SAC Novices

"It's not necessary until we understand the plan better," said a member of SAC named Paul Willliamson at the first meeting of the advisory committee to the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee.

At discussion was the request from Citizens for Changes to the Master Water Plan chair Terry Mooney for an independent consultant to review the plan with a view to using Okanagan Lake as a water source, as requested by the nearly 1,000 signatories to the group's petition, which followed failure of the $70 million borrowing referendum.

It could be argued that no matter how well lay people profess to--eventually--understand a series of technical reports, their lack of experience in such matters could never match that of an expert trained in the field.  But that's the plan in this game played with loaded dice.  So lay people spending time (projected to be until March 2016) trying to get their heads around engineering studies/reports could simply allow GVW to proceed with projects that ultimately move the master water plan further ahead.

It's not as if GVW hasn't made buckets of money gouging the area's water users over the last 10 or so years!

Some would call the new process obfuscation...mincing words...a layperson review isn't the same as a peer review (of consultants' work).
An advisory committee to an advisory committee.

It's killing time until more and more work has been done.
New work that will perhaps make it impossible to reverse the water utility's course next year?

Here's today's Morning Star story by Rolke, in its entirety:

"Water Plan Review Stalls.

Calls for independent scrutiny of Greater Vernon's water system have been stalled.

The master water plan stakeholder advisory committee recommended Thursday to the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee that the request for an independent engineering consultant be postponed pending review of the 2012 plan by the stakeholders group.

"It's not necessary until we understand the plan better," said Paul Williamson, SAC member.

The request for an independent consultant had come from the Citizens for Changes to the Master Water Plan.

However, Williamson, who made the motion to defer the request, stated that bringing a consultant on board now could be costly and add complexities to the discussion.

Opposition to the motion came from Terry Mooney, a SAC member and chairperson of the Citizens for Changes to the Master Water Plan.

"The idea behind the request is that a fresh new look of the plan is required," said Mooney, adding that 1,000 people have signed a petition in favour of a review.

The stakeholder advisory committee was formed after a majority of Greater Vernon residents voted against borrowing $70 million for the plan in 2014.

Mooney says the process that led to the failed referendum must be avoided.

"None of us are an expert on any of these areas.  I wold not want to see the public disenfranchised from an independent set of eyes and ears," he said.  "We need advice along the way to discuss technical data."

Other SAC members, though, pointed out that a peer review of the plan could occur in the future.

"At some stage it may be appropriate to say we hit a dam in moving this forward," said Robert Evans.

Jim Garlick, Coldstream mayor and SAC chairperson, is hopeful the 18 committee members will be able to be thorough in their deliberations.

"It will all be a fresh, new look because we have new people asking questions," he said.

Thursday was the inaugural gathering of the SAC and members are trying to familiarize themselves with Greater Vernon's water system.  Numerous requests were made for information, including the price of operating the Kalamalka Lake and Duteau Creek sources.

"On the minds of people I talk to, it's the cost," said member Ray Foisy.

Also on Thursday, the committee decided that it wants to hear from a representative of the consulting engineering technical group that developed the 2012 master water plan."

The thousand signatories to the petition didn't ask for laypeople to review the Master Water Plan.
So elected officials--boldened by sheltered GVW bureaucrats who are used to little oversight--are largely ignoring the public will.  Perhaps they don't plan to let their names stand for re-election, but the electorate can, and often does, have a long memory.

Sheltered bureaucrats?  Yup.  Not unlike a lawyer beginning his summation to a jury, engineering manager McTaggart, in his customary omnipotent style, tutored SAC members when he stated that GVW's Summary of Assumptions "must be followed" as they consider issues.  An early focus should be to consider--in all aspects of the review--utilizing Okanagan Lake as a water source following upland water license diversions.  But McTaggart's bullying of these laypeople will be brought to the fore to prevent that, no doubt.  He could never bully an independent engineering consultant.

Did anybody ask why raising Aberdeen Dam 4 metres was--suddenly--moved to this year?  The one-page GVW handout prior to the referendum stated the work would be done in 2022.  Why has that been moved to now?  It's certainly not a result of mud-boggers!

Now bureaucrats are stating they're planning bio-active filtration at Duteau Creek!
Huh?
So that 90 per cent of the chlorinated water produced in summer can continue to irrigate crops in East Coldstream?  (Where is that INCREDULITY emoticon???)

In the meantime, Hillview Golf Course has finished their well and irrigation pond...there's another $43,000 GVW will be short next year...so their budget needs to be scaled back.  Or will they simply raise the base rates again to compensate for the lost revenue? 

Photo:  J.Atmore, Hillview

And while SAC laypeople continue being bullied by Garlick and McTaggart, Vernon Golf Course is planning considerable changes of their own.

"Committee people will eventually learn what many of us have already learned firsthand," offers Kia.

But don't we regret the time wasted?
Yup.