Garlick's Annual Yadda Yadda

Coldstream's mayor Garlick has released his annual Christmas letter to residents via the District of Coldstream Community News (linked copy unavailable at this date).

(Click image to enlarge)

Mayor's message

Apart from proving how uber-governed we taxpayers are--he says "the District works with our partners - the City of Vernon and Electoral Areas B and C in the sub-region of Greater Vernon to govern and deliver several services through the RDNO" (huh????) -- Mayor Garlick proves again that he's a consummate politician.

Wayyyyy too many bosses, huh?  Yup, all of whom want tax dollars from us.

 

Saying plenty but explaining little.
Like why? 

Here's his fourth paragraph:
"As laid out in the Greater Vernon Master Water Plan, GVW continues to work towards meeting the water standards set by the province and enforced by the Interior Health Authority (IHA).  This includes the recently completed ultraviolet treatment facility at the Duteau Creek Water Treatment Plant which benefited from a $6.1 million grant.  The water utility is developing and implementing an asset renewal plan to replace aging infrastructure in a cost-effective manner.  The District supports securing grant funding from the provincial and federal governments before undertaking the more costly water projects such as filtration.  Unfortunately, our last grant application for 73.3% of the $45.4 million filtration project to treat water from Kalamalka Lake at the Mission Hill Treatment Plant was turned down."

Why was the grant application turned down?
No idea, but taxpayers want to know.
And naturally, mayor Garlick said nothing about that, or whether they will re-apply for the grant. 
Or does that now mean the $45.4 million filtration project funding will fall entirely onto the laps of residents?
Garlick doesn't say...hence the consummate politician moniker.  

His fifth paragraph had my jaw dropping...

"Presently, GVW is working on a water extension policy which would consider the sale of water outside of the existing water utility boundary.  This would include lands beyond the boundary both within and outside Greater Vernon.  Council does not support the sale of water outside of Greater Vernon, unless there is the ability to tax those benefiting properties for the other services provided by Greater Vernon:  recreation facilities, parks, trails, open spaces, and arts and culture.  Council also believes that all costs for any boundary extension infrastructure should be paid for by the benefiting property owners and that no negative impact on the efficiency of the water utility should be allowed.  The water sources and the approximately $743 million in infrastructure owned by GVW are a precious resource to Greater Vernon.  Water extensions, should not be permitted unless they directly support the District's other shared services and provide a net positive benefit to our existing Greater Vernon water utility users."

Whew!  Had to take a big breath after reading that paragraph.

Okay, let's take apart the mayor's paragraph. 

We residents have a very good memory about water supply (not to mention the horrendous costs we pay for it).

Whether on radio, or in print throughout the summer seasons, we water users are continually (it seems) harrangued by Greater Vernon Water and its political spin-off, the Okanagan Basin Water Board, that the water resource is (a) precious, (b) limited seasonally, and (c) finite.

So it probably makes sense that nobody would want "our" water sold "outside of an existing water boundary".  Duh!

But there Garlick missed another Why opportunity:  Why is GVW even considering selling water outside the existing boundary?  Is it because they spend more than 50 per cent of what taxpayers remit for water on wages and benefits?  Or...could it be because there never is a shortage of water and they can readily move the boundaries and supply more properties?

Next item:

Garlick goes on to say "the District submitted a grant to fund the construction of a new community hall on the Women's Institute Hall site, and another two applications are being completed for submission for two childcare facilities which would be entirely funded by the Province."  Huh?

Why are we seeking to replace the community hall? The District of Coldstream bought the land and hall a number of years ago and rents it out for functions.
What if the construction grant fails?  Does that mean residents are on the hook for building a new hall?  And where are the two childcare facilities going to be based?  In the "new" hall?  on another site?  Where?  Who pays for those?

"Coldstream is working with the RCMP and the Province to determine options to ensure the best policing service for the community.  Coldstream Council and staff have been working with the RCMP to achieve a greater police presence in Coldstream...has also budgeted additional funds to provide more officers to work on reducing speeding."

So is he saying that Coldstream has previously had the worst policing service?

Why are additional funds needed for policing?  Perhaps his next statement is part of the explanation.

"The dismantling of the integrated detachment in Vernon with the removal of Spallumcheen and Armstrong by the respective jurisdictions has provided the opportunity for Council to reconsider how police services can be housed for our municipality, either through a partnership with another jurisdiction of similar policing needs or on our own within Coldstream?"

Huh?  Couldn't Garlick have explained why the integrated detachment in Vernon was dismantled?  So is Garlick now suggesting police services "can be housed" inside Coldstream municipality?  As in having Coldstream police?  Our own cops?

Could be that his last sentence on the topic may hint at what he wants/is planning:  
"The accommodation costs for Coldstream to remain in the Vernon detachment, together with support worker costs, requires further consideration by Council of other accommodation options." 

So, again we ask Why?

The rest of Mayor Garlick's comments relate to a lake use survey, with percentage results from respondents.  (enlarge second graphic above by clicking on the image to see those results).


Maybe we're supposed to guess.
Perhaps Mayor Garlick is hoping we don't learn Why.