CLICK THE PLUS SIGN (+) TO OPEN THE RESPONSE
How will you ensure a project or projects benefiting Peachland’s watershed receives provincial attention and funding?
Through advocacy targeted at Minister Heyman (Environmnt and Climate Change Strategy) and our MLA, Dan Ashton.
How would you make this happen?
By understanding the engagement process, by contributing to its effective development, and by participation at the table.
Explain how you would implement this or why you would not.
I do not see this as a simple Yes or No question which is why I checked No. I do support the goal, but with the reservation that I need more information before settling on any particular plan for implementation.
What additions would you suggest to this second request letter, considering clear cutting has continued for the intervening three-plus years and still further road building and tree removal are planned?
The letter is clear and does not need elaboration. However, the addition of factual information regarding the verbal and written exchanges that have taken place between the District (elected and staff ) and Minister(s) and Deputy Ministers would be instructive. Similarly, the inclusion of data on recent harvesting volumes, re--planting levels, and related road construction activity will be helpful in reinforcing the urgent need for the recommended moratorium. .
Does Peachland Have Enough Water? As of August 2022, no one in the District of Peachland can confirm we have enough water for all current and planned developments. A rough calculation suggests a population increase of 11,000 is possible if all approved and proposed developments on the books in the planning department are completed and occupied. District Consultants’ water supply reports quote a variety of numbers, gleaned from a variety of inconsistent assumptions. One report stated that in order to provide enough water for these developments, major engineering would be required in order to divert creeks and other water sources into Peachland Creek to feed the Peachland water-treatment plant. Besides the financial costs, such engineering works have the potential to permanently alter the ecosystem of the watershed, destroy fish-bearing habitat, wildlife connectivity, forests and habitat, recreation opportunity, trail systems, hunting grounds, and environmental water flow patterns. How much are you willing to compromise our water source for the sake of development, given that climate change may very well prolong water shortages, watering restrictions and potential engineering works for increasing the flow of water could cause irreparable environmental damage to the very ecosystem that creates the water in the first place? Are you comfortable engaging on behalf of the District if acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements in the watershed as well as service negotiations with Glencore or other industry, for example, may be involved?*
Protection of our water source and ecosystem, and ensuring that development does not compromise a sustainable level of water supply, are issues of vital importance to Peachland. Ideally we would have control over all decisions affecting watershed health, and valid information to inform decision making. Until we achieve that goal (perhaps through a new governance model) I support taking whatever legal steps are available to us.
. Costs to upgrade, expand or build a new Water Treatment Plant: In 2015, an amendment to the Peachland Water Master Plan was completed by Urban Systems, the conclusion of the report noted that “sufficient water is available within the Peachland Creek watershed to meet the demands of the District of Peachland and the environmental flows as required by the Ministry” at that time. As of today, the existing treatment and distribution system is appropriate for approximately 7100 people. With a future population projection in the region of 15,000, there will need to be some upgrades undertaken to meet those flow demands. For example, after the 7100 threshold is reached, an upgrade in storage / reservoir capacity at the treatment plant will be required. Similarly, once the 11,300 threshold is reached, an upgrade of the treatment plant (allowing us to generate more treated water) will be required. As these costs are principally related to further development, the cost will be borne by the developers through the mechanism of development cost charges. The most recent DCC update report estimates the overall costs for all of these upgrades to be approximately $45M. All previous and current developments did not supply near enough money to pay for the costs of the past WTP nor current new WTP, (usage fees, a $400 annual WTP tax, Federal and Provincial grants contributed to the costs). If elected, how will you ensure that these new costs will not be borne AGAIN by the current residents but, by the developers and the future residents through the mechanism of development cost charges, as the district staff suggest? Do you believe this is even possible? If so, how will you ensure Peachland starts to collect a portion of this $45M in your four-year term?
The question and background facts clearly illustrate the mistaken belief, held by many, that growth is essential for a healthy tax base and as a means to keep property taxes low. There are many area where we under-recover the costs of growth because DCC's and other developer contributions do not even contribute towards them - fire, policing, public administration are examples. With respect to funding water-treatment plant expansion, fairness and equity need to be primary values.