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?
Getting to the top of a Minister's attention list is the $20 Million task! As a former senior policy analyst with the BC government, I feel that I have some insight about how to effectively reach them to incentivize their proclivity to help us. It is not good enough to beg for money. The success is making it a win-win.
How would you make this happen?
The key is in understanding how to frame the project and/or request. Traditional methods have not always been successful. One needs to fully understand the parties you are dealing with first - in order to find the winning model for moving forward. "Seek first to understand - Then be understood!"
Explain how you would implement this or why you would not.
The key is in understanding how to frame this matter. Traditional methods have not always been successful. One needs to fully understand the parties you are dealing with first - in order to find the winning model for moving forward. Nothing happens until we have data. The first order of business, before we run out making demands is to ascertain the traffic data for any given project. You cannot presume to prejudge an outcome here.
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 district has had a dismal record of data collection, analysis, big acquisition, and forward thinking management in nearly all resource areas. This is why I am running for council. When an entity acts on matters without full knowledge and understanding of the big picture, mistakes are made. We can find "wins" in all of this, but it will require a corporate "attitude adjustment."
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?*
You keep using the term "Climate Change" as though it was something new.. or a scab upon one's body. Climates have been changing for thousands of years. This is nothing new. As you know, science is nearly always wrong. For example, through the 70's they were preparing us for an ice age. That scare tactic didn't work so they morphed to Global warming. The first task is to clean up the districts way of handling this stuff. They fail almost every time. We need to fix it properly.
. 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?
I'm not yet a councillor and have not had access to the data. That said, I do know that the district has been poorly managed and has a dismal record of acquiring accurate bids on projects. One of my first task would be to find out where the "cog" in this system is broken, then fix it. You can't solve all of your problems just by throwing money at it. I don't trust the way Peachland has handled almost all contracts. None of the usual obfuscat