CLICK ON THE PLUS SIGN (+) TO OPEN THE RESPONSE
How will you ensure a project or projects benefiting Peachland’s watershed receives provincial attention and funding?
I can not promise that a Peachland proposed project will get the funds. This lies not in a Mayor's power, and you should never make promises you can not keep. The only thing I can promise is that I will closely follow up and communicate the need for funding with the government agency responsible for the disbursement of funds, even if this means visiting Victoria and meeting with them one on one.
How would you make this happen?
I will work with local Syilx communities and provincial and federal governments to establish a BC Watershed Security Fund for Peachland and neighbouring areas. I believe in partnerships and strength in numbers.
Explain how you would implement this or why you would not.
I support a user pay system for heavy trucks using municipal roads. That being said, we must look into all regulations to see if this is possible. Working with local stakeholders and Provincial and Federal Government is crucial to get the ball rolling.
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?
I would add the request for a meeting in person; meeting eye to eye is always better than just sending a letter. As your Mayor, I will gladly meet them in Victoria or a place of their choosing.
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?*
I am very 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 comes up. As part of the upcoming budget deliberations, staff will be bringing forward to Council a request to complete an updated water availability analysis which update these values as well as the situation in the watershed with regards to water licensing, ultimate buildout, etc.
. 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?
All future upgrades are to be borne by developers since the costs are principally related to development expansion. This can be done through the process of DCC’s or through the developer fronting the initial cost prior to the develop proceeding (consider the initial Ponderosa works in which a substantial portion of the District’s watermain trunk was installed between Gladstone Rd and Ponderosa Drive – allowing for service to their lands as well as existing properties within the Ponderosa area)