- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
The "good ole boys" on Langley Township council don't get it again! Once again only Councillor Kim Richter sees the big picture. The real writing on the wall with Translink's bride of Frankenstein to be, a new provincially run bureaucracy Ground Water Board(s)!
Watch out all you regions and municipalities of British Columbia! This feature Government production will be playing out in your communities sooner than later too!!! The 'good ole boys" on Langley Township Council will provide the blind simple rubber stamp to help justify their province wide implementation!
In fact the depth of perception of the "good ole boys" team on Township council is as limited as a shallow well, as demonstrated by another Cllr. whose only major observation and comment is, "If I was on a well, I would be sure to be out at a couple of open houses..". Dooh!
While the issue is certainly also about wells, the real bigger issue is about a Translink clone that can grow province wide to model itself to even rival the Translink, regional health boards and regional school boards. But this time with TAXATION POWERS! A new level of govt. folks. A new bureaucracy. Betcha they get a massive hi-rise govt office building in Victoria too with tons more satelite government offices throughout BC too! Bet it will be appointed and not elected too!
Watch your tax bills start low and climb vertically! Hold on to your wallets folks! Especially all of us rural taxpayers who don't get many real municipal services now anyway! You urban people better not smirk because you won't be off the hook financially either bets this Editor.
We all know how wonderfully the previous three quoted provincially created boards have worked for us smuck users and taxpayers! It hasn't but it sure worked for the provincial government by getting centralized control with a rubber stamp buffer board and increasing their tax coffers!
The other real problem is right here with this Township Mayor's council of good ole boys who don't even see this coming. When they sign off on this they have essentially signed off for ALL of BC! Sad isn't it? Does anyone think that these guys will really have a second sober look at this. Hopefully now they will since Richter broke the story! Not them, they don't even second her motions! When's the next election....November 2008! Gee... that long!
A "Get WATER Moving BC" promotional partisan website is next! Let's see now we need a provincial Liberal friendly website creator/moderator. Know anybody who fits the bill?
Soon the rural lifestyle will only be for the rich with thier big homes and swimming pools. The average folk are being kicked off thier acreages due to extreme tax for minimal services.
The government can't bill/tax us for groundwater usage. But they sure can bill/tax us all for SERVICE! Hence the creation of a new regulatory body - Translink type of water board(s)! Open your wallets and purses wide folks! Sneaky, real sneaky, under the guise of protecting our groundwater.
LFP,
I just wanted to give a quick clarification to help the discussion along. I admit to not having read the entire post carefully but promise to do so as groundwater is an area in which I have some expertise.
Technically under provincial legislation (The Water Protection Act) the crown has asserted ownership to all groundwater in the province. Specifically section 3(2) of the Act states "The property in and the right to the use, percolation and any flow of ground water, wherever ground water is found in British Columbia, are for all purposes vested in the government and are conclusively deemed to have always been vested in the government."
Thus, under current legislation the Province has the regulatory right to charge for the use of groundwater as they are deemed by legislation to own the resource.
Blair, never mind the looming spector of another probably non elected bureaucratic Translink type of water board with broad taxation powers. That's the big issue in my mind as well as obviously Kim Richter's too.
But just on the issue of metering and charging for private well groundwater usage. I predict a rural revolt here and province wide.
Imagine the poor smuck with a 15 foot shallow well that is always concerned about it running dry anyway. He has to continually replace costly pumps, hundreds of dollars a shot, repair them sometimes a couple of times a year with a $50+ an hour professional help, his same well water supply goes back into his septic which may also have pumps, maintenance costs, $200 septic tank service. Now he will have to pay a new tax? Maybe pay for a water meter? Maybe pay for excess metered water? Yet nobody helps him pay for his well and septic costs. Also he most likely pays way more property tax than the new Yuppies in Willougby who have all their water maintenance costs paid for by the municipality and they also pay less property taxes! Not to mention the rurul smuck has to plow through high snow weeks on end, has no sidewalks, no close parks or any services, etc.
This Editor smells a major rural rebellion if they wake up and finally get the message! By the way the rural property owners do vote! And they probably make up a BIG portion of the small 20% of eligible voters that show up to vote.
The real abusers of groundwater use are the many large agricultural and industrial/agricultural users. This water management plan is just a blanket all encopmpassing across the board solution on all that will affect everyone financially when the real target should be the big time industrial/agricultural users and their ilk. Target andh hit the big users first. I doubt that the small users are a real cause of water supply and quality concerns.
Since we all know that there are lobbyists in the capitol. who sell their goods via the government under the guise of what's good for us all. That's how GM got us hooked on buses vs electric street rail years ago. We are still stuck, and worse than ever! I wonder if it would be possible to identify who might be the lobbyist in this case.
If the township is genuinely looking for those who are destroying our groundwater, they might first look in the mirror very seriously. If they need any help with identifying where they do this, just look at the Willoughby gold rush for starters. They could then turn to methods of fertilizing that are less harmful, and the many chemicals that flushed into the environment unnecessarily.
When they are done with those things, they should maybe look more closely at what we do with our water when we and our animals have passed it through our intestines. Is it just possible that how we treat it after we use it is more reasonable.
LFP, this is bigger than the good ole boys club. The glaring fact is that there is money to be made hitting the well owners, and where the real problems lie, there are COSTLY upgrades, and policy changes that are less palatable within and beyond governments.
This has to be stopped, and Langley Township is a good place to do it.
I heard though the grapevine that the govt. either can't or dosn't want to charge for groundwater usage. It's probably the latter. The negative optics may be huge for them with BC's rural voters. It's neater and simpler and obviously much easier to justify to probably say we are charging for services under the mantle of protecting our water resources.
As Richter said this Editor also believes that the protection of ground water is critical and neccesary. But do we want a new Translink model(s) to manage and tax us? I'd prefer any other model. Your expertise and thoughts in this area technically are very welcome indeed Blair. It's a complex and controversial topic.
LFP, if poor and diminishing ground water is the SYMPTOM of our ailment, why should we waste precious time on it instead of chasing down the CAUSES? We know just about all of them.
I'm reasonably sure that domestic wells have little or no impact on ground water consumption.
LFP,
Some initial thoughts:
Enhanced groundwater protection has been in the works provincially for a long time and is moving forward at a surprisingly fast rate considering the politics involved. The Langley water management plan is based on the anticipated requirements of Phase 3 of the Ground Water Protection Regulation. Ultimately it will be a responsibility of all municipalities (or Regional Districts it is unclear at this time which level of municipal gov’t will be forced to take on this responsibility in unwilling districts). By acting in the way they have, Langley has potentially prevented Metro Vancouver from holding the hammer in our area.
As for governance, I sense your fears may be misplaced. The Township may propose a model but the final version will be incorporated into the Phase 3 implementation. Since groundwater preservation and control will be a province-wide initiative the funding model will have to be similar in scope. Make your voices heard but rest assured that the Province is the only one who can authorize the creation of this new body so lobby your MLA if you have a strong opinion.
From my point of view TransLink has been a spectacular failure. That being said the TransLink governance model is solid in theory. As I note it has been a disaster in application and that should definitely be taken into account when the province sets its mind to the task.
Ultimately ground water is our generation’s “tragedy of the commons” issue. Private well owners have been able to take what they wanted without any consideration to future supply and have very little incentive to conserve as individuals. As our population continues to rise the demand will simply outstrip the supply. Mind you, in Langley if they don’t get some form of control over the large agricultural users then when all has been said and done even this plan may not be able to save the Hopington or the Aldergrove aquifers. The reason for charging for use is that charging for use encourages conservation. It is guaranteed that when this comes to a fore province-wide, the battle will be historic. I predict that before my son reaches high-school at least one provincial election will have been fought on this issue. Unless someone with a solid grip on the big picture can sell this as something we have to do to protect groundwater for future generations then this will be one of the decisive urban versus rural issues in the next decade. Alternatively the cynic in me guesses that the province will keep passing on the tough political choices because no political body wants to alienate so many voters.
More to come as I continue to read.
Blair:
I appreciate your comments and value your insights on this issue given your academic training and experience.
I have some significant concerns which I have tried to highlight in this latest "Richter Report". Perhaps you could shed some more light on them.
The report development structure was set up under a Ministerial Order. The "Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC) - [see p. 18 of the report] was preselected by the "Interagency Planning Team"- [also see p. 18 of the report]. Township Council was asked to designate an "observer" to the process. They designated 3 all of whom had to remain outside of the discussion table at all meetings. In addition, the plan is currently in Step 3 [see p.11] and the next step (Step 4) is Order in Council followed by Step 5 (Implementation Regulation).
The SAC met 4 times during this process. I attended 3 of these meetings. Councillors Ferguson and Fox attended 2. During the same time period, the Interagency Planning Team met 22 times - no public representatives were present as they were not invited.
The last time the SAC met was on June 14, 2007. They did not meet again until 5 months later on November 14, 2007. At this meeting, they were asked to comment on the draft report and its 44 recommendations in a 6 hour period and to give their overall acceptance of it.
They had received the draft report one week prior to the meeting. Some members had not even had the chance to read it and some members were not even present.This was the first time they had seen the report and when they were done, they were given "thank you" baskets for their work.
During the November 14, 2007 SAC meeting, I found it particularly interesting that all the Interagency Team members sat together on one side of the table - a 'united front'?
SAC members accepted much of the draft report but expressed many concerns round the costs and implementation plan. By the time, they broke for dinner at 6:10 pm, they had only reached Core Recommendation #16. The meeting was scheduled to end at 8:00 pm.
In response to cost concerns expressed earlier in the afternoon by an SAC member, one of the Interagency Team members said that there is no legislative mechanism to charge for groundwater use but they could possibly charge a penalty for overuse. However, local government can charge for the "provision of service" under the Community Charter. In this case, the service would be the protection of quality and quantity of groundwater so in effect they would not be charging for water but for "service" relative to that water. Furthermore, a rate structure through the Township would keep these dollars in the Township rather than sending them to provincial general revenues.
So, Blair, my question to you is: Do you think this is an upfront plan or a backdoor plan? I am also particularly interested in your comments on Core Recommendation #23 ( p . 38 of the report). What do you think is going on here?
Wow. If you are going to monger fear, it should be the fear of what it is going to cost the Township, and the retired rural residents, when some of these aquifers go dry.
As for creating a “new TransLink”, you are way, way out to lunch. One of the steps in the WMP (CR 22L, page 37) is to figure out what the structure, mandate, and nature of the board will be. No-one has decided what the board will look like, but you already have brown shirts picked out for them!
The real story here, (thank you Blair, and thank you staff at the open house yesterday for answering questions), is that we need to protect the water now, and the provincial Liberals are (surprise!) abdicating their responsibility to do that. Therefore, the township are forced to step in, nothing more than another download from the Liberals. The township has neither the staff nor the resources to do this job, so they need to create a department in the township to do it. Yes it will cost money. But the money we spend now ($800,000, maybe $2 million over 5 years), will save millions of dollars in the long run.
Right now, producing its own water costs the township 1/3 of what the GVRD charges per gallon for water. If we want to supply all the township with GVRD water, the township (you, me, Kim Richter, your brother-in-law in Willoughby and your grandmother down on 16th ave, all of us) three times what we pay now for water, plus (and this is important) hundreds of millions of dollars to install the pipelines needed. On way or another, the rural user will be paying for water eventually. The question is if they pay a small meter fee (some time in the future) for their legally-protected private well, or if they pay the GVRD whatever they demand for their increasingly-expensive water system, PLUS the costs of hooking up to that system.
Stop the fear mongering, Kim. Think this thing through. What alternative are you offering?
Kim,
The process you describe for input from the public and the Township sounds like a typical Provincial Gov’t, top down management style that drives me batty. They pick the experts and the panel and then put them to work. The public is deemed unqualified to supply useful input and therefore only lip service is paid to the public input stage. I’m surprised that Langley doesn’t have policies that would prevent this being forced down out throat this way. Especially in a situation like this where we will be taking the brunt of any new plan. I do understand, theoretically, where they are coming from in that this will be the model for other communities and so the BC gov’t wants their stamp on it but it is the Township of Langley that will pay if things go wrong and so the taxpayers of this region should be allowed a real say in the planning and implementation stages. To put a plan out there holus-bolus, then have two short open houses and finally expect the plan to be finalized less than 30 days thereafter (with a holiday like X-Mas fit in there) is simply ridiculous. I’ll bet that the comments from the open houses won’t even be collated in less than a couple days. Then the plan’s authors have to have a chance to read the input and consider it. Any changes to the plan, based on the public input, would then have to be considered by the committee as a whole, then run through the review process and finally the lawyers. To expect all this in under a month is beyond inane.
As for the public input set-up that is a farce. There should be open houses in more than one location and at more than one time period. Thursday nights are particularly bad for me and having the same limited hours on the same night in the same location over two weeks seems designed to discourage people who actually work for a living. Heck I seldom get out of work before 6 and then I have to get home for dinner and then it is time to get the little guy to bed. For an issue with these far-reaching consequences at least one open house should be on a weekend when it is easier for people to schedule to get there and the open houses should be in various locations in the Township to allow those who rely on transit or alternative means of transportation a chance to comment. This is a Township-wide plan and people from across the Township should have a chance to be heard.
Mind you this a regular concern of mine. Open houses in the Township seem designed to be convenient to Township Staff and hostile to the public. Does the Township not understand that maybe just some of the tax-paying population in Langley actually works for a living? They always seem to schedule open houses in undesirable locations at lousy times for those of us with employers who expect us to be at work during working hours!!!
RC, the issue is the process and what the final governance model will be. Both in this case are scary as hell in my opinion as they are being rushed in without due public diligence. I agree fully with Councillor Richter.
From this Editor's point of view, Cllr. Richter is not fear mongering at all, she is just ringing alarm bells to get everyone's attention. Thank the lord someone is! The rest of council are as usual asleep at the wheel.
Her issue is clearly how it is decided and what the final governance model will be! It sure looks like these are both being driven by partisan provincial government bureaucrats and being rushed through just before christmas the best time to do so quietly.
Do you really want another Translink type authority of our groundwater that has taxation powers ultimately controlled by Victoria with a partisan puppet buffer board? Why can't the Township do this with mutually agreed to guidelines and rules provincially for instance.
Also this whole process is being railroaded through as Blair has also so aptly commented on. Blair, you should have been selected to have been on this commttee group of township stakeholders! So the focus now should be to slow down and get all the people of Langley to better understand the full impact and to then get them more involved to give proper input and perhaps a better model. We need a sober second review of this.
Kim Richter has always been the strongest proponent of protecting our water resources. To suggest anything else is clearly ridiculous and suspicious and the real fear mongering. The goverrnance structure should be decided up front with the Township and the people's input. Put the horse in front of the cart first! Let's trust the people's input , not discard it or bypass it. If you RC think that it won't be a provincially non-elected Translink type of model you are dreaming in bright colours. The provincialy controlled bureaucrats have driven this process so far.
SLOW THE PROCESS DOWN NOW AND GET PROPER COMMUNITY INPUT AND PARTICIPATION.
Nothing is being rammed down anyone’s throat here. Here is a direct quote, the opening paragraph, page 10:
“This draft report serves as the next step in the consultative planning
process before the Water Management Plan (WMP) is finalized. The
draft report is therefore intended to serve two primary purposes. First,
it summarizes the principal recommendations identified and still being
considered. Second, it serves as a reference point to solicit additional
feedback from the public and government agencies on the progress
made to date. After review and comments are received during this
consultative step of the process, the plan will be revised and
submitted by the Township of Langley for approval to the BC Minister
of Environment.
Hardly a firm document with binding resolutions, this is a work in progress, designed to gauge public opinion. What you are calling for (public consultation,) is exactly what this document is designed for!
It seems to me the process ahs not been driven by “provincial bureaucrats”, but by a committee of community stakeholders (listed on Page 1
with the note “Township Councillors also viewed the proceedings.”
I don’t know why Kim is choosing to make her great Custerian stand here, considering she made developing and implementing this plan a major plank in her last election platform:
http://www.kimrichter.com/
curren...rrentissues.htm
What’s changed Kim, and since you were on the planning team, why did it change? Why did you not speak up (as a council representative at the planning table or during one of the previous council meetings)? Who was really asleep at the wheel, Editor?
RC,
let's all hear what you would choose as an alternative? You might also identify the source of your water.
RC/Lone Voice:
Thank you for your comments. I think perhaps some clarifications are in order. Please see my detailed reponse to your concerns posted on the front page (Richter Report - November 23, 2007).
Am I passionate about protecting groundwater? You bet! But not at the cost of another bureaucracy and that's what I'm afraid this is going to turn out to be.
I hope I've answered your questions, RC/Lone Voice. Thank you again for taking the time to write.
Commenting by HaloScan
