Welcome to Your Kamloops!

Reflections on John O'Fee's Council Comment on Government Debt...

 

Councillor John O'Fee's latest column in the Kamloops Daily News deals with government debt. It's a pretty solid piece, in my opinion, explaining the benefits and costs of the practice.

A couple of things struck me.

This first is a bit of tangential point. John partly justifies government debt by saying "Like any enterprise, improvement requires investment." I personally would hate to think this is true. Sometime, improvement might mean cutting when budgets are getting too high or when programs are no longer working. John makes a similar point, seems to me, in the last sentence of his column in saying "It’s certainly not a problem we can afford to ignore."

Second, and this is more of a question, I'm wondering why John used TNRD (our regional district) aggregate figures rather than City of Kamloops figures. It would probably made the column a lot stronger if people had a better picture of what is happening locally.

Video: My Initial Thoughts on Council's Water Meter Decision...

Practicing my video skills!

Kamloops City Council Decides to Implement Universal Water Metering...

Mayor Peter Milobar guarantees he will personally pay more, but says it is the fair and equitable thing to do. Vote is 7 to 2. Opposed are Denis Walsh and Pat Wallace.

Universal Water Metering Report from Kamloops City Administration...for March 16 2010 Council Meeting

Here is is...

Kamloops City Hall Universal Water Meter Recommendation Report - March 16th 2010

Water Meters 101 - In Light of the Decision Coming Soon...

Update March 11th: Radio NL reporting that water meter report with options coming to city council next Tuesday, Mar 16th. Decision might be made then...

Dear readers, I am trying my hand at summarizing, in 400 words or less, some of the key issues in Kamloops. I welcome your thoughts on if the below summary on the water meter debate in our community is easy to understand and balanced. If you know a lot about the issue, did I miss any key points? If you don't know a lot about the issue, did this summary give you a broad understanding?

Preamble

Water meters have been a controversial issue in Kamloops for many years. City Council has again been discussing this issue with a view to making a decision soon on mandatory metering. I attempt here to provide an overview with a brief introduction of the mandatory metering issue and then a list of the major pros and cons of water meters. I end with links to more information.

I should say, up front, that I support water meters but I have tried here to be as even handed as I can be.

Introduction
Kamloops has high water consumption rates. Statistics from City Hall indicate the Kamloopsians use an average of 800 Litres of water a day. The Canadian average for unmetered water systems is 467 Litres and, for metered systems, is 266 Litres. In Kelowna, which has mandatory meters, the daily average of 587 Litres.

The main impetus for water meters comes not so much from a concern about water supply, but from the costs associated with maintaining the pipes and pumps that distribute water around the community. Summer time use is the major concern, when some days the average household consumes 2000 Litres a day. When we have days like that, our pipe and pump capacity hit virtually 100%. The choice is between reducing our water consumption or increasing our pipe and pump capacity.

Potential Pros of Water Meters
Proponents of water meters believe that we should have user pay for water and that water meter installation will save money for the community, as a whole, in the medium to long term. They also talk about the ethic of conservation as opposed to consumption.

Potential Cons of Water Meters
Opponents of water meters believe that there are other ways of reducing water consumption, are concerned that there will be a loss of aesthetic beauty of lawns and gardens in the our desert like climate, think that water meters will be more costly, and feel that lower income households will be impacted unfairly. Many also feel that the community decision against water meters in a referendum held in 2001. There is a concern about the privatization of our water system and the potential consequences of people not being able to afford water. City Councils, however, past and present, have expressed as a whole that they would not support privatization of a metered system.

Why has BC Government Stopped Worrying Out About Public Opinion on Gaming?

Given the financial contribution and social impact of local gaming facilities, Sean Holman's recent post is an important read.

The Great Sahali Sign Debate...

Had an opportunity to watch the "game tape" of the Feb 16th council meeting. An interesting issue came up at the meeting. In my opinion, it showcases important and different opinions among Council members.

Owners of a new commercial building on Summit Drive, right beside Firehall #1, have applied to erect a free standing side. In order to get the sign they want, they have asked city hall if they could dip just over the property line and erect the sign on firehall land. The city planning department has agreed to this, providing that the building owners agree to landscape and maintain the area around the sign. The owners did not include such a sign in their initial plans.

The below video clocks in at about 5min and 15 seconds and showcases the responses of two Councillors - Denis Walsh and John O'Fee, as well as the views of Mayor Peter Milobar. As I was listening to the Mayor's comments in particular, I started to think a bit differently than he does about potential precedent. Peter said that if people driving by the sign don't realize it sits on city property, than he doesn't think precedent setting will be much of an issue. I would think that the precedent issue arises more if potential developers learn about this case. I also wonder if city staff will feel they have more of a green light to look at and recommend similar sign proposals. However, maybe a precedent is a good thing to set here.

Council voted to send the proposal for public comment by a vote of 7 - 2.

The Anatomy of a Civil City Budget Meeting...

I had a quick chat, after tonight's public budget meeting, with a lady who has never attended before. She was struck by how civil and thoughtful the questions were. She had heard that people rant and rave at these meetings, and that only a few ranters and ravers show up - everyone else stays home. Tonight's meeting was indeed of a very different flavour. More people attended than in many previous years, people were respectful and interested.

I was struck by the number of people who vocalized support for water meters - maybe the third of the nine or ten questioners. I was also interested that two people politely brought up the issue of an airshed management plan prompted by the creosote tie gasifier proposal currently ongoing in the community. 

Mayor Milobar said that a council decision on universal water metering should be coming in the next couple of months. This issue has arisen again as city hall is now faced with some pretty immediate decisions on expanding water distribution capacity.

Video: Kamloops RCMP Supt Jim Begley Explains Request for More Officers

As part of the 2010 Kamloops budget discussions, our outstanding local detachment has asked for 3 more officers. Councillor Nancy Bepple asks an excellent question of RCMP Supt Begley. Councillor Pat Wallace asks about transient criminals. City Manager Randy Diehl frames up the request in the first clip of the video:

Should We Increase the RCMP Budget in Kamloops?

I think the Kamloops RCMP has done incredible and amazing work in the last couple of years. The overall crime rate in Kamloops has plummeted. The detachment has been very proactive with targeting prolific offenders and has won international policing awards.

Now, success should perhaps spur more resources. And, in that sense, I am empathetic to the Supt Begley's request to add three more officers to the detachment.

But, I also wonder if there should not be some sort of "keeping the peace dividend" that should not come back to taxpayers. I mean, in an ideal world, we would fund many more police officers to police in a proactive, targeted manner. But, there obviously other budget items that need attention and city council wants to keep the tax rate down. Our crime rate has come down - does the community as a whole support spending more money, perhaps at the expense of other important budget requests, to try to bring it down further. Are we ever safe enough?

I thought Councillor Nancy Bepple asked a great question question to the Supt Begley, asking for some explanation for the added officers. The main explanation I heard was about added paperwork (may have missed something though). I am not sure if there is more paperwork burdens this year than there was in the past. 

I've got the video from the exchange. Just need to make it web ready and I will post it.