Wednesday, February 22, 2012

At last night's WL City Council Meeting

At last night's WL Council meeting - a couple of topics raised eyebrows...

1) Social Planning Function - Cariboo Regional District ...

I've already spoken on this topic - read here however WL City Councillor Sue Zacharias stated:

Council can communicate to the citizens of Williams Lake that the Social Planning Council is an important cog in a big wheel.

"Supporting this is good for business, good for economic development and business development," she said. "I'm very supportive of this. I hope that people will see that it's a foundational brick for building our economy."

Unfortunately - I can not agree with her given that both people in Electoral Areas 'D' & 'F' have complained to their elected official (Area Director) that taxes imposed by the Cariboo Regional District are simply too high. Keep in mind that Councillor Zacharias was the CRD Area 'D' Director between 2005-2008 and I hear from some that complain that she "imposes" solutions and doesn't hear well from others that may not agree with her -- specifically, some in Area 'D' I talk to are still miffed about her insistence on Building Inspection in all of Electoral Area 'D' & the permanent shut-down of the Wildwood Transfer Station -- against the will of local residents.  Finally - a region wide Social Planning Function could put Mayor Cook's word about being sympathic about the taxation plight of heavy industry into doubt.  In addition, Quesnel's Mayor has been doing excellent work on reducing the tax load for heavy industry in her municipality and this new tax will not help her work on this file

Finally - I'm reminded of a infamous quote from an Electoral Area 'E' resident in early 2009, during the 2009 Area 'E' Town Hall meeting where he brought up the issue of the imposition of the tax for the Central Cariboo Arts/Culture Function, where he said...

I'm tired of politicians telling me what's good for me

So - I'll be drafting a "Letter to the Editor" to all newspapers' in Quesnel, Williams Lake and 100 Mile House later today and it'll be in the form of a "Open Letter to the Cariboo Regional District Board" in which I'll be calling upon the Board to reject the request of Williams Lake City Council

2) Woodland Drive Funding Options

At last night's WL Council meeting (after Mayor Cook left Council Chambers) - Council agreed to the following resolution:

Council authorize Staff to investigate and recommend a process to engage the Woodland Drive residents in a workshop to discuss the options available to the Woodland Drive residents & Council with respect to the provisions of water and sewer services for Woodland Drive

While discussing the issue, Councillor Sue Zacharias stated:

"I want Council to try to keep our emotions at bay and keep a clear head--it needs to be a resident-driven solution. If the City can help, we need to determine that. It may have to go to a referendum. The rest of the City may need to vote to say whether they want to help pay for this."

I really don't see the reason why she needed to tell Council to "not get emotional" on Woodland Drive.  Council has shown exceptional patience and leadership to getting water/sewer for those residents.  Now - whether or not the City will go to residents' to authorize borrowing of funds for water infrastructure via referendum remains to be seen.  If done by referendum - the cost will be considerable, even possibly into the tens of thousands of dollars while a counter-petition process (borrowing authorized unless 10% or more of voters' in Williams Lake, roughly 747+ people sign a form formally opposed the borrowing) will cost a very small amount of money, certainly less than a formal referendum.

Here on my blog - there are supporters for both a referendum and counter-petition process to borrow funds for water infrastructure for Woodland Drive and Council will get criticized for whatever decision they make in this regard and there are good arguments for either side

A workshop between the City and Woodland Drive residents', according to the City's CAO (B. Carruthers), would be scheduled "soon"

No comments: