The Greater Vernon parks And recreation service started in 1978 and now, 32 years later, the mayor of Vernon has risked the end of a service that is beneficial and basically fair to all the residents of Greater Vernon. The mayor is now attempting to blame the other partners, but when the review started, all partners were asked to identify their key concerns.
Coldstream Mayor Garlick provided a written list of seven basic concerns — nothing from Mayor Wayne Lippert. Director Mike Macnabb (Area C) took the irresponsible position that he was unwilling to comment or commit until water devolution was resolved. After five meetings of about one-and-a-half hours duration (for which they get very well paid), the review reached a point that could see the end of the service as we know it. Vernon council followed the mayor like a bunch of sheep and refused to support a motion to keep the status quo. Coldstream’s concerns could have been easily addressed. This mayor and council have ignored the best interests of the Vernon taxpayers when it relates to services provided via the North Okanagan Regional District. Fire dispatch will cost us much more, there's no concern over the unfair contribution we make for the Sterile Insect Release program, no sharing in the costs of O’Keefe Ranch, and tourism and economic development functions now at the city instead of being shared at Greater Vernon. No resolution to the dispute over Greater Vernon water is in sight.
Coldstream and electoral area residents must have nightmares if they think they may be amalgamated into Vernon. No one in their right mind would want to be governed by this mayor and council. Vernon appears to be trying to become the highest taxed community. with no concern for its taxpayers.
Let's hope that they all get thrown out in November 2011.
Barry Beardsell
Posted with permission of author.
6 comments:
Thank you Barry for pointing out how Vernon Council's apparently blind desire for control instead of cost-sharing of regional services, does not serve the best interests of Vernon taxpayers.
And I will point out yet again that amalgamation will not present any cost-savings - worse yet, there is no indication that amalgamation would be better for anybody.
Does this mean that Barry will run in the next election?
Come on Barry! We need more people like you in council!
I agree, Coldstream's wants could have been easily addressed. The whole governance structure is bizarre, and seems to be designed to keep everyone in perpetual meetings. Where is the leadership?
You people who are anti-amalgamation need to crawl out of your cave and see the waste of money. Within 10 km there are three councils, three different govenments, 35 fire trucks at four fire departments with four different fire Chiefs! How can you possibly be concerned with wasting money on a few parks! BIG PICTURE! What does Barry know??!!
Seriously, that is the BIG PICTURE? So brave of you, Anonymous, to attack Mr. Beardsell's knowledge base - have you ever served on Council?
If you still insist on the fantasy that amalgamation is cheaper, despite ALL evidence to the contrary, check out the debate on this same blog about extending community sewer for residents of the Okanagan Landing, which was annexed by the City in 1993.
17 years later (!!!) and we STILL CAN'T AFFORD to bring this neighbourhood up to the same standards as the other neihgbourhoods of Vernon - sidewalks, sewer, roads, community centres...
What hope would we have, if we annexed even more lands (eg. Areas B&C), and were similarly forced to bring them up to City standards?
Yep, Anonymous, apparently you want to pay MORE than you already do for exactly the SAME.
Check your financial facts - governance, or what we pay politicians to make decisions for us - is just a tiny, tiny drop in the bucket. Sadly, eliminating politicians will not bring cost-savings - cutting local government staff and services does.
So if you insist amalgamation is the answer, and you also insist on keeping taxation at the same level, you might as well start thinking now about which services you can do without.
Post a Comment