RDEK Motion on Jumbo Resort

To: Those Who Have Been Entrusted With The Decision

Re: RDEK vote on the motion to refer the Jumbo Resort decision to the provincial government

I would like to state my thoughts on this question, in the hopes that you will take them into consideration along with all the other public input you have received on this issue, when you vote tomorrow.

1. This matter is not even officially in front of the RDEK board, as no formal application has been made. Why is Director Wilks reacting to an issue which a) is not even near his area, and b) may come before the board in the future (or may not)? Furthermore, if the RDEK, whose primary mandate is land use planning for the benefit of the community, does not feel equipped to deal with this land issue, how do they define their purpose? And is avoiding a perceived legal threat a valid and responsible criteria for making (or not making) a far-reaching and irreversible decision? Lastly, does the RDEK feel it is in the best interest of it’s constituents to set a precedent by allowing these types of decision to be taken out of the hands of local government in the future

2. It is true that this matter as been before the government for too long. Too much time and too many resources have been spent to have it drag on any longer. However, I do not believe the public is responsible for this delay, and they should not be penalized by having local input denied. The provincial government has chosen to turn a deaf ear to the organized and vocal opposition, and creep ever forward. At any time, the issue could have been clarified by asking for official public input in the form of a referendum. Why does it appear they have been avoiding public input?

3. Who will actually benefit from this development, should it proceed? Will the possible economic benefits flow through to our communities? Or will the majority of jobs be low-paying and transient in nature? Would the loss of wilderness and habitat and space be offset by real, long-term jobs, and increased tourism? Or will a few individuals profit from the real estate, and leave the resort to struggle as others in our region already do? Will the public, or our local municipalities, be forced to cope with the increased burden of emergency services, road maintenance, etc, as the provincial government continues to withdraw funding for such responsibilities? What will happen if the Resort were to fail? What about the new ‘Green Economy’? Shouldn’t we direct this energy be directed towards broadening and expanding our economic base, to provide stability in the future?

Thank you for taking the time to hear my comments.

My Letter to the Environment Assessment Office

July 20, 2009

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed ‘Run of the River’ Glacier/Howser Creek power project.

I believe it’s time for our governments to show real leadership, and to encourage true innovation and technology in order to meet our province’s demand for power. We should be exploring and investing in less invasive power generating methods, as well as insisting on reducing energy consumption.

This project appears to benefit the investor only, at the expense of the environment, wildlife, and people. It interferes deeply with our most precious and valuable resource – pure clean water. I don’t see any evidence to suggest we should feel comfortable about the long-term effects of diverting mass amounts of water from mountain streams. It seems more like an extremely large and long-term experiment, with no contingency plan or exit strategy.

Based on past experiences, I have little confidence the Environmental Assessment Office, or other branches involved in this issue, will make a decision with the best interests of the people of the Kootenays in mind. Please prove me wrong!

Thank You,

Spring Hawes

Provincial Election

Hi Everyone-

Happy Springtime finally!  I wanted to let you know the District of Invermere has a booth at the Home & Rec Show this weekend.  There's information on our air quality; it's quality, and how it's monitored.  Plus there will be several Councilors or the Mayor available to talk with you about issues, ideas, or concerns you may have.  Please come by and say hello!

I'd also like to take this opportunity to encourage you to make use of your right to vote, and come out on Tuesday May 12!  It's so important to get your opinion counted, whatever it may be. Personally, I have made a decision to support our incumbant NDP MLA, Norm McDonald.  I have found him to be receptive and available to his constituents.  I believe he is a man with integrity and humbleness, and that's the sort of person I want to represent me.  Norm was influential in having the legislation reviewed requiring local beef producers to haul their beef cows long distances to be processed (making it very difficult for small farmers to be profitable). He believes decisions with far-reaching environmental effects (like Run Of the River projects, and Jumbo Glacier Resort) should be made at the local level.  He believes in improving Elder Care, Education, etc.  I have asked for his assisstance in some personel matters, and found him to be responsive and supportive.  

The main thing is, whoever you choose to support - get out and vote on Tuesday!!

Well, we’re back! 

You may have heard by now that at the regular Council Meeting last night (Tuesday, March 10), council voted unanimously to turn down the proposal for annexation of Grizzly Ridge Properties.  The sentiments expressed reflected a general discomfort with the proposal as it now stands.

 After the initial public house, several things became clear:

            -much more solid information was required by both council and the public in order to confidently make a decision of such monumental proportions and long-lasting effects on the future of Invermere

            -the residents of Invermere strongly expressed their desire to include MUCH more up-front, quality parkland in the proposal

            -there was no desire or need to rush through the public consultation and  annexation process

 Although most of the members of Council agreed that there are still potential benefits that could possibly be realized by annexation, they didn’t feel that at this time, the benefits outweighed the negatives.  So, Invermere, you have spoken, and been heard.

 My personal thoughts and reactions are this:

I have expressed from the beginning my concerns over the size and speed of the proposed annexation.  I’ve always felt that a decision of this size should be made pro-actively, from a well-planned, thought-out plan, rather than in reactionary way.  The truth is that if GRP hadn’t made the proposal, we would not be considering annexation of any of these lands.  We simply don’t need it at this time.  Since this is Council’s process, we should feel free to proceed at a rate that we and the public feel comfortable with.  If it is deemed important (which I think it is) to have a third-party analysis done of the possible risks and benefits associated with an annexation of this magnitude, then we need to take the time to do it.  We need to be able to do proper consultation with the public, including some measurement of our vision for our community, to determine if this is what we want and need.  As a new councilor, I didn’t feel comfortable trying to make this decision without much more information.

I think our job now will be to work closely and co-operatively with the Regional District to ensure that whatever happens on these lands is consistent with the current land use plans, is compatible with surrounding land use, and supportive of Invermere’s current Official Community Plan.  We’ll need to look for creative ways to secure greenspace, protect our water source, and encourage light industry in Invermere.  I look forward to exploring the possibilities!

It is also important to note that there is currently a study regarding the potential for Regional Governance within the Columbia Valley, and it’s outcome could effect how land use is determined.       

As always, I welcome all of your thoughts and comments.  Please don’t hesitate to contact me by phone, e-mail, or in person.  Thank you for your interest and attention!

 

Hello Again-

I hope some of you are here because you saw the article in the Valley Echo today!

It has been a busy month for Invermere Mayor and Councilors.  Feb. 17 – 19 was ‘Newly Elected Official Training’ in Nelson.  We had a very busy agenda, packed tight with seminars and training sessions designed to provide knowledge about municipal government, how it works, legalities, processes, etc.  We also found a little time to network with other staff and officials from around the Kootenays.  All around, it was a very beneficial 3 days.

Immediately upon our return from Nelson, mayor and council participated in an all-day, Strategic Priority Setting session.  We were able to express our own ideas,  priorities, and ideals, the most ‘important’ and widely held of which will be included in a Strategic Priority plan, along with a plan for how these priorities can be implemented and achieved.  It was interesting and encouraging to find that Mayor and councilors have many common priorities, including things like protection of Lake Windermere.  I hope that we will be able to act decisively on these universal values.

At the regular meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 24, the bylaw was passed to make Invermere an official Pesticide-Free Community!  This is exciting news, because reducing and/or eliminating chemical pesticides will benefit the health of everyone in the community.  We will have cleaner air, purer water, and a more balanced eco-system.  There are many simple, effective natural methods to control pests in our backyards.  Watch for educational materials and workshops this spring.    

There has been great public conversation, comments, and input with regards to the Boundary Expansion Proposal.   I would like to thank everyone for their excellent questions and intelligent suggestions.  Please try to attend the next open house, on March 9.  The format and information has been substantially improved since the last open house.  There will be considerably more information available, as well as a public presentation at 7:00 pm, followed by a question & answer question period.  Unfortunately, I’m unable to attend, but please be sure to fill out the comment sheets and hand them in, as all council members receive copies to read and review.

To keep from getting too long, more on Boundary Expansion next time…  

My views on boundary expansion

As a new councilor, I’d like to take this opportunity to publicly state my position on the Grizzly Ridge boundary expansion proposal.

I understand the reasons the previous council unanimously choose to bring the proposal forward for public consultation.  I believe there are legitimate and pressing issues we need to consider, such as control over our outlying areas, preservation of parklands, and protection of Paddy Ryan lakes, that boundary expansion may help to address.  And I recognize and appreciate the amount of effort and hard work council and staff have put into these negotiations thus far.

However, I also have many serious reservations about this proposal. 

Number one; we do not need this land.  We have plenty of more appropriate, undeveloped space within our existing boundaries and in the OCP.  Are we prepared to assume the burden of administering and servicing this massive area?  Are we in a position to prevent urban sprawl and it’s byproducts if we approve the expansion? We do need more light industrial zoning for economic sustasinability, but until the Bypass road is in, which is in the quite distant future, there is no capacity for industrial traffic along the existing access routes.

Number two; the upfront parkland dedication.  This could be a wonderful benefit to our community, but it needs serious thought.  First, what is in fact included in the offer on the table.  From my research, there is a very small amount of usable land (up to 49 acres)  included.  The rest is quite undevelopable anyways.  Second, can there be any assumption by the developer that by giving us ‘parklands’, we are inviting their development applications?  Are we prepared to deal with this, one way or another?

I suggest we pause, thouroughly investigate the variety of options available, and only move ahead on our own timeline, once we have:

*identified boundary expansion as a community priority

*established a well-developed community vision statement and set of core values for decision making purposes, in order to make monumental and far-reaching decisions from a rational and confident position

*developed usable and powerful tools and bylaws to ensure economic, environmental, and social sustainability within the community as it moves forward.  Example: Port Coquitlam’s Sustainability Initiative, including their OCP and Sustainability Checklist for Rezoning and Development Permit Applications 

*ensure we have the tools to manage residential vs. resort development, permanent residency and short-term rental property; zoning to manage where resort/vacation development occurs.  For example:  Cardel condos on 10^th Ave more appropriate for permanent residents 

Feb. 5 Update

Hello Everyone!  Time for an update from Council!

 

Things started off quite slowly in December, as we were sworn in not long before the Holiday rush, which didn’t provide much time to make any big decisions.  I spent quite a lot of time reading up on the projects currently underway with the District (like the Community Enhancement Plan and OCP), talking with various groups and individuals about their priorities and concerns, and getting some background on some of the issues we will be dealing with this year.  I’m pleased to have been appointed to two committees, the Personal Committee and the Lot 4616 Committee.  I’m especially happy to be involved with the discussions around 4616, as I’m sure they will provide interesting opportunities to build positive relations with all of the stakeholders.

 There is a lot going on, but here’s a quick run-down of what’s happening: 

- budget approval

-property tax held steady for residential

-property tax lowered for commercial & light industrial  

- grant applications for community enhancements such as Pothole Park, 7^th Ave, the planting of trees throughout town

- discussions around Lot 4616

- Mayor Taft will be attending the Living Lakes Conference in Great Britain  

- The Measuring Up community study should be beginning soon. 

The big issue right now is the discussion surrounding the Grizzly Ridge Properties boundary expansion proposal.  This is a monumental and complicated issue with clear arguments on both sides.  Council is seeking public input through community open houses.  One occurred last Tuesday, and two more are scheduled in the coming weeks.  Please try to come out, ask lots and lots of questions, and make your opinion known!

I’ll be posting many more of my thoughts here next week – so please check back soon!