Archive for October, 2011

Review of the October 26, 2011 regular board meeting

Thursday, October 27th, 2011

There were 6 commissioners present this meeting; Commissioner Enns was away. Notably, after his long health-related absence, Commissioner Cameron returned for this meeting and it was good to see him back.

The following is some colour on the thoughts I had regarding select board business of the day:

1. I believe this was the longest meeting of the year. There was a significant amount of material covered on the agenda.

2. There was a public input session on the 2012 budget and five year plan. There were no written submissions to the park board office, nor did anybody correspond with me to my own email about the budget. There were four people in the audience that spoke to the plan, two of which are candidates in the upcoming election. All comments received were in the form of questions, including questions on: clarifications on various line items of the budget, explanations of variances from actuals to budgeted values, comparative amounts from 2011 to 2012, and a question/comment amounting to “does the bottom line show enough of a surplus?”.

The most philosophical of questions was asked by Malcolm Shanks (candidate in the election), regarding the “moral authority” of the board to approve a budget that will be inherited by a new board just a month later. This is primarily a function of having a calendar year-end fiscal year and having the election cycles set by the province for a November election date (changing to October in 2014). While I do remember having the same thoughts myself as a newly elected (but not yet in office) commissioner while sitting on the November 26, 2008 meeting when that board passed third reading and adoption of their budget, we lived with their decision for the 2009 budget until it became apparent that there was no way the park board could afford it. In 2009, we then subsequently cut all non-critical spending until we could figure out what was going on.

The way to solve the budgetary timing matter (if it is indeed warrants a solution – it would occur every three years) is to change the fiscal year end, perhaps to March or June. Doing so has its own challenges with the limited hours we have in our finance staff and I rank this low on the priority list compared to other looming projects that they will be engaged in 2012 with, including the implementation of some new software that will assist with better financial reporting.

Ultimately the future board can re-open the budget if they want to. If they do, the reason will not be because they discovered we passed a budget the park can’t afford.

After considering public input, the board later on in the meeting passed third reading of the 2012 budget and 5-year plan 5-1 (Woodrow opposed). It will come up for adoption next meeting.

3. The board passed a motion concerning the positioning of signage for commercial businesses that do not have visibility from Columbia Valley Highway. This solution is amicable to all stakeholders.

4. The adoption of the fines, fees and charges bylaw was deferred 5-1 (myself opposed) upon more information to be received by staff to do a comparative review of relevant fees on our existing bylaws. I was fairly satisfied that this mirroring of development cost charges that other municipalities charge is the correct approach, but the rest of the board wants to see further information. In terms of differentials, however, our previous rates are far from what is charged in modern times. There are times to look at relative impact of changes and times to not, and in this instance relative comparisons are highly misleading.

5. An encroachment bylaw addressing the issue of grandfathered encroachments that are generally for the beautification of the park received first and second reading. This bylaw reflects a good balance.

6. A proposal to restructure our reserve accounts was effectively deferred until the December meeting when the new board can consider it. I think the information within the memorandum is quite in line with our financial transformation and although I would have preferred getting the ball rolling on this right now, ultimately it will be the next board that will be approving the follow-through changes and the two month delay will not be the end of the world. How and what projects we should be structuring our reserve funds for will be one of the initial challenges the new board will face this winter.

7. A reconsideration motion on the 2010 vote for a rejection of a variance application at 334 Balsam was defeated 4-2 (Hall and Woodrow in support of reconsideration). This board has seen two reconsideration motions make it to the table and I have voted against both of them as in both cases there was no misinformation or relevant new information since the initial vote. The applicant would be in his rights to re-submit a variance application if there is any new evidence to bring to light – he would probably have better luck doing so after the new board is in.

There will be at least four new commissioners

Monday, October 17th, 2011

There will be at least four and up to six new commissioners after the November elections – Commissioners Cameron, Enns, Nokleby and Woodrow are not running in the upcoming election.

On the Cultus Lake side, where two commissioners are elected to the board, there were two candidates – Commissioner Charlotte Hall and Lawrence (Larry) Payeur. They will be acclaimed to office and presumably their election expenses will be quite low this season. I have already called both to congratulate them.

On the Chilliwack side, on the incumbents side are both myself and Commissioner Owen Skonberg. Other candidates are Scott Allinott, Bob McCrea, Austin Ross, Malcolm Shanks and Carlton Toews. There are seven candidates running for five seats.

Review of the October 12, 2011 regular board meeting

Monday, October 17th, 2011

There were 5 commissioners present this meeting; Commissioners Cameron and Skonberg were away.

The following is some colour on the thoughts I had regarding select board business of the day:

1. The board received a memorandum that stated that staff is working on a bylaw amendment to the Encroachment bylaw with respect to previous applications received. This is a case of developing a comprehensive solution to the issues concerning encroachments rather than applying quick fixes and the cost of waiting a little while is far less than the cost of not doing it correctly. Commissioner Woodrow moved a motion to agree to the prior encroachment with no further costs to the applicant, but this received no seconders.

2. The board approved four measures concerning Sunnyside campground.

The first measure was to adopt a decrease in parking rates for seasonal campers for a second vehicle from $150 to $100. This motion was carried 3-2 (Woodrow and Peter opposed). My vote against was because there is a significant measure for Sunnyside seasonal campers to allow entry in April and that unlike day use campers, who bring extra vehicles in typically for a weekend, seasonal campers will bring in their automobiles for significantly higher periods of time.

The second measure was to decrease the cost of a second vehicle / second family member to $10 from $20 presently. This was carried 5-0 and brings us much more in line with other campgrounds. There will be a revenue consequence to this, however.

The third measure was to decrease the pet rate from $5/day to $5/day up to $20/week, which was carried 5-0.

Later on in the meeting, the board agreed to a recommendation to allow the opening of Sunnyside to seasonal campers in the closest weekend to April 15 instead of the May 1st fixed date. As Sunnyside is staffed from April 1st there will be no labour consequence in costs, but there will be an increase in electricity consumption between the mid-April to end of April date.

3. The board moved first, second and third reading of our fees, charges and fines bylaw. This bylaw consolidates various rates into a single bylaw. The City of Chilliwack has similar bylaws with their Miscellaneous Rates Bylaw, Development Cost Charge bylaw, etc. Other municipalities have similar bylaws in place.

4. The board moved first and second reading of our 2012 budget bylaw. I will reserve comment until the bylaw has passed. There will be a public comment period on the budget bylaw at the October 26, 2011, 7:00pm board meeting and people can voice their comments through that medium. Also, they can write into the board office by postal mail or by e-mail. In addition, commissioners can also be emailed.

I did ask for a motion, however, which was moved by Commissioner Hall and seconded by Commissioner Woodrow requesting that the 2013 and later years’ increments for the daily use rates for the Old Age Pensions group at the Community Hall be removed. Currently the day use rate the OAPs are paying at the community hall are scheduled to be increased in the 2012 budget, but there was an increase in 2013 and subsequent years. While our community hall is not making money for the park, and indeed, it costs more to keep it up, it does provide a good meeting place for the community and I believe the social benefits of having it there far outweigh the cost going into it. That said, there does have to be some planning with respect to the building over the medium-term time range. This is something the next board should be addressing.

5. The board moved third reading of the appointment of officers bylaw, which included language over our existing officers bylaw that would indemnify commissioners from legal costs as a result of the performance of their duties. Future commissioners will doubtlessly be relieved to this has been put into place. Hopefully this provision will never have to be used. The language is similar in nature to the Municipal Officers and Employees Bylaw in the City of Chilliwack.

6. The board considered a matter concerning pay parking, specifically the rates to be offered and the contract to administer parking. I excused myself from this part of the proceedings due to a perceived conflict of interest due to a personal relationship I have with the owner/operator of the company in question. For further background information, his wife and my wife are friends. I will also disclose that the relationship is not an economic relationship (i.e. I do not stand to gain financially if this decision was accepted or rejected).

As I stated in my dissection of the April 13, 2011 meeting where I declared a similar conflict of interest, although this does not fall as a real conflict of interest, in my mind it easily can fall into a perceived conflict of interest situation. There are simply some matters where personal life and business do not mix – it is much more prudent for me to declare a conflict and be able to look straight into the faces of both the stakeholders at Cultus Lake Park, and the owner/operator of Lions Parking and say that I took the most ethical action possible by removing myself. I did not see how taking part in this decision that I could be considered an objective participant, which is why I removed myself from the proceedings.

7. Commissioner Skonberg‘s proposed motion to reduce residential leaseholder rates by 10% did not receive a seconder, with Commissioner Nokleby “moving it for discussion purposes”.

8. Finally, the board considered and adopted a motion thanking the Citizens on Patrol for the great work they have been doing in the Cultus Lake Community. Lewis Kirkness and his group have been doing a fine job.

Running for Re-Election

Thursday, October 6th, 2011

SACHA PETER ANNOUNCES RE-ELECTION BID

CHILLIWACK, BC – With the filing of nomination papers, Sacha Peter is seeking re-election for a second term as a Cultus Lake Park Board Park Commissioner.

“The work I am accomplishing for the park board is not yet finished,” stated Mr. Peter. “We have made great strides in improving our financial performance over the past three years. If re-elected, I will work to ensure that people will continue seeing a financially sustainable park. I also commit to avoiding an increase in residential density so people will not have to experience extra traffic congestion and strained infrastructure.”

Significant highlights from the first term in office included:

• Strong leadership on budgetary decisions that took the park from deficit to surplus;
• An active voice on the Governance Committee, which decided to not embark on an expensive amalgamation with the City of Chilliwack;
• Implementing open and accountable public meetings with a public question period.

Sacha Peter is currently the chairman of the Cultus Lake Park Board. A resident of Chilliwack, he is a certified management accountant and employs himself with policy and communications work in the public sector, financial analysis, accounting and writing.