Oct 12th CRD Mtg on Rural Fire Protection Referendum Question

12-36 - One Referendum for WL Fringe Fire Protection

At yesterday's CRD Board meeting by a vote of 13-2, the Board reversed its' previous referendum questions to be put to voters' in Areas D, E,F for the continuation of rural fringe fire protection

The meeting started off by Area 'F' Director Joan Sorley raising a concern about a petition (read here/here) that had been delivered to the Cariboo Regional District earlier in the week (Oct 8th/11th) that was initiated by Kathy Ferguson, both a White Rd resident and a Cariboo Regional District staff member.  Director Sorley also suggested that the petition should be "received, noted and filed" as some who signed the petition asking that they vote on receiving fire services from Williams Lake FD, rather than 150 Mile House VFD, had since recanted.  Further, Director Sorley took umbrage by earlier comments from City of Williams Lake Councillors' Ivan Bonnell and Surinderpal Rathor about the current situation on rural fire protection, which Bonnell/Rathor made at the Oct 9th WL Council meeting

CRD Administrator Janis Bell clarified that it was not against CRD Policy for a CRD Staff member, in their capacity as a private citizen, to initiate a petition with regards to a pending CRD Referendum.  Area 'I' Director Jim Glassford then asked if residents' on a property to property  basis, after the vote, could request to have fire services be provided from 150 Mile VFD to Williams Lake Fire Department.  It was clarified that  it could happen but Victoria would require that the request be considered on an area basis, rather than property to property basis

Area 'D' Director Bischoff then asked Director Sorley what the consensus of the information that she had in her possession.  Director Sorley replied that cost was the overriding factor ($69 per $100,000 for 150 Mile VFD vs $125 per $100,000 for WL FD for the same fire service standard).  Area 'E' Director Byron Kemp also raised a concern saying that those who would be voting on 150 Mile VFD expansion would hurt those voting on staying with WL Fire Department

For her part -- Williams Lake Mayor Kerry Cook stated that the City of Williams Lake has no official position on the referendum except to ensure that voters' have all relevant information that make an informed vote

The Board, with Directors' Sorley/Bischoff opposed, threw out its' previous position on the Nov 24th referendum question and decided to send the following question to the voters' in Areas D,E,F:

"Are you in favour of the adoption of Bylaw No. 4776, 2012, which would establish a fire protection service in portions of Electoral Areas D, E and F, with a maximum annual requisition of the greater of $619,167 or an amount raised by applying a tax rate of $1.55/$1,000 to the net taxable value of land and improvements in the service area? (Based on 2012 assessed values, the current residential rate would be $1.37/$1,000, which translates to a residential rate of $129/$100,000.)"

Steve's Take:

While I congratulate Directors Sorley & Bischoff for putting up a brave fight, the rest of the Board should be ashamed for not "listening" to their colleague in Joan Sorley.  If she said that remaining with the current referendum question was the right thing to do, the Board had a "moral" obligation to back her up

As Joan Sorley herself told the Rush:

“I am disappointed, I feel like I have let down my constituents. It’s my job now to support the Board’s decision and I’ll do that to the best of my ability.”

While I share Director Sorley's frustration -- she should not feel that she let down her constituents, rather her colleagues let her down by not listening to her and take her comments at face value.  And for that reason -- Directors Armstrong, Dixon-Warren, Massier, Kemp, Wagner, William, Rattray, Cook, Sjostrom, Campsall and Sharpe should be ashamed for telling Director Sorley, through their votes, that they know what her residents' want better than Joan Sorley which is definitely, in my opinion, NOT the case

Finally - for the Regional District Chair Al Richmond to vote as if this was the right thing to do then decry about the situation at the end of the meeting, smacks of total hypocrisy.

Meanwhile - I have since emailed both Director Sorley/Chair Richmond and suggested that the Board might very well want to have policy on whether or not petitions should influence referendum question(s), especially after a Board decision.  If residents' were told when a Board decision was going to occur and then petitioned the Board anyways, then what's to stop the Board to change its' mind on a referendum vote on, say, borrowing to repair/replace the aging Sam Ketcham Pool or even Grants-In-Aid decisions.