Courtesy of the Rush:
 |
| Janis Bell, Cariboo RD CAO |
Janis Bell, Chief Administrative Officer with the Cariboo Regional District, has come forward to try and clear up some confusion surrounding this month’s WL Fringe Fire Protection referendum.
“I think really what we want residents to understand is that in its simplest form this referendum is really about maintaining the status quo. It really means if you’ve got fire protection and you’re happy with it, you want to vote yes. There are no additional costs for residents and some people think there is but it’s important to understand that that is not the case.”
Bell also admits the referendum question is intimidating but says all its asking is if you’d like to continue receiving fire protection at a slightly lower cost than you’re paying right now.
She encourages anyone with questions about the referendum to call the CRD office (250-392-3351) in Williams Lake. The referendum is scheduled for Saturday, November 24th with advance polls available Wednesday, November 14th & Monday, November 19th.
7 comments:
What? They need a referendum to maintain the status quo? They need a referendum to lower the costs? How much is this person paid to come up with such hare brained activities? Doesn't she have bigger problems to solve for us? Good Grief!
WHY in blazes is this referendum necessary? If yes means status quo, why is a referendum needed to maintain status quo? If yes means I'm happy with my fire protection, why is there a referendum required to gather that information? If there are no additional costs involved for the status quo, isn't that just a normal, expected condition that should NOT need a referendum? This whole mess sounds like a make work project. How much did it cost to run this referendum? It seems that Ms. Bell's initiation of this referendum ought really be questioned as busy work. Its caused alot of confusion the way its been handled, and its starting to grate on peoples nerves....annoying.
Thanks for your comments...
I should clarify however that it wasn't a recommendation from Janis Bell (CRD CAO) to go to referendum however it was a decision of the CRD Central Cariboo Directors to do so.
Those Central Cariboo Directors' are:
Area 'D' - Deb Bischoff
Area 'E' - Byron Kemp
Area 'F' - Joan Sorley
You should contact your Area Director if you feel strongly that a formal vote (referendum) is a waste of your tax dollar
Steve
Spare me Steve. They, the board, are given options. If a referendum was given as a viable option, ask the question "who said it was a viable option?"
Anonymous at 6:50pm...
I should further clarify that the Board *never* had that option as CRD Staff were directed to consider only seek permission for the new WL Contracted Rural Fringe Fire Protection Service through a formal referendum, again that decision was an agreement of CRD Directors' Bischoff, Kemp and the only decision the Board was asked to decide was "1 question" or "two questions" for assent of rural fringe residents in CRD Areas D, E, F for continuation of fire protection
Steve
The CRD had no choice.... zero, zip, nada, none about going to referendum.
It is the law...when the old fire protection agreements expired and a new system is proposed they MUST go to referendum for voter assent. MUST. No ther options
Take off your tinfoil hats people...contrary to what you might imagine in your heads this is not a conspiracy theory by Ms. Bell to waste your tax dollars.
Thanks for your comments...
For those against a referendum, Jim is right - the CRD would have had no choice (even if the CRD Central Cariboo Directors' had said "seek approval via counter-petition/AAP) for the proposed Rural Fire Protection Function as Section 801.3 (1) (a) of the Local Gov't Act says:
(1) Participating area approval may be obtained by alternative approval process if
(a) the maximum amount that may be requisitioned for the service is the amount equivalent to 50¢ for each $1 000 of net taxable value of land and improvements included in the service area,
As the proposed Rural Fire Protection Function has a proposed tax rate of $1.55/$1,000. Counter-Petition (AAP) *could not* be used in this case and hence, a formal referendum for approval of the proposed Rural Fire Protection Function was required by provincial law
Steve
Post a Comment