SMALL COMMUNITY STANDS TO MAKE HUGE CONTRIBUTION
If the North Saanich community chooses to embrace the idea of the current Sandown application and proposal, we stand to make a significant contribution to the Region with the acquisition of the Sandown property. Our first public Town Hall meeting saw about 100 people attend to hear about the latest application and proposal for the property. Moderated by Chief Administrative Officer Rob Buchan and Mayor Alice Finall, the meeting included Council members who listened with the public to a presentation that laid out the general proposal. That proposal would see about 83 acres preserved for agricultural use and gifted to the North Saanich community by the current owners, a Vancouver-based family. This is the first proposal of its kind in North Saanich history and if it succeeds, could be a model to boost regional food security and enhance local farming.
Of course there were the usual nay-sayers at the meeting but, in general, what I heard was an audience majority who seemed to support the concept (some even congratulated us on our innovation), provided a clear and detailed business plan is developed that addresses issues of cost to taxpayers of environmentally remediating the property, servicing the commercial aspects of the proposal (12 acres on McDonald Park Rd.), dealing with drainage and water and assessing long term benefits of additional tax revenue to the Municipality. My notes from audience questions include the following:
• Should the current owner be given commercial zoning?
• What will be the cost of fire and other services to the property?
• How will you define "farming use?"
• What are the staff costs to the District of working on this proposal?
• Should the municipality be engaged in "land development?"
• What are the costs of cleaning up the property and demolishing existing buildings?
• What happens if the cost of maintaining the property exceeds commercial tax revenue?
• Who would own the land? (12 acres would be owned by current owner and District of North Saanich would own 83 acres of ALR)
• What is the business plan for this proposal?
• What about affordable housing on the site? (Agricultural Land Commission regulations prohibit housing developments on ALR)
• Will there be a tax increase for North Saanich residents?
• Will there be further public consultation? (Absolutely)
• What are the revenue, terms and length of two existing leases on Sandown property? (Great Canadian Gaming Corporation and a cell tower)
• Should this go to referendum in the next Municipal general election?
In the end, I believe North Saanich and the current owner of the property could be on the brink of seizing a precedent-setting opportunity to establish a public legacy that could make a positive and ever-lasting difference to agricultural land use locally, across the Saanich Peninsula and in the Region. Once the Municipality has completed its due diligence, I just hope that the majority of North Saanich residents agrees.
My thanks to everyone who took the time to attend and participate in the meeting.
Webcasting Comes to NS Council
STAYING CONNECTED IN NORTH SAANICH
Thanks to Times Colonist reporter Kim Westad for the terrific front page coverage in Sunday's edition, headlining our new web casting project. As you know, this is a ground breaker for North Saanich as the only local government doing this in the CRD. My only regret is that we could not find a local service provider for the technology, forcing us to go outside the local business community. I am hopeful therefore that a local Island-based tech company will recognize a niche market for this service and pick up the challenge to provide the technology at a competitive price to local governments in the region.
We have been talking about this initiative for a long time, first entertaining the idea early last year. We recognized that we needed to better connect residents to local government and reach those who do not attend meetings due to time pressures and other factors. The Mayor also remembered the valuable public service Shaw Cable provided during the 1990s when meetings were carried live on the local cable channel. But once Shaw Cable abandoned this market, there were few options available to small communities like ours, until now. Although initially cost prohibitive, our IT Director John Carnell continued to explore the market until he found the provider that had a track record with other small communities and could best serve our needs at a reasonable and competitive cost.
As they say, the rest is history. We launch the service on May 2 and on May 3, you will be able to download video, audio or both, as well as clicking to specific agenda items in the event you don't want everything -- the site is conveniently indexed to make it easier for residents to listen to or watch a discussion on a particular topic of interest. So, we hope it is a big hit with residents over the next year during the trial period. My thanks goes to IT Director John Carnell and his staff as well as to Lisa Coburn for helping to make all of this possible. Lights, camera, action!
Thanks to Times Colonist reporter Kim Westad for the terrific front page coverage in Sunday's edition, headlining our new web casting project. As you know, this is a ground breaker for North Saanich as the only local government doing this in the CRD. My only regret is that we could not find a local service provider for the technology, forcing us to go outside the local business community. I am hopeful therefore that a local Island-based tech company will recognize a niche market for this service and pick up the challenge to provide the technology at a competitive price to local governments in the region.
We have been talking about this initiative for a long time, first entertaining the idea early last year. We recognized that we needed to better connect residents to local government and reach those who do not attend meetings due to time pressures and other factors. The Mayor also remembered the valuable public service Shaw Cable provided during the 1990s when meetings were carried live on the local cable channel. But once Shaw Cable abandoned this market, there were few options available to small communities like ours, until now. Although initially cost prohibitive, our IT Director John Carnell continued to explore the market until he found the provider that had a track record with other small communities and could best serve our needs at a reasonable and competitive cost.
As they say, the rest is history. We launch the service on May 2 and on May 3, you will be able to download video, audio or both, as well as clicking to specific agenda items in the event you don't want everything -- the site is conveniently indexed to make it easier for residents to listen to or watch a discussion on a particular topic of interest. So, we hope it is a big hit with residents over the next year during the trial period. My thanks goes to IT Director John Carnell and his staff as well as to Lisa Coburn for helping to make all of this possible. Lights, camera, action!
March 24, 2011 Editorial - Take Big Money Out of Politics
The following is my letter to the T/C Editor regarding campaign spending in politics and municipal elections:
RE: March 24, 2011 Editorial - Take Big Money Out of Politics
Your editorial on campaign spending in politics and municipal elections is timely and I couldn't agree more. I made one of the 131 submissions last year to the provincial Elections Reform Committee, calling for municipal campaign spending/donation limits and greater public oversight by Elections BC. Good people to whom I refer as "grass roots candidates" who simply want to serve their community in local government, may be discouraged to get involved if running an expensive campaign is the key measure of success at the polls. Access to our political system should be open to everyone.
The level of campaign funding should not determine the level of election support. But some municipal election campaigns in recent years have been more about expensive marketing strategies than about the candidate's real skills, ability and genuine desire to serve. And the higher the political stakes, the greater the amount of money available to candidates it seems, given that the primary role of local governments is making decisions about land use. And with land values on the South Island some of the highest in the country, there is often keen interest in the outcome of local elections by those who may have the most to gain.
But one of the greatest weapons against the influence of big money in politics is a well informed voter. It is vitally important for voters to prepare for the next election by attending local Council meetings, talking or meeting with local candidates one-on-one or in group settings, joining or starting up a community association; whatever it takes to critically assess candidates and their campaigns beyond big signs and glossy brochures. Voters need to know details about a candidate's background, experience and commitment to public service and to the community. Local media also have an important role to play in providing the public with responsible, objective and well researched story material on local issues and local candidates.
Apart from tightening up campaign funding rules and bringing greater public scrutiny to the election process through legislation, the next best thing to safeguarding our democratic system is an aware and informed voting public because it's true, information is power.
RE: March 24, 2011 Editorial - Take Big Money Out of Politics
Your editorial on campaign spending in politics and municipal elections is timely and I couldn't agree more. I made one of the 131 submissions last year to the provincial Elections Reform Committee, calling for municipal campaign spending/donation limits and greater public oversight by Elections BC. Good people to whom I refer as "grass roots candidates" who simply want to serve their community in local government, may be discouraged to get involved if running an expensive campaign is the key measure of success at the polls. Access to our political system should be open to everyone.
The level of campaign funding should not determine the level of election support. But some municipal election campaigns in recent years have been more about expensive marketing strategies than about the candidate's real skills, ability and genuine desire to serve. And the higher the political stakes, the greater the amount of money available to candidates it seems, given that the primary role of local governments is making decisions about land use. And with land values on the South Island some of the highest in the country, there is often keen interest in the outcome of local elections by those who may have the most to gain.
But one of the greatest weapons against the influence of big money in politics is a well informed voter. It is vitally important for voters to prepare for the next election by attending local Council meetings, talking or meeting with local candidates one-on-one or in group settings, joining or starting up a community association; whatever it takes to critically assess candidates and their campaigns beyond big signs and glossy brochures. Voters need to know details about a candidate's background, experience and commitment to public service and to the community. Local media also have an important role to play in providing the public with responsible, objective and well researched story material on local issues and local candidates.
Apart from tightening up campaign funding rules and bringing greater public scrutiny to the election process through legislation, the next best thing to safeguarding our democratic system is an aware and informed voting public because it's true, information is power.
Housing Affordability in the Capital Region
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY A BIGGER DISCUSSION
Please visit the following Times Colonist link to read a very good editorial on housing affordability across the Capital Region. It goes right back to my earlier comments about how challenging this problem is, a problem that is definitely regional and not unique to North Saanich. The message in the editorial is also clear -- there are a variety of factors that contribute to housing affordability, not the least of which is employment status and current salary to mortgage ratios. The editorial supports my views about how challenging and complex the issue is and that looking solely to local governments to provide solutions is not realistic. I understand that the TC will do another article(s) on possible solutions to housing affordability in this region so please watch for it: http://www.timescolonist.com/business/Editorial+Cost+housing+hurting+region/4454728/story.html
Please visit the following Times Colonist link to read a very good editorial on housing affordability across the Capital Region. It goes right back to my earlier comments about how challenging this problem is, a problem that is definitely regional and not unique to North Saanich. The message in the editorial is also clear -- there are a variety of factors that contribute to housing affordability, not the least of which is employment status and current salary to mortgage ratios. The editorial supports my views about how challenging and complex the issue is and that looking solely to local governments to provide solutions is not realistic. I understand that the TC will do another article(s) on possible solutions to housing affordability in this region so please watch for it: http://www.timescolonist.com/business/Editorial+Cost+housing+hurting+region/4454728/story.html
Be Prepared Now More Than Ever!
I encourage you to learn more about what you can do to prepare at home for an emergency. Our Fire Chief Gary Wilton is part of a regional emergency planning process and his office can provide more details about just what you can do in the event of a similar disaster. One of the most important items is to pack an emergency kit (I have used a large tupperware container) and keep it where you will be able to access it quickly. The kit can contain such items as:
water
canned and dried food
prescription medications if applicable
food and supplies for infants and children if applicable
food and supplies for pets, if applicable
extra clothing and shoes, including coats/jackets
wind up radio and flashlight
blankets/sleeping bags
crowbar (for removing debris)
matches/batteries
first aid kit
There are other items too that can be life-saving during a natural disaster and you can decide on what other special items should be included in your kit. Check the kit every few months to ensure that water and food items remain current.
I encourage you to also have a plan for loved ones if they do not live with you at home. How will you contact one another, where will you gather and what will you need for a few days if services and communications are otherwise severed? Local, regional and provincial governments have emergency planning in place and North Saanich is part of that network. I encourage you to learn more by contacting the District at 250-656-0781.
water
canned and dried food
prescription medications if applicable
food and supplies for infants and children if applicable
food and supplies for pets, if applicable
extra clothing and shoes, including coats/jackets
wind up radio and flashlight
blankets/sleeping bags
crowbar (for removing debris)
matches/batteries
first aid kit
There are other items too that can be life-saving during a natural disaster and you can decide on what other special items should be included in your kit. Check the kit every few months to ensure that water and food items remain current.
I encourage you to also have a plan for loved ones if they do not live with you at home. How will you contact one another, where will you gather and what will you need for a few days if services and communications are otherwise severed? Local, regional and provincial governments have emergency planning in place and North Saanich is part of that network. I encourage you to learn more by contacting the District at 250-656-0781.
More on Food Security
Canada's Food Insecurity
Vancouver Sun journalist Stephen Hume asks the right question when he puts it to politicians: "What exactly is Canada's and British Columbia's strategic plan for domestic food security?" Another variation on the same serious theme -- how will we feed ourselves when the availability of global and world food supplies is shrinking? Check out his column at this link,
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Opinion+Politicians+need+combat+Canada+food+insecurity/4400361/story.html
Vancouver Sun journalist Stephen Hume asks the right question when he puts it to politicians: "What exactly is Canada's and British Columbia's strategic plan for domestic food security?" Another variation on the same serious theme -- how will we feed ourselves when the availability of global and world food supplies is shrinking? Check out his column at this link,
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Opinion+Politicians+need+combat+Canada+food+insecurity/4400361/story.html
Food News
FOOD FORESHADOWED
What we have been warned about for years by environmentalists, scientists, climatologists and the farming community, that world food supplies are at risk from global events beyond our control, is fast becoming our new reality. Ever increasing population growth and demand in India and China, regional and civil unrest in the Middle East and weather catastrophes in fertile areas around the world, to name just a few, are forces negatively affecting global food supplies. We are also told that these events should be a wake-up call for us in the West.
Even here, recent media announcements are alerting us to imminent price increases of up to 5% in Greater Victoria and other Vancouver Island communities that include dairy products, fresh produce, baked goods, fuel and transportation (the last two have projected increases beyond 5%). These price increases again underscore how problematic it is that we depend so much on outside food sources that require transportation to and from the Island.
Given these recent events, I can't help but see an irony, that local governments such as ours in North Saanich, led by a Mayor and Council majority who made local food and agriculture priorities when we were first elected nearly three years ago, have been criticized or even ridiculed in some circles for our focus on agriculture. I have heard us described as "simplistic" in our approach to local land use, that we are attempting to resurrect an industry that has long since seen its heyday (no pun intended). Yes, I have listened to the critics and skeptics, especially those who seem to believe that food security is when the local grocery store stays open past 6:00 p.m.
Well, I strongly disagree with these nay-sayers, especially given recent food and agricultural movements across North America and public sentiment that reflect a growing concern about food security. As I have mentioned before, of Canadians surveyed last year, nearly 82% cited local food security as their greatest concern overall. So I am proud to be part of this Mayor and Council majority's work that continues to lobby for a thriving, secure and local food supply in North Saanich, on the Peninsula and across the region.
Our recipe for success is threefold -- making agriculture economically viable, raising the profile of local growers/producers and creating a supportive environment for farming and marketing -- a complex and daunting task but one that we cannot afford to ignore.
And while the efforts to date of some local and regional governments may sometimes feel like a drop in the bucket to the local farmer or grower, as a member of North Saanich Council, I am particularly proud of what we have achieved so far, including agricultural area planning and development of a cutting edge draft whole agricultural strategy.
Of course none of these initiatives would be possible without community involvement, the dedication and commitment of local volunteers, engagement by farmers and growers, as well as direct support from North Saanich Municipal staff such as CAO Rob Buchan and many others who provide policy expertise and hands-on help when we host local agricultural workshops and events.
I am also grateful to the work of local, Peninsula and regional organizations and groups, all of whom believe, more than ever before, that growing food close to home is more than just an option -- it is becoming a necessity. But we still have a lot to do and while we cannot solve all the problems related to local agriculture in just three years, together with our community, we can establish policy and practices at the municipal level that will continue to support one of the most important values of all -- the ability of communities like ours to eventually feed themselves.
Stay tuned.
NOTE ON FEBRUARY 28 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING:
Due to illness, I was unable to attend the February 28th Committee of the Whole meeting so I am unable to provide highlights. Please consult the District of North Saanich website for a copy of the meeting minutes which will summarize the Committee of the Whole and Budget meetings for February 28th.
What we have been warned about for years by environmentalists, scientists, climatologists and the farming community, that world food supplies are at risk from global events beyond our control, is fast becoming our new reality. Ever increasing population growth and demand in India and China, regional and civil unrest in the Middle East and weather catastrophes in fertile areas around the world, to name just a few, are forces negatively affecting global food supplies. We are also told that these events should be a wake-up call for us in the West.
Even here, recent media announcements are alerting us to imminent price increases of up to 5% in Greater Victoria and other Vancouver Island communities that include dairy products, fresh produce, baked goods, fuel and transportation (the last two have projected increases beyond 5%). These price increases again underscore how problematic it is that we depend so much on outside food sources that require transportation to and from the Island.
Given these recent events, I can't help but see an irony, that local governments such as ours in North Saanich, led by a Mayor and Council majority who made local food and agriculture priorities when we were first elected nearly three years ago, have been criticized or even ridiculed in some circles for our focus on agriculture. I have heard us described as "simplistic" in our approach to local land use, that we are attempting to resurrect an industry that has long since seen its heyday (no pun intended). Yes, I have listened to the critics and skeptics, especially those who seem to believe that food security is when the local grocery store stays open past 6:00 p.m.
Well, I strongly disagree with these nay-sayers, especially given recent food and agricultural movements across North America and public sentiment that reflect a growing concern about food security. As I have mentioned before, of Canadians surveyed last year, nearly 82% cited local food security as their greatest concern overall. So I am proud to be part of this Mayor and Council majority's work that continues to lobby for a thriving, secure and local food supply in North Saanich, on the Peninsula and across the region.
Our recipe for success is threefold -- making agriculture economically viable, raising the profile of local growers/producers and creating a supportive environment for farming and marketing -- a complex and daunting task but one that we cannot afford to ignore.
And while the efforts to date of some local and regional governments may sometimes feel like a drop in the bucket to the local farmer or grower, as a member of North Saanich Council, I am particularly proud of what we have achieved so far, including agricultural area planning and development of a cutting edge draft whole agricultural strategy.
Of course none of these initiatives would be possible without community involvement, the dedication and commitment of local volunteers, engagement by farmers and growers, as well as direct support from North Saanich Municipal staff such as CAO Rob Buchan and many others who provide policy expertise and hands-on help when we host local agricultural workshops and events.
I am also grateful to the work of local, Peninsula and regional organizations and groups, all of whom believe, more than ever before, that growing food close to home is more than just an option -- it is becoming a necessity. But we still have a lot to do and while we cannot solve all the problems related to local agriculture in just three years, together with our community, we can establish policy and practices at the municipal level that will continue to support one of the most important values of all -- the ability of communities like ours to eventually feed themselves.
Stay tuned.
NOTE ON FEBRUARY 28 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING:
Due to illness, I was unable to attend the February 28th Committee of the Whole meeting so I am unable to provide highlights. Please consult the District of North Saanich website for a copy of the meeting minutes which will summarize the Committee of the Whole and Budget meetings for February 28th.
Councilor Commandeur's Take on Budget Process
Visit Councilor Ruby Commandeur's Website for Her Take on the 2011 Budget Process
Councilor Ruby Commandeur has prepared and posted another "Wise Up Report" dedicated to the current budget process and how property taxes are calculated. As you know, North Saanich Council and staff are currently engaged in budget deliberations for 2011, an important process that happens every year at this time. Please visit her website at: http://rubyc.ca/html/facts-and-fiction.html
The Case for Web-Casting Council Meetings
MY VIEW
I am fully supportive of Council's latest decision to proceed with a proposal for a one-year trial to web-cast all Council meetings. I would have supported this initiative years ago but learned that costs to do so for small municipalities were prohibitive. Until now. So I am very pleased that the District of North Saanich plans to launch this important service this spring.
Why do I believe that this is an important service? Here are some reasons for improved communication with residents:
• Adequate ongoing communication with local residents about how Mayor and Council conduct the public's business during Council meetings is always a challenge for local governments and North Saanich is no different. Apart from our standard agenda package, District website, quarterly newsletter and audio recording, it is difficult if not sometimes impossible, for Council members and staff to reach the public on a weekly basis, especially to those who may never attend regular Council meetings, which is the vast majority.
The small percentage of residents who regularly attend Council meetings is understandable, given that the meetings themselves are not relevant to everyone. I have observed that the majority of those who more regularly attend meetings do so out of general interest, as representatives of a community organization/association, out of concern about a specific issue or topic, because of a public hearing or other bylaw issue, or because they have a land use application that requires Council approval. And sometimes, meetings can be tedious, particularly when the discussion is focused on technical, legal or operational matters. So a communications strategy that effectively reaches a majority of residents, such as web-casting, is a positive step and can only boost public awareness, knowledge and understanding of local government and how it works.
• "A picture is worth a thousand words." Web-casting is a unique method of communicating with the public, bringing greater accountability to local government, especially for elected officials related to attitudes, behaviour and decision-making.
There is to my knowledge no filter on web-casted Council proceedings -- what you see is what you get. Yes, what happens at North Saanich Council meetings is currently reported in a variety of ways, such as through staff minutes, the local press, the District website, those who attend and individuals such as me who use social media and take the time to write and report on issues and subjects deliberated during meetings. But each of these methods is susceptible to interpretation by whomever the individual is who takes the minutes, reports for the local press, manages the website, attends a meeting or writes a blog. A web-cast, on the other hand, is reality, a form of "raw footage" where the only thing left to interpretation will be how each of us assesses and processes what we have seen and heard.
• Information about Council proceedings should be timely, relevant and available to the public at all times.
Council and Committee of the Whole meetings are always open to the public (including North Saanich Commission/Committee meetings), unless topics are designated "in camera." Web-casting Council and Committee of the Whole meetings provides another venue for the public to quickly access information about decisions, issues and topics that are of interest or relevant to them, at a place and time convenient to them. I believe that information fails to "inform" if it is not current or easily accessible -- when the public's ability to access information is limited, then their ability to participate in their local government is also limited. Remember, "information is power" and the best thing that we, as elected officials can do with power and information, is to share them with the people and communities who elect us.
I am fully supportive of Council's latest decision to proceed with a proposal for a one-year trial to web-cast all Council meetings. I would have supported this initiative years ago but learned that costs to do so for small municipalities were prohibitive. Until now. So I am very pleased that the District of North Saanich plans to launch this important service this spring.
Why do I believe that this is an important service? Here are some reasons for improved communication with residents:
• Adequate ongoing communication with local residents about how Mayor and Council conduct the public's business during Council meetings is always a challenge for local governments and North Saanich is no different. Apart from our standard agenda package, District website, quarterly newsletter and audio recording, it is difficult if not sometimes impossible, for Council members and staff to reach the public on a weekly basis, especially to those who may never attend regular Council meetings, which is the vast majority.
The small percentage of residents who regularly attend Council meetings is understandable, given that the meetings themselves are not relevant to everyone. I have observed that the majority of those who more regularly attend meetings do so out of general interest, as representatives of a community organization/association, out of concern about a specific issue or topic, because of a public hearing or other bylaw issue, or because they have a land use application that requires Council approval. And sometimes, meetings can be tedious, particularly when the discussion is focused on technical, legal or operational matters. So a communications strategy that effectively reaches a majority of residents, such as web-casting, is a positive step and can only boost public awareness, knowledge and understanding of local government and how it works.
• "A picture is worth a thousand words." Web-casting is a unique method of communicating with the public, bringing greater accountability to local government, especially for elected officials related to attitudes, behaviour and decision-making.
There is to my knowledge no filter on web-casted Council proceedings -- what you see is what you get. Yes, what happens at North Saanich Council meetings is currently reported in a variety of ways, such as through staff minutes, the local press, the District website, those who attend and individuals such as me who use social media and take the time to write and report on issues and subjects deliberated during meetings. But each of these methods is susceptible to interpretation by whomever the individual is who takes the minutes, reports for the local press, manages the website, attends a meeting or writes a blog. A web-cast, on the other hand, is reality, a form of "raw footage" where the only thing left to interpretation will be how each of us assesses and processes what we have seen and heard.
• Information about Council proceedings should be timely, relevant and available to the public at all times.
Council and Committee of the Whole meetings are always open to the public (including North Saanich Commission/Committee meetings), unless topics are designated "in camera." Web-casting Council and Committee of the Whole meetings provides another venue for the public to quickly access information about decisions, issues and topics that are of interest or relevant to them, at a place and time convenient to them. I believe that information fails to "inform" if it is not current or easily accessible -- when the public's ability to access information is limited, then their ability to participate in their local government is also limited. Remember, "information is power" and the best thing that we, as elected officials can do with power and information, is to share them with the people and communities who elect us.
COMMITTEE/COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2011
Mayor Alice Finall finalized in December, 2010 Council Liaison positions for this new year 2011. These appointments are reviewed by the Mayor at the end of every calendar year. Sometimes, changes are made after consultation with Council members, however, the Mayor has full discretion to make appointments with a view to balance the needs of the municipality, our CRD partners and stakeholders and, finally, individual Council members.
New this Council term has been the request for Council Liaisons to make regular reports to Council about each of the Commissions/Committees they serve. Such reporting, instituted by Mayor Finall at the beginning of the term, provides greater accountability, improves communication and provides important information to North Saanich residents and taxpayers.
My 2011 appointments are as follows:
- Mayor's Alternate Director on the CRD Board
- North Saanich Appointee - Greater Victoria Labour Relations Association (GVLRA)
- Mayor's Alternate to the Peninsula Recreation Commission
- Alternate First Nations Liaison
- Liaison to the Peninsula Agricultural Commission (PAC)
- Liaison to the Regional Housing Trust Fund Commission (RHTF)
- Liaison to North Saanich's Heritage Advisory Commission (HAC)
- Liaison to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC)
- Liaison to the North Saanich Heritage Advisory Commission
I look forward, on behalf of North Saanich, to continue working with local volunteers and regional colleagues involved in each of these groups. This work helps to broaden our knowledge and perspective about the significance of North Saanich's participation and place in local and regional issues and initiatives. If you have any questions about any of these responsibilities or bodies, please feel free to contact me.
Farmland Threatened
FARMLAND THREATENED
To further illustrate the importance of agriculture in British Columbia, not just on the Saanich Peninsula, I thought you might find the following article by the Tyee of interest. In my view, shared by so many others, this is once again a significant consideration for all jurisdictions as concerned as North Saanich is, about the future of food and its link to community health. http://thetyee.ca/News/2010/11/26/FarmlandsBrink/?utm_source=mondayheadlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=291110
Canadian Farmland At Risk
Canadian Farmland at Risk of Being Ploughed Under
In a recent article in the October 19, 2010 edition of Ontario Farmer, written by Canadian agrologist, farm columnist and director of Canada's largest credit union Wendy Holm, she warns about realities facing the Canadian farmer and farming worldwide. Ms. Holm suggests in her article that by mid-century, the world population will grow to about 9 billion from today's 6.9 billion, at a time when the world continues to consume more than it produces (grain reserves for instance were at 111 days just 10 years ago and are now at 54 days). She goes on to say that the World Bank foresees world demand for food increasing by 50 per cent by 2030 and that grain producers will have to double their outputs in the next 40 years to keep up with beef demands by higher income consumers (China now consumes 4 times more beef than it did just 25 years ago).
What is even more alarming, according to Holm's article, is that these increases are occurring when the global ratio of arable land per person has dropped by half since the 1970s, the demand for bio-fuel has tripled and we consume 4% more water than we replenish. So, asks Holm, where will our food come from and according to her information, large investors are looking at food as the "new plastic." She says that the "game plan" on the part of these global investors is that once they control our fertile farmland, they control the future. Holm cites a survey by the World Bank that "reports 45 million hectares of large-scale holdings changed hands in 2009, compared with an average of 4 million hectares changing hands between 1998 and 2008." And, says Holm, "this is only the beginning." She suggests that if Canadians want to retain control of their own food production, then we must find a way to support and invest in our farmers. Holm argues that "farm lenders in Canada should be working together" to help Canadian farmers survive against serious challenges.
The following demographic is the purchaser or investor profile as described in Holm's article:
"In California, foreign buyers are from Spain, Switzerland, China, Egypt and Iran and they also have their sights set on the U.S. Midwest, Texas, Mississippi, Idaho and the Dakotas."
"Hundreds of millions of hectares are being bought in sub-Saharan Africa, Central and Latin America and Eastern Europe, by foreign interests from the Gulf States, China, Japan, South Korea and Western Europe."
More recently, Holm suggests, foreign investment in farmland is also focused on "two other countries that have good infrastructure, government, farmland and relatively low land prices: Canada and Australia." Holm believes that "in two to three years, when interest rates rise, many carrying heavy debt loads will exit the sector. Left standing will be the foreign investors." Finally, Ms. Holm concludes, "There are structural changes occurring in Canada's farm sector. We need to work together to find ways to reduce the impact on farmers and food security, not attack each other in a turf war that no one can win." Innovative partnerships and collaboration, not competition among Canadian lenders, are the keys to the future in farm lending, Ms. Holm says, and can lead to new relationships that can help protect Canada's food security, farmland and farming communities.
To read this article in full and to get more information and news about farming in Canada, please visit ontariofarmer.com
In a recent article in the October 19, 2010 edition of Ontario Farmer, written by Canadian agrologist, farm columnist and director of Canada's largest credit union Wendy Holm, she warns about realities facing the Canadian farmer and farming worldwide. Ms. Holm suggests in her article that by mid-century, the world population will grow to about 9 billion from today's 6.9 billion, at a time when the world continues to consume more than it produces (grain reserves for instance were at 111 days just 10 years ago and are now at 54 days). She goes on to say that the World Bank foresees world demand for food increasing by 50 per cent by 2030 and that grain producers will have to double their outputs in the next 40 years to keep up with beef demands by higher income consumers (China now consumes 4 times more beef than it did just 25 years ago).
What is even more alarming, according to Holm's article, is that these increases are occurring when the global ratio of arable land per person has dropped by half since the 1970s, the demand for bio-fuel has tripled and we consume 4% more water than we replenish. So, asks Holm, where will our food come from and according to her information, large investors are looking at food as the "new plastic." She says that the "game plan" on the part of these global investors is that once they control our fertile farmland, they control the future. Holm cites a survey by the World Bank that "reports 45 million hectares of large-scale holdings changed hands in 2009, compared with an average of 4 million hectares changing hands between 1998 and 2008." And, says Holm, "this is only the beginning." She suggests that if Canadians want to retain control of their own food production, then we must find a way to support and invest in our farmers. Holm argues that "farm lenders in Canada should be working together" to help Canadian farmers survive against serious challenges.
The following demographic is the purchaser or investor profile as described in Holm's article:
"In California, foreign buyers are from Spain, Switzerland, China, Egypt and Iran and they also have their sights set on the U.S. Midwest, Texas, Mississippi, Idaho and the Dakotas."
"Hundreds of millions of hectares are being bought in sub-Saharan Africa, Central and Latin America and Eastern Europe, by foreign interests from the Gulf States, China, Japan, South Korea and Western Europe."
More recently, Holm suggests, foreign investment in farmland is also focused on "two other countries that have good infrastructure, government, farmland and relatively low land prices: Canada and Australia." Holm believes that "in two to three years, when interest rates rise, many carrying heavy debt loads will exit the sector. Left standing will be the foreign investors." Finally, Ms. Holm concludes, "There are structural changes occurring in Canada's farm sector. We need to work together to find ways to reduce the impact on farmers and food security, not attack each other in a turf war that no one can win." Innovative partnerships and collaboration, not competition among Canadian lenders, are the keys to the future in farm lending, Ms. Holm says, and can lead to new relationships that can help protect Canada's food security, farmland and farming communities.
To read this article in full and to get more information and news about farming in Canada, please visit ontariofarmer.com
Vital Signs - Strong or Do We Need a Shot in the Arm?
The Victoria Foundation just released its 2009 Vital Signs Report, an interesting and informative snapshot of quality of life on the South Island and in the Capital Region (in my view, valuable reports of this type further illustrate the need to retain the Stats-Canada long form census).
Vital Signs provides "vital" information to all of us who are working and making decisions on behalf of people, their families, their neighbourhoods and their communities. I appreciate the time, research and commitment the Victoria Foundation demonstrates, not only through its Vital Signs report but also through its various philanthropic projects that make a significant contribution to the well-being of populations living in our region.
I have requested that the Victoria Foundation makes a presentation to North Saanich Council at one of its fall meetings, focusing on the results of the report. Please watch the District website and this blog for the date and time of this presentation.
Report highlights, cited as follows, represent to me some of the most important and interesting data based on the Foundation's census information, data analysis and survey results:
People Profile:
• How Many We Are - total Capital Regional population - 364,108 (2008)
• Where We Live - 67.1% of Greater Victoria residents lived in urban core; 16.9% in the West Shore; 11.7% on Saanich Peninsula; and, 4.3% on Gulf Islands (2006)
• Who We Are - 17.6% of Greater Victoria residents reported non-European ethnic origins, including those from Aboriginal communities, Latin America, Asia, Africa, Australia and Pacific Islands, the Caribbean and Middle East (2006)
• Our Homes - Average house had 2.2 people compared with 2.5 for B.C. (2006)
• Our Houses - 65.4% single family occupation, 2.5% multi-family occupation and 32.1% single person or non-family occupation (2006)
• Living Alone - 32.3% of people over 65 years of age were living alone (2006)
Important Issues Cited by Survey Respondents (listed in descending priority):
• Homelessness - 52.8%
• Cost of Living - 32.2%
• Addictions - 29.2%
• Housing - 27.3%
• Community Planning - 16.2%
• Poverty - 14.1%
• Mental Illness - 13.5%
• Sewage Treatment - 12.7%
• Health Care - 12.4%
• Municipal Integration - 11.8%
What We Do Well In:
• Recycling - 97% recycle (2007)
• Natural Environment - 85.9% satisfaction rate with access to natural environment (2008)
• Museum - 542,596 paid visits (2007/2008)
• Parkland - total of 16,141 hectares of regional, provincial and federal parkland in 2007, up by 2,687 since 2001
• Internet Use - 79.1% of 16 and over residents used internet in their homes for personal use (2007)
What We Need to Improve:
• Rental availability
• Illicit drug use
• Social housing wait list
• Child care spaces
• Rental vacancy
• Affordability index
Young Voices: (46.6% of youth in Greater Victoria are between 15 and 18 years old):
In areas of arts and culture for youth and youth having a voice in elections at a younger age, Greater Victoria was rated as a B and a C respectively. It seems clear from the results that our youth want to be more involved in their community in meaningful ways.
Youth care about their environment, citing need for green transportation such as bus service that meets their needs.
Young people cite cost of living as a "strain" and want a higher minimum wage as well as more affordable housing.
Unemployment among youth increased in 2009, leading to youth wanting safer and better places to assemble that are closer to their own neighbourhoods.
Youth are health conscious, on average eat healthy meals and snacks and understand the need for physical activity and recreation that are accessible.
Youth feel "somewhat connected" to their communities, at 60.4% of those surveyed.
Youth rated the following as "important or essential" areas for community investment:
1. Education - 89.70%
2. Affordable housing - 87.30%
3. Drug/Alcohol Rehabilitation - 79.75%
4. Public Transportation - 77.25%
5. Environmental Action - 75.55%
6. Family Support Services - 70.20%
7. Employment Programs - 67.95%
8. Arts - 55%
9. After School Programs - 53.80%
10. Police and Law Enforcement - 53.40%
Participation in Civic Life (Belonging and Leadership):
• Charitable Giving - in 2007, 28.0% of those who filed tax returns reported that they made charitable donations, down slightly than previous years.
• Sense of Belonging - 68.5% of seniors over 65 reported a "somewhat or very strong sense of belonging to their local community," demonstrating a decrease.
• Voter Turn-Out - the 2008 federal election saw a turn-out of 67.5%, considerably higher than the percentages for B.C. and Canada.
• Employment - in 2009, 63.3% of Greater Victoria residents 15 and older were employed, slightly higher than the averages for B.C. and Canada.
Over 85% of residents surveyed said they "usually or always felt safe" walking after dark.
Greater Victoria consumers paid 1.1% more in March 2009 for services and goods than they did in March 2008.
3.5% of people between 19 and 64 in December 2008 depended on unemployment insurance or basic income assistance.
Over 4,600 people were traveling the Malahat to commute to work in 2006 (most of the population lived in Cowichan Valley and Nanaimo areas).
Summary Conclusions from this Report:
The Vital Signs report indicates, based on its data collection and survey information, that Greater Victoria appears to be "moving forward" on issues of property crime, amount of median donations, rental vacancy, commuting methods and income needed for shelter. We appear to remain static on children in care of the provincial government and we appear to be losing ground on issues of unemployment, perceived health, solid waste disposal, tourism revenue, composite learning index, physical activity and charitable giving.
Note: All of the information I have used for this blog post represents data and language taken directly from the Vital Signs Report. For further information and a full copy of the report, please visit the Victoria Foundation at www.victoriafoundation.bc.ca
Vital Signs provides "vital" information to all of us who are working and making decisions on behalf of people, their families, their neighbourhoods and their communities. I appreciate the time, research and commitment the Victoria Foundation demonstrates, not only through its Vital Signs report but also through its various philanthropic projects that make a significant contribution to the well-being of populations living in our region.
I have requested that the Victoria Foundation makes a presentation to North Saanich Council at one of its fall meetings, focusing on the results of the report. Please watch the District website and this blog for the date and time of this presentation.
Report highlights, cited as follows, represent to me some of the most important and interesting data based on the Foundation's census information, data analysis and survey results:
People Profile:
• How Many We Are - total Capital Regional population - 364,108 (2008)
• Where We Live - 67.1% of Greater Victoria residents lived in urban core; 16.9% in the West Shore; 11.7% on Saanich Peninsula; and, 4.3% on Gulf Islands (2006)
• Who We Are - 17.6% of Greater Victoria residents reported non-European ethnic origins, including those from Aboriginal communities, Latin America, Asia, Africa, Australia and Pacific Islands, the Caribbean and Middle East (2006)
• Our Homes - Average house had 2.2 people compared with 2.5 for B.C. (2006)
• Our Houses - 65.4% single family occupation, 2.5% multi-family occupation and 32.1% single person or non-family occupation (2006)
• Living Alone - 32.3% of people over 65 years of age were living alone (2006)
Important Issues Cited by Survey Respondents (listed in descending priority):
• Homelessness - 52.8%
• Cost of Living - 32.2%
• Addictions - 29.2%
• Housing - 27.3%
• Community Planning - 16.2%
• Poverty - 14.1%
• Mental Illness - 13.5%
• Sewage Treatment - 12.7%
• Health Care - 12.4%
• Municipal Integration - 11.8%
What We Do Well In:
• Recycling - 97% recycle (2007)
• Natural Environment - 85.9% satisfaction rate with access to natural environment (2008)
• Museum - 542,596 paid visits (2007/2008)
• Parkland - total of 16,141 hectares of regional, provincial and federal parkland in 2007, up by 2,687 since 2001
• Internet Use - 79.1% of 16 and over residents used internet in their homes for personal use (2007)
What We Need to Improve:
• Rental availability
• Illicit drug use
• Social housing wait list
• Child care spaces
• Rental vacancy
• Affordability index
Young Voices: (46.6% of youth in Greater Victoria are between 15 and 18 years old):
In areas of arts and culture for youth and youth having a voice in elections at a younger age, Greater Victoria was rated as a B and a C respectively. It seems clear from the results that our youth want to be more involved in their community in meaningful ways.
Youth care about their environment, citing need for green transportation such as bus service that meets their needs.
Young people cite cost of living as a "strain" and want a higher minimum wage as well as more affordable housing.
Unemployment among youth increased in 2009, leading to youth wanting safer and better places to assemble that are closer to their own neighbourhoods.
Youth are health conscious, on average eat healthy meals and snacks and understand the need for physical activity and recreation that are accessible.
Youth feel "somewhat connected" to their communities, at 60.4% of those surveyed.
Youth rated the following as "important or essential" areas for community investment:
1. Education - 89.70%
2. Affordable housing - 87.30%
3. Drug/Alcohol Rehabilitation - 79.75%
4. Public Transportation - 77.25%
5. Environmental Action - 75.55%
6. Family Support Services - 70.20%
7. Employment Programs - 67.95%
8. Arts - 55%
9. After School Programs - 53.80%
10. Police and Law Enforcement - 53.40%
Participation in Civic Life (Belonging and Leadership):
• Charitable Giving - in 2007, 28.0% of those who filed tax returns reported that they made charitable donations, down slightly than previous years.
• Sense of Belonging - 68.5% of seniors over 65 reported a "somewhat or very strong sense of belonging to their local community," demonstrating a decrease.
• Voter Turn-Out - the 2008 federal election saw a turn-out of 67.5%, considerably higher than the percentages for B.C. and Canada.
• Employment - in 2009, 63.3% of Greater Victoria residents 15 and older were employed, slightly higher than the averages for B.C. and Canada.
Over 85% of residents surveyed said they "usually or always felt safe" walking after dark.
Greater Victoria consumers paid 1.1% more in March 2009 for services and goods than they did in March 2008.
3.5% of people between 19 and 64 in December 2008 depended on unemployment insurance or basic income assistance.
Over 4,600 people were traveling the Malahat to commute to work in 2006 (most of the population lived in Cowichan Valley and Nanaimo areas).
Summary Conclusions from this Report:
The Vital Signs report indicates, based on its data collection and survey information, that Greater Victoria appears to be "moving forward" on issues of property crime, amount of median donations, rental vacancy, commuting methods and income needed for shelter. We appear to remain static on children in care of the provincial government and we appear to be losing ground on issues of unemployment, perceived health, solid waste disposal, tourism revenue, composite learning index, physical activity and charitable giving.
Note: All of the information I have used for this blog post represents data and language taken directly from the Vital Signs Report. For further information and a full copy of the report, please visit the Victoria Foundation at www.victoriafoundation.bc.ca
Food Safety Message -- Keeping It Local
Food Safety Message and Canadians - Keep It Local
72% of Canadians (up 6% since 2007) cite food safety as a concern, favouring locally grown or produced fare over imported items. So says a recent Ipsos-Reid poll that suggests that a majority of Canadians are "very" or "somewhat" concerned about the food they eat. The poll further indicates that "more than two thirds of Canadians believe Canadian food is safer than imported food." Canadians further agree that importing food all over the world is not good for the environment and while Canadian grown or produced food may be more expensive, they are willing to pay for it. "Another 87% agree that they trust food that comes from Canada more than food that comes from abroad, with 85 % of respondents saying they make an effort to buy locally grown and produced food." This poll was conducted through an online survey of over a thousand respondents, between July 23 and 30, 2010.
These results are not a surprise to the North Saanich Food for the Future Society, instrumental in starting up the first North Saanich Farm Market over 3 years ago, with initial support from the Deep Cove Market and now ongoing help from Janet Silman of St. John's United Church. Attendance at the Market, located behind St. John's on West Saanich Road across from Deep Cove Elementary School, averages about 300 people every Saturday morning during the summer, a significant increase compared with early years. Not only is attendance steady, reports indicate another significant increase in the number of Market vendors offering for sale everything from free range eggs and local lamb to fresh fish, beef, honey, home baking and, of course, fresh produce, most of it organic.
The quality and variety of fresh produce and specialty items is impressive as local growers provide from their gardens large and small. The North Saanich Farm Market is also a local pioneer of winter produce, with the opening of its first winter farm market this past year. The North Saanich Farm Market, with its positive and creative atmosphere, truly reflects a community that embraces local food production and supports North Saanich's strong commitment to agriculture through local farming.
The Market also provides a great venue for the annual Flavour Trail and I hope that residents will attend this weekend's festivities, beginning with the North Saanich Farm Market opening at 9:00 AM. We also know that what keeps farms economically viable, no matter how big or small, is their continued ability to reach consumers. The press coverage for this weekend's events has been terrific and a big thanks goes out to media who have featured the Flavour Trail, including the Times Colonist, Monday Magazine and the CBC morning radio program, "On the Island."
I believe that without support of local media, growers and farmers cannot get their message out as effectively to the people who need to hear it. The success story of the North Saanich Farm Market and the annual Flavour Trail deserves celebration so straw hats off to all those, including local restaurants and wineries, who work so hard to make it happen week after week during the summer growing season and on a periodic basis during the winter.
"Happy Flavour Trails to you!"
72% of Canadians (up 6% since 2007) cite food safety as a concern, favouring locally grown or produced fare over imported items. So says a recent Ipsos-Reid poll that suggests that a majority of Canadians are "very" or "somewhat" concerned about the food they eat. The poll further indicates that "more than two thirds of Canadians believe Canadian food is safer than imported food." Canadians further agree that importing food all over the world is not good for the environment and while Canadian grown or produced food may be more expensive, they are willing to pay for it. "Another 87% agree that they trust food that comes from Canada more than food that comes from abroad, with 85 % of respondents saying they make an effort to buy locally grown and produced food." This poll was conducted through an online survey of over a thousand respondents, between July 23 and 30, 2010.
These results are not a surprise to the North Saanich Food for the Future Society, instrumental in starting up the first North Saanich Farm Market over 3 years ago, with initial support from the Deep Cove Market and now ongoing help from Janet Silman of St. John's United Church. Attendance at the Market, located behind St. John's on West Saanich Road across from Deep Cove Elementary School, averages about 300 people every Saturday morning during the summer, a significant increase compared with early years. Not only is attendance steady, reports indicate another significant increase in the number of Market vendors offering for sale everything from free range eggs and local lamb to fresh fish, beef, honey, home baking and, of course, fresh produce, most of it organic.
The quality and variety of fresh produce and specialty items is impressive as local growers provide from their gardens large and small. The North Saanich Farm Market is also a local pioneer of winter produce, with the opening of its first winter farm market this past year. The North Saanich Farm Market, with its positive and creative atmosphere, truly reflects a community that embraces local food production and supports North Saanich's strong commitment to agriculture through local farming.
The Market also provides a great venue for the annual Flavour Trail and I hope that residents will attend this weekend's festivities, beginning with the North Saanich Farm Market opening at 9:00 AM. We also know that what keeps farms economically viable, no matter how big or small, is their continued ability to reach consumers. The press coverage for this weekend's events has been terrific and a big thanks goes out to media who have featured the Flavour Trail, including the Times Colonist, Monday Magazine and the CBC morning radio program, "On the Island."
I believe that without support of local media, growers and farmers cannot get their message out as effectively to the people who need to hear it. The success story of the North Saanich Farm Market and the annual Flavour Trail deserves celebration so straw hats off to all those, including local restaurants and wineries, who work so hard to make it happen week after week during the summer growing season and on a periodic basis during the winter.
"Happy Flavour Trails to you!"
Too Liberal with BC's Farmland
A Vancouver Province editorial about a new report by Nathan Pachal, titled "A Snapshot of the Agricultural Land Reserve from 2000-2009 in the south of Fraser," and the report itself reveal that the biggest culprit in the losses of ALR lands, particularly on the Lower Mainland (Delta, Barnston Island, Township and City of Langley and Surrey), is the B.C. Government through its Ministry of Transportation. Research found that "the provincial government is responsible for 72.8% of all the land in this region that has either been excluded from the ALR or paved over for transportation use."
What is equally disturbing to me about this report is that apparently the "hard numbers" and other detailed information could only be accessed through a lengthy freedom of information process. Until the process kicked in, it's alleged that Mr. Pachal's efforts to get more information from the BC government "were met by bureaucratic doors slamming in his face." I understand that Mr. Pachal, co-founder of the Langley-based South Fraser on Trax group, a non-profit that studies regional transportation and highlights related issues, writes that "While it may appear that private development is responsible for the erosion of the ALR in the south of Fraser, it is actually the public sector (that's you and me!) that has removed the most land for future farm use in the last decade."
The sub-region is part of the Metro Vancouver regional district on which Mr. Pachal's report focuses and reportedly "accounts for about 70 per cent of all Metro acreage within the ALR. Metro itself produces 27 per cent of B.C.'s total gross farm receipts from primary crops such as field vegetables, berries, greenhouse vegetables and ornamental plants." According to the Province editorial and the Pachal report, the roughly 73% loss of ALR "compares with just under 23 per cent by the private sector and nearly five per cent by local governments." The report further states that a "total [of] 264 hectares of land [or approximately 650 acres] in the sub-region have been lost to farming over the period and about two-thirds or 175 hectares [approximately 430 acres] was devoted to government transportation projects."
The editorial quotes Mr. Pachal as being surprised by these stats and, frankly, so am I. I also understand that Mr. Pachal "found that, under its legislation, the Agricultural Land Commission doesn't categorize lands these transportation projects occupy as being excluded from the ALR." "Instead," he learned, "they're recorded as 'eliminated from farm use,' which gives the impression of more land being farmed than is the case."
The results of Mr. Pachal's study of the south of Fraser sub-region should concern all North Saanich and Peninsula residents. While some of us had always assumed it was developers and primarily the private sector who pillaged farmland, they are apparently not the major offenders, if Mr. Pachal's findings are correct. This is significant information in light of a recent Ipsos-Reid poll that shows of those Canadians surveyed, over 70 per cent are concerned about their food security.
Why then would the B.C. government put ALR in one of the most fertile areas in the world, the Fraser Basin, at risk by appropriating arable land for transportation projects? Of course we need transportation routes and infrastructure but, as the Province newspaper's editorial concludes, "Certainly pavement is important, but affordable fresh food is fundamental." Perhaps it's true when some farmers, agrologists and environmentalists proclaim that we are in the fight of our lives to save farmland and protect our ability to grow our own food. Shouldn't governments help us to win this battle?
For more details about this issue, please visit blewis@theprovince.com
What is equally disturbing to me about this report is that apparently the "hard numbers" and other detailed information could only be accessed through a lengthy freedom of information process. Until the process kicked in, it's alleged that Mr. Pachal's efforts to get more information from the BC government "were met by bureaucratic doors slamming in his face." I understand that Mr. Pachal, co-founder of the Langley-based South Fraser on Trax group, a non-profit that studies regional transportation and highlights related issues, writes that "While it may appear that private development is responsible for the erosion of the ALR in the south of Fraser, it is actually the public sector (that's you and me!) that has removed the most land for future farm use in the last decade."
The sub-region is part of the Metro Vancouver regional district on which Mr. Pachal's report focuses and reportedly "accounts for about 70 per cent of all Metro acreage within the ALR. Metro itself produces 27 per cent of B.C.'s total gross farm receipts from primary crops such as field vegetables, berries, greenhouse vegetables and ornamental plants." According to the Province editorial and the Pachal report, the roughly 73% loss of ALR "compares with just under 23 per cent by the private sector and nearly five per cent by local governments." The report further states that a "total [of] 264 hectares of land [or approximately 650 acres] in the sub-region have been lost to farming over the period and about two-thirds or 175 hectares [approximately 430 acres] was devoted to government transportation projects."
The editorial quotes Mr. Pachal as being surprised by these stats and, frankly, so am I. I also understand that Mr. Pachal "found that, under its legislation, the Agricultural Land Commission doesn't categorize lands these transportation projects occupy as being excluded from the ALR." "Instead," he learned, "they're recorded as 'eliminated from farm use,' which gives the impression of more land being farmed than is the case."
The results of Mr. Pachal's study of the south of Fraser sub-region should concern all North Saanich and Peninsula residents. While some of us had always assumed it was developers and primarily the private sector who pillaged farmland, they are apparently not the major offenders, if Mr. Pachal's findings are correct. This is significant information in light of a recent Ipsos-Reid poll that shows of those Canadians surveyed, over 70 per cent are concerned about their food security.
Why then would the B.C. government put ALR in one of the most fertile areas in the world, the Fraser Basin, at risk by appropriating arable land for transportation projects? Of course we need transportation routes and infrastructure but, as the Province newspaper's editorial concludes, "Certainly pavement is important, but affordable fresh food is fundamental." Perhaps it's true when some farmers, agrologists and environmentalists proclaim that we are in the fight of our lives to save farmland and protect our ability to grow our own food. Shouldn't governments help us to win this battle?
For more details about this issue, please visit blewis@theprovince.com
A Matter of Public Service
The Times Colonist (TC) editorial titled "Public service, not free money" (August 10, 2010) reflects, in part, a sentiment that I have always shared -- that the essence of the work of an elected municipal Council member should be service to the public, emphasizing a higher form of volunteerism and not focused on self-service, as appears to be the case for some recent BC municipal Councils reportedly voting themselves healthy raises (in one case, an increase of 76% to the Mayor's salary alone).
These generous awards to the stipends of locally elected officials are particularly offensive to a tax-paying public that has weathered serious recession impacts, a new consumer tax, challenging government cutbacks to public services and programs and little or no increases to the public sector (wages or positions) or to organizations and agencies who also rely on the taxpayer for funding. In fact, B.C.'s public sector wage increases have been consistently in the 0% to 2.0 % range for many years. Further, B.C.'s minimum wage, seemingly now administered by Scrooge himself, is apparently the lowest across the country, an issue that I believe should be addressed without further delay but, that's another story for another time.
Stipend increases for municipally elected officials were also the subject of heated debate in North Saanich about three years ago. It was my first Council term and I remember when the former Mayor of North Saanich struck a Task Force to review income levels of the Mayor and Councilors, despite what I understood was a recommendation just a few months earlier from an appointed residents' group suggesting an increase consistent with the cost of living (COLA). In the end, the Mayor's new Task Force suggested, for example, that a 32% increase to the Mayor's stipend should be made (if granted, I calculated that the former Mayor would have likely been the highest paid Mayor on the Peninsula). While a lesser increase for Councilors was also recommended, the former Mayor and his supporters appeared to lobby hard for the increase to the Mayor's stipend, citing in part the need to keep up with other municipalities, stressing that the job was more demanding.
I strongly disagreed (as did some of my other Council colleagues at the time) with what we perceived as an attitude of entitlement, arguing that such large increases, especially for the Mayor's position, were out of line and unfair to North Saanich taxpayers. I also did not agree, as some others argued, that compared to other municipalities, North Saanich was falling behind. Nor did I agree with the final argument that by substantially raising stipends, we would attract "younger" people to elected office. I believed then (and still do) that the issue of attracting younger people to public office has less to do with money and more to do with their available time --- the majority of younger people I know are busy raising families, working full-time and volunteering in their communities, making it difficult for them to take on the additional duties and responsibilities of an elected official whose schedule most often involves daytime and evening hours (in the end, more modest increases were approved).
As the TC editorial points out, the nature of Council work is part-time and, in my experience, the amount of time devoted to the job can vary depending on one's level of commitment, size and make-up of community and complexity of issues. My understanding from those who served during the 1990's, however, is that the work has definitely changed since then and has become more complex, particularly since 2001, due in part to greater provincial government downloading to local governments. Nevertheless, in my opinion, time commitments for the average Council member cannot yet be compared to a full-time private or public sector job. And while some will argue that the annual stipend is not enough, the TC Editorial states, "...increasingly, municipal councils in B.C. seem to view elected office as just another form of employment...it places self-interest ahead of the public interest." The editorial adds "...it raises personal ambition above the needs of the community. And it invites the rise of lifetime politicians who will do anything to stay in power and perpetuate their income."
In my nearly 5 years as an elected official, I am pleased to say that I have met very few municipal Council members who would fit that rather jaded description. In my view, most of my Council colleagues across the CRD behave and believe in working as "servants of the public," keeping always the public's best interests at heart. They dedicate long hours to the role of Councilor and longer hours to the role of Mayor. North Saanich is lucky, for example, to have elected a Mayor and Council majority whom I believe reflect the very best of what service to the public means.
As the TC Editorial concludes, many of us continue to believe that "the traditional service-based approach [to the work of local government] is more healthy." While the TC editorial is highly critical and makes some valid points, I believe that "whopping increases" are still not the norm. I do believe that we need "broader guidelines that would apply to all municipalities" so that the tax paying public can be confident that the quality of local government they receive is not tied simply to the amount of remuneration that elected officials believe they deserve. As altruistic as it may sound, holding public office at the local level is a matter of public service. We are, at the end of the day, "servants of the public" and as local governments, closest to our constituents.
These generous awards to the stipends of locally elected officials are particularly offensive to a tax-paying public that has weathered serious recession impacts, a new consumer tax, challenging government cutbacks to public services and programs and little or no increases to the public sector (wages or positions) or to organizations and agencies who also rely on the taxpayer for funding. In fact, B.C.'s public sector wage increases have been consistently in the 0% to 2.0 % range for many years. Further, B.C.'s minimum wage, seemingly now administered by Scrooge himself, is apparently the lowest across the country, an issue that I believe should be addressed without further delay but, that's another story for another time.
Stipend increases for municipally elected officials were also the subject of heated debate in North Saanich about three years ago. It was my first Council term and I remember when the former Mayor of North Saanich struck a Task Force to review income levels of the Mayor and Councilors, despite what I understood was a recommendation just a few months earlier from an appointed residents' group suggesting an increase consistent with the cost of living (COLA). In the end, the Mayor's new Task Force suggested, for example, that a 32% increase to the Mayor's stipend should be made (if granted, I calculated that the former Mayor would have likely been the highest paid Mayor on the Peninsula). While a lesser increase for Councilors was also recommended, the former Mayor and his supporters appeared to lobby hard for the increase to the Mayor's stipend, citing in part the need to keep up with other municipalities, stressing that the job was more demanding.
I strongly disagreed (as did some of my other Council colleagues at the time) with what we perceived as an attitude of entitlement, arguing that such large increases, especially for the Mayor's position, were out of line and unfair to North Saanich taxpayers. I also did not agree, as some others argued, that compared to other municipalities, North Saanich was falling behind. Nor did I agree with the final argument that by substantially raising stipends, we would attract "younger" people to elected office. I believed then (and still do) that the issue of attracting younger people to public office has less to do with money and more to do with their available time --- the majority of younger people I know are busy raising families, working full-time and volunteering in their communities, making it difficult for them to take on the additional duties and responsibilities of an elected official whose schedule most often involves daytime and evening hours (in the end, more modest increases were approved).
As the TC editorial points out, the nature of Council work is part-time and, in my experience, the amount of time devoted to the job can vary depending on one's level of commitment, size and make-up of community and complexity of issues. My understanding from those who served during the 1990's, however, is that the work has definitely changed since then and has become more complex, particularly since 2001, due in part to greater provincial government downloading to local governments. Nevertheless, in my opinion, time commitments for the average Council member cannot yet be compared to a full-time private or public sector job. And while some will argue that the annual stipend is not enough, the TC Editorial states, "...increasingly, municipal councils in B.C. seem to view elected office as just another form of employment...it places self-interest ahead of the public interest." The editorial adds "...it raises personal ambition above the needs of the community. And it invites the rise of lifetime politicians who will do anything to stay in power and perpetuate their income."
In my nearly 5 years as an elected official, I am pleased to say that I have met very few municipal Council members who would fit that rather jaded description. In my view, most of my Council colleagues across the CRD behave and believe in working as "servants of the public," keeping always the public's best interests at heart. They dedicate long hours to the role of Councilor and longer hours to the role of Mayor. North Saanich is lucky, for example, to have elected a Mayor and Council majority whom I believe reflect the very best of what service to the public means.
As the TC Editorial concludes, many of us continue to believe that "the traditional service-based approach [to the work of local government] is more healthy." While the TC editorial is highly critical and makes some valid points, I believe that "whopping increases" are still not the norm. I do believe that we need "broader guidelines that would apply to all municipalities" so that the tax paying public can be confident that the quality of local government they receive is not tied simply to the amount of remuneration that elected officials believe they deserve. As altruistic as it may sound, holding public office at the local level is a matter of public service. We are, at the end of the day, "servants of the public" and as local governments, closest to our constituents.
Creeping Development Not Unique to Our Area
I was interested to read this week in the British newspaper The Guardian, an article titled "The Creeping Spread of Built-Up in Britain." It indicates that "thousands of British wildlife habitats, including refuges for some of the country's rarest species and sites..." recognized the world over for their significance to the eco- system/nature, are threatened by development." For those of us fortunate enough to have traveled to Britain and to have spent time in the countryside, I had always admired the British for their land use planning, based partly on history and partly on modern land use principles, that I believed successfully preserved rural Britain. Until now it seems.
I first visited England in 1972 and drove 2,400 miles in 3 weeks, much to the astonishment of the car rental agency. As I drove from the South Coast of England all the up way to Ullapool in Western Scotland (and back again), I loved how the rural landscape was dotted by small, compact villages, with great tracts of green and sometimes remote spaces in between. I also loved the seaside communities, where beaches and waterfront were completely open to the public and one could walk as far as the eye could see. It was true, Britain was the quaint, bucolic and magic country that I had imagined, a place steeped in ancient history that somehow had managed to preserve its landmarks, heritage sites and unique landscapes through centuries of growth and development.
Now it appears that "land-grabs, from small gardens to major housing estates, ports and roads, is revealed...as the Guardian launches a project called Piece by Piece, exposing the creeping [development] threat to Britain's natural world."
Sound familiar? It should because, as you many of you are aware, it appears to be the same reality that I believe threatens places such as Central and North Saanich, other rural and natural areas in the CRD and Southern Vancouver Island generally. Johnathon Porritt, one of the UK's most prominent environmental experts, observes that in Britain "The [government] is intent on setting aside some of the restrictions and constraints in the current planning process in a way that will promote local decision-making at the expense of environmental safeguards."
Again, sound all too familiar? It's apparent to me that over the past 10 years, for example, with ongoing devolution of authority by the BC government to local governments, land use planning and decision-making seem to be more fractured and less focused on protection and conservation. There appear to be so many competing interests, influences and downright lobbying in some cases, that government bodies and land use policies designed to protect habitat seem more vulnerable to this constant pressure. And then there is the money. We know that there are huge profits to be made through land development.
In Britain, the figures related to threats posed by development are collected by the Wildlife Trusts Federation, which provided "the most comprehensive review...[and] last year asked for 4,900 projects to be changed or stopped. The Trusts reported that "these were the most damaging schemes [selected] after reviewing 83,000 planning applications." Threats to birds, wildlife and woodlands in Britain represent approximately 2,500 different development projects being fought by a number of conservation organizations throughout the country. It is also reported by Britain's Garden Organic that "one in seven homes in Britain were being built on 'residential' land - mostly gardens...these small patches of land, which sustain wildlife in cities and provide vital corridors for species to reach the countryside, calculates that between 2006 and 2016, a quarter of a million gardens will be concreted and bricked over."
The article concludes that "Natural England, the government countryside agency, this year reported that more than two species a year in England are becoming extinct, and hundreds more are at risk of disappearing. The agency lists development as the second biggest cause of loss, after vast monoculture farms and the widespread use of chemicals." In a country where history is centuries' old and the preservation of tradition is paramount, it is ironic that the one thing Britain seems unable to preserve now is its natural habitats, rural lands and wildlife.
It is my hope, after reading this article, that British Columbians, especially communities at the local level, will learn from land use planning mistakes and work together with agencies, organizations and other governments/jurisdictions to stem the losses to our natural world as those now reported to be occurring in Britain.
To read this article in its entirety, please visit the Manchester Guardian website on this blog.
I first visited England in 1972 and drove 2,400 miles in 3 weeks, much to the astonishment of the car rental agency. As I drove from the South Coast of England all the up way to Ullapool in Western Scotland (and back again), I loved how the rural landscape was dotted by small, compact villages, with great tracts of green and sometimes remote spaces in between. I also loved the seaside communities, where beaches and waterfront were completely open to the public and one could walk as far as the eye could see. It was true, Britain was the quaint, bucolic and magic country that I had imagined, a place steeped in ancient history that somehow had managed to preserve its landmarks, heritage sites and unique landscapes through centuries of growth and development.
Now it appears that "land-grabs, from small gardens to major housing estates, ports and roads, is revealed...as the Guardian launches a project called Piece by Piece, exposing the creeping [development] threat to Britain's natural world."
Sound familiar? It should because, as you many of you are aware, it appears to be the same reality that I believe threatens places such as Central and North Saanich, other rural and natural areas in the CRD and Southern Vancouver Island generally. Johnathon Porritt, one of the UK's most prominent environmental experts, observes that in Britain "The [government] is intent on setting aside some of the restrictions and constraints in the current planning process in a way that will promote local decision-making at the expense of environmental safeguards."
Again, sound all too familiar? It's apparent to me that over the past 10 years, for example, with ongoing devolution of authority by the BC government to local governments, land use planning and decision-making seem to be more fractured and less focused on protection and conservation. There appear to be so many competing interests, influences and downright lobbying in some cases, that government bodies and land use policies designed to protect habitat seem more vulnerable to this constant pressure. And then there is the money. We know that there are huge profits to be made through land development.
In Britain, the figures related to threats posed by development are collected by the Wildlife Trusts Federation, which provided "the most comprehensive review...[and] last year asked for 4,900 projects to be changed or stopped. The Trusts reported that "these were the most damaging schemes [selected] after reviewing 83,000 planning applications." Threats to birds, wildlife and woodlands in Britain represent approximately 2,500 different development projects being fought by a number of conservation organizations throughout the country. It is also reported by Britain's Garden Organic that "one in seven homes in Britain were being built on 'residential' land - mostly gardens...these small patches of land, which sustain wildlife in cities and provide vital corridors for species to reach the countryside, calculates that between 2006 and 2016, a quarter of a million gardens will be concreted and bricked over."
The article concludes that "Natural England, the government countryside agency, this year reported that more than two species a year in England are becoming extinct, and hundreds more are at risk of disappearing. The agency lists development as the second biggest cause of loss, after vast monoculture farms and the widespread use of chemicals." In a country where history is centuries' old and the preservation of tradition is paramount, it is ironic that the one thing Britain seems unable to preserve now is its natural habitats, rural lands and wildlife.
It is my hope, after reading this article, that British Columbians, especially communities at the local level, will learn from land use planning mistakes and work together with agencies, organizations and other governments/jurisdictions to stem the losses to our natural world as those now reported to be occurring in Britain.
To read this article in its entirety, please visit the Manchester Guardian website on this blog.
Hot Weather "Inflames" Coastal Areas
A wildfire risk-advisory, dated July 30, 2010, has been jointly issued by the Coastal Fire Centre, provincial Ministry of Forests and Range and the BC Forest Service. The advisory warns that an extended period of hot and dry weather, without any rain, has dried forests, particularly fuel on the ground. Duff Codes, codes used to measure drought and moisture, are higher than this time last year, which has increased the risk of easy fire ignition and challenging suppression should a wildfire occur. Reports further suggest that fires are growing more quickly and taking more resources to contain compared to just a week ago. Current fire/weather outlooks for next week indicate the potential for dry lightening throughout Southern B.C. but it is expected that these lightening events will not include any appreciable moisture.
Please take note of the following information:
Report all fires as soon as possible to the Coastal Fire Centre 24-hour emergency number at 250-951-4200, providing details about location, size, behaviour and current resources, either deployed or needed. To report a wildfire call 1-800-663-5555 or by cell at *5555.
Please use extreme caution in all North Saanich parks, on trails, at beaches and around your homes where there are extensive tree canopies and/or in areas designated as a wildfire hazard. For further questions about local issues, please contact Chief Gary Wilton at the North Saanich Municipal Hall, 250-656-0781. Thank you.
Please take note of the following information:
Report all fires as soon as possible to the Coastal Fire Centre 24-hour emergency number at 250-951-4200, providing details about location, size, behaviour and current resources, either deployed or needed. To report a wildfire call 1-800-663-5555 or by cell at *5555.
Please use extreme caution in all North Saanich parks, on trails, at beaches and around your homes where there are extensive tree canopies and/or in areas designated as a wildfire hazard. For further questions about local issues, please contact Chief Gary Wilton at the North Saanich Municipal Hall, 250-656-0781. Thank you.
A Steep Hill To Climb?
Update on the Public Meeting Held July 14, 2010 - Vantreight Hill Development
Reports I have received from North Saanich (NS) and Central Saanich (CS) residents who attended the July 14th public hearing on the Vantreight Hill development proposal suggest that those for and against were fairly evenly split, with perhaps a majority of the audience expressing their opposition to the proposal. I understand that the room was packed and the hearing continued until well after midnight. Speakers were apparently given about 5 minutes each to make comments and the Chair, Central Saanich (CS) Councilor Ron Kubek, managed the meeting well. Reports are that the crowd was orderly and CS Council members listened carefully to what was being said.
Much of the public concern expressed by opponents at the hearing seems to focus on such issues as:
-- gradual loss of agricultural land to large scale development totally out of character with rural Central Saanich
-- development is well outside CS's urban containment boundary
-- increased tax burden for taxpayers related to provision of increased services to housing development (water, sewer, roads and other amenities)
-- CS Councilors reminded about their election promises to uphold Official Community Plan
-- residents want to save local farms but developing rural land to do so does not seem an option they support
-- recent review of Official Community Plan by CS residents reaffirmed community's support of an urban containment boundary
-- majority expressed unequivocally that rural lands are not to be "held" pending future development
-- erosion by CS Council members of local community decision-making, especially related to rural and agricultural lands
-- core to the issue are the regional implications related to the Regional Sustainability Strategy (formerly known as the Regional Growth Strategy or RGS)
I have also learned that there is another possible issue related to sewage treatment and wastewater that may, in the end, involve the CRD. My understanding is that there is a CRD bylaw known as #2312 which sets out the process for subdivision where on site sewage treatment is identified. It means in this case that if the bylaw is applicable, the Vantreights and CS Council may have to seek CRD approval for this development after all. At the time of writing this article, I did not have confirmation about the bylaw's fine print, about whether this bylaw is still current or whether it would apply to the Vantreight Hill Development.
North Saanich Mayor Alice Finall and Councilor Peter Chandler also attended the public hearing and observed that those in favour of the development of course included the Vantreights, their supporters and staff that work at their operation. I understand that based on the feedback from the meeting, this will be a complex and difficult decision for the CS Council. North Saanich is taking a special interest in the outcome because of the possible negative impact on NS residents living adjacent to the site, in the SEQ.
Large development decisions are never easy for those elected to make the decision but the overriding question decision-makers must always ask themselves, "What is the overall benefit to the community and its residents?" Other reports from the meeting suggest that there still remain many unanswered questions about the impacts of this proposal, including traffic, water, sewage and regional concerns about unplanned growth in rural areas. Stay tuned...
POSTSCRIPT:
VANTREIGHT PUBLIC HEARING
In response to my article on the July 14th Public Hearing on the Vantreight Hill Proposal, readers who attended the Hearing have e-mailed me to request that I add two further important points raised that evening:
Reports I have received from North Saanich (NS) and Central Saanich (CS) residents who attended the July 14th public hearing on the Vantreight Hill development proposal suggest that those for and against were fairly evenly split, with perhaps a majority of the audience expressing their opposition to the proposal. I understand that the room was packed and the hearing continued until well after midnight. Speakers were apparently given about 5 minutes each to make comments and the Chair, Central Saanich (CS) Councilor Ron Kubek, managed the meeting well. Reports are that the crowd was orderly and CS Council members listened carefully to what was being said.
Much of the public concern expressed by opponents at the hearing seems to focus on such issues as:
-- gradual loss of agricultural land to large scale development totally out of character with rural Central Saanich
-- development is well outside CS's urban containment boundary
-- increased tax burden for taxpayers related to provision of increased services to housing development (water, sewer, roads and other amenities)
-- CS Councilors reminded about their election promises to uphold Official Community Plan
-- residents want to save local farms but developing rural land to do so does not seem an option they support
-- recent review of Official Community Plan by CS residents reaffirmed community's support of an urban containment boundary
-- majority expressed unequivocally that rural lands are not to be "held" pending future development
-- erosion by CS Council members of local community decision-making, especially related to rural and agricultural lands
-- core to the issue are the regional implications related to the Regional Sustainability Strategy (formerly known as the Regional Growth Strategy or RGS)
I have also learned that there is another possible issue related to sewage treatment and wastewater that may, in the end, involve the CRD. My understanding is that there is a CRD bylaw known as #2312 which sets out the process for subdivision where on site sewage treatment is identified. It means in this case that if the bylaw is applicable, the Vantreights and CS Council may have to seek CRD approval for this development after all. At the time of writing this article, I did not have confirmation about the bylaw's fine print, about whether this bylaw is still current or whether it would apply to the Vantreight Hill Development.
North Saanich Mayor Alice Finall and Councilor Peter Chandler also attended the public hearing and observed that those in favour of the development of course included the Vantreights, their supporters and staff that work at their operation. I understand that based on the feedback from the meeting, this will be a complex and difficult decision for the CS Council. North Saanich is taking a special interest in the outcome because of the possible negative impact on NS residents living adjacent to the site, in the SEQ.
Large development decisions are never easy for those elected to make the decision but the overriding question decision-makers must always ask themselves, "What is the overall benefit to the community and its residents?" Other reports from the meeting suggest that there still remain many unanswered questions about the impacts of this proposal, including traffic, water, sewage and regional concerns about unplanned growth in rural areas. Stay tuned...
POSTSCRIPT:
VANTREIGHT PUBLIC HEARING
In response to my article on the July 14th Public Hearing on the Vantreight Hill Proposal, readers who attended the Hearing have e-mailed me to request that I add two further important points raised that evening:
- A petition of 800 signatures opposing the development was presented at the meeting by a citizens' group
- Those opposed to the development spoke repeatedly about the fact that the personal financial dilemma the Vantreights find themselves in has nothing to do with Central Saanich.
Water, Cool Clear Water
During spring and summer months, there are always concerns about water consumption and drought conditions throughout the province. I have just received information from the provincial government that provides two websites that will give regular updated information on water and drought conditions affecting water consumption. Hope you find these websites useful and of interest.
For information on the water supply outlook, go to: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/rfc/index.htm
For information on drought management go to: www.env.gov.bc.ca/wsd/public_safety/drought_info/index
For information on the water supply outlook, go to: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/rfc/index.htm
For information on drought management go to: www.env.gov.bc.ca/wsd/public_safety/drought_info/index
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)