The Last Three Years

Looking back, this term has been highly productive, but with with some notable failures and deficiencies. Anyone looking at the Mayors' reports (Undercurrent- Oct. 7/14th) can read the major accomplishments. I want to expand on a few of those.

OCP

The OCP update did one major thing- which was to reaffirm Bowen's core values. Attending the early IDEAS forum, and the various workshops along the process, anyone could see the strong support for the principles embedded in the previous 1996 OCP. So while Bowen has grown, and some issues change, the nature of our community has not. The OCP update has a number of other new things as well. A section on air quality that I wrote. A bare bones economic development section that Time Rhodes and I did together- though it got truncated in the edits. As well, some mandated inclusions on climate change adaptation. Plus- what was created was an eminently readable, if long and somewhat repetitive document.

I think OCP processes are expensive, often divisive, and yield little new policy with each iteration. They should probably be continuously revised, in small chunks, as has been done at Robert's Creek, where an OCPC- an OCP committee does just that (not sure if they are still active, as their last minutes were from Oct. 2010).

The process was very different this time around, and not without glitches. We lost our planner, and so Dave Witty stepped into that role. We shied away from some contentious subjects, such as how we measure residential density, or how to establish a virtual density bank. Certainly, the opportunity to review the CRC Neighbourhood Plan within the update was lost.

To now have a petition to the courts launched against the OCP is very troubling, and I hope it is adjudicated quickly. The remedy, if the plaintiff prevailed, could simply be to reopen the public process, make amendments, conduct a new hearing, then give final readings and reenact.

What concerns me is that real mischief could be unleashed. Public commentary on the OCP was generally very favourable; it was the mapping for LUB regulatory bylaws that was contentious. A reopened OCP could result in unwarranted meddling within sections that elicited little original concern.

That said, the OCP followup will be a big job in any case. There is a considerable to do list for LUB changes, and strategic planning items such as exactly how we wish to pursue economic development.

CRC

I walked the Cape a few days ago, and the changes there are quite profound. The Cape trail is gorgeous, but obviously the construction of what will likely be substantial residences, the private areas, and the 10 acre simple subdivision format will create something very different from what alternatives might have happened. Regardless of any feelings about the suitability of the Neighbourhood Plan, I feel a sense of missed opportunity that there has not to date been a better outcome.

SNUG COVE

The first Snug Cove Plan was crafted in the early '80's, and revisited so many times, the more mention of the subject can make eyes roll. What happened this term is that James Tuer adroitly not only reviewed all the plans, but extracted their best elements, and asked the hard questions about the deficiencies that had stopped them cold.

Out of that he crafted a number of basic scenarios- from close to status quo to dramatically visionary. All are exciting and have strong merit. Council will pick and choose what it likes and identify some go-ahead steps (like rewriting our parking policy), but the real work will come in this upcoming term.

Costing and financing, followed by servicing and ultimately building, will be a large focus of the next few years. Clearly, this will require partners and further negotiations with Metro Parks that I spearheaded this term.

NATIONAL PARK

Ten years ago, in 2001, I met with then Minister of Environment David Anderson, with the blessing of Council, to ask whether the federal government might be interested in including portions of Bowen Island in the new Gulf Islands National Park Reserve. Through the facilitator, lawyer Greg McDade, I heard a resounding NO. They were not going north of Active Pass nor east of the main Gulf Islands.

So, to have PC express an interest in Bowen some eight years later in response to a second query was quite remarkable.

I'll pause right there....it is not my intention to argue here the merits of the Park. Suffice to say I am a supporter of the idea, and nowhere near confident on the details. The Park vote on November 19th is to seek support for the 'creation of a National Park', and does not imply support of the preliminary or revised concept.

This is a significant opportunity and carries risks, no doubt. But one thing is clear- it is the public who will decide if the idea moves forward, and all on Council will respect the outcome. I hope we get a positive vote, and parties enter into meaningful negotiations (NP, Metro, BC, BIM, First Nations).

WHERE HAS ALL THE MONEY GONE?

Good question. Why is it that the taxes have gone up (albeit not dramatically), but our financial status has deteriorated? Quite simple, really- we have been spending our reserves which were built up carefully in the first years since incorporation. Mayor Bob stated in his last report that we developed capacity to manage projects in the past term, and did so. We bumped the roads budget, paid for a synthetic turf field, expanded and upgraded the sewer, paid out some severances and upped senior staff salaries to attract new people.

Was I happy with this? In a word- no! I have generally gone along with 'reasonable' spending hikes, but last year, the plummeting reserves combined with $200K spending hikes on roads projects, led me to vote against the budget. My preference was either reduce the roads budget, or be honest and raise general taxes. But we took it out of the Capital and Stabilization reserve instead, and now it is almost depleted.

Our portion of the sewer project was $721,000, and out of that we got a $2 million upgrade/expansion. It may well be argued that should not have gone on the backs of taxpayers who do not use the sewer, but there are two other considerations. First the overall public benefit of tertiary treatment accrues island and region wide. Second, we needed to do this if we are ever to service our community lands in preparation for sale and/or development.

Now it gets a bit sticky. We don't have money to complete the piping. Should we borrow money to do so, or get partners- ie have a design competition, entertain applications or send out requests for proposals, wherein those costs become part of the developer's risk equation. That is what happened with Cates Hill, and I generally support that approach, provided that, in the end, our lands are well valued and given appropriate uses -ie, we as a community do not get shortchanged.