Answer Me This, Please (Deja Vu)?!

On Jan. 22nd, 2007, I sent the following email to Twyla Graff, District of Lantzville Chief Administrative Officer:

Twyla,
Late last spring, I dropped by the District's temporary office at Seaview Plaza and asked to see a number of items relating to the introduction of sanitary collector sewers in Lantzville. At that time, I also inquired about the timing for the task item 'Liquid Waste Management Plan process' under tab #3, 'Municipal Sewage Collection (Phase 1)' on the 'June CAO Report', a task which has been on your 'project list' since at least January '06 but which has now been removed as of the 'December CAO Report'. Although it wasn't easy lining up the dates with the task, I was told that it must be a 'typo' that the 'Completed' date (Oct. 05) was a year earlier than the 'Planned' date (Oct. 06) although, after that, the dates disappeared completely.
At their regular meeting on Sept. 19/05, Council passed a motion to "amend the OCP to include wording that Council must immediately commence a LWMP (Liquid Waste Management Plan) to include a study of what areas of Lantzville are able to sustain on-site sewage disposal". This motion was specifically made because Council, under considerable pressure from 'down-zoned residents', had decided to reinstate the 'Estate Residential' land-use category (with conditions) in the OCP, thereby allowing lot sizes without sewers down to .4 ha (1 acre). This motion was subsequently implemented and appears as item 5 under Sec. 9.2.4 of the consolidated version of the OCP, dated Dec. 7, 2005.
It was certainly always my understanding, based on comments from Council that, after the Estate Residential designation was re-instated in the OCP, a LWMP became necessary to maintain our eligibility for the sewer infrastructure grant (B.C. Water Improvement Program), this designation having been removed by Council originally for that very reason. I distinctly recall hearing council state, on more than one occasion and at more than one meeting, that the 'down-zoning' was necessary in order for us to qualify for the grant.
At a Special Meeting of Council on Sept. 26/06 to adopt the OCP, several of the councillors also made reference to the need of completing the LWMP in order to qualify for the sewer infrastructure grant. Therefore, how is it that we can have progressed this far, already having spent considerable sums of money on sanitary collector sewers, and yet we don't appear to have fulfilled an important condition of the grant?
As always, thank you in advance for your kind and prompt attention to my questions and I look forward to receiving your response by return email.

Sincerely,
Hans J. Larsen

Having received neither a response or even an acknowledgement, I sent her this follow-up email on Feb. 8th, 2007 :

Twyla,
Having sent you the 'attached' email on Jan. 22nd with questions relating to the need to complete a Liquid Waste Management Plan in order to remain eligible for the B.C. Water Improvement Program Infrastructure Grant, I was hoping to have received a reply by now. With the District considering awarding the tender for the second stage of the the works covered by the grant at the Regular Council meeting this coming Monday, time is fast running out to ensure that we have 'all our ducks lined up'. Can you please tell me when you will be able to provide me with answers to my questions?

Sincerely,
Hans J. Larsen

As of the initial posting of this article at 10:00 am on Feb. 23rd, 2007, I have not received any kind of reply from either Ms. Graff [or the Mayor, who sometimes replies to questions asked of her]. As with the questions referred to in a previous Blog article (Answer Me This, Please!), I am at a loss as to why the people we pay to conduct our business will not answer pertinent questions from the public concerning that very business. I'd love to receive comments from any Lantzville residents who value democracy concerning this situation (click on the 'Comments' link at the bottom of this article - you may have to register with Blogger first).

On Feb. 15, 2007, having not received any reply whatsoever from the District of Lantzville to the two emails above, I sent the following email to Mr. Glen Brown, Director, Infrastructure section of the Infrastructure and Finance Department in the Ministry of Community Services, which is the group responsible for the administration of the B. C. Water Improvement grants:

Dear Mr. Brown,
Firstly, if you are not the best person to address this matter, would you please see to it that my email is forwarded to the correct individual? As you can see from the two 'attached' emails, I have been trying to obtain an answer from Ms. Twyla Graff, the District of Lantzville Chief Administrative Officer, regarding the District's meeting the eligibility requirements for a previously announced $2.4 million B.C. Community Water Improvement Program infrastructure grant (for sanitary collector sewers) in our small, seaside community. Unfortunately, she has not responded to either of those emails and I am at a loss to explain why. Obviously, it would have been preferable to have received the answer to my question from our community's chief civil servant but, regrettably, that doesn't appear like it will happen.
Could you please have a look at my original email to Ms. Graff and provide whatever comments you can. I should also point out that the minutes of the Special Meeting of Council on Sept. 26/05 contain an 'Explanation regarding the grant application' in which it is noted the "Ministry's position was that if on-site sewage disposal were permitted on properties less than 2.5 acres it would immediately nullify our application however in dealing with Estate Residential properties we believe we can maintain eligibility if we embark on a LWMP. Further, the District has correspondence from the Ministry stating this position." I remain unclear on how we got from there to now.
The agendas and minutes referred to in this as well as my email to Ms. Graff can be found at http://www.lantzville.ca. Even if the infrastructure grant eligibility had somehow been satisfied without a LWMP, there would still be the issue of the $10,000 planning grant, which the District was apparently awarded by your Ministry in 2005 to complete a LWMP.
Thank you in advance for your kind and prompt attention to my query.

Sincerely,
Hans J. Larsen

After waiting over a week for any kind of repy from him, I sent the following follow-up email to him:

Dear Mr. Brown,
Having now been over a week since I sent you the 'attached' email (along with its own 'attachments') without an acknowledgment from you that you received it and are formulating a suitable response, I would be less than honest if I didn't say I am becoming very concerned. You are already aware that I sent you the original email because I had been unable to obtain an answer to my question relating to the District of Lantzville's continuing eligibility for a B.C. Community Water Improvement Program infrastructure grant from our community's chief civil servant, Ms. Twyla Graff. I sincerely hope that you will be providing me with an answer to what appears to me to be a very straightforward and important question in the near future. If there is anything further you need from me to make this happen, please be sure to let me know.
You might also find it interesting to know that the beach interceptor, the cost of which is a significant part of the infrastructure funding under discussion, for which the District has said in their application that "(e)lector assent will not be sought until the senior government grant is confirmed", was actually completed before the District undertook to establish a Local Area Service subject to petition against. Since the counter petition process was only recently completed, they did things in the order stated but I'm not sure that's quite what you (or any other reasonable person) were expecting when you (they) read those words.

Sincerely,
Hans J. Larsen

Are you beginning to see a pattern of deliberate evasion emerging here and are you as concerned as I am about the possible reasons behind such a tactic by our municipal and provincial public servants? Once again, I'd love to receive comments from any Lantzville residents who value democracy concerning this situation (click on the 'Comments' link at the bottom of this article - you may have to register with Blogger first).

Oh Poop! (Possibly Unnecessary Primary Sewage Treatment Coming Soon To A Neighbourhood Near You?)

Short Version (The Essentials)

Politics triumphs over science and common sense.
Michael McDonald, Sr. VP, Methanex

Rafe Mair's Axiom of Subsidiarity, perfectly suited to this situation: Lesser politicians should always, without fail, beware of gifts coming from higher levels of governments.

Uninformed Statements Made About Lantzville and Sewers
"literally a cesspool"; "criminally overdue" - Marnie Taylor, Nanaimo Daily Free Press Feb. 8/96
"sewage running in our ditches"; "sick to death" - local resident, Nanaimo News Bulletin May 13/96

* not one 'expert' has been able to state what percentage of our individual fecal coliform counts are due to failed septic systems [from human, as compared to animal (dogs, cats, deer, birds, seals, etc.) feces] and many of these 'experts' are in a conflict of interest situation in the first place - they build sewage systems!
* it is very unlikely that we have "untreated sewage seep(ing) and leach(ing) directly into roadside ditches", since some treatment occurs in the septic tank (removing 40% of the TSS, 60% of the BOD and 5-10% of the pathogens). While the claim of untreated/raw sewage is made several times in the District's grant application, not one shred of evidence is provided to support it!
* over a recent 9 - 10-year period, only 60 failed septic systems in Lantzville have been ordered repaired by local Health officials so you might well wonder why they would rather support a sewer system than seeking out and correcting any problems
* according to a report issued by a senior VIHA environmental officer, "(r)epairs to individual failed onsite sewage systems can be made in almost every situation" and "(p)roperly designed, installed and maintained onsite systems should be able to work indefinitely."
* sewers, even under the most optimistic schedule, would take years to reach some of the denser areas where we have some failing/failed septic systems
* since there are numerous, cost-effective solutions to failed septic systems, doesn't it make sense that we find and fix any problems now instead of at least $20 million (2006$) being spent over the next 10 years to sewerize much of Lantzville? Even if the rest of us had to share in the cost to 'get it done', it would still likely be cheaper than sewers, in both financial and social terms.
* it will cost each property $77/yr at today's rates to partially replace (33%) the moisture which will now be flushed out into the Strait (assuming we even have that replacement water!). This does NOT take into account the nutrients which will be lost.
* infrastructure grants are an inefficient and highly 'politicized' way of spending taxpayers' money
* sewers are almost always for development, not you and I, and, since they drive development, will forever and markedly change the essence of our community! Sewers serve to drive density relentlessly upwards and, once they're started, they can't easily be undone (that initial cost will be too great to abandon)!
* there is nothing "green" (OCP, Sec. 4.2.5) about Lantzville connecting to the RDN 'enhanced' primary treatment plant, which flushes all the moisture and some of the nutrients out into Georgia Strait
While only Mayor Haime and his wife, Councillor Denise Haime, by virtue of their ownership of a downtown office building, will be directly affected by Council's decisions on Phase 1 sewers, a cost which I would assume that they can write off, Councillor Brian Dempsey could, as soon as more water becomes available, apply for an 'out-of-sequence' connection from this area (the easement already exists) to service his 5-acre 'farm' on Owen Road and, thereby, be in a position to apply to subdivide.
I'm calling upon all residents of Lantzville to become engaged in the conversation and ask the tough questions of Council and staff, using your common sense as your guide. Ask yourselves what possible motive concerned residents like myself could have for investing so much time and effort to research and publish relevant information. Then ask yourselves why Council and some individuals aren't interested in a fair, frank and open discussion of the issues. This thing we call 'democracy' is very fragile and requires constant nurturing in order for it to survive and truly serve the people and not some special interest agenda. Are YOU up to the challenge?!

Answer Me This, Please!

On Jan. 16th, 2007, I sent the following email to Twyla Graff, Chief Administrative Officer of the District of Lantzville:

Twyla,
I have read the District's 'Public Notice - Proposed Local Area Service Sanitary Sewer Collection System - Phase 1' in the Saturday, January 6/07 edition of the Nanaimo News Bulletin, which has raised several significant questions in my mind:
1. The District's B.C. Community Water Improvement Program infrastructure grant application for collector sanitary sewers states that "(e)lector assent will not be sought until the senior government grant is confirmed". Also, the footnote at the bottom of the District's 'Five-year Financial Plan 2005-2009' states that "approval from the community (emphasis is mine) is necessary for this project to proceed" (referring to the phased sanitary sewer collection system). Since the District has already installed the shoreline interceptor at a cost of approx. $800,000, which is a part of the costs being covered by the parcel tax (and/or initial one-time payment) for the proposed Local Area Service, why is elector assent by counter petition only now being sought, months after construction of this line was begun? And why is the whole community not being asked to provide their assent, as referenced in the financial plan, especially since their sewage would ultimately flow through the trunk lines within Phase I?
2. the costs of Phase I, as provided in the public information session financial presentations of Nov. 29 & Dec. 2/06, include the cost of constructing the trunk sewer lines up Ware Road to Aulds and along Aulds Rd. to Harwood Dr. Why is this segment not included within the Phase I boundary on the map contained in the notice? It would have been much 'cleaner' if LPL and LFE had contributed to Phase I only to the extent that the main lines needed to be over-sized for their needs and then constructed the line to their respective properties at their own expense as 'out-of-sequence' connections. Do these lines, servicing new development as they do, even qualify for funding under the B.C. Water Improvement Program infrastructure grant?
3. the Notice mentions an annual cost of $168 for 20 years under the $3290 initial one-time payment option (this amount is also included in the $497 annual payment option). It is my understanding, from talking to Paul Sangalang, that this amount is for the operation, maintenance and specialized servicing equipment replacement for the sewage collection system. Therefore, could you please explain to me how a charge which pays to operate the collector system and includes labour, materials, electricity, etc. can cease after 20 years and why it has no inflation factor built into it over those same 20 years?
4. the notice entitled 'District of Lantzville Community Update Sanitary Sewer Collection System - Phase I', mailed out to all households around Nov. 20/06 states that "Council intends to conduct additional information sessions early in the New Year". When and where are these sessions scheduled to be held?
Although it would appear that you have met the notice requirements of Sec. 213 of the Community Charter, it is unfortunate that the costs provided in the notice are only the 'statutory' costs - there generally being several more charges to pay before an individual can have sewer service (adding up, in most cases, to thousands of dollars).
If there is something that I am not understanding or don't have quite right about this, please explain it to me. I look forward to receiving your reply by return email and thank you in advance for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Hans J. Larsen

Having received no reply, I then sent her this follow-up email on Feb. 2nd, 2007:

Twyla,
Having sent you the 'attached' email on Jan. 16th with questions relating to the timing of obtaining Elector Assent and the implementation of a Sewer Local Area Service, I was hoping to have received a reply by now. Can you please tell me when you will be able to provide me with answers to my questions?

Sincerely,
Hans J. Larsen

As of the posting of this article at 10:00 am on Feb. 9/07, I have yet to receive any reply whatsoever to my emails. Frankly, I am at a loss to explain why our senior civil servant would not be prepared to answer questions, answers which could affect a large number of Lantzville residents. If any of you readers have any ideas, please click on the 'Comments' link at the bottom of this article (you may have to register with Blogger first) and give me your thoughts.