REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN BOARD of DIRECTORS MEETING Wednesday, March 17, 2010 4:00 p.m. REGULAR AGENDA

A. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

1. Board of Directors – March 17, 2010

(Opportunity for Introduction of Late Items)

RECOMMENDATION 1 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That the Agenda of the March 17, 2010 regular meeting of the Board of Directors be approved as presented.

B. ADOPTION OF MINUTES

1. Board of Directors – March 3, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 2 Page 1 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That the minutes of the March 3, 2010 meeting of the Board of Directors be adopted as circulated.

2. Committee of the Whole – March 3, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 3 Page 11 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That the minutes of the March 3, 2010 meeting of the Committee of the Whole be adopted as circulated.

3. Public Hearing (Bylaw 2264) – March 3, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 4 Page 14 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That the minutes of the March 3, 2010 Public Hearing (Bylaw 2264) be adopted as circulated.

C. PETITIONS AND DELEGATIONS

1. Vernon and District Agricultural Society - Gary Bannerman – presentation regarding the future of the Kin Race Track

Regional Board Agenda – Regular - 2 - March 17, 2010

D. REPORTS

1. Public Information Meeting (Bylaws 2378 and 2379) – March 3, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 5 Page 16 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That the notes from the March 3, 2010 Public Information Meeting regarding Bylaws 2378 and 2379 be received for information.

2. Okanagan Basin Water Board – March 2010 Report

RECOMMENDATION 6 Page 22 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Includes Armstrong, Coldstream, Spallumcheen, Vernon, Electoral Areas “B”, “C” and “D”) That the report dated March 4, 2010 from the Okanagan Basin Water Board be received for information.

3. Administrator’s Report

E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

1. Bylaw 2400 – Subdivision Servicing Bylaw - Staff report dated January 20, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 7 Page 23 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009, be amended as follows; 1) Division 5, Section 5.4.2, Groundwater Water Source from; “5.4.2 Groundwater Water Source Where individual groundwater sources are proposed for subdivision the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 6,550 liters of potable water per day (1.0 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision. Proof of availability of potable water shall consist of the following; a) A well must be drilled on each proposed new property. A well log and pumping test must be conducted for each well. All well tests must be carried out under the supervision of a professional hydrogeologist, or a professional engineer having considerable knowledge of groundwater hydrology or groundwater geology who shall prepare a report on the results with due consideration of neighbourhood groundwater hydrology including possible interference with neighbouring well sources and the combined effect on the aquifer utilised of pumping from all wells simultaneously. The report must also affirm that the quantity of water available will be adequate for the spectrum of uses available on the site. b) Testing of wells shall be conducted during the dry months of the year in order to determine the year-round capacity of the well. c) There exist certain areas within the Regional District, as delineated in attached Schedule “B”, where drilled wells may be tested by a qualified well driller.” Regional Board Agenda – Regular - 3 - March 17, 2010

to; “5.4.2 Groundwater Water Source Where individual groundwater sources are proposed for subdivision the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 6,550 liters of potable water per day (1.0 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision, in Electoral Areas “B”, “C” and “F”. For Electoral Areas “D” and “E”, the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 2,275 liters of potable water per day (0.35 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision. Proof of availability of potable water shall consist of the following; a) A well must be drilled on each proposed new property. A well log and pumping test must be conducted for each well. All well tests must be carried out under the supervision of a professional hydrogeologist, or a professional engineer having considerable knowledge of groundwater hydrology or groundwater geology who shall prepare a report on the results with due consideration of neighbourhood groundwater hydrology including possible interference with neighbouring well sources and the combined effect on the aquifer utilised of pumping from all wells simultaneously. The report must also affirm that the quantity of water available will be adequate for the spectrum of uses available on the site. b) Testing of wells shall be conducted during the dry months of the year in order to determine the year-round capacity of the well. c) There exist certain areas within the Regional District, as delineated in attached Schedule “B”, where drilled wells may be tested by a qualified well driller.” And further, that Bylaw No. 2400, 2009, as amended, be given second and third readings.

2. Official Community Plan / Rezoning Application COUSINS, Paul (File 09-0689-C-OR) - Letter dated February 23, 2010 from the Administrator

RECOMMENDATION 8 Page 50 (Part 26 – Special Voting – Includes Electoral Areas only) That the letter of February 23, 2010 from the Administrator regarding a request from Mr. Paul Cousins for a refund of Application Fees be received for information.

F. NEW BUSINESS

1. Greater Vernon Water Service Review – Appointed Representatives - Letter dated February 24, 2010 from the City of Vernon - Letter dated February 25, 2010 from the District of Coldstream

RECOMMENDATION 9 Page 52 (Customized Stakeholder Vote – Includes Coldstream, Vernon, Electoral Areas “B” and “C”) That the February 25, 2010 letter from the District of Coldstream and the February 24, 2010 letter from the City of Vernon advising of their appointed representatives to the Greater Vernon Water Service Review be received for information.

Regional Board Agenda – Regular - 4 - March 17, 2010

2. Sterile Insect Release (SIR) Program - Letter dated February 18, 2010 from the Sterile Insect Release Program

RECOMMENDATION 10 Page 54 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Includes Armstrong, Coldstream, Spallumcheen, Vernon, Electoral Areas “B” and “C”) That the letter dated February 18, 2010 from the Sterile Insect Release Program regarding the recommended post-2007 SIR structure program be received for information.

3. Bylaw 2374 – Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw 2375 – Rezoning 0829474 BC Ltd. (File 09-0123-C-OR) - Staff report dated February 18, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 11 Page 66 (Part 26 – Special Voting – Includes Electoral Areas only) That Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2374, 2009 to amend the land use designation of that property legally described as Lot 1, Section 20, Township 5, ODYD, Plan 30557, located at 7285 Dixon Dam Road, Electoral Area “C” from Country Residential to Small Holdings be referred to Public Hearing.

RECOMMENDATION 12 Page 66 (Part 26 – Special Voting – Includes Electoral Areas only) That Rezoning Bylaw No. 2375, 2009 to rezone that property legally described as Lot 1, Section 20, Township 5, ODYD, Plan 30557, located at 7285 Dixon Dam Road, Electoral Area “C” from Recreation Commercial Zone [C.5] to Small Holding Zone [S.H.] be referred to Public Hearing.

4. Development Permit Application DIRKS, Fred (File 07-0570-B-DP) - Staff report dated February 11, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 13 Page 78 (Part 26 – Special Voting – Includes Electoral Areas only) That Development Permit 07-0570-B-DP for that property legally described as Parcel A (Plan B6715) of Lot 5, Sections 25 and 26, Township 8, ODYD, Plan 1956, Except Plans 20384, H18484 and KAP68929 located at 7975 Greenhow Road, Electoral Area “B” to permit a 13.72 m x 30.48 m addition to the existing commercial building be extended, and the project and all works and services be completed by June 2011.

5. Coldstream Creek Water Quality Enhancement Project - Letter dated February 19, 2010 from the District of Coldstream - Draft letter of support

RECOMMENDATION 14 Page 86 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That the District of Coldstream’s funding proposal to the Okanagan Basin Water Board for a water quality enhancement project along a segment of Coldstream Creek be supported.

Regional Board Agenda – Regular - 5 - March 17, 2010

6. Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update - Staff report dated March 4, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 15 Page 90 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Excludes Electoral Area “E”) That the staff report dated March 4, 2010 regarding Fire Training Centre – Service Review Update be received for information.

Direction is requested with regard to desired changes (if any) to the service offerings currently being provided by the Fire Training Centre.

7. Air Quality Function

RECOMMENDATION 16 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Includes Armstrong, Coldstream, Lumby, Spallumcheen, Vernon, Electoral Areas “B” and “C”) That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, the Air Quality service (110) be abandoned and that no funds be requisitioned in 2010.

RECOMMENDATION 17 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Includes Armstrong, Coldstream, Lumby, Spallumcheen, Vernon, Electoral Areas “B” and “C”) That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, the Air Quality service (110) reserve be used to fund the Regional District of North Okanagan’s participation in the Okanagan Similkameen Airshed Coalition, and to fund any other expenses attributable to the service.

8. Regional Transit Strategic Planning

RECOMMENDATION 18 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Excludes Electoral Areas “C” and “E”) That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, the provision of $15,000 for consulting costs be included in the 2010 financial plan, to be funded from reserves, to facilitate the participation of the Regional District of North Okanagan if and when BC Transit undertakes a strategic review of transit in the North Okanagan.

RECOMMENDATION 19 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Excludes Electoral Areas “C” and “E”) That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, 350 bus passes be donated to the United Way for their Emergency Transportation Assistance Program.

9. Okanagan Basin Water Board – Annual Budget Approval Process

RECOMMENDATION 20 (Weighted Stakeholder Vote – Includes Armstrong, Coldstream, Spallumcheen, Vernon, Electoral Areas “B”, “C” and “D”) That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, the Okanagan Basin Water Board (OBWB) be requested to engage the Regional District of North Okanagan in the future in the review and development of the OBWB budget prior to final approval. Regional Board Agenda – Regular - 6 - March 17, 2010

10. Bylaw 2431 - Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan - Staff report dated March 8, 2010

RECOMMENDATION 21 Page 112 (Unweighted Corporate Vote – Simple Majority) That Bylaw 2431, being Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2431, 2010 be given First, Second and Third Readings.

RECOMMENDATION 22 Page 112 (Weighted Corporate Vote – 2/3 majority) That Bylaw 2431, being Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2431, 2010 be reconsidered and adopted.

G. ADJOURNMENT BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

MINUTES of a REGULAR meeting of the BOARD of DIRECTORS of the REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN held in the Board Room at the Regional District Office on Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Members: Director H. Halvorson Electoral Area “F” Chair Director P. Nicol City of Vernon Vice-Chair Director J. Trainor City of Armstrong Director D. Dirk District of Coldstream Director D. Wejr City of Enderby Director K. Acton Village of Lumby Director W. Hansma Township of Spallumcheen Director J. Gilroy City of Vernon Director W. Lippert City of Vernon Director M. Gavinchuk Electoral Area “B” Director M. Macnabb Electoral Area “C” Director R. Fairbairn Electoral Area “D” Director E. Foisy Electoral Area “E”

Staff: G. Betts Administrator R. Smailes General Manager, Planning and Building R. Kray General Manager, Engineering A. McNiven General Manager, Parks, Recreation and Culture B. Campbell Infrastructure Manager A. Cotsworth Greater Vernon Water Manager L. Mellott Human Resources Officer (taking minutes)

Also Present: Alternate Director G. Kiss District of Coldstream Media and Public

CALL MEETING TO ORDER

The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Board of Directors – March 3, 2010

Moved and seconded by Directors Gilroy and Acton That the agenda of the March 3, 2010 regular meeting of the Board of Directors be approved with the following addition:

Item F.23 – Okanagan Valley Goose Management Strategy CARRIED

Page 1 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 2 - March 3, 2010

ADOPTION OF MINUTES

Board of Directors – February 17, 2010

The resolution related to Okanagan Regional Library should state that the library borrowing service area would include the entire regional district.

Moved and seconded by Directors Trainor and Lippert That the minutes of the February 17, 2010 regular meeting of the Board of Directors be adopted as amended. CARRIED

Committee of the Whole – February 17, 2010

Moved and seconded by Directors Trainor and Gilroy That the minutes of the February 17, 2010 meeting of the Committee of the Whole be adopted as circulated. CARRIED

REPORTS

Committee Minutes

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Acton That the minutes of the following meetings be received for information: - Electoral Area Advisory Committee – February 16, 2010 - Greater Vernon Advisory Committee – February 11, 2010 - White Valley Parks, Recreation and Culture Committee – February 8, 2010 CARRIED

Building Inspection Report – January 2010

Moved and seconded by Directors Hansma and Fairbairn That the Building Inspection Report for January 2010 be received for information. CARRIED

Silver Star Building Permit Statistical Report – January 2010

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Lippert That the Silver Star Building Permit Statistical Report for January 2010 be received for information. CARRIED

Director Hansma left the meeting.

Vision North Okanagan – Quarterly Report: October 1 – December 31, 2009

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Lippert That the Vision North Okanagan Quarterly Report: October 1 – December 31, 2009 be received for information. CARRIED

Page 2 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 3 - March 3, 2010

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

Bylaw 2378 – Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw 2379 – Rezoning YNTEMA, Richard and Lorraine (File 08-0663-F-OR)

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Gavinchuk That staff be directed to prepare a report for a future Board of Directors meeting regarding the application of Richard Yntema to rezone property and amend the text of the Zoning Bylaw to allow „incinerator‟ as a permitted use. CARRIED

Bylaw 2264 – Rezoning DOWN, Harold (File 07-0597-C-RZ)

Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Gavinchuk That Rezoning Bylaw No. 2264, 2007 (Harold Down) to rezone that property legally described as The South West ¼ of the North East ¼ of Section 20, Township 5, ODYD, located at 7974 Silver Star Road, Electoral Area “C” from Non-Urban Zone [N.U.] to Country Residential Zone [C.R.], to permit a seven (7) lot subdivision, be given third reading and adoption. CARRIED

NEW BUSINESS

Electoral Area “B” Advisory Planning Commission – Appointment

Moved and seconded by Directors Gavinchuk and Fairbairn That pursuant to Section 8 of Advisory Planning Commission Bylaw No. 1748, 2002, the following person be appointed to the Electoral Area “B” Advisory Planning Commission for a two year term to expire on December 31, 2011: Bryan Ryley, 325 Howards Road, Vernon, BC V1H 1G4. CARRIED

North Okanagan Bike to Work Week

Moved and seconded by Directors Lippert and Gilroy That the North Okanagan Bike to Work Week, May 10-16, 2010, be supported by the Regional District of North Okanagan; And further, that staff be endorsed to invite member municipalities to partner with the City of Vernon and Regional District of North Okanagan in hosting the North Okanagan Bike to Work Week. CARRIED

Bylaw 2425 – Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan Amendment ZUMMACK, Todd and Jodylee (File 09-0489-F-OR)

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Macnabb That Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2425, 2010 to amend the designation of the property legally described as Lot 5, Sec 27, Twp 19, Rge 9, W6M, KDYD, Plan 30764, Except Plan 36785, located at 841 Grandview Bench Road, Electoral Area “F” from Non-Urban to Country Residential, be given First Reading and considered in conjunction with the Regional District

Page 3 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 4 - March 3, 2010

(i) financial plan and (ii) waste management plan pursuant to Section 882 of the Local Government Act; And further, that Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2425, 2010 be referred to various agencies and First Nations in accordance with Section 879 of the Local Government Act. CARRIED

Solid Waste Management Program – 2008 Annual Report

Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Gilroy That the report dated February 10, 2010 from the Environmental Services Manager regarding the Solid Waste Management Program 2008 Annual Report be received for information. CARRIED

Bylaw 2430 – Mabel Lake Community Domestic Water Service Establishment Amendment Bylaw

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Wejr That Bylaw 2430, cited as “Mabel Lake Community Domestic Water Service Establishment Amendment Bylaw No. 2430, 2010”, be given first, second and third readings; And further, that Bylaw 2430, cited as “Mabel Lake Community Domestic Water Service Establishment Amendment Bylaw No. 2430, 2010” be referred to the participant in the service for consent. CARRIED

General Liability Insurance

Moved and seconded by Directors Acton and Fairbairn That as recommended by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee, the Regional District of North Okanagan respond to the call for input put forward by the Ministry of Finance regarding review of the Society Act and provide Board support for the consideration of liability insurance for community organizations and societies. CARRIED

Regional Solid Waste Management

Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Trainor That the Regional Solid Waste Management Memorandum of Understanding between the Regional District of North Okanagan and City of Vernon, City of Enderby, City of Armstrong, Village of Lumby, Township of Spallumcheen and the District of Coldstream be endorsed; And further, that the Regional Solid Waste Management Memorandum of Understanding be forwarded to the member municipalities for signature. CARRIED

Fire Dispatch

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Gilroy That the letter dated February 9, 2010 from the City of Vernon regarding Fire Dispatch be received for information. CARRIED

Page 4 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 5 - March 3, 2010

Local Government Elections Task Force – UBCM Member Consultation Meeting

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Gavinchuk That the attendance and any costs related thereto, for Electoral Area Directors wishing to attend the Local Government Elections Task Force – UBCM Member Consultation to be held Friday March 12, 2010 at the Delta Vancouver Airport Hotel be authorized. CARRIED

2010 Tipping Fee Schedule and Consolidated Solid Waste Management Bylaw

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Acton That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, the proposed 2010 Tipping Fee Schedule and the Draft Consolidated Solid Waste Management Bylaw be endorsed; And further, that staff report back to the Committee of the Whole with a comprehensive revenue strategy for solid waste to address capital requirements and reserve requirements for landfill closure plans. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Acton That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, in addition to the regular tipping fee, a $5.00 surcharge tipping fee per tonne disposed be added to provide a direct contribution to a closure reserve fund. CARRIED

Policy – Parking for Special Events

Moved and seconded by Directors Nicol and Gilroy That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, staff be directed to draft a letter to all of the local High School Grad Committees to advise of safety concerns with regard to uncontrolled use of Polson Park during Grad events and encouraging them to consider alternatives to address these concerns as raised in the report dated January 21, 2010 from the General Manager, Parks, Recreation and Culture; And further, that a copy of the letter be forwarded to Terri Jones, initiating member of the public. CARRIED

Wesbild Centre – Special Events Reserve Fund

Moved and seconded by Directors Nicol and Gilroy That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, staff include in the budget an expenditure of $60,000 for 2010, which includes $30,000 remaining from 2009 and an additional $30,000 for 2010, to assist in the attraction and/or sponsorship of special events at the Wesbild Centre with the understanding that the $60,000 is to be used to sponsor / co- sponsor events and the intent is that such events would earn a profit; And further, that this matter be revisited and reported back to budget discussions in 2011. CARRIED

Turf Management, Tree and Shrub Care Program

Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Gavinchuk That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, staff be directed to continually look for methods / products to reduce herbicide use, yet maintain healthy turf grass; And further, that in 2010, herbicides not be used within 30 metres of playground equipment and picnic tables within the City of Vernon;

Page 5 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 6 - March 3, 2010

And further, that the application of Round Up on shale / hard surface areas be reduced from three applications per year to two applications per year; And further, that top dressing of playing fields be done as deemed necessary; And further, that there be no herbicide / pesticide use within the District of Coldstream. CARRIED

Greater Vernon Parks and Recreation District – 2010 Budget

Moved and seconded by Directors Nicol and Gilroy That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, provision be made in the 2010 budget to provide Gallery Vertigo with a one time grant of $15,000, and that additional funds be included in the 2010 budget to provide the Greater Vernon Museum and Archives, Vernon Public Art Gallery, Vernon Community Arts Council and the Boys and Girls Club of Vernon each an additional $5,000. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Directors Nicol and Gilroy That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, the following items be included in the 2010 Greater Vernon Parks, Recreation and Culture Financial Plan: A. Operating Budget Expenditures: - Tree Removal at Kin Beach ($15,000) - 2012 BC Winter Games ($5,000) - Trails $20,000 - Parks – Irrigation Water ($40,000) - Museum ($2,000) - Phase I – Implementation of Reducing Herbicide Use ($15,000) B. Operating Budget Revenue - Grant from the federal government for Priest Valley Gym dividers $8,000 C. Capital Budget - The following projects will be carried over from 2009 as well as the funds to complete the projects: i. Rocky Ridge Park $20,000 ii. Priest Valley Gym Dividers $25,000 iii. GVPRD Service Review $30,000 iv. Telephone / internet / audio visual wiring – auditorium $15,000 - Legal fees for land acquisition $15,000 - Polson Park Fitness Equipment $135,000 CARRIED Opposed – Director Gavinchuk

Moved and seconded by Directors Nicol and Gilroy That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, $10,000 be included in the 2010 Vernon and District Performing Arts Centre Financial Plan for replacement of the display panel on the marquis sign. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Directors Nicol and Macnabb That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, operating reserves for the Multi-Use Facility service (062) and the Community Theatre service (065) be set at 20% of 2010 operating expenses; And further, that $200,000 be transferred to capital reserves for the Multi-Use Facility service (062) in 2010. CARRIED

Page 6 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 7 - March 3, 2010

Greater Vernon Water – 2010 Budget

Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Lippert That as recommended by the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee with respect to the Greater Vernon Water Utility budget: An across-the-board water rate increase of 9% be approved; 20 cubic metres of consumption be included in the quarterly base fee at a rate of $0.92 per cubic metre; The rate per cubic metre be increased to $1.10 for the 3rd quarter billing cycle (July – September); A base fee be charged to all properties with a service connection whenever the property is not served by an approved alternate potable water source; The rising block rate concept be approved in principle and that staff report back with a proposal to implement rising block rates for 2011; Staff be directed to consult with the farming / agricultural community and report back with a recommendation on the appropriate criteria to qualify for the irrigation rate; Staff be directed to ensure that appropriate notification is provided to Greater Vernon Water customers regarding 2010 rate changes. CARRIED

Development Variance Permit Application NIELSON, Robert (File 09-0751-F-DVP)

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Macnabb That as recommended by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee, a Development Variance Permit be issued for that property legally described as: That Part DL 526, KDYD, which may be more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the SW Corner of said Lot; Thence Northerly along the Western Boundary of said Lot 12 Chains, Thence Easterly and at Right Angles to the Western Boundary and Parallel with the Southern Boundary of said Lot A, Distance of 10 Chains; Thence Southerly and Parallel with the said Western Boundary a Distance of 12 Chains; Thence Westerly and along the Southern Boundary to the Point of Commencement, located at 6619 Highway 97A, Electoral Area “F” to vary Section 803.9.e. of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003, by reducing the side yard setback for the Accessory Residential Building under construction from 4.5 m (14.76‟) to 3.21 m (10.53‟). CARRIED

Development Variance Permit Application TRUSTEES OF GRINDROD GOSPEL CHURCH (File 09-0751-F-DVP)

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Gavinchuk That as recommended by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee, a Development Variance Permit be issued for that property legally described as Lot 6, Blk 9, DL 526, KDYD, Plan 592 located at 185 – 3rd Avenue, Electoral Area “F” to vary the following sections of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003; 1. Section 702(9)(a) of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 be varied by reducing the exterior side yard setback (south side of property) from 5.0 m to 4.44 m; and, 2. Section 702(8), in reference to Section 1101(3) of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 be varied to reduce the required off-street parking for a church from 0.49 per attendee to 0.0 per attendee; to allow construction of an addition onto an existing church building. CARRIED

Page 7 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 8 - March 3, 2010

Community Works Fund – Project #019 – Sounds of Light Multicultural Society Solar Installations

Moved and seconded by Directors Gavinchuk and Nicol That as recommended by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee, the Sounds of Light Multicultural Society Solar Installations be funded from the Community Works Fund at a cost of $10,128.97. CARRIED

Community Works Fund – Project #020 – Cherry Creek Riparian Restoration Project – Stage 2

Moved and seconded by Directors Foisy and Fairbairn That as recommended by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee, the Cherry Creek Riparian Restoration Project – Stage 2 be funded from the Community Works Fund at a cost of $16,053.45. CARRIED

Southern Interior Local Government Association (SILGA) – 2010 Convention

Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Gavinchuk That as recommended by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee, the attendance and any costs related thereto, for Electoral Area Directors wishing to attend the 2010 Southern Interior Local Government Association (SILGA) convention to be held April 28–30, 2010 at Sun Peaks, BC be authorized. CARRIED

Request to Waive Development Cost Charges

Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Foisy That as recommended by the White Valley Parks, Recreation and Culture Advisory Committee, Parkland Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 1390 be amended to allow for reduction in Development Cost Charge fees for eligible projects and to include a definition of eligible projects that would be the same as the definition in the Village of Lumby Development Cost Charge bylaw; And further, that the BC Housing Corporation 16 unit senior housing development in Lumby be required to pay the parkland development cost charges as outlined in the amended bylaw. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Directors Foisy and Acton That as recommended by the White Valley Parks, Recreation and Culture Advisory Committee, Parkland Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 1390 be amended to allow the use of development cost charge funds for capital improvements as permitted under the Local Government Act. CARRIED

Financial Plan 2010 - 2014

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Nicol That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, Reserves for Parks Services and Engineering Services be repaid from General Government for building expansion costs. CARRIED

Page 8 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 9 - March 3, 2010

Moved and seconded by Directors Acton and Lippert That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, the Fire Training Centre budget for 2010 be supported.

Moved and seconded by Directors Acton and Lippert to amend the motion as follows: That the matter of Fire Training Centre budget for 2010 be postponed pending receipt of additional information regarding the Fire Training Centre service review. CARRIED Opposed – Directors Macnabb and Dirk

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Macnabb That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, a Statutory Reserve be established for Solid Waste Management service (670) for the specified purpose of landfill closure and post- closure costs. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Directors Wejr and Halvorson That as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, $1,500 per month be requisitioned for Fortune Parks, Recreation and Culture service (090), and that $390 be requisitioned for 2010 for each of Fortune Animal Control service (154) and Cemetery – Enderby and Area “F” service (200) for overhead. CARRIED

Okanagan Valley Goose Management Strategy

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Gilroy That staff be directed to submit a Water Conservation and Quality Improvement Grant application to the Okanagan Basin Water Board for a $10,000 grant to assist with the Okanagan Goose Management Control Program; And further, that a letter of support be included with the grant application. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Directors Gilroy and Nicol That the regular meeting of the Board of Directors recess to meet as a Committee of the Whole. CARRIED

The regular meeting of the Board of Directors adjourned to meet as a Committee of the Whole at 7:39 p.m. The regular meeting of the Board of Directors reconvened at 8:02 p.m.

IN CAMERA

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Gilroy That, pursuant to Section 92 of the Community Charter, the regular meeting of the Board of Directors convene In Camera to deal with matters deemed closed to the public in accordance with Section 90(1)(e) and (g) of the Community Charter. CARRIED

The regular meeting of the Board of Directors adjourned to meet In Camera at 8:03 p.m. The regular meeting of the Board of Directors reconvened at 8:45 p.m.

Page 9 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.1 Board of Directors Minutes – Regular - 10 - March 3, 2010

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:46 p.m.

Certified Correct:

Chair Corporate Officer

Page 10 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.2

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

MINUTES of a meeting of the COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE of the REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN held in the Board Room at the Regional District Office on Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Members: Director H. Halvorson Electoral Area “F” Chair Director P. Nicol City of Vernon Vice Chair Director J. Trainor City of Armstrong Director D. Dirk District of Coldstream Director D. Wejr City of Enderby Director K. Acton Village of Lumby Director W. Hansma Township of Spallumcheen Director J. Gilroy City of Vernon Director W. Lippert City of Vernon Director M. Gavinchuk Electoral Area “B” Director M. Macnabb Electoral Area “C” Director R. Fairbairn Electoral Area “D” Director E. Foisy Electoral Area “E”

Staff: G. Betts Administrator D. Sewell General Manager, Finance R. Kray General Manager, Engineering N. Kohnert Environmental and Engineering Services Manager L. Mellott Human Resources Officer (taking minutes)

Also Present: Alternate Director J. Brown Township of Spallumcheen Alternate Director G. Kiss District of Coldstream Councillor M. Besso District of Coldstream Public and Media

CALL MEETING TO ORDER

Chair Halvorson called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Committee of the Whole – March 3, 2010

Moved and seconded by Directors Gilroy and Acton That the Agenda of the March 3, 2010 meeting of the Committee of the Whole be approved as presented. CARRIED

Page 11 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.2 Committee of the Whole Minutes – Regular - 2 - March 3, 2010

NEW BUSINESS

Air Quality Function

The Environmental and Engineering Services Manager provided an overview of activities that would no longer be possible if the Air Quality Function was not funded. Discussion took place on whether or not there is support for hiring an Air Quality staff person.

The Committee discussed the Regional District’s commitment to the Okanagan Similkameen Airshed Coalition and the significance of the Wood Stove Exchange Program.

Moved and seconded by Directors Hansma and Gavinchuk That the Air Quality service (110) be abandoned and that no funds be requisitioned in 2010. CARRIED Opposed – Directors Macnabb, Dirk and Nicol

Moved and seconded by Directors Lippert and Hansma That the Air Quality service (110) reserve be used to fund the Regional District of North Okanagan’s participation in the Okanagan Similkameen Airshed Coalition, and to fund any other expenses attributable to the service. CARRIED

Transit Strategic Planning

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Hansma That discussion regarding Transit Strategic Planning take place following the March 3, 2010 Board of Directors regular meeting. CARRIED

Okanagan Basin Water Board – Annual Budget Approval Process

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Nicol That discussion regarding the Okanagan Basin Water Board Annual Budget Approval Process take place following the March 3, 2010 Board of Directors regular meeting. CARRIED

The meeting was suspended at 3:55 p.m. and reconvened at 7:40 p.m.

Transit Strategic Planning

The Administrator summarized results of the Service Review that was concluded in January 2008.

Moved and seconded by Nicol and Gilroy That the provision of $15,000 for consulting costs be included in the 2010 financial plan, to be funded from reserves, to facilitate the participation of the Regional District of North Okanagan if and when BC Transit undertakes a strategic review of transit in the North Okanagan. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Nicol and Lippert That 350 bus passes be donated to the United Way for their Emergency Transportation Assistance Program. CARRIED

Page 12 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.2 Committee of the Whole Minutes – Regular - 3 - March 3, 2010

Okanagan Basin Water Board – Annual Budget Approval Process

Moved and seconded by Directors Dirk and Nicol That the Okanagan Basin Water Board (OBWB) be requested to engage the Regional District of North Okanagan in the future in the review and development of the OBWB budget prior to final approval.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:01 p.m.

Certified Correct:

Chair Corporate Officer

Page 13 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.3

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

MINUTES of a PUBLIC HEARING (Bylaw 2264) of the BOARD of DIRECTORS of the REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN held in the Board Room at the Regional District Office on WEDNESDAY, March 3, 2010.

Members: Director H. Halvorson Electoral Area “F” Chair Director P. Nicol City of Vernon Vice Chair Director J. Trainor City of Armstrong Director D. Dirk District of Coldstream Director D. Wejr City of Enderby Director K. Acton Village of Lumby Director W. Hansma Township of Spallumcheen Director J. Gilroy City of Vernon Director W. Lippert City of Vernon Director M. Gavinchuk Electoral Area “B” Director M. Macnabb Electoral Area “C” Director R. Fairbairn Electoral Area “D” Director E. Foisy Electoral Area “E”

Staff: G. Betts Administrator R. Smailes General Manager, Planning and Building A. McNiven General Manager, Parks, Recreation and Culture N. Kohnert Environmental and Engineering Services Manager L. Mellott Human Resources Officer (taking Minutes)

Also Present: Alternate Director J. Brown Township of Spallumcheen Alternate Director G. Kiss District of Coldstream Councillor M. Besso District of Coldstream Media and Public

CALL PUBLIC HEARING TO ORDER

Chair Halvorson called the Public Hearing to order at 4:00 p.m.

INTRODUCTION OF BYLAW

DOWN, Harold (File 07-0597-C-RZ)

Bylaw 2264 – Rezoning (7974 Silver Star Road, Electoral Area “C”) Purpose: A bylaw to rezone lands and amend the Zoning Map attached to the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to change a zone designation.

The General Manager, Planning and Building introduced the bylaw and summarized two written submissions that had been received.

Gord Kennedy, 8054 Silver Star Road – raised two concerns with respect to the future subdivision of the subject property. Mr. Kennedy is concerned that he may lose his view and is

Page 14 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM B.3 Public Hearing – Bylaw 2264 - 2 - March 3, 2010

also concerned that there may be additional power lines or poles constructed adjacent to or through his property.

Brent and Teresa Cleveland, 7925 Falcon Road – raised concerns with traffic flow issues (speed, volume and amount of dust) from the three proposed lots off of Wallace Road. They have found since large properties such as this one have been subdivided and developed, the traffic has used Falcon Road exclusively. The best solution would be to deactivate the east end of Falcon Road or alternatively provide large speed bumps to deter and slow traffic.

PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

The Chair asked if there were persons present who wished to speak to the bylaw.

Harold Down (applicant), 7974 Silver Star Road – advised that his intent was to leave the lot in as natural a state as possible. He confirmed that the intention is to install underground wiring.

Matthew Levere, 8016 Wallace Road – expressed concerns with the proposed development’s impact on both quality and quantity of water, as well as concerns with the retention of existing vegetation.

Lance Crump, 8004 Silver Star Road – expressed concerns that the road would affect setbacks on his property.

CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING

There being no one further to speak to Bylaw 2264, the Public Hearing was closed at 4:22 p.m.

Certified Correct:

Chair Corporate Officer

Page 15 of 121

Horse Racing in the North Okanagan

Historic Kin Horse Park and the future q

kin-VISION - 1 -

Horse Racing in the North Okanagan

Historic Kin Horse Park and the future

An overview and proposal prepared by: Gary Bannerman

For the Okanagan Equestrian Society

9 October, 2009

s - 2- kin VISION

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

PREFACE 4 ~ State of the horse racing industry in North America 5 ~ An equine industry overview 8

NORTH OKANAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/TOURISM 9 ~ Kin ParkjVernon situation 10 ~ The Chilliwack example 10

NORTH OKANAGAN EQUESTRIAN CENTRE 11 ~ The equine residential, training, veterinary centre 13 ~ Location, location, location 14 ~ Racing festivals 15

CONCLUSION 15

NEXT STEPS 16

APPENDICES ~ Bibliography and interviews ~ Gary Bannerman, biographical notes and horse racing background ~ A Submission On Behalf of the Interior Horse Racing Association kin-VISION -3-

Executive Summary • Vernon horse racing, in its current location and with the present maintenance arrangement, is sustainable and can expect modest growth because of anticipated improved funding from the provincial industry. • No new racetrack anywhere in North America can be self-sufficient without other endowments or revenue streams (teletheatre wagering, slot machines, adjacent commercial activity or public events.) • A succession of BC horse racing industry reports have cited the health of Interior Racing as vital to the sport's future in the province. • Horse racing is in serious decline throughout North America, but thriving elsewhere in the world, where it is supported by "clubs" such as the Okanagan Equestrian Society. • As the oldest thoroughbred track in Canada (at the same location) Kin Horse Park's 116-year heritage can always be part of the North Okanagan promotional story. • Despite a long list of admirable attributes and achievements, the Greater Vernon area lacks an identity either in culture or industry. • A "North Okanagan Equestrian Centre" is proposed to become a focal point for the BC equine industry (all breeds and horse activities) complete with a major veterinary hospital and rehabilitation centre, horse training, racing, equestrian competitions, boarding and commercial activities such as a BC Lottery Corporation CHANCES operation (bingo, some slot machines, keno and a TBC horse racing teletheatre). • In addition to the potential of a regional industrial identity, heritage promotions could build upon icons such as Kin Park racing, Armstrong cheese, and O'Keefe Ranch, and link with the Caravan Theatre and the region's impressive achievements in sports and the arts. • The best example of what can be achieved in a land swap between an Agricultural Society and a municipal government, is Chilliwack's success with two P3s downtown, facilitating the development of Heritage Park on the Trans-Canada Highway. • Location is the most vital consideration. The vision may be a generation in the development, requiring 100 acres of land or more, not necessarily contiguous, but gaming and commercial attractions require a high traffic frontage. • A new attraction could host two annual "racing festivals" (thoroughbred and standardbred), the nucleus of attractions that would include a travelling midway, concerts and myriad activity. • This report is to be considered merely a "vision" - Phase II would explore feasibility. ~---

-4- kin VISION

Preface

We were asked by the Okanagan Equestrian Society (formerly the Vernon Agricultural Society - "The Society" for the purposes of this paper - to assess the current status of thoroughbred horse racing in its present and,historic location at Kin Park, adversarial relations with local government concerning optimal usage of the property, and principally:

• the viability of continuing at Kin Park if legal obstacles can be removed, or

• the viability of live thoroughbred horse racing at a new location, and,

• to envision a process which "The Society", the City of Vernon and the North Okanagan Regional District (NORD) could pursue as partners, not adversaries.

As a standalone, self-sufficient business entity, no argument can be made in support of viability for ANY new racetrack in North America no matter how major the market. The industry continues in sharp decline, an erosion that began with the birth of government lotteries and which has escalated in the face of casino expansion. Where horse racing appears to be doing well, it is solely because of other revenue streams: teletheatre income (wagering on tracks worldwide, often through off-track locations within political jurisdictions; slot machines; sale of real estate or other entertainment activities).

It is not horse racing - the spectator sport - that principally captures the attention of government, but rather its vast economic impact. The ultimate benefit of horse racing to society, as opposed to other forms of gambling, is that it creates thousands of highly varied jobs. Farms, ranches, transport companies, a myriad of suppliers, and dozens of other businesses (such as gravel pits, trucking companies and a saddle-making business in Merritt) share small pieces of the pie. Every dollar passes through several hands.

There is no doubting that this is a substantial industry, in stark contrast to the ephemeral cash machines represented by other gaming pursuits. The focus of housing, breeding and training race horses in B.C. is principally in the Fraser Valley and the Saanich Peninsula of the Southwest, where land has become prohibitively expensive, and the Okanagan where it is more affordable (particularly the north and the slopes).

If there is a future for horse racing in the Vernon/North Okanagan area, the foundation will have to be related - but separate - businesses and revenue streams that can operate year-round.

We will propose here the development of an important B.C. equestrian nucleus, under the working title NORTH OKANAGAN EQUESTRIAN CENTRE. Q

kin-VISION - 5-

The state of the horse racing industry - North America

Horse racing is doing well - in many cases thriving - just about everywhere else in the world, except North America.

The principal reason for this success - particularly in small markets - is because the racing is operated by "clubs," not unlike the Okanagan Equestrian Society. The biggest in the world is the fabulously wealthy Hong Kong Jockey Club, the profits of which finance all arts programs and many charities in the city. More typical, however, are the clubs in small town England, Scandinavia, continental Europe, New Zealand and Australia, each of which may host just five or six race days each year, but club activity (club rooms, catering, teletheatre racing) is year-round and the live race days are major community events, sometimes even civic holidays. Volunteers do much of the work. On race-days (sometimes multi-day racing "festivals") colourful candy-striped marquee tents dot the grounds and infield, each of them hosting corporate parties. Private caterers, nearby restaurants and concessionaires usually provide the amenities, impacting the entire local economy.

The dichotomy between North America and the rest of the world can be summed up in just one phrase: "too much product chasing too few dollars." The United Kingdom has 61 thoroughbred racetracks. On any given day, only a few of these are racing, all broadcast live to thousands of "off-tracks" all over the country, and even home TV, with typically only 6 or 7 races per card. Every significant newspaper in the British Isles - several with circulation in the millions of copies per day - devote pages to horse racing. Despite this profile and market penetration 10 times or more that of North America, there are usually only 30-40 races each day to wager on. On any day on this continent there may be 60-100 pari-mutuel tracks running, collectively offering anywhere from 600 - 1,000 races. There is practically no media profile except for the great occasions. Major events such as the Kentucky Derby and Breeders Cup remain triumphant successes, but everyday racing has been trivialized to the pOint of irrelevance, made far worse by the slot machine revenues providing purses for races nobody but horsepeople want.

d -r------

-6- kin VISION

The heart of the B.C. thoroughbred sport is at Hastings Racecourse in Vancouver. "Standardbred" racing, more commonly referred to as "harness racing" has its B.C. focal point at Fraser Downs in Surrey, but it was a high profile sport in the Vernon area from the 1890s and into the early years of the 20th century. For most of its history, Kin Horse Park has been exclusively a thoroughbred venue. Sandown Park near Victoria once thrived as both a thoroughbred track and, since 1978, standardbred. However, business at Sandown gradually declined over the years to the point where - for the first time - there was no racing at all during the summer of 2009.

B.C. Interior horse racing is held at Kamloops, Vernon and Princeton. Osoyoos, another historic centre for the sport, has had no racing in recent years although current efforts are to bring it back. There are about half the number of race days at the Interior venues now, compared to 10-years-ago.

The Interior has historically been subsidized by grants from the former B.C. Racing Commission and, in more recent years, "off-the-top" of the gross pari-mutuel revenues earned by thoroughbred racing at Hastings and via teletheatres. This grant - used exclusively for purses - has been $200,000 in recent seasons. Early in 2009 the operator of Hastings Racecourse and Fraser Downs, Great Canadian Gaming Corporation, declined to remit its share of the grant to Interior racing, touching off a political controversy. Not only did the government regulator, the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch (GPEB), restore the $200,000 from industry revenues, the event led to a major review of all horse racing financing structures, currently in progress. It is expected that restructuring now taking place will at least marginally improve present levels of funding for the Interior. Therefore, the current level of annual racing at Kin Park - based upon present costs and slightly improved external support - can be sustained. The best evidence of this is the attendance and pari-mutuel activity for live race days in 2008 and 2009, despite a black cloud of negativity hanging over the business and little community help with promotion. Kin Horse Park's three 2009 days attracted a combined paid audience of 3,500 who wagered about $75,000. Appended to this report is a submission made this summer to the government review by the Interior Racing Association. Its authors, Richard A. Yates and Brian Kozak, demonstrate how much money is taken out of the regions served by Interior tracks, through TBC Teletheatres. Aside from the $200,000 grant, all of this horse racing profit flows directly to Great Canadian and the two horsepeople's associations, standardbred and thoroughbred, entirely to the benefit of racing in Greater Vancouver. The two major tracks claim entitlement to these funds. Since the mid-1990s, TBC Teletheatres has become a major undertaking requiring sophisticated satellite technology, computerization and the development of venues. Many of the early outlets were in unattractive pubs - and some of that remains - but, increasingly, the newer "race books" for televised horse races and wagering are first class in every respect. TBC Teletheatres, increasingly becoming a credit to the industry, donates $1,000 toward the cost of the tote fees (pari-mutuel wagering) for each race day at Kamloops and Vernon. kin-VISION -7-

Therefore, this is not to suggest that every dollar leaving the Interior racing region is a net to the operators and horsepeople at Fraser Downs and Hastings, but the Yates-Kozak paper dramatically demonstrates that the Interior must receive far more than $200,000 in the future. In fact, Interior horseplayers are subsidizing Lower Mainland racing, not the reverse.

Economic development plans prepared by the industry over a generation consistently emphasize the need fora "B" racing circuit, developmental racing at lower cost, such as what exists in Alberta. These excerpts from industry publications make the point:

A priority of the B.C. horse racing industry must be to secure consistent long-term financing for Interior racing. It not only exposes new audiences to the thrill and beauty of the sport, these venues are for less expensive developing horses and also those whose careers are in decline. All successful professional sports enterprises have a minor league. One of the principal weaknesses of the B. C. thoroughbred sport is that there is no significant regional "B" circuit. - Business Plan prepared by Great Canadian Gaming and the Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (November, 2008)

The new era requires a better public-private partnership - The private sector will pay the bills. Government may be asked to assist with a long list of services within its power, which may include investment incentives, zoning, infrastructure, promotional supports, deregulation, and research. Within horse racing, as in other industries, there are new and marginal operations that may be future profit centres or which indirectly add value to a larger, more profitable enterprise. . . . Important examples of this might be the Interior Racing Association and Victoria's Sandown Park. Breeding and a thoroughbred horse racing culture remain exceptionally strong in the Okanagan, on Vancouver Island and elsewhere in B.C. despite the rarity of live racing opportunities. The health of the sport and its province-wide appeal would be greatly enhanced if there was more racing in more communities. If Vancouver aspires to be "major league" in the jargon of other sports, there simply must be a "minor league." - The Road to Recovery, B.C. Racing Commission, May, 2001

t - 8- kin VISION

Those within the B.C. industry who attempt to marginalize the Interior racing by suggesting it is a small percentage of the total sport seem not to realize that the same argument applies to them. About 70 percent of all pari-mutuel activity in B.C. is wagered on races that occur outside of the province. This means that the live horse races at Fraser Downs and Hastings Racecourse have no more to do with this income than do the races at Kamloops, Vernon and Princeton. This is income as a result of a monopoly provided by the Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency (federal) and the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch (provincial). Fraser Downs and Hastings Racecourse also benefit from slot machine revenues, a portion of which goes directly into the purse pool, yet another gift made available by government but not extended to racing elsewhere.

This is not to minimize the value of contacts and contracts acquired by the two main tracks over the years nor the work of TBC Teletheatres building the network, and the professional expertise and infrastructure in finance and technology, but it is a very strong argument to be raised at political levels to ensure that horse racing in smaller centres also share in these additional windfalls. An equine industry overview

Few people comprehend the enormity of the entire horse industry within B.C. There are no recent and reliable economic impact statistics, but a study by the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture in 1998 determined that the impact of the equine sector of the provincial economy - all matters related to horses - was $771 million per year. This study said that there are 37,000 horse owners and 90,000 horses in B.C. They occupy 158,000 acres of land and employ 10,000 people.

Thoroughbred and standardbred horse racing (annual economic impact $350 million) is just part of the story. Other racing includes non-wagering (legal) Arabian, Quarter Horses and Appaloosas. Equestrian events and dressage within the province frequently involve very valuable animals, affluent owners and riders of international Olympic calibre. Alberta's Spruce Meadows is among the most famous venues in the world, attracting crowds of up to 50,000 people and television coverage to its most significant events, usually with many competitors from B.C.

There are thousands of "cutting horses" bred and trained for ranch work and rodeo competitions. Other activities include barrel racing, chuck wagon races, riding academies, trail riding, dude ranches and beloved family pets.

There are 20,000 dues-paying members of The Horse Council of B.C., representing multiple interests other than horse racing. A valuable service offered by the Council to its members is liability insurance required before any horse can participate in a sanctioned public event. kin-VISION -9-

North Okanagan Economic Development/Tourism

The NORD area consists of geography and farm country as beautiful as any in the world. The City of Vernon, perhaps better described for these purposes as the Greater Vernon area, has an infectious degree of community spirit, captured at all public events, from the arts to sports and growing spectaculars such as the annual Funtastic celebration. The junior hockey team has been national champions five times. A disproportionate number of National Hockey League players, relative to the regional population, has come out of the area, an achievement also paralleled in music and the arts. The Predator Ridge golf courses and related developments have duplicated the Silver Star ski resort evolution of a generation earlier. The Performing Arts Centre, since opening in 2001, has enriched the entire area.

Despite all this, the region lacks an identity. Aside from the collective impact of agriculture, there is little in the way of major industry. The preponderance of commercial activities and professional offices fall into the category of "small business."

The iconic Armstrong cheese plant was closed by absentee owners several years ago. Kin Park horse racing - among the rare heritage attractions - is at a low ebb, its property coveted by the supporters of other sports. The O'Keefe Ranch complex, dating back to 1867, attracts thousands of visitors, but it has a perplexing current governance; within the District of Spallmucheen but management entrusted to the City of Vernon.

The area has a great deal to offer, but contrast the "identity" factor with the Central and South Okanagan. For 25 years now, the growing medical centre at Kelowna; the retirement communities and the regional business headquarters, golf courses, vineyards and Big White skiing have fostered an extraordinary boom. The South Okanagan languished but the explosion of vineyards in Osoyoos, Oliver, Naramata and north to Kelowna have been almost miraculous, with wine quality and international respect beyond anyone's dreams. Tourism there has outgrown current hospitality industry capacity, so there is a spin off of hotel bookings to neighbouring communities, including Vernon. That will not last as wineries and the South Okanagan add hotel rooms and restaurants.

Vernon must become a destination - not merely an overnight stop - if tourism is to become a significant industry. Similarly, identity can grow out of business achievement, a notable centre for any high-profile activity.

s -10- kin VISION

The Kin Park/Vernon situation The Kin horse racing track is likely the oldest venue in the Canadian thoroughbred sport that still hosts live races. Racing began at or about 1890. Live horse races occurred in B.C. as far back as the 1860s down the main streets of towns, at Beacon Hill in Victoria and at East Park in Vancouver (now part of the Hastings grounds) since 1889. The Fredericton Raceway (harness) in New Brunswick was established In 1888. Woodbine racing in Toronto has been continuous for 148 years, although in different locations).

Had earlier generations of racecourse management registered the track as a National Heritage Site or had anyone discovered artefacts of aboriginal peoples on the grounds, today's debate would be academic. The lack of such fortuitous protection for horse racing makes the Kin Park heritage no less significant.

All this just amplifies Vernon's importance, a rare gem in the North Okanagan, part of the horse racing heritage the entire B.C. racing industry would want to preserve. That being said, it would probably not be in the best interests of B.C. horse racing to stand in the way of year-round community recreation services that would benefit far more people than a few race dates, if there was any other viable alternative.

It is not within the terms of reference of this report to comment upon the Kin Park dispute, except to say that unless "The Society" has an opportunity to host horse racing elsewhere, their passion and the rich legacy they have inherited, likely means long, drawn out and expensive legal processes of no benefit to anyone, least of all the community.

Far healthier it would be for everyone if there could be a shared vision to accommodate and enrich all interests and activities.

The Chilliwack example Chilliwack's modern day sports facility development is a model of creative thinking that has achieved a great deal for the community. It was a remarkably similar situation to what Vernon faces today. By the mid-1990s, the city desperately needed downtown land for recreational facilities. The best vacant land was a 60-acre parcel near downtown, but owned by the Chilliwack Agricultural Society. The only major activity that took place on the site was an annual fair.

The Society was convinced to swap this land for an entirely new location along the Trans-Canada Highway. On the downtown site, Chilliwack has developed two successful public private partnerships (P3s), the Chilliwack Landing Leisure Centre (swimming, indoor athletics, meeting rooms, crafts, gymnasium, fitness centre) and the Prospero Centre, a hockey arena for major junior hockey. There are also sports fields on these lands.

In exchange for this, the city purchased 40 acres of land along the Trans-Canada Highway and built large barns (Exhibition Halls), outdoor display areas, a restaurant, parking and a 5/8ths mile racetrack, all at a cost of $4 million. This has been a dynamic success story for all tenants and participants. Heritage Park has trade shows, industrial exhibitions, concerts, festivals, rodeo, chuck wagon races, barrel jumping and scores of other activities. There is hardly ever a dark day. 4

kin-VISION - 11 •

The racetrack at Heritage Park has hosted demonstration (non-betting) harness races. In 2001, Chuck Keeling of Fraser Downs led a delegation of Chilliwack representatives (including Mayor Clint Hames and City Manager Ted Tisdale) on a tour of county-fair harness racing tracks in New England. This is a thriving circuit with weeks of continuous racing, each week in a new town and another county fair. This what we believe is possible in B.C., with strong leadership from licensing agencies, beginning with Sandown Park near Victoria and Chilliwack's Heritage Park. The Okanagan, which has a rich harness racing history from the 19th century, could be an ideal venue for a brief, but exciting season.

The North Okanagan Equestrian Centre

As noted in the preface, the above is a "working title" for what could be an extraordinary business development for the North Okanagan, if a suitable location can be found with sufficient property for a generation of equine-related projects.

The catalyst for this project would not be a horse racing track in itself, but rather the dispute over racing at its historic location. Municipal, regional and local governments are motivated to find a solution, just as "The Society" is desirous of earning goodwill and support from the broader community. The viability of a racetrack at a new location would depend more upon what could be developed along with it than the raCing business itself. - 12- kin VISION

The Equestrian Centre we propose might consist of:

• a one-mile track (fallback, 5/8 mile) convertible for either thoroughbred or standardbred racing.

• a building complex for year-round activity, with a grandstand and VIP area on the track side for racing and other event spectators, a general office, club rooms, pari-mutuel area, food service and event space.

• a training, exercise track within the circumference.

• extensive stabling in different sectors for racehorses and other breeds.

• a world-class equine veterinary centre with the latest in all sophisticated equipment, including MIR (magnetiC resonance imaging) and other high-tech diagnostics, aquasizers, similar physiotherapy baths, rehab technology and surgery.

• a large concert stage in the midfield, with hydraulically operated roof and side walls to preserve sight lines for racing, equestrian events and other attractions on track and on the midfield.

• work to accommodate any synergistic cultural attractions as fixtures, headquartered in the complex, such as the outstanding Caravan Theatre company. If the location is near Spallmacheen - as has been suggested - the O'Keefe Ranch should be embraced as part of any promotional package. A small monument/museum to Kin Horse Racing could be built, possibly managed as an adjunct of the Vernon Museum. It should be noted that arts, culture and historical endeavours are eligible for many national and provincial endowment programs.

• In reasonable proximity to the track and related facilities, but located on a high-traffic highway, could be a CHANCES Gaming Entertainment operation of the BC Lottery Corporation. These include slot machines, bingo, keno and, often, a TBC Teletheatre outlet, which would obviously be a big attraction here.

• fairgrounds including a large barn (iconic architecture) that could serve as a multipurpose Exhibition Centre, adaptable for conferences, entertainment events, agriculture and industrial trade shows.

• substantial parking, the core of which would be paved and well lighted.

• a surrounding, zoned land reserve to facilitate the future development of a hotel, retail and other synergistic businesses. "f

kin-VISION -13 -

The equine residential/training/veterinary centre Despite the scale of the equine sector of B.C.'s agriculture, sports and recreation industry, the province lacks the kind of sophisticated veterinary facility commonplace on the eastern seaboard of the U.S., Florida, California, Ontario and even smaller markets such as Prince Edward Island and the State of Washin'gton. When B.C. horse owners need and can afford top diagnostics, treatment and surgery, the horses have to be shipped out of the province.

There is no focal point for the province's equine industries, with the possible exception of the Fraser Valley where land is so prohibitively expensive it is unlikely to grow any further.

By way of background, this historical anecdote is instructive. Official BC government policy from 1987-93 was to construct a world class horse racing complex, with a one-mile main track, chutes and training track - possibly even a turf course - somewhere in Greater Vancouver. Hastings Racecourse (then called Exhibition Park) would be abandoned. Some within the standardbred sector, based at Cloverdale, suggested that the Hastings track would make an ideal venue for harness racing.

The then General Manager of Cloverdale Raceway (now Fraser Downs), the late Jim Keeling Jr., envisaged a subsequent use for his racetrack, if the main racing events moved downtown. He became convinced that his alternate-use vision for the Cloverdale Fairgrounds complex would be a larger and more economically successful venture than horse racing. The components of the plan consisted of:

• state-of-the-art equine veterinary centre serving all breeds, and consisting of surgeries, hydra-therapies and related physio equipment - the best technology available anywhere.

• housing for racehorses and training tracks

• BC horse racing museum

• redevelopment of the grandstand with seating altered for concerts and special events, and the interior redeveloped for a restaurant, nightlife, offices and a horse racing teletheatre

• short off-season "B" circuit harness racing meet

Where the most sophisticated equine veterinary centres exist, their patients are often horses routinely seeking six figure purses and more, or breeding stock worth millions. It must be understood that the vast majority of racehorses in B.C. are worth $10,000 or less, and rarely would justify major veterinary investments. This is demonstrably untrue with respect to equestrian competition, exotic horse breeds (Halflinger imports from Austria, and other exotics, to the Okanagan have proved to be big business), special rodeo horses and even beloved private pets of affluent families. The business is there to be had.

d '"'"

- 14- kin VISION

Location, location, location

With respect to a CHANCES gaming centre (keno, bingo, slots) and a TBC Teletheatre with full services, and any other spin-off commercial ventures from the equestrian hub (hotel, restaurants, retail), the location must be on a major transportation corridor.

Bill McNeill, the general manager of TBC Teletheatres and others emphasized that - within reason - location doesn't matter too much for live events, but it is essential for ancillary commercial/gaming activity. The difference between success and failure in any commercial endeavour is not the "hard core" regulars, but rather the spontaneous drop-in who can be massaged into a repeat client. BC Lottery Corporation is adamant on this point. Not only must any new location be on a major highway, there will also need to be supportive traffic counts to demonstrate a sufficient volume of passers-by to justify the investment.

To illustrate this point, even the current location of Kin Park would not satisfy that requirement, but a few hundred yards away, on 32nd SVHwy 97, there is sufficient passer-by traffic.

The full vision outlined here could require 100 acres or more of property, but it need not be one contiguous parcel. The various elements should be in reasonable proximity to one another and not in conflict with neighbouring agricultural or commercial activity. Infrastructure development would be no small matter. Transportation would have to accommodate easy access and egress for horse boxes, buses and assorted heavy vehicles, and occasional large crowds for major attractions.

A factor to be considered is the likelihood that a considerable part of the acreage could be categorized as agricultural use. It would simply be a question of geographic design and a good working relationship with the Agricultural Land Commission.

We are advised that establishing a suitable location would be the greatest challenge to be faced in this proposal. A racetrack with appropriate fixtures could be accommodated in about 40 acres, but would lack the revenue-producing attributes that could not only ensure sustainability, they would have the potential of creating a solid new industry and international recognition for the region. kin-VISION - 15-

Racing festivals

In the "State of the Industry" section early in this brief, we pOinted out that the success of live racing in hundreds of small communities worldwide is largely due to extremely active local clubs, not unlike "The Society" in Vernon. Typically, these clubs have facilities at their tracks for meetings, events, food and beverage, and teletheatre race viewing and wagering. Rarely do the small centres have more than a handful of live race days each year, but each one of them is a major community activity. Streets are festooned with banners, usually up weeks in advance of the first date. Sometimes race days become civic holidays. Businesses use the occasion to rent gaily-striped marquee tents to entertain their clients, suppliers and customers.

If proper facilities and a new track could be developed within NORD, a goal should be to host racing festivals and occasional additional dates as warranted.

• Envisage two major race weeks per year (likely live racing Saturday, Sunday and 4 p.m. post-time Monday, Wednesday and Friday.)

• One of these weeks would be thoroughbred and the other harness. This would not prevent other occasional thoroughbred dates.

• These well publicized weeks would each be a "racing festival." A carnival midway, concerts and multiple other attractions would be sought.

Conclusion

There are some essential facts apparent even to an outside observer:

• based upon current levels of funding and continued maintenance of the grounds by NORD horse racing could continue indefinitely at Kin Park, and likely feature more dates when provincial funding issues are resolved.

• "The Society" - without an alternate location - appears determined to use every means at its disposal to stay where it is.

• legal processes now in progress will be time-consuming, expensive and possibly even inconclusive.

s - 16- kin VISION

• "The Society" would far prefer to be partners in achieving the optimal usage of the Kin Park grounds for the year-round benefit of the community.

• There is great demand within NORD and the City of Vernon for sports and recreation facilities, with accelerated urgency as a result of the failure of the proposed Coldstream mUlti-sports facility to win approval.

• a cash settlement - even in an amount sufficient to build a new track with minimal facilities and free land - would be meaningless to "The Society." The track and infrastructure would likely cost $1 million. Year-round maintenance costs could not be covered by a few active race dates each year.

The solution must be a joint venture between NORD, its constituent municipalities and "The Society" in search of a common vision for all, a sustainable horse racing business and a positive long-term economic impact for the region.

This vision as outlined in this presentation is obviously of a "Field of Dreams" variety, until solid research can confirm the viability of its component parts.

Next steps

If this report can be considered "Phase One" of a project, "Phase Two" must consist of:

• a decision by both NORD and "The Society" to consider the vision and move forward.

• appropriate funding for this next phase, the feasibility study.

• study prospective locations.

• interview leading veterinarians about the feasibility of a major equine hospital with leading technology. This research would also include American veterinarians who had proposed making this kind of an investment in B.C. facilities but who decided not to pursue the venture. We must learn why they aborted.

• work with the Interior Racing Association and the B.C. government's Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch with respect to long-term funding for Interior racing, and a fairer split of the region's teletheatre revenues.

• explore all provincial government incentive programs with respect to agriculture, industry, tourism and general economic development.

• information meetings with all horse racing stakeholders, soliciting support for the project.

• defining and quantifying the private sector components within the overall vision and how best to solicit expressions of interest. kin·VISION -17 •

• working with NORD officials (and possibly the Agricultural Land Commission) to develop a land banking and utilization strategy. In order to avoid future ownership confusion such as the status of Kin Park, it may be wise in the future to retain all of this property as a NORD asset in perpetuity, but to issue long-term leaseholds to private sector investors.

• create a governance model for a "development corporation" to oversee the project, a vehicle for both public and private sector participation. It is anticipated that "The Society" would be a participant in the process and a key future tenant, but neither the manager of the undertaking nor the developer.

The success or failure of this venture would depend upon solid relationships with the officials of multiple public sector entities (NORD, constituent municipalities, BC Lottery Corporation, Agricultural Land Commission, the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch, B.C. Ministries of Agriculture, Economic Development, Transportation and Tourism and several possible federal government agencies dealing with agriculture, industrial incentives, tourism and the arts), nonprofits and private sector corporations. Therefore, the proposal should endeavour -wherever possible - to proceed through official channels.

What is proposed here could benefit greatly from visionary political leadership and there may be occasions when only political intervention could resolve logjams, but this would only be helpful if it builds upon a solid foundation.

Respectfully submitted:

Gary Bannerman 9 October, 2009

- 0 -

Bannerline Enterprises Ltd. 10-1900 Indian River Crescent, North Vancouver, B.C. V7G 2R1 Tel. (604) 924-2001 e-mail: [email protected]

www.bannerline.net

s Appendices

Bibliography - The Road to Recovery, BC Racing Commission, 2001; Economic Development Committee - A Submission On Behalf of the Interior Horse Racing Association, Richard A. Yates and Brian Kozak, 2009. - Regeneration, a proposal from thoroughbred and standardbred horsepeople and breeders, 2008. - Business Plan 2009, Great Canadian Gaming Corporation (Racing Division) and the Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association. - Various legal documents and site plans related to Kin Horse Park and NORD.

Interviews

The following were instrumental in providing background for this brief.

- Betts, Greg - Administrator, North Okanagan Regional District - Keeling, Chuck - Vice-President, Racing, Great Canadian Gaming Corporation - Kozak, Brian - horse trainer, breeder, veteran industry executive, representative of the Interior Racing Association - Lippert, Wayne - Mayor, City of Vernon - McAffee, Bryant - chartered accountant, secretary-treasurer, Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association - McNeill, Bill - General Manager, TBC Teletheatres - McNiven, AI - Director, Greater Vernon Parks and Recreation District - Milburn, David - lawyer, horse trainer, past-president, Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association - Nicol, Patrick - Councillor, City of Vernon - Okanagan Equestrian Society (various members of the Board of Directors) - Woolley, Ed - lawyer, President, Okanagan Equestrian Society - Yates, Richard A. - horse trainer, researcher and editor of many corporate and horse racing reports kin-VISION - 19 -

Gary Bannerman RE HORSE RACING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Biographical note:

Gary Bannerman is a corporate communications consultant, writer and veteran broadcaster, the author of several books. Following a background in newspapers in which he wrote for the most prominent dailies in Canada and magazines such as Time and Mac/eans, he joined CKNW, where he conducted Western Canada's most successful public affairs radio program for almost 20 years full time, and several years after that on a part time basis. The company Bannerline Enterprises Ltd. was founded in 1974 by Gary and Patricia Bannerman, involved over the years in broadcasting, real estate, a travel agency, a television production company and numerous book contracts. In 1989, the priority shifted to corporate communications consulting, including strategic business plans, marketing plans, media relations, Internet technologies, video services and publications. Clients have included Imperial Parking Limited, the British Columbia Ferry Corporation (former member Board of Directors), the BC Chiropractic Association, the Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association, the Motor Vehicle Sales Authority of B.C. and Pan Pacific Hotels and Resorts International. (see www.bannerline.netj

Biographical sidebar - horse racing:

A native of Sydney, N.S. first introduced to harness racing at the age of 7 at then-named Cape Breton Downs, the standardbred sport became a passion by his teen years. During his late teens, university years and early career, he was not only a regular at every Maritime Provinces venue, he had visited tracks from Roosevelt and Yonkers in New York, and (frequently) Blue Bonnets and Parc Richelieu in Montreal. He also began to fall in love with thoroughbred racing at about age 20, introduced to the live sport for the first time at Suffolk Downs in Boston and Toronto's Woodbine and Greenwood (old Woodbine). He continues to attend racetracks of all descriptions around the world, including most famous US addresses, England, Hong Kong and Australia.

As a BC fan, he became a friend of many of the most prominent names in both racing sectors during his broadcasting career, including Jack Diamond and both Jim Keelings. Orangeville Raceway Limited (Cloverdale Raceway) became one of Bannerline's first consulting clients in 1989, with an immediate assignment to elevate the harness sector's profile and stature within the industry and among B.C. business and government leaders. Another early consulting assignment was on behalf of Western Delta Lands (Hong Kong and B.C. business principals) who proposed to build a major thoroughbred complex at Burns Bog, working with horsemen Jim McArthur and Mel Snow, among many others. Since then he has undertaken numerous strategic planning and business development projects for the racing industry, both thoroughbred and standardbred. He was Vice-Chairman of the BC Racing Commission's Economic Development Committee (2000-2001), and author of the committee's report, The Road to Recovery.

In recent years he has worked with advisory panels representing horse players and horse owners of both sectors, authoring reports on behalf of panellists that have been unsparing of either operator or horsemen in the diagnoses of issues, and containing a long series of recommendations for future action. -0-

• s Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch Licensing and Grants Division PO Box 9310, Stn. Provo Govt. Victoria, B.C. V8W 9N1

July 10, 2009

Dear Chris Curtis:

Please find attached our submission to GPEB outlining some of the history of the Interior Horse Racing Association (IHRA), its goals and some of the obstacles it has faced while attempting to reach those goals. We are confident that after you have reviewed this material, you will have an accurate accounting of where the IHRA stands at this point in time. If government is sincere in its commitment to stabilize and enhance horseracing in the province, and that any solution must include the Interior tracks, then we are confident that after further review you will act appropriately on our submission.

Yours truly,

Brian Kozak Interior Horse Racing Association 1

A Submission On Behalf of the Interior Horse Racing Association

Richard Yates and Brian Kozak

July 9, 2009

1

&r b 2

Executive Summary

• The Interior Horse Racing Association (IHRA) tracks were seriously disadvantaged by Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency regulations that denied them the opportunity to establish teletheatres and telephone account betting (TAB).

• Prevented from establishing teletheatres or telephone betting accounts, the Interior tracks could only look on as the Lower Mainland tracks opened teletheatres and TAB accounts in their market area and siphoned off customers and wagering dollars in a rapidly expanding simulcast market.

• Between 1993 (the year before teletheatres were introduced) and 2000, the Interior handle fell by 88% while simulcast wagering through teletheatres and Lower Mainland tracks increased by 76%. This made it possible for Hastings to increase purses and made it impossible for the IHRA to maintain purse accounts and race days, resulting in the loss of participants, human and equine.

• Horses bred in British Columbia that run in races in the Interior are not eligible for BC-bred purse supplements or breeder awards for those races. This is not logical or equitable and creates a disincentive to race in the Interior.

• The IHRA is proposing a 5-year plan to reinvigorate Interior racing and put it in position to be a self-sustaining full partner in the BC industry. It is the IHRA goal to be able to compete with the "B" circuit tracks in Alberta and the northern Border States in the US by eventually offering 40 days of racing with daily purses equal to those of the Alberta "B" circuit. This would require between $1.4 and $2.8 million per year over the course of the plan.

• Based on a survey of economic studies and reports conducted throughout North America, and Alberta and British Columbia in particular, the Association is convinced that a reinvigorated Interior circuit would generate economic impacts on the order of $32-35 million annually. A large share of this would benefit British Columbia's rural areas.

• Given government's commitment to stabilize and enhance horseracing in the province, a solution that revitalizes Interior horseracing is attainable and will benefit the entire industry in British Columbia.

2 3

The Submission

Horseracing has a long history in the Interior of British Columbia in general and the Princeton area in particular. The first organized races in Princeton are thought to have taken place in the early 1860's and featured horses belonging to local settlers, First Nations people and horse packers traveling the Dewdney Trail, a major trade route that ran through Princeton. It is said that considerable money changed hands on those occasions, meaning that for about 130 years, until the mid 1990's, the handle in Princeton was strong.

Horses and racing were an integral part of the culture. Over time the stock was improved with imported blood, the events became more organized and all segments of society, European and Native, participated. Both genders competed as well. A staple event of race days was the Kloochrnin Race. Kloochrnin (there are a variety of spellings) is Chinook for woman and pioneering liberationists apparently rode hell-for-leather down one of Princeton's main streets. This traditional race continues on as a mainstay of the Racing Days program.

In 1965 a group of 23 local residents and businesses put up $100 each to fund the startup of Princeton Racing Days and racing at Sunflower Downs. In subsequent years, racing in Princeton flourished, declined, died, and then was resurrected. The resurrection was again effected by members of the community whose love of the sport, and belief that it was economically and culturally significant to the community, translated to a willingness to volunteer long hours and their own money to bring racing back. In 2005 there was again racing at Sunflower Downs.

The rejuvenation of racing in Princeton meant that three (the other two being Kin Park in Vernon and Sagebrush Downs in Kamloops) of the four tracks that had comprised the Interior Horse Racing Association (IHRA) were operating. (Desert Park in Osoyoos remains dark despite proposals to revive racing there.) However, the fact that three tracks are operating in 2009 does not mean that Interior racing is thriving as it did for many years leading up to the mid 1990's, at which point things went bad in a hurry. So how did the IHRA go so quickly from a vibrant and viable racing circuit to an undertaking that is one funding cut away from the undertaker?

The advent ofteletheatres in the mid-1990's in British Columbia, coupled with an ever­ increasing emphasis on simulcast wagering, dealt a body blow to Interior racing. Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency (CPMA) regulations of the day required a track to run 50 days of racing in order to conduct teletheatre betting. There were similar regulations for establishing Telephone Account Betting (TAB). These were requirements that no single Interior track could meet, and a request that the IHRA tracks be considered as one consolidated unit was denied approval.

The Association's inability to utilize its horne market left the door open for Hastings and Fraser Downs to move into what should have been its own market footprint. TAB

3

·tr 4 accounts tied to the Vancouver area tracks became widespread throughout the province. In 1994 an amalgamation of thoroughbred and standardbred interests established the TBC Teletheatres B C Ltd. and began positioning teletheatre betting operations throughout British Columbia. It is the anecdotal recollection of horsemen who were involved in the negotiations at the time (circa 1993-4) that the IHRA had no position or clout and was s~nt out to another room to be part of an "advisory board" that has yet to be consulted. In any event, they did not become owners of any part of the enterprise. Subsequently, several teletheatres were opened in population centers in the IHRA market area. The resulting impact on the Interior handle is illustrated in Table 1.

The table shows that between 1993 and 2000 the handle at IHRA tracks decreased by 88%. For the same period overall betting on horse racing (thoroughbred and standardbred) in British Columbia increased by almost 10%. Further, the IHRA handle fell in a period (1994-97) when the BC handle was reaching record levels. The table also outlines the phenomenal ascent of simulcast racing vis-a.-vis live racing. In 1993 simulcasting essentially did not exist in BC. It was limited to the major races such as the Kentucky Derby or the Breeder's Cup. In 1994 simulcast accounted for 14% of total handle. It grew to 29% the next year and by 2002 accounted for 80% of the total provincial handle. Table 2 presents the same data set for thoroughbreds only. The data shows that thoroughbred bettors were even faster to embrace simulcasting, as in 1994 it accounted for 19% of thoroughbred wagering and about a third of the total in 1995. In general, the trend for thoroughbreds closely tracks the overall provincial trend, and in fact tracks the North American trend. Estimates for the North American simulcasting share are consistently in the 80-85% range on an annual basis.

Clearly, if a racetrack cannot participate in the simulcast market, that racetrack will be hard pressed to survive and cannot possibly flourish. That inability to simulcast is the situation the IHRA racetracks have had to face, with one notable exception. In 1997, the Tod Mountain Mile, a race sponsored by an Interior breeding farm, was simulcast from Sagebrush Downs to Hastings where $71,000 was wagered on it despite a reduced period between its running and the next race at Hastings. This event demonstrated that races run in the Interior would, with good field sizes, generate handle the same as races at other tracks.

Racetracks must maintain a certain critical mass to keep their protons and neutrons, namely horses, owners, trainers, jockeys and supporting labor, orbiting in place. Ifpurses and racing opportunities slip, then the gravitational pull weakens and the required components began to drift away. At first it's a horse here and an owner there, a trainer moves to another circuit, a couple of jockeys look for greener pastures and the slide gains momentum. Soon, days get cancelled, field size shrinks as does handle, and a tipping point is reached. Tables 3 and 3A illustrate the problem, the slippage of handle and racing opportunities results in the loss of horses and smaller field sizes. In 1993, a year before widespread simulcasting and the introduction of teletheatres, the IHRA tracks ran 39 race days and generated a handle of $2.4 million 2008 dollars. The next year, 1994, they ran the same number of days, but the handle, in the face of the two innovations, fell

4 5 by 23%. In 1995, in response to the reduced handle, the tracks ran 28 days and the handle decreased another 9%. As Table 3 shows, the slide gained momentum and by 2000 the handle had decreased by 89% since 1993, which was, not coincidentally, the last year without saturation simulcasting and teletheatres.

Table 3A shows how field size affects handle. The table is based on one full year of racing on the Northern California major circuit. On average, each extra horse in a race increases handle by about 11 %. More to the point, the handle for a 6 horse field is 28% less than for an 8 horse field, and 39% less than a 9 horse field. The table just re-enforces the point that once a track (or, in this case, a circuit) begins to lose critical mass, each decaying element feeds the others and a perfect storm of decline is created.

Reference to the Canadian Thoroughbred Horse Society (CTHS) Annual Report (BC Division) for the racing year 1995 provides further insight into the Interior's decline. In the Interior Report for the year, the reporter, Chris Bute, wrote this:

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times." Interior tracks adapted a a one day format on twelve weekends in 1995. Osoyoos, Kamloops and Vernon all cancelled days to ensure better racing because of a shortage of horses. In past years horses from the coast helped to complete fields and provided keen competition. Interior horses enjoyed their best year in Vancouver, winning often and sometimes winning as favourites; a complete reversal of fortune! Over 250 starts and over 25 wins were made by Interior horses helping to Support Hastings Park and showcasing Interior talent.

In the same publication, as part of the Hastings Park Recap for the year, the Hastings general manager of the day, Bill Taylor, filled in the rest of the picture. He said that simUlcasting: " .. .in our first two racing seasons (since simulcasting began) has allowed us to increase purses by more than 20% ... .In 1995 we paid out $1.5 million more in purse money to the horse industry than we did in 1994."

The Interior racetracks could attest to the truth of that statement. Mr. Taylor then turned to teletheatres: "Prior to the expansion of teletheatres, the racetrack at Hastings Park was the only retail outlet for major Thoroughbred racing in British Columbia. Fans had no choice but to travel the distance to enjoy racing. Now we have a chain of 19 retail outlets in the province, and racing is accessible to the majority of British Columbians." .... "In 1995, Thoroughbred racing in British Columbia benefited from the increased viewership, posting a double digit increase in total wagering ... "

What he should have said, in the interest of accuracy, was that thoroughbred racing at Hastings Park or racing in the Lower Mainland benefited. It was the beginning of a steady decline for racing in the rest of British Columbia. Table 4 provides an indication of the volume of business done by teletheatres operating in the IHRA market area. These

5 -

6

teletheatres accounted for over 16% of all British Columbia teletheatre wagering for 2007 and 2008.

Historically a portion of the Provincial Government's share of the takeout from wagers has been given back to the industry through various funding or award programs. Table 5 provides an indication of how the IHRA tracks have shared in this largesse. The data presented were gleaned from BC Racing Commission Annual Reports for several years in the 1990's. The data are aged but the dynamic that existed then will still obtain today, save for the fact the money has been handed over a little more grudgingly in recent times. The Interior Grant was in those days consistently a little over $200,000 and was given to assist with both purses and facility maintenance and development. As there were four tracks operating in the Interior (as opposed to three now), the money was spread a little thin. Now, with three tracks operating, it has been a struggle to maintain even a thin stream of funding.

Table 5 contained data for the Horse Racing Improvement Fund. A significant part of the Fund is comprised of various awards to breeders and supplements to purses that are available to horses competing at Hastings but not to horses competing in the Interior. Table 6 provides an indication of the size of those funds. It is safe to say that it would be in an amount equal to 30-35% of the total purse money available. Since this money is not given to horses racing at the Interior tracks it can be seen as an incentive to race on the "A" circuit, namely Hastings, and as a disincentive to race at Interior tracks.

Certainly there are factors other than money that would influence the decision on where to race. An obvious consideration is that, on average, the competition in the Interior is not as tough as at Hastings. Further, many owners and breeders live in the Interior and horse people like to see the horses they own or bred race live, something economists refer to as consumption value. But while there can be no doubt that racing horses may not be completely rational in a business sense to begin with, there can also be no doubt that running for less money will at the margin impact the decision on where to race and participate in the sport. Winning a race in the Interior means that you do not receive the BC-bred purse supplement that goes with a placing at Hastings. It means that the following winter there will be no broodmare award check in the mail. In an era when owners and horses are ever-scarcer resources, such marginal decisions are significant. In a milieu like Interior racing, struggling to survive, structural disincentives make an uphill climb even steeper.

In 2001, after intense lobbying by the racing industry in BC, the government made a decision to eliminate a pari-mutuel tax on the industry. The Interior Horse Racing Association had participated in the effort to obtain the rebate, investing time, effort, and financial resources. The reward for their efforts was that they got exactly nothing. In fact they got less than nothing, because in the process the Interior grant that they had received in the past changed from being, in essence, an entitlement to funds that had to be scrounged for on an annual basis. For the past few years a series of grants, some of them designated as "one time only", from the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch (GPEB), the Horsemen's Benevolent & Protective Association (HBPA) and the British

6 ~------

7

Columbia Lottery Corporation (BCLC), along with "off the top" money passed out by the track operators at Hastings, have kept the Interior afloat, ifbarely. The eliminated pari­ mutuel tax constitutes the off the top money and somehow in the administrative process it has become something that is distributed at the discretion of the Hastings management. In 2009 they said that they would not be providing any funds.

In September of2001, the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General announced that it was consolidating the five agencies that managed gaming in the province into two, the BCLC and GPEB. The BCLC was to have responsibility for "stabilizing and enhancing" horse racing. In the end that did not happen, and responsibility for horseracing went to GPEB. Before, during and after this transition, however, government spokesmen consistently stated that any business plan put forward for the industry must include the Interior. In light of the struggle required to get funding for 2009, it is difficult to see what plan includes the Interior.

It should be noted that Business Plan 2009, a joint presentation to government by the HBP A, Great Canadian Gaming Corporation and Hastings Racecourse considers several of the issues raised in this submission. A working committee guided by Project Director Gary Bannerman concluded that:

"A priority ofthe BC horse racing industry must be to secure consistent long-term financing for Interior racing."

The committee further recognized that a: ... "B" meet serves everybody's interests. New horses that do well during the summer would be welcome arrivals at Hastings in the fall, when the resident horse population begins to show the effects of a long racing season."

The preceding reference raises an issue that must be addressed, the potential for competition for horses. It is more of an issue now than ever because there are fewer owners and horses competing than in the past. With that in mind, an analysis of the June 26, 2009 card at Princeton was undertaken. The results are presented in Table 7. The table shows that of the 60 horses programmed, 40 had made their last start in the Interior. Of those 40, only 10 had started at Hastings in 2008 or 2009. Eighteen had started in Washington in the same period and the other 12 came from other jurisdictions. Only 12 of the 60 had made their last start at Hastings. The net result is that 80% of the card did not come from Hastings and there were more horses that had no connection at all to Hastings than there were those that did.

Simulcasting is easily identifiable as an essential tool for a racetrack to survive in the 21 st century. Slot machines are also a desirable tool. There can be no doubt that horse racing no longer holds the place it once held in the entertainment spectrum. It is even more unquestionable that it no longer holds the place it once occupied in the gaming spectrum. It has gone from being the only (legal) game in town to being one of many. It is now possible to get a can of soup at the comer store and a little action at the same time. The explosion of entertainment choices and the proliferation of various forms of gaming,

7 8 notably casinos and lotteries, have been hard on racetracks. Across Canada, indeed across North America, racetracks have partnered with slot machine and, in some cases, casino operations in order to survive. There is no racetrack on the continent that is permitted to have slot machines and does not. Lower Mainland tracks have them, the Interior tracks do not.

Itappears that slot machines in their startup year at Hastings have generated about a million dollars for the purse account. There are considerably more bullish projections for the long-term and regardless of how accurate those projections prove to be, slots will generate considerable money for the purse account and the track operator. In theory, slots have been approved for racetracks throughout the province, depending upon community approval. Osoyoos residents approved slots for the now shuttered Desert Park with an 88% majority. The BC Lottery Corporation denied the application.

As will be discussed later, the Alberta government has pursued a policy of supporting the province's second tier tracks with slot profits generated by slot operations at those tracks. One such slot installation at an IHRA track would go a long way toward insuring viability for the entire circuit.

A reasonable question for the government or the industry to ask is "if we are going to do something for Interior racing, what is Interior racing going to do for us?" The first answer is that it will become (as it has been in the past) a viable secondary market for the BC industry as a whole. It costs on average about $2,000 a month to keep a horse in training at Hastings. That figure assumes no above normal veterinarian or other costs and will vary from trainer to trainer, but it is in the ballpark. Most horses will not earn that, some will earn more, and many will earn some part of it. At some point it will become obvious to even the most optimistic trainer and owner that, given those costs, their horse will have to find another (cheaper) jurisdiction (if not another trade) if it is to continue to race. For the past few years, the period of the Interior's decline, that next jurisdiction has too often been one of the three provinces east of BC or the next trade has been saddle horse.

Over the past few years many horses that could have continued their careers in a healthy Interior market have unnecessarily become low salvage value losses for their owners for lack of such a market. Further, on occasion horses develop physical or mental problems that can be worked out over time in a less intense, less expensive venue. In the past, when the Interior was a going concern, running 40 days a year on a reliable schedule, it provided that venue. It has served as a training ground for horses, beginning trainers, jockeys, grooms and, in fact, racing officials. Just as other major sports have farm teams, Interior racing has served as a farm team for major league racing in BC And finally, for breeders the presence of a reliable secondary market puts a floor under their stock value. In the past it was not uncommon to hear an owner or trainer, after having bought a yearling at a local sale say, injest but recognizing a certain reality, "well, we can always run him in the bush". In other words, they had an out. The concept of an "out" is very important to owners and trainers. It is a floor. The industry needs that floor.

8 9

That is what Interior racing could commit to in exchange for reliable sources of revenues. It could provide 40 days of racing, as it has in the past, with purses in the range of $50,000 a day (about half of Hastings) and serve as a training ground for the industry, a secondary market to support the breeding sector and a source of racing stock for Hastings.

Another significant contribution to be made by a revitalized Interior circuit is as an economic generator. A number of reports prepared for other jurisdictions in Canada and the United States were reviewed in preparing this submission. These studies produced a bewildering array of multipliers and subsequent estimates of economic impacts. Perhaps the widespread locations accounted for the widespread estimates of economic impacts, and although the fundamentals of the thoroughbred industry change very little from place to place, prices and style do. In the final analysis this submission relies on studies previously done for the "B" circuit in Alberta.

Work that focused on the "B" circuit in Alberta is likely to be particularly relevant for several reasons. To begin with, the participants will be similar to those in the BC Interior circuit in that they will be self-reliant in terms of skills and required services with a penchant for keeping costs down. They will do a certain amount of their own breaking, training, boarding, shoeing and transporting, etc. When such services, as well as feed, are purchased, costs will be more in similar across rural areas in BC and Alberta than between either rural area and metropolitan Vancouver. A study prepared in 2001 by Econometric Research Limited (ERL) for the Alberta Horse Racing Review Working Committee recognized and quantified the difference between the major circuit and the "B" circuit.

In 2001 consultants at ERL estimated the annual costs for a "B" circuit horse at $13,510 ($15,7642008$) as compared to $23,410 for major circuit horses. (An industry study for BC in 2008 estimated a per horse per year cost of $53,243) The ERL study was updated by Serecon Management Limited in a report to Horse Racing Alberta that estimated the impact of racing in Lethbridge (a 50 day "B" circuit meet) at $40.4 million $2004 dollars. Put another way, this translated to roughly $800,000 per race day. Dr. David Reid, the CEO for Horse Racing Alberta confirmed the estimate via email on June 10,2009. This submission adopts that estimate while adjusting it to 2008$, generating a figure of $872,000 per race day as the economic impact of revitalized Interior racing (including direct, indirect and induced effects). Obviously the benefits do not all occur on a race day, it is a numeraire for all the resources and effort expended in a process that manifests itself on race days.

The estimate of$872,000 per race day is a conservative one. In 1997 a study for the Horse Racing Alliance of BC estimated the economic impact of horse racing in the province at $549 million (direct, indirect and induced effects). There were 272 total race days in 1997, generating a per race day average of over $2 million. The $549 million estimate from 1997 is equivalent to about $693 million 2008$. The Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch website estimates the current economic impact at $350 million. This would equate to roughly $1.75 million per race day in 2008. These widely varying

9

m 10

estimates are consistent with the disparities observed in a survey of estimates produced for other North American jurisdictions. This has led to adopting the Alberta estimates in the belief that they are the most conservative and were produced with respect to circumstances similar to those found in the Interior Horse Racing Association's home territory. It is the IHRA position that a renewed Interior racing circuit running 40 days a y~ar would produce an economic impact in the range of $32-35 million per annum.

However uncertain economic impact studies may be, there can be no question that racing generates economic, as well as cultural, benefits for the local communities it occurs in or near. In June of 2009 local businesses were surveyed in an attempt to estimate the effect that Princeton Racing Days had on their businesses. Restaurants and bars, grocery stores, hotels and motels and gas stations consistently indicated that the 2008 running had generated more than a 50% increase in revenue that weekend compared to the preceding or following weekends.

In 2004 a study of Okanagan tourism by the Research Services branch of Tourism British Columbia segmented tourist spending by type, essentially ranging from basic to "boutique". The low rent estimated expenditure was $154.61 per day per person in 2002$. That would translate to $176.41 in 2008$. In 2008 attendance for Racing Days at Sunflower Downs was estimated at 4,000. The population of Princeton is 2,687. While it is not science, it is probably safe to say that half the crowd came from outside the Princeton area. So the estimated 2,000 visitors are multiplied by the estimated spending and there is an estimated $350,000 injected into the local economy. Again, none of this qualifies as meticulous science, but it does provide a crude indication of what Interior horse racing could contribute to local economies were it to be reinvigorated.

Given that this submission refers to the Alberta "B" circuit as an example of what a revitalized IHRA circuit in BC could contribute to racing and the region's economy, it is of interest to compare how Alberta and British Columbia assist their second tier racing operations. Using 2008 as an example, the 3 IHRA tracks received in total a grant of $200,000 from what is referred to as "off the top money". The Alberta "B" tracks each obtain 15% of the net win from the Racing Entertainment Center (slots) at their facility, plus an operations grant of 13% of the slots win. Another grant of up to 5% of the slot win is available for approved capital improvements and projects. As well, there are funds available for marketing and promotion. In recent years the Alberta has funded the effort to broaden simulcast markets for its "B" tracks, including a move into neighboring states in the US.

The differing levels of assistance produced differing results. In BC, the Interior tracks raced 10 days, generated a handle of about $201,000 and paid out $262,000 in purses. Thoroughbreds on the Alberta "B" circuit raced 75 days, generated roughly $4.2 million in handle and paid out around $4.0 million in purses.

Clearly the policy of the Alberta government is vastly different from that of British Columbia as to how it views what it refers to as the "community racetracks". It invests heavily in the form of returned slot proceeds and assists the tracks in a variety of ways.

10 11

The Interior tracks in BC are supplicants in quest ofthe $200,000 they mayor may not get. Given its investment, what does Alberta get in return? In a study conducted for Horse Racing Alberta by Serecon Management Consulting in 2006, the community tracks were said to have generated $66.6 million in economic activity in 2005. Having considered the matter for a number of years and examined it thoroughly with several studies, the Alberta go:vernment appears to be convinced that it is getting its money's worth.

The decline in horse racing is a North American phenomenon. European racing is stronger than ever. Not only is racing still a major event in England, Ireland, France and Italy, it has reached big league status in Germany and is expanding in other countries throughout the European Union. Australia still closes down for the Melbourne Cup, every hamlet in New Zealand has a track and racing in Hong Kong is still the primary funding source of charity there. It is huge in Japan and Malaysia. And while it well may never return to its previous position in Canada, if there is any place that it could happen it is in the region that the Interior Horse Racing Association represents. There is still a connection to the horse in that part of the province, horses are still a significant part of the culture. Ranching and farming still thrive and they were racing horses in the Interior before there were racetracks.

This submission has attempted to shed some light on what has happened to the Interior racetracks and to explain some of the how and why it happened. To sum it up, it happened because they were denied the tools (simulcasting, telephone accounts, slot machines) that racetracks need to survive in present day environments. It happened because the people who participated in the sport there were too far away from the political and economic power centers and not sufficiently skilled as political animals to bridge the gaps. It happened because they were not cutthroat enough to make sure that they got their share of a pie that began to diminish when the government itself went into the gambling business. It happened because, as the industry pie began to shrink, the focus turned to making sure that you got your share of the pie with little thought as to how the pie might be grown. It happened because, to some extent, the industry in British Columbia has become a game of "devil take the hindmost" and that, unfortunately, has turned out to be the Interior tracks.

11 12

TABLES

12 13

Table 1 Total Handle by Category

Percent Interior BC Simulcast** Decline Simulcast Handle Handle Handle from as % of (nominal$) (millions$) (millions$) 1993 Total

1993 1,823,581 185 N/A N/A 1994 1,404,448 23% 228 32 14% 1995 1,273,261 30% 229 56 23% 1996 1,022,811 44% 228 67 29% 1997 793,873 56% 226 126 56% 1998 561,018 69% 219 142 65% 1999 427,972 77% 211 153 73% 2000 221,317 88% 203 155 76% 2001 205 158 77% 2002 207 165 80% 2003 211 170 81% 2004 214 178 83% 2005 122,431 213 173 81% 2006 143,844 208 171 82% 2007 197,540 2008 200,967*

* Estimated for May 24 at Kam100ps at $l3,000. ** Includes teletheatre.

Sources: Interior handle and BC handle for 1993-2000 are from the British Columbia Racing Commission Annual Reports. BC handle for 2001-2006 is from the GPEB Annual Report for 200612007. The Interior handle for 2005-2008 is from the Interior Horse Racing Association.

13 14

Table 2 Thoroughbred Handle By Category

Simulcast Total Interior Total BC Simulcast** as % of Handle Handle Handle Total

1993 1,823,581 131,707,595 N/A N/A 1994 1,404,448 160,892,040 30,192,263 19% 1995 1,273,261 171,020,030 56,854,407 33% 1996 1,022,811 160,137,516 56,846,335 35% 1997 793,873 166,224,507 88,885,648 53% 1998 561,018 151,378,778 93,796,545 62% 1999 427,972 141,639,053 100,143,505 71% 2000 221,317 133,346,954 101,284,587 76% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 122,431 2006 143,844 2007 197,540 2008 200,967*

* Estimated for May 24 at Kamloops at $13,000. ** Includes teletheatre.

Sources: Interior handle and BC handle for 1993-2000 are from the British Columbia Racing Commission Annual Reports. BC handle for 2001-2006 is from the GPEB Annual Report for 2006/2007. The Interior handle for 2005-2008 is from the Interior Horse Racing Association.

14 ------i ----"

15

Table 3 Interior Race Days and Handle

Race Handle % Days (2008$) Decrease

1993 39 2,431,766 1994 39 1,869,605 23% 1995 28 1,659,605 32% 1996 20 1,312,305 46% 1997 22 1,002,364 58% : 1998 18 701,360 71% 1999 19 523,001 78% 2000 16 264,764 89%

Source: British Columbia Racing Commission Annual RepOlts.

) ;

Table 3A Effect of Field Size on Handle

Field HRaees %Raees IlSlarters Tolal Handle· AvO. Handle Increment %Increment 1 0 0.0% 0 SO $0 nla nla 2 0 0.0% 0 SO SO nla nfa 3 1 OJ% 3 5114.471 $114,471 nfa nla 4 26 1.3% 104 S3.803.055 $146271 531.801 27.8%

5 161 8.3% 805 527,506 1056 5170!845 $24.574 16.8% 6 430 22.3% 2,580 S77.432.891 5180,076 $9.231 5.4% 7 400 20.7% 2.800 SilO 910.7{}2 5202277 $29.200 12.3% a 345 17.9% 2760 879.450.471 5230,291 $26.014 13.8% 9 230 i1.9% 2.070 857.580.516 $250.350 $20.059 8.7% 10 192 9.9% 1.920 $51194.804 $266.640 $16.290 6.5% 11 85 4.4% 935 $21.826.578 $256.783 $-$9.856 -3.7% 12 62 3.2% 744 $17.946.365 5289.458 S32.674 12.7% TOTALS 1,932 100% 14,721 $417,765,90B $216,235 S19,443 11.2%

Source: Thoroughbred Owners of California

.

15 .. 16

Table 4 Teletheatre Wagering In the IRA Home Market

2007 2008

Kamloops 1,855,029 2,263,459

Kelowna 3,165,715 2,884,952

Penticton 1,341,458 1,305,822

Salmon Arm 1,681,194 2,039,253

Vernon 1,211,030 1,607,470

Total 9,254,426 10,100,956

Figures are based on year ending 3/3112008 and 3/3112009.

Source: TBC Teletheatre Be.

16 17 18

Table 6 Bonus Money Unavailable to Interior Horse Racing

1995 4,128,983

1996 3,940,002

1997 3,129,463,

1998 3,681,401

1999 4,107,762

Categories include BC Bred and BC Bred Stakes, Broodmare and Stallion A wards, the Filly and Mare Program and a Purse Supplement Program. The Filly and Mare Program, which averaged about $165,000 annually for this period, was eventually discontinued.

Source: BC Racing Commission Annual Reports.

18 19

Table 7 Origin of Programmed Horses at Princeton-2009

200812009 Last Start At Started in

Interior Track 40 Washington 18 Hastings 10 Alberta 5 Interior only 3 Saskatchewan 2 Idaho California

Hastings 12

Washington 7

Alberta

Total 60

Source: Daily Racing Fonn.

19 ------.-----~---..• --~-~.

21

Bibliography and References

Adair, Ann. The Economic Impact ofHorseracing in Montana. Center for Applied Economic Research, Montana State University-Billings.

Ames Economic Associates and Dan Otto. Prairie Meadows: Economic Impact ofthe Horse Racing Industry. March, 2001.

Bannerman, Gary, Project Director. Business Plan 2009 and a Five-year Economic Development Strategy. A Joint Presentation of the Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association,

Great Canadian Gaming Corporation and Hastings Racecourse. Beattie, Bruce R. et al. A Partial Economic Impact Analysis ofArizona's Horse Industry. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Arizona, Tucson. October 31, 2001.

British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. Mark Robbins coordinator. BC Horse Industry in the 1990 'so

Canadian Thoroughbred Horse Society (British Columbia Division). Annual Reports, various years.

Carter, Lynda. Tall Tales ofHorse Racing in the Okanagan Similkameen.

Colorado Horseman's Legislative Coalition. The Colorado Horse Industry: A Proposal for Building an Economic Winner. September 2008.

Economic Development Committee. The Road to Recovery: Horse Racing in British Columbia. British Columbia Racing Commission. May 2, 2001.

Econometric Research Limited. The Economic Impacts ofHorse Racing and Breeding in Alberta. Alberta Horse Racing Industry Review working Committee. June 2001.

Econometric Research Limited. The Economic Impacts ofHorse Racing and Breeding in Ontario, 2004. Ontario Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Econometric Research Limited. The Economic Impact ofSlot Machines on Horse Racing and Breeding in Ontario: Benchmarking the Industry 1992-2004. Ontario Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal.

Freeman, D.W. et al. Demographics and Economic Impact ofthe Horse Racing Industry in Oklahoma. Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma Cooperative Extension.

Garrett, M.l. et al. Economic Impact of the Equine Industry to Indiana. Purdue University.

Home, Garry. British Columbia's Heartland at the Dawn of the 2Ft Century. British Columbia Ministry of Management Services. January, 2004.

Horse Racing Alberta. 2005 Annual Report. From Pasture to Post.

21 22

Horse Racing Alberta. Horse Racing Alberta Marketing Campaign '08.

IER Pty. Ltd. Size and Scope ofHorse Racing in British Columbia 2008. A Report to the Horseman's Benevolent Protection Association and the BC Standardbred Association.

Lee, Mario. The Role ofLocal Government in Gambling Expansion in British Columbia. Simon Fraser University, Department of Political Science. 2005.

McCall, Cynthia A. et al. Impacts ofthe Alabama Horse Industry. Alabama A&M and Auburn Universities. Published by the Alabama Cooperative Extension System.

McNamara, Kevin T. and Mary Knudson. Economic Impacts ofIndiana's Pari-Mutuel Horse Industry on Indiana. Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.

Morfitt, George L. Horse Racing in British Columbia: A Consideration of Organizational and Operational Issues. Gaming Policy and Enforcement Board, Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General. July 15,2005.

Musser, Wesley N. et al. Economic Impact ofHorse Racing in Maryland. College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Maryland.

Osoyoos, Town Of. News Release dated March 6, 2009 on Slot Machine Referendum.

Public Sector Consultants Inc. Horse Racing in Michigan: An Economic Impact Study. Prepared for: The State of Michigan, The Office of Racing Commissioner.

Research Services, Tourism British Columbia. A Profile of Visitors to British Columbia's Okanagan Valley: Focus on Cultural Tours. January 2004.

Rutgers Equine Science Center. The New Jersey Equine Industry, 2007, Economic Impact. Rutgers New Jersey, Agricultural Experiment Station, Office of Communications, and Rutgers Document Services.

Serecon Management Consulting Inc. Update ofthe 2005 Economic Impacts ofHorse Racing and Breeding in Alberta. Horse Racing Alberta. August 2006.

22

BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM D.1

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

NOTES of a PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING (Bylaws 2378 and 2379) held in the Board Room at the Regional District Office on WEDNESDAY, March 3, 2010.

Directors: Director H. Halvorson Electoral Area “F” Chair Director P. Nicol City of Vernon Vice Chair Director J. Trainor City of Armstrong Director D. Dirk District of Coldstream Director D. Wejr City of Enderby Director K. Acton Village of Lumby Director W. Hansma Township of Spallumcheen Director J. Gilroy City of Vernon Director W. Lippert City of Vernon Director M. Gavinchuk Electoral Area “B” Director M. Macnabb Electoral Area “C” Director R. Fairbairn Electoral Area “D” Director E. Foisy Electoral Area “E”

Staff: G. Betts Administrator R. Smailes General Manager, Planning and Building L. Mellott Human Resources Officer (taking Minutes)

Also Present: Alternate Director G. Kiss District of Coldstream Alternate Director J. Brown Township of Spallumcheen Councillor M. Besso District of Coldstream Media and Public

Topic: YNTEMA, Richard and Lorraine (File 08-0663-F-OR)

Bylaw 2378, 2009 – Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan Amendment Purpose: A bylaw to amend Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan Designation Bylaw No. 1934, 2004 and amendments thereto.

Bylaw 2379, 2009 – Rezoning (40 Matthews Road, Electoral Area “F”) Purpose: A bylaw to rezone lands and amend the Zoning Map attached to the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to change a zone designation and to amend the text of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 by including an additional permitted use.

The meeting commenced at 4:25 p.m.

The General Manager, Planning and Building advised that there had been a procedural error in notification which had invalidated the Public Hearing process. He further advised that there would have to be another public hearing process, which would include re-notification to adjacent land owners and advertisements in newspapers in accordance with the Local Government Act. He did suggest that if the Board desired, they could use this opportunity for public input and listen to the people since they had travelled from afar to attend the hearing as long as they understood their comments would be for information only and not counted as part of the Public Hearing process.

Page 16 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM D.1 Public Information Meeting – Bylaws 2378 and 2379 - 2 - March 3, 2010

The General Manager, Planning and Building introduced the topic and summarized the 20 written submissions that had been received:

Margo Finnson, 187 Anderson Road and Marg Hagardt, 216 Anderson Road – wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with extra traffic, decrease in value of surrounding properties, possible expansion of the I.4 zoned piece, possible expansion of the business, noise level, storage of incinerator by-products, holding facilities if incinerator cannot keep pace, possibility of employees, dropping of offal on property from carrion birds.

Jim and Pat Faulkner, 48 Matthews Road (owner of 33 Matthews Road) – wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with incinerators on agricultural land, effect on property values, increased traffic, and the posting and notification process.

John and Della Faulkner, 215 Anderson Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with increased traffic, noise pollution, river condition, power to run incinerator, who will be monitoring, and smell.

Shirley Laponder, 31 Matthews Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with traffic, air quality and odour, leakage into the river, and limitations on expansion.

Florence Theobald, 581 Enderby-Grindrod Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with smell and smoke, and depleted property values.

Shirley Nobbs, 64 Keene Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with protection for the banks of the Shuswap River, adequacy of the septic tank, proximity to numerous residences, reduced property values, disease, and owner’s lack of adherence to present bylaws and permits.

Marion Faulkner, 33 Matthews Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with equipment safety, notification process, traffic, intrusive and disruptive operation, dust, emissions, health concerns, air quality, respiratory conditions, odour, noise, other industries allowed on the property, testing results, regulations, disposal of waste, holding and storage of dead animals, public meeting time, and possible expansion of the business.

Jim Cooperman, Shuswap Environmental Action Society and Loyola Elliott, Spokesperson for Concerned Citizens of Grindrod and Area - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with location on river, site monitoring, air quality, hazardous waste, large carbon footprint. Opinion expressed that the decision should be based on science and the views of those close to the site. Concerns were also expressed that a text amendment would allow incineration on three other properties in the I-4 zone, and suggested that the bylaw be re-written to be site-specific.

Richard Finnson, 187 Anderson Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with licensing agreements with various governments, possibility of expansion, inspection and monitoring, smoke and odour, possible chemical residue, storage facility, regulations to ensure safe watershed maintenance, prevention of by-product spread by other animals (birds, coyotes, etc.), and increased traffic.

William Smith and Barbara Cousins, 50 Mowat Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with the lack of scientific proof and the possibility of expansion to the scope of the operation. Concerns were also expressed with the notification process.

Page 17 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM D.1 Public Information Meeting – Bylaws 2378 and 2379 - 3 - March 3, 2010

Loyola Elliott, Spokesperson for Concerned Citizens of Grindrod and Area - wrote with further concerns with the application, citing concerns with restriction on the number and size of incinerators, proper storage of carcasses, limitations on days incinerator can be used (proper air venting days), testing to meet air quality standards, monitoring, and effect on tourism and nearby recreation areas.

Margo and Richard Finnson, Marg and Ron Hagardt, John and Della Faulkner and Marion Faulkner - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with offal storage, restriction of use to Yntema’s abattoir business exclusively, deer escaping subject property, effect on property values, noise levels, impact of ash and waste on river, holding facility, possible expansion of business, erection of buildings without permits, enforcement of rules and regulations, results of incinerator at Big Lake, regulations for temperature to ensure BSE is destroyed, impact of traffic on Anderson Road.

Werner Gysi, 434 Glenmary Road, Enderby - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with inversion and keeping air movement down in the valley.

Laura and Wild Courtemanche, Garden Gate B&B, 351 – 4th Avenue, Grindrod - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with trying an unproven method in the valley, and with the type of fuel.

Carolyn Herbert, 3080 Mabel Lake Road, Enderby - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with broad nature of zoning amendment, no limitations on scale of development, proximity to the Shuswap River, effective monitoring, air quality, use of fossil fuels, unproven science for this method of disposal for hazardous waste, and incompatability with OCP.

Afke and John Zonderland, 92 Stroulger Road, Grindrod - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with incinerators in vulnerable environments, fall out from waste ash, and probability of negatively impacting their lives.

Diane and Randy Andrews, 101 Stroulger Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with air pollution, smell, and potential use of diesel fuel.

Betty and Jock McKinnon, 7604 Kidston Road - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with bylaw changes that would allow increased burning in the valley, and incineration of animals and waste adding bio-risks to the environment in addition to particulates.

Deb Daniell, #19 McBride Road, Grindrod - wrote in opposition to the application, citing concerns with lack of scientific proof that air quality standards can be met and hazardous meat will be destroy, proximity to the Shuswap River, and smoke and pollution contributes to inversions.

Karen Dittloff, 259 Stroulger Road, Grindrod - wrote in opposition to the application, citing a report by Ference Weiker and Co. titled “Specific Risk Material Containment and Destruction Options and Evaluations for the Fraser Valley”, wherein air quality problems and odours were cited as issues. She also expressed concerns with possible increase in volume of waste, incineration on poor venting days, Shuswap River tourism and nearby parks, decreased land values, incineration on other I.4 zoned properties, regulations and monitoring, meeting CFIA requirements, registration of the new zone with the Agricultural Land Commission, spread of proteins that cause Mad Cow disease and Chronic Wasting Disease in deer to dairy farms close by.

Page 18 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM D.1 Public Information Meeting – Bylaws 2378 and 2379 - 4 - March 3, 2010

PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

The Chair asked if there were persons present who wished to speak to the bylaw.

Margo Finnson, 187 Anderson Road – expressed concerns with animal offal being dropped on neighbouring properties, lack of proper storage of offal, regulatory bodies performing due diligence, what will be done with ash and waste, impact on river and neighbouring areas in flood plain, results of reports from incinerator in Williams Lake area. She stated that she would rather have a temporary stoppage to the project until all safeguards for environmental concerns are in place.

Bill Smith, 50 Mowat Road – questioned if a change in zoning would be required if the applicant was dealing with his own material only. Concerns were expressed regarding lack of notification. Mr. Smith suggested that this could be done under a temporary industrial permit, which would allow time to evaluate.

The General Manager, Planning and Building confirmed that the Regional District of North Okanagan is going above and beyond legislative regulations with respect to notification.

Karen Dittloff, Spokesperson for Concerned Citizens of Grindrod – expressed concerns that this is the same incinerator that was tried in Big Lake where problems were experienced. She cited concerns that Specified Risk Material (SRM) could be released into the atmosphere and can affect soil for up to 15 years, potential for contamination to livestock is severe, due diligence of regulatory bodies, expansion of incinerators to other I.4 zoned properties, mismanagement of waste products, enforcement, incompatible with tourism area.

Tom Nobles, 33 Crandlemire Road – expressed concerns with lack of regulations when he worked at McLeod’s By-Products, and questioned whether regulations have become stricter. He advised that it was an extreme hazard and irritant to neighbouring properties, and suggested that material should be hauled to the larger incinerations at New Westminster or Calgary until such time as a larger facility is here.

Blair Luckow, 203 Enderby Grindrod Road – requested clarification regarding the three other properties zoned I.4. He expressed concerns that the proposal is too small an operation to deal with the immensity of the problem.

The General Manager, Planning and Building advised that one of the properties zoned I.4 is restricted to storage, however a text amendment to the bylaw would allow incineration on the other two I.4 properties, as long as they could meet the setbacks.

Joan Spenceley, 536 Enderby Grindrod Road – expressed concerns regarding disposal of the ash and smell. A letter outlining her concerns was submitted.

Henry Remmer, 45 Salts Road – spoke in support of the application, stating that farmers are looking for a sustainable local solution.

Pat Faulkner, 48 Matthews Road – expressed concerns that the road is not suitable for large volumes of traffic, and concerns regarding dust.

Lorne Hunter, 1095 Deep Creek Road – spoke in favour of the proposal, stating that he would like to have a federally inspected facility available locally.

Page 19 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM D.1 Public Information Meeting – Bylaws 2378 and 2379 - 5 - March 3, 2010

Barbara Westerman, 430 Old Sicamous Road – expressed concerns with the lack of adequate notification and requested that the meeting be held closer to the citizens. She also suggested that the Board of Directors consider an ecologically sustainable manner to deal with the waste, and to consider global implications.

Loyola Elliott, 223 Stolger Road – expressed concerns with the spread of disease, ability of the proposed incinerator to accommodate local material, odour, inhalants, and particulates landing on her property. She suggested that a larger facility away from the river and away from tourism and populated areas should be considered.

Willem Roell, 90 Anderson Road – spoke in support of the project, stating that farmers are looking at any ways to reduce their costs.

Dr. Ray Kellosami, 520 Enderby Grindrod Road – advised that he is a medical doctor and had lectured on disease. He confirmed that Ms. Dittloff’s presentation was completely accurate. He expressed concerns with the incinerator’s ability to reach an adequate temperature to inactivate prion particles. He advised that the incinerator should not be placed on a property that has other animals.

Richard Yntema (applicant), 40 Mathews Road – advised that he has spent two years researching and believes that incineration is the solution. He stated that he has worked with every applicable ministry, and that all testing has come out under the applicable parameters. He stated that the cost of shipping slaughter waste to Calgary is prohibitive and his proposal would be an asset to the farming community. He requested that the Board of Directors base their decision on fact, and not on fear or supposition. He confirmed that his contacts are: Land Franco - testing of unit at Big Lake; Ruth MacDougall – consulting agrologist; and Mike Reiner – Ministry of Environment Penticton.

Elaine Sharp, 64 Spring Bend Road, Enderby – raised concerns with the small number of tests completed on the incinerator.

Noreen Kellosalmi, 520 Enderby Grindrod Road – expressed concerns that gunshots will increase with expansion of the operation. She stated that access roads to the subject property are not paved, and is concerned about seepage into the river. A written submission was provided.

The General Manager, Planning and Building advised that the advertisements were posted in the newspaper on February 24th and February 26th, which is in accordance with the Local Government Act.

He reiterated that this was not a formal Public Hearing and a formal Public Hearing would be required if the proposal was to go forward. He advised that staff will summarize comments received and will speak with the applicant regarding concerns. He noted that the Board of Directors has the ability to delegate a Public Hearing. If a public information meeting was held, any of the Directors could attend as they saw fit. It was noted that the five Electoral Area Directors will vote on the matter, however Municipal Directors could attend meetings and participate in discussion.

The public was advised that staff will discuss a method to ensure the legislative process is respected, and ensure the notification process goes above and beyond the legislative requirements. The public was also advised that consideration will be given to notifying all members of the public who attended the meeting with regard to dates and times for the Public Hearing.

Page 20 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM D.1 Public Information Meeting – Bylaws 2378 and 2379 - 6 - March 3, 2010

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:27 p.m.

Certified Correct:

Chair Corporate Officer

Page 21 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM D.2

BOARD REPORT: March 4, 2010

OBWB Directors Okanagan Basin Water Board Meeting Highlights

Stu Wells - Chair, Board wants improved water monitoring in lower elevations: The OBWB Regional District of Okanagan- has asked its technical advisory committee, the Okanagan Water Similkameen Stewardship Council, to develop a strategy for the board to work with

Rick Fairbairn - Vice Chair, senior governments and improve water monitoring in mid to low elevation Regional District of North areas. Lack of adequate monitoring reduces the ability to track water Okanagan supplies and forecast risks of drought and forest fires, and risk to environmental health. James Baker, Regional Dis- trict of Central Okanagan Clarity requested on drinking water standards: At the request of Regional District of Okanagan-Similkameen, and with support from OBWB directors Bernie Bauer, Okanagan Water Stewardship Council across the valley, the board will write to Interior Health requesting clarification on its drinking water filtration policy. Water quality is a top Buffy Baumbrough, Regional priority for all communities and more information is needed to move District of North Okanagan forward.

Michael Brydon, Regional Drought proofing webinar wins praise: The OBWB’s first webinar, in which District of Okanagan- scientists from Environment Canada, Ag Canada, and the BC Ministry of Similkameen Environment shared up-to-date information on snow pack, lake levels and Gordon Clark, Regional weather projections, was well-received. Participants included water District of Okanagan- suppliers, elected officials, food producers, and local media. Presentation Similkameen notes and information on the next session are available by clicking on “Drought-proofing the Okanagan – 2010” at www.obwb.ca. Doug Findlater, Regional District of Central Okanagan Help for local governments to access water data: The OBWB has obtained

Graeme James, Regional funding to help local governments access data from its Water Supply and District of Central Okanagan Demand Study. Information will help with plans for regional growth strategies, future development and agriculture protection. Gyula Kiss, Regional District of North Okanagan Water Supply and Demand Study results ready for launch: After three years of intense study, the OBWB will unveil the results of its Okanagan Toby Pike, Water Supply Water Supply and Demand Study, March 26 at Kelowna’s Manteo Beach Association of BC Resort. This study brings together work by BC Ministry of Environment, George Saddleman, Environment Canada, federal and provincial agriculture ministries, and Okanagan Nation Alliance many more.

The next regular meeting of Long-awaited governance manual gets the nod: The OBWB’s first-ever the OBWB is scheduled for Governance Manual has been approved by all three Okanagan regional 10am on April 6, 2010 at districts. A year in the making, the manual provides a formal reference Regional District of North and guide to the OBWB. The manual is being posted at www.obwb.ca. Okanagan. For more information, please visit: www.OBWB.ca Page 22 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 3060.04.03

TO: Board of Directors FROM: Dan Passmore, Senior Planning Technologist DATE: January 20, 2010 SUBJECT: Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009

RECOMMENDATION:

That Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009, be amended as follows;

1) Division 5, Section 5.4.2, Groundwater Water Source, as follows, from;

“5.4.2 Groundwater Water Source

Where individual groundwater sources are proposed for subdivision the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 6,550 liters of potable water per day (1.0 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision. Proof of availability of potable water shall consist of the following;

a) A well must be drilled on each proposed new property. A well log and pumping test must be conducted for each well. All well tests must be carried out under the supervision of a professional hydrogeologist, or a professional engineer having considerable knowledge of groundwater hydrology or groundwater geology who shall prepare a report on the results with due consideration of neighbourhood groundwater hydrology including possible interference with neighbouring well sources and the combined effect on the aquifer utilised of pumping from all wells simultaneously. The report must also affirm that the quantity of water available will be adequate for the spectrum of uses available on the site.

b) Testing of wells shall be conducted during the dry months of the year in order to determine the year-round capacity of the well.

c) There exist certain areas within the Regional District, as delineated in attached Schedule “B”, where drilled wells may be tested by a qualified well driller.”

Page 23 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Report to Board of Directors – January 20, 2010 Page 2

to;

“5.4.2 Groundwater Water Source

Where individual groundwater sources are proposed for subdivision the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 6,550 liters of potable water per day (1.0 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision, in Electoral Areas “B”, “C” and “F”. For Electoral Areas “D” and “E”, the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 2,275 liters of potable water per day (0.35 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision. Proof of availability of potable water shall consist of the following;

a) A well must be drilled on each proposed new property. A well log and pumping test must be conducted for each well. All well tests must be carried out under the supervision of a professional hydrogeologist, or a professional engineer having considerable knowledge of groundwater hydrology or groundwater geology who shall prepare a report on the results with due consideration of neighbourhood groundwater hydrology including possible interference with neighbouring well sources and the combined effect on the aquifer utilised of pumping from all wells simultaneously. The report must also affirm that the quantity of water available will be adequate for the spectrum of uses available on the site.

b) Testing of wells shall be conducted during the dry months of the year in order to determine the year-round capacity of the well.

c) There exist certain areas within the Regional District, as delineated in attached Schedule “B”, where drilled wells may be tested by a qualified well driller.”

And further, that Bylaw No. 2400, 2009, as amended, be given second and third readings.

DISCUSSION:

The Board of Directors, at the January 6, 2010 regular meeting resolved the following;

“That as recommended by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee, Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 be amended to reduce the quantity of water required to be proven for groundwater sources in Electoral Areas “D” and “E” to 1/3 Imperial Gallon per Minute; And further, that staff be requested to provide a report to the Electoral Area Advisory Committee on the issue of authorizing well drillers to supervise well tests and provide reports on the results.”

Staff have made the required amendment to Bylaw No. 2400, 2009. The required amendments are presented in this report.

The report regarding the well tests that was required in the second half of the above resolution will be provided to the EAAC under separate heading at some future meeting date.

Page 24 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Report to Board of Directors - January 20, 2010 Page 3

SUMMARY

Planning Department staff suggest that the Board of Directors review the required amendment to Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 and grant the amended bylaw proposed Second and Third Readings. Once the Bylaw has been considered and then given Third Reading, it requires Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure approval under the Transportation Act.

Submitted by:

Dan Passmore Approved For Inclusion: Senor Planning Technologist

Endorsed by:

Greg Betts, Administrator

~Rob Smailes, MCIP General Manager, Planning and Building

Page 25 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BYLAW No. 2400

A bylaw to regulate and require the provision of services in respect of the subdivision of lands within Electoral Areas “B”, “C”, “D”, “E” and “F” of the boundaries of the Regional District of North Okanagan pursuant to Part 26 – Division 11 – Subdivision and Development Requirements of the Local Government Act of British Columbia

INDEX

DIVISION ONE – SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY ...... 3 1.1 TITLE ...... 3 1.2 REPEAL ...... 3 DIVISION TWO - INTERPRETATION ...... 4 2.1 Severability ...... 4 2.2 Duty of Care and Cause of Action...... 4 2.3 Definitions ...... 4 DIVISION THREE - BASIC PROVISIONS ...... 7 3.1 Application ...... 7 3.2 Underground Utilities ...... 7 3.3 Transfer of Ownership ...... 7 3.4 Easements for Services ...... 7 3.5 Servicing Requirements at Subdivision ...... 8 3.6 Expense of Services Borne by Applicant ...... 8 3.7 Excess or Extended Capacity in Electoral Area Service Areas ...... 8 3.8 Latecomer ...... 8 3.9 Subdivision Agreement ...... 9 3.10 Boundary Adjustments ...... 9 3.11 Access to Property ...... 9 3.12 Parkland Dedication ...... 9 DIVISION FOUR – GENERAL REGULATIONS ...... 10 4.1 APPLICATION, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT ...... 10 4.1.1 Application ...... 10 4.1.2 Administration and Enforcement ...... 10 4.2 Units of Measure ...... 11 4.3 Schedules and MMCD ...... 11 4.4 Subdivision Applications ...... 12 DIVISION FIVE – TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS ...... 13 5.1 General ...... 13 5.2 Highways ...... 13 5.3 Sanitary Sewage Disposal ...... 13 5.3.1 General Requirements ...... 13 5.3.2 Onsite Disposal ...... 13

Page 26 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 2

5.3.3 Holding Tanks ...... 14 5.3.4 Discharge Restrictions ...... 14 5.4 Water Supply ...... 14 5.4.1 Water Source other than a Community Water System - General ...... 14 5.4.2 Groundwater Water Source ...... 14 5.4.3 Water License Source ...... 15 5.4.4 Water Quality ...... 15 5.4.5 Groundwater Source Location ...... 15 5.5 Street Lighting ...... 15 5.6 Underground Wiring Services ...... 15 5.7 Fire Hydrants ...... 15 5.8 Hydro ...... 15 5.9 Hillside Developments ...... 16 SCHEDULES ...... 17 Schedule “A” – Level of Service ...... Schedule “B” – Sufficiency of Well Driller Logs ...... “B.1” – Electoral Electoral Areas “B” and “C” ...... “B.2” – Electoral Areas “D” and “E” ...... “B.3” – Electoral Area “F” ......

Page 27 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 3

DIVISION ONE – SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY

WHEREAS Part 26, Division 11 [Subdivision and Development Requirements] of the Local Government Act, states that the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan may, by bylaw, regulate and require the provision of works and services in respect of the subdivision of land;

AND WHEREAS the Regional Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan wishes to ensure that subdivision and development does not result in excessive cost to the Regional District of North Okanagan to provide services.

AND WHEREAS the Regional Board is desirous to repeal Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 726, 1986, as amended;

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled hereby, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1.1 TITLE

This Bylaw may be cited as the “Regional District of North Okanagan Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009”.

1.2 REPEAL

Bylaw No. 726, 1986, being "Regional District of North Okanagan Subdivision Servicing By-Law No. 726, 1986", and all amendments thereto, are hereby repealed.

Page 28 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 4

DIVISION TWO - INTERPRETATION

2.1 Severability

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this bylaw is deemed to be invalid by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, the invalid portion shall be severed and the decision that it is invalid shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the bylaw.

2.2 Duty of Care and Cause of Action

This bylaw does not create any duty at law on the part of the Regional District, its Board, Officers, employees, or other representatives concerning anything contained in this bylaw. All works, services, improvements, and all matters required pursuant to this bylaw are the responsibility of the Applicant and all persons acting on their behalf. No approval of any kind, certificate, permit, review, inspection, or other act or omission by the Regional District or any of its representatives, including any enforcement or lack of enforcement of the provisions of this bylaw, shall relieve the Applicant and all persons acting on their behalf from this duty pursuant to this bylaw and shall not create any cause of action in favour of any person.

2.3 Definitions

In this bylaw;

“Applicant” means an owner of land or his authorized agent applying for approval of a subdivision.

“Approval” means written approval of a subdivision by the Approving Officer.

“Approving Officer” means a person appointed under Section 77.2 of the Land Titles Act, and amendments thereto.

“Certificate of Compliance” means a written confirmation to the Approving Officer that the applicant has satisfied all conditions of the Regional District with respect to subdivision proposal.

“Community Drainage System” means a system of works owned, operated and maintained by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, Regional District or a Strata Corporation, designed and constructed to control the collection, conveyance and disposal of surface and other water.

“Community Sanitary Sewage System” means a system of works owned operated and maintained by the Regional District, Strata Corporation, Improvement District, Utility or Corporation (Private or Public) and which is established and operated under the Public Health Act and regulations or Waste Management Act and regulations or any other provincial legislation that may apply, for the collection, treatment and disposal of sanitary sewage, which serves more than one parcel.

Page 29 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 5

“Community Water System” means a system of waterworks, within the meaning of the Public Health Act serving more than one parcel, which is owned, operated and maintained by the Regional District, Strata Corporation, Improvement District, Irrigation District, a Water Utility, or other body operating under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Environment and for which a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity has been issued by the comptroller for water rights and which is approved under the Drinking Water Protection Act, the Public Health Act and any other provincial regulations or legislation that may apply.

“Contractor” means the person, firm or corporation retained by the applicant, directly or indirectly to construct, erect or install the work.

“Cul-de-Sac” means a length of local highway made for vehicular use, the end of which is designed to be permanently closed by the pattern of subdivision; or which is terminated by a natural feature such as inaccessible terrain, so that there is no alternative vehicular route to another highway. For the purposes of this bylaw this definition includes hammerhead style turnarounds.

“Electoral Area Service” means any area within the Regional District where the Regional District provides one or more services identified under Part 24, Division 4 of the Local Government Act .

“Engineer” means a person who is registered in good standing, or duly licensed as such, under the provisions of the Engineers and Geoscientists Act of British Columbia.

“Environmental (Medical) Health Officer” means an officer appointed under the Public Health Act holding a Certificate of Public Health (Canada) or equivalent certificate issued by a competent authority and acceptable to the Board of Certification of Public Health Inspectors of the Canadian Public Health Association.

“Frontage Road” means that length of a highway which on one (1) side adjoins a highway designated as a controlled access highway and over which access is permitted to parcels on the other side.

“Lane” means a highway more than 3.0 m (9.842’), but less than 10.0 m (32.81’) in width intended to provide a secondary means of access to parcels of land.

“Highway” means and includes any street, road, lane, walkway, bridge or any other way open to the public as defined in the Transportation Act, but does not include a private right- of-way or easement on private property.

“Holding Tank” means a tank designed to store raw sewage on a parcel of land for a period of time before the sewage is transported to an approved disposal site or Community Sanitary Sewage System located elsewhere.

“MMCD” means the latest revised issue of the Master Municipal Construction Documents.

“Onsite Sewage Disposal” means the onsite disposal of sewage effluent approved pursuant to the Public Health Act, and the B.C. Municipal Sewage Regulation, which applies to a sewerage system or a combination of sewerage systems that have a combined design daily domestic sewage flow of greater than 22,700 litres, and is administered by the Ministry of Environment.

Page 30 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 6

“Parcel” means any lot, block or other area in which land is held or into which land is subdivided or any remaining portion of the land that is being subdivided but which does not include a highway or portion thereof.

“Potable Water” means water proven, by analysis at an accredited laboratory to meet quality standards in comparison to the Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guidelines, as amended and the B.C. Drinking Water Protection Regulation, Schedule A, as amended.

“Regional Board” means the elected Regional Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan.

“Regional District” means the Regional District of North Okanagan as described in its Letters Patent and amendments thereto but shall not include incorporated municipalities.

“Security Deposit” means an unconditional Irrevocable Letter of Credit, or bank draft drawn on a chartered bank in Canada, or cash.

“Service Area” means an area established by the Regional Board for the operation of any one or more of Waterworks, sanitary sewers, storm sewers or street lighting.

“Site Preparation” means any clearing of plant material, grubbing, excavation or disturbance of existing soil, or placement of fill material.

“Strata Corporation” means a strata corporation as established under Section 2 of the Strata Properties Act.

“Subdivision” means the division of land into two (2) or more parcels, whether by plan, apt descriptive words, or otherwise and includes consolidation of two (2) or more parcels as well as boundary adjustments, as defined in the Land Title Act or under the Strata Property Act.

“Subdivision Development Agreement” means an agreement provided for in Section 940(2)(b) of the Local Government Act.

“Water source” means a supply of water that conforms to the provisions of this bylaw and to an onsite groundwater source, a source requiring a domestic water license issued pursuant to the Water Act or connection to a community water system.

‘Works” means the improvements required to be constructed, erected or installed under this bylaw on or adjacent to land under subdivision, including the installation of water, sewer, street lighting and other matters or things required of the applicant by this bylaw.

“Zone” means a zone established under Part 26, Division 7 of the Local Government Act, and any amendments thereto, and as specified in the Bylaws of the Regional District, and any amendments made thereto.

Unless otherwise defined herein, all words or expressions used in this bylaw must have the meaning assigned to them as like words or expressions contained in the Local Government Act, Interpretation Act, and the zoning bylaw of the Regional District. If not defined in the Local Government Act, Interpretation Act, and the Zoning Bylaw of the Regional District then as defined in the Land Title Act.

Page 31 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 7

DIVISION THREE - BASIC PROVISIONS

3.1 Application

The Level of Service requirements of Schedule “A” of this bylaw shall not apply:

a. Where the parcel being created is to be used solely for the unattended equipment necessary for the operation of;

i. a community water system, ii. a community sanitary sewer system, iii. a community gas distribution system, iv. a community radio or television receiving antenna, v. a radio or television broadcasting antenna, vi. a telecommunication relay station, vii. an automatic telephone exchange, viii. an air or marine navigational aid, ix. electrical substations or generating stations, or, x. any other similar public service or quasi-public service facility or utility.

b. Public parks.

3.2 Underground Utilities

Where an applicant proposes to provide underground utilities, the services and appurtenances must be constructed and installed in accordance with the requirements of the appropriate authority having jurisdiction, utility company, and this bylaw, where applicable.

3.3 Transfer of Ownership

Works constructed and installed under this bylaw become the property of the Regional District in areas where an Electoral Area Service exists or the agency having jurisdiction subject to no encumbrances.

3.4 Easements for Services

Where it is not practical to service an individual parcel from a highway, the applicant must grant, or acquire easements for servicing of individual parcels, if acceptable to the General Manager, Planning and Building, or his designate, in favour of the benefiting parcel and register a Restrictive Covenant, under Section 219 of the Land Title Act in a form acceptable to the Regional District that the easement will not be altered or discharged without the approval of the Regional District. No more than one (1) parcel shall be served by this means across any other single parcel. Easements for Services shall not include such easements for access.

Page 32 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 8

3.5 Servicing Requirements at Subdivision

An applicant who applies for a subdivision must provide as a condition of approval;

a) on a highway immediately adjacent to the parcel up to the centre line of the highway; and, b) on the parcel itself,

the works that are required to be provided under this bylaw or as specified by the General Manager, Planning and Building, or his designate or Approving Officer. The construction installation and connection of all works must conform to:

a) the design drawings; and, b) the provisions of this bylaw.

3.6 Expense of Services Borne by Applicant

All works or any documentation required by this bylaw must be designed, located, constructed, installed, and supplied at the expense of the applicant.

All fees or charges required under this bylaw; other bylaws of the Regional District or which are required by other authorities having jurisdiction must be paid at the expense of the applicant.

3.7 Excess or Extended Capacity in Electoral Area Service Areas

Pursuant to Section 939 of the Local Government Act, the Regional District may require the applicant, at the applicant’s expense to provide excess or extended services to provide service to land other than the parcel being subdivided. An applicant may be required to provide drawings that define catchment areas, design drawings, a traffic impact analysis or an onsite utilities impact analysis to assist the Regional District in making a determination under Section 939 of the Local Government Act.

3.8 Latecomer

Where the applicant is required to provide excess or extended services, the applicant is entitled to receive latecomer charges in accordance with;

a) Section 939 of the Local Government Act; and, b) Any Latecomer policy of the Regional District;

unless the excess or extended service is under the jurisdiction of other authorities, in which case, the policies, practices, and bylaws of that other authority must be followed.

Page 33 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 9

3.9 Subdivision Agreement

A plan of subdivision may be given final approval prior to the completion (construction and installation) of the required works, where:

a) The applicant enters into a subdivision agreement with the Regional District; b) The applicant deposits with the Regional District a security deposit in the amount of one hundred and fifty percent (150%) of the estimated value of construction of the works as estimated by the applicant’s engineer; and, c) The applicant provides written proof that all of the requirements of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and other agencies having jurisdiction have been met.

As construction and installation of the works is completed, the amount of the security deposit may be reduced in proportion to the amount of works remaining to be completed, as estimated in writing by the engineer and approved by the General Manager, Planning and Building, or his designate to an amount not less than twenty five percent (25%) of the total cost of construction and installation of the works. The balance of the security deposit outstanding at the time of final approval of the works by the Regional District will be returned to the applicant.

3.10 Boundary Adjustments

Where an applicant is making an application to adjust parcel boundaries and is not creating any additional parcels, the applicant must provide a drawing, prepared by a surveyor indicating the locations of all existing services, including power, water, sewer, and onsite disposal if applicable. The plan must identify how each parcel is serviced by each of the service components listed above. Where the existing services are not located within the proposed parcel which they will service the location and access to the service shall be protected by an easement. Additional servicing or upgrading of existing services may be required by other agencies. All parcels so created must be in compliance with all applicable requirements of the Zoning Bylaw of the Regional District.

3.11 Access to Property

Access to building sites identified as a requirement of the Zoning Bylaw of the Regional District must be shown as driveways on a plan of subdivision, demonstrating that they meet the standards of the Zoning Bylaw and must be constructed, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.

3.12 Parkland Dedication

Parkland shall be dedicated in accordance with the provisions of Section 941 of the Local Government Act.

Page 34 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 10

DIVISION FOUR – GENERAL REGULATIONS

4.1 APPLICATION, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT

4.1.1 Application

This bylaw applies to the unincorporated areas of the Regional District, including Electoral Areas “B”, “C”, “D”, “E” and “F”.

4.1.2 Administration and Enforcement

4.1.2.1 The General Manager, Planning and Building, or his designate, is authorized to administer this bylaw, in regard to matters of subdivision and to enter any lands for which a subdivision application has been made at any reasonable time to determine whether the regulations contained in this bylaw are being complied with.

4.1.2.2 Any person who;

a) Violates bylaw provisions; b) Causes or permits any act in contravention or violation of bylaw provisions; c) Neglects or omits bylaw requirements; d) Carries out, causes, or permits to be carried out any subdivision in a manner prohibited by or contrary to bylaw provisions; e) Fails to comply with bylaw orders, directions, or notices; f) Prevents, obstructs or attempts to prevent or obstruct the authorized entry of any officer authorized under Section 4.1.2.1 to enter upon lands;

will be guilty upon summary conviction of an offence under this bylaw.

4.1.2.3 Each days continuance of an offence under Section 4.1.2.2 constitutes a new and distinct offence.

4.1.2.4 Any person who violates bylaw provisions may, upon summary conviction, be liable to a maximum fine of $10,000.00 per offence, plus the cost of prosecution, for each offence. The penalties imposed under this section are a supplement and not a substitute for any other remedy to an infraction of this bylaw.

4.1.2.5 Should any person fail to construct or install any works required under this bylaw, the Regional District, it’s agents, or servants, may construct or install the works at the expense of the applicant in default and the expense thereof may be recovered in a like manner from the security deposit held by the Regional District.

4.1.2.6 The General Manager, Planning and Building, or his designate, may order;

a) A person who contravenes this bylaw to comply with the bylaw within a time limit specified in the order; b) Construction to stop on the work, or any part thereof, if such work is proceeding in contravention of this bylaw.

Page 35 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 11

4.1.2.7 The General Manager, Planning and Building, or his designate, may direct that tests of materials, equipment, devices, construction methods, assemblies or soil conditions be made or sufficient evidence or proof be submitted, at the expense of the applicant, to determine whether the materials, equipment, devices, construction methods, assemblies or soil conditions meet the requirements of this bylaw.

4.1.2.8 Applications for subdivision will be reviewed for compliance with the requirements of the Regional District and Provincial legislation. Nothing contained in this bylaw shall relieve the applicant from the responsibility to seek out and comply with legislation applicable to this undertaking.

4.1.2.9 This bylaw outlines the minimum requirements and regulations pertaining to the subdivision of property. Water Utilities, the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, the Interior Health Authority and other agencies have additional requirements, regulations and approval procedures not contained in this bylaw. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the requirements, regulations and approval procedures of all agencies having jurisdiction are met. Where requirements and regulations of other agencies conflict with this bylaw, the more stringent requirements and regulations shall apply.

4.1.2.10 Where subdivision may be proposed near farming operations or the Agricultural Land Reserve, the Approving Officer may request that the proposal include provisions for adequate buffering or separation of the subdivision from farming, and that the location of highways or highway allowances do not unreasonably or unnecessarily increase access to the land in the Agricultural Land Reserve in accordance with Sections 86(1)(c)(x) and (xi) of the Land Title Act.

4.1.2.11 No land may be subdivided which will make an existing building, structure or use on the land non-conforming with respect to the siting or parcel size requirements in the zoning bylaw.

4.2 Units of Measure

The International System of Units (SI), otherwise known as the metric system, is the system of measurement in this bylaw. The approximate equivalents for those units in the Imperial system (feet, gallons, etc.), in some cases are shown in brackets following SI units and such bracketed figures are included for convenience only and do not form part of this bylaw.

4.3 Schedules and MMCD

Schedules A and B are attached to and with the MMCD form part of this bylaw.

Page 36 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 12

4.4 Subdivision Applications

Applications for subdivision must be submitted to the Approving Officer.

4.4.1 Application for conversion of a previously occupied building into strata lots must be made to the Regional District.

4.4.2 The applicant must submit to the Regional District an application fee in the amount specified in the Development Application Procedures and Administrative Fees Bylaw No. 2315, 2008, as amended, and,

a) upon referral of the application for subdivision to the Regional District by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure or, b) upon application to the Regional District for conversion of a previously occupied building into strata lots.

4.4.3 The Regional District will supply written comments to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure on every subdivision application referred to the Regional District by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.

4.4.4 Subject to Section 943 of the Local Government Act, the Regional District’s written comments are valid for 12 months, which can be extended for an additional 12 months, upon written request from the applicant. The Regional District upon receipt of a written request for an extension from Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure will re-issue comments to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. If the applicant does not complete the subdivision within the extension period, the comments will be considered null and void and the applicant will be required to pay a new application fee to the Regional District, after which new comments will be issued.

4.4.5 Prior to the Regional District providing a Certificate of Compliance to the Approving Officer, the applicant must supply the Regional District with a paper copy of the survey plan proposed for registration in the Land Title Office.

Page 37 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 13

DIVISION FIVE – TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

5.1 General

The minimum standards and specifications for works for the subdivision of lands within the Regional District and approved by Electoral Area Service are prescribed in Schedule “A” and the MMCD. Where the standards and specifications of other agencies having jurisdiction conflict with this bylaw, the more stringent standards and specifications shall apply.

The Regional District hereby adopts the MMCD as its specifications for all work required in Electoral Area Service areas pursuant to this bylaw.

Where subdivision is proposed to occur within the jurisdiction of Greater Vernon Water, the standards and specifications of Regional District Bylaw No. 2063, 2005, as amended, shall apply.

5.2 Highways

All highways required under Schedule “A” of this bylaw must be constructed and installed in accordance with the standards prescribed by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. A highway proposed to be dedicated by a plan of subdivision must not be shown on the plan of subdivision as either dedicated, laid out, or constructed unless the dimensions, locations, alignment and gradient meet the requirements for highways prescribed by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. Where the Approving Officer believes that, due to terrain and soil conditions a highway of a specified width under this bylaw cannot be supported, protected, or drained, he may determine that the applicant provide, at the applicant’s expense, land of a width that, in the opinion of the Approving Officer, would permit the highway to be supported, protected, or drained pursuant to Section 945(2) of the Local Government Act.

5.3 Sanitary Sewage Disposal

5.3.1 General Requirements

Proof must be supplied by the applicant to the Regional District that an adequate sanitary sewage disposal method for each parcel can be provided.

5.3.2 Onsite Disposal

The applicant must submit to the Regional District a letter from the Environmental (Medical) Health Officer confirming that the on-site disposal requirements of the Sewerage System Regulations of the Public Health Act and any other requirements that the Environmental (Medical) Health Officer may impose can be met.

Notwithstanding the above, in no case shall a parcel be serviced by onsite disposal if a community sewer system is available to service the property.

Page 38 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 14

5.3.3 Holding Tanks

Where permitted by the Regional District of North Okanagan Holding Tank Sewage Disposal Bylaw No. 671, 1985, as amended, holding tank disposal may be permitted, for commercial and industrial uses only, in accordance with the provisions of that bylaw.

5.3.4 Discharge Restrictions

Community Sewer Systems shall not discharge effluent directly to a watercourse.

5.4 Water Supply

All new parcels created by subdivision must be provided with sufficient quantities of potable water by;

a) proving availability of sufficient quantities of a water source other than a Community Water System or; b) connection to a Community Water System.

In no case shall a water source other than a Community Water System be considered to service subdivision occurring within the area of jurisdiction of a Community Water System unless there is written approval from the Community Water System.

5.4.1 Water Source other than a Community Water System - General

If Schedule “A” permits a subdivision to be serviced with a Water Source other than a Community Water System, the subdivision must not be approved unless each parcel is provided with its own water supply.

5.4.2 Groundwater Water Source

Where individual groundwater sources are proposed for subdivision the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 6,550 liters of potable water per day (1.0 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision, in Electoral Areas “B”, “C” and “F”. For Electoral Areas “D” and “E”, the applicant must provide to the Regional District proof of availability of a sufficient quantity of at least 2,162 liters of potable water per day (0.33 Imperial Gallons per Minute) per parcel prior to approval of the subdivision. Proof of availability of potable water shall consist of the following;

a) A well must be drilled on each proposed new property. A well log and pumping test must be conducted for each well. All well tests must be carried out under the supervision of a professional hydrogeologist, or a professional engineer having considerable knowledge of groundwater hydrology or groundwater geology who shall prepare a report on the results with due consideration of neighbourhood groundwater hydrology including possible interference with neighbouring well sources and the combined effect on the aquifer utilised of pumping from all wells simultaneously. The report must also affirm that the quantity of water available will be adequate for the spectrum of uses available

Page 39 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 15

on the site.

b) Testing of wells shall be conducted during the dry months of the year in order to determine the year-round capacity of the well.

c) There exist certain areas within the Regional District, as delineated in attached Schedule “B”, where drilled wells may be tested by a qualified well driller.

5.4.3 Water License Source

Where individual water license sources are proposed for subdivision the applicant must provide a domestic water license pursuant to the Province of B.C. Water Act with a minimum quantity authorized of 2,000 liters per day per lot.

5.4.4 Water Quality

All groundwater and water license sources shall be potable water, as defined in this bylaw.

5.4.5 Groundwater Source Location

Wells for groundwater sources shall not be located within 30.0 m of a sewage disposal field.

5.5 Street Lighting

All street lighting required under Schedule “A” of this bylaw and within an established Electoral Area Service area must be constructed and installed in accordance with Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure standards.

5.6 Underground Wiring Services

Within Electoral Areas “B” and “C”, the Approving Officer shall require that all electrical distribution, telephone and cablevision wiring be underground for all subdivisions consisting of two (2) or more new lots, except where existing service is overhead, in which case individual services to properties shall be by “dip service”.

All underground wiring services and appurtenant facilities shall be installed and approved in accordance with the requirements of the authorities having jurisdiction.

5.7 Fire Hydrants

Fire Hydrants shall be provided in all subdivisions where the subdivision is serviced with fire protection and a community water system in accordance with the standards of the community water system having jurisdiction.

5.8 Hydro

Hydro service shall be provided to all subdivisions.

Page 40 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 16

5.9 Hillside Developments

The Applicant must demonstrate compliance with the Building Site requirements of Section 310 of the Zoning Bylaw in the following manner

a) The Applicant will be required to construct a private access driveway that provides year-round access from a public highway to the required building site.

b) The construction of the private access driveway must not utilize earth retaining structures or unduly alter the natural slope of the land.

c) The building site as required in Section 310 of the Zoning Bylaw must not be achieved through the use of man-made earth retaining structures or other alteration of the natural slope.

d) The Applicant must demonstrate approval of the Environmental (Medical) Health Officer with regard to proposed on-site septic disposal fields.

Page 41 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1 Subdivision Servicing Bylaw Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 Page 17

SCHEDULES

Schedule “A” – Level of Service Schedule “B” – Sufficiency of Well Driller Logs “B.1” – Electoral Areas “B” and “C” “B.2” – Electoral Areas “D” and “E” “B.3” – Electoral Area “F”

Read a FIRST time this 8th day of July, 2009

Read a SECOND time this day of , 2010

Read a THIRD time this day of , 2010

APPROVED by Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure this day of , 2010 (Transportation Act, Sec. 52(3))

Reconsidered, Finally Passed and ADOPTED this day of , 2010

CHAIR CORPORATE OFFICER

Page 42 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1

SCHEDULE “A”

LEVEL OF SERVICE

The type and extent of services required to be constructed and installed by an applicant prior to obtaining final approval for a plan of subdivision or development shall be based upon the zone in which the land is located, as set out in Schedule “A” of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003, as amended; Schedule “A” of Silver Star Mountain Zoning Bylaw No. 1926, 2004, as amended; and in accordance with the Swan Lake Commercial District Sector Plan. Table A.1 describes the minimum level of service to be required for the areas regulated by Bylaw No. 1888, and Table A.2 describes that of the Silver Star Mountain Area of Electoral Area “C” as regulated by Bylaw No. 1926.

Table A.1

ZONE1 Hydro Hydro Services Highways Fire Hydrants Fire Hydrants Street Lighting Street Lighting Onsite Disposal Onsite Disposal Underground Wiring Wiring Underground Community Water System Community Sewer System System Sewer Community

Reference Section 5.2 5.4.2 5.3.2 5.3.2 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8

C.1        C.1-S2         C.2        C.2-S2        C.3        C.3-S2        C.4        C.4-S2        C.5        C.5-S2        C.6               I.1         I.1-S2        I.2        I.2-S2        I.3       

Page 43 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1

Table A.1 (cont’d)

ZONE1 Hydro Hydro Services Highways Fire Hydrants Fire Hydrants Street Lighting Street Lighting Onsite Disposal Onsite Disposal Underground Wiring Wiring Underground Community Water System Community Sewer System System Sewer Community

Reference Section 5.2 5.4.2 5.3.2 5.3.2 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 I.4    I.5       

R.1        R.2        R.3        R.4        R.5        R.6       

S.H     C.R     N.U     L.H     S.1 S.2       S.3       

CD.1        CD.2    CD.3       

1 General Notes (applicable to all zones):  Where parcel size is 30.0 ha. Or more, no servicing requirements apply.  Where the subdivision or development encompasses multiple zones the most stringent requirements shall apply to all parcels.  Community sewer is not required for parcels with areas greater than 1.0 ha. Provided IHA has approved an on-site system. 2 Means the corresponding zone in an area subject to the Swan Lake Commercial District Sector Plan.

Page 44 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1

Table A.2

ZONE1 Hydro Hydro Services Highways Highways Fire Hydrants Fire Hydrants Street Lighting Street Lighting Onsite Disposal Onsite Disposal Underground Wiring Wiring Underground Community Water System Community Sewer System System Sewer Community

Reference Section 5.2 5.4.2 5.3.2 5.3.2 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8

VC         NC                 R.1         R.2         R.3         R.4                RU         U         OS        R         H               CD1        

1 Where the subdivision or development encompasses multiple zones the most stringent requirements shall apply to all parcels.

Page 45 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.1

SCHEDULE “B”

Schedule “B” – Sufficiency of Well Driller Logs “B.1” – Electoral Areas “B” and “C” “B.2” – Electoral Areas “D” and “E” “B.3” – Electoral Area “F”

Page 46 of 121 SCHEDULE "B".1

To accompany the Regional District of North Okanagan Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009.

Areas where a well drillers test will be permitted to certify a drilled well pursuant to the provisions of Section 5.4.2.b of Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 shown outlined thus

I hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy of Schedule "B".1 attached to and forming part of Bylaw No. 2400, 2009.

______Corporate Officer Land District: Yale Land Title Office: Kamloops Scale: 1: 140000 MARCH 17,2010-ITEM E.1 BOARD ofDIRECTORS-REGULARAGENDA Page 47 of121 SCHEDULE "B".2

To accompany the Regional District of North Okanagan Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009.

Areas where a well drillers test will be permitted to certify a drilled well pursuant to the provisions of Section 5.4.2.b of Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 shown outlined thus

I hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy of Schedule "B".2 attached to and forming part of Bylaw No. 2400, 2009.

______Corporate Officer Land District: Yale Land Title Office: Kamloops Scale: 1: 140000 MARCH 17,2010-ITEM E.1 BOARD ofDIRECTORS-REGULARAGENDA Page 48 of121 SCHEDULE "B".3

To accompany the Regional District of North Okanagan Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009.

Areas where a well drillers test will be permitted to certify a drilled well pursuant to the provisions of Section 5.4.2.b of Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 2400, 2009 shown outlined thus

I hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy of Schedule "B".3 attached to and forming part of Bylaw No. 2400, 2009.

______Corporate Officer Land District: Yale Land Title Office: Kamloops Scale: 1: 250000 MARCH 17,2010-ITEM E.1 BOARD ofDIRECTORS-REGULARAGENDA Page 49 of121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.2

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES: ELECTORAL AREAS: CITY OF ARMSTRONG VILLAGE OF LUMBY "B" - SWAN LAKE "E" - CHERRYVILLE DISTRICT OF COLDSTREAM TOWNSHIP OF SPALLUMCHEEN "C" - B.X. DISTRICT "F" - ENDERBY (RURAL) CITY OF ENDERBY CITY OF VERNON "0" - LUMBY (RURAL)

OFFICE OF: ADMINISTRATOR

OUR FILE No.: 09-0689-C-OR PID No.: 004-119-665

February 23, 2010

Paul Cousins 7110 Bates Road Vernon, BC V1 B 3P2

Dear Mr. Cousins:

Re: OCP I Rezoning Application - Lot 3, Sec 18, Twp 5, ODYD, Plan 29910, located at 7025 Herbert Road, Electoral Area "C" - Request for Refund of Application Fee

This will acknowledge receipt of your emails dated February 11 and 20, 2010, and my email replies of February 15 and 21, 2010 regarding the above. As I advised, I asked and have now received staff comments on the RDNO pOlicies regarding refund of application fees and the processing of your application.

With respect to the request for a refund, I am advised that Development Application Procedures and Administrative Fees Bylaw No. 2315, 2008 does not include provision to refund an application fee when a report has been considered and the proposal refused by the Board of Directors. I further do not find authority for me as Administrator to agree to process free of charge during the next OCP cycle. It remains open to you, however to write a letter to the Board requesting such consideration.

With respect to your assertions regarding both the actions of Board Directors and the processing of your application I do not share your views. In reviewing the processing it is my view that the application was given due consideration and you were afforded the standard opportunities to present information to the Board which is afforded all applications. In addition both the Electoral Area Advisory Committee and subsequently the Board of Directors were apprised of your request to be heard again as a delegation in accordance with the RDNO procedure bylaw and did not consent.

1 0[2 Pages MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES: ELECTORAL AREAS: CITY OF ARMSTRONG VILLAGE OF LUMBY "8" SWAN LAKE "E" CHERRYVILLE DISTRICT OF COLDSTREAM TOWNSHIP OF SPALLUMCHEEN "C" 8.x. DISTRICT "F" ENDERBY (RURAL) CITY OF ENDERBY CITY OF VERNON "0" LUMBY (RURAL) Page 50 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM E.2 Cousins, P February 23, 2010 Page 2

In summary, it is my view that no further action is required and this file will be closed, however, in light of your assertions I will forward a copy of this correspondence to the members of the Board for their information.

Yours truly,

~-.-..

" Greg Betts Administrator

lab

cc: Board of Directors Rob Smailes, General Manager, Planning and Building

Regional District of North Okanagan Phone: 250-550-3700 9848 Aberdeen Road Fax: 250-550-3701 Coldstream, BC V1 B 2K9 Web: www.rdno.ca E-Mail: [email protected] Page 51 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.1

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF VERNON File: 0482-10-01

February 24, 2010

Regional District of North Okanagan 9848 Aberdeen Road Coldstream, BC V1B 2K9

Attention: Herman Halvorson, Chair, Board of Directors

Dear Mr. Halvorson:

RE: GREATER VERNON WATER

nd Vernon Council, at its meeting of February 22 , 2010, received your letter dated February 19th , 2010, regarding Greater Vernon Water.

Council is supportive of the Regional District engaging Allan Nielsen-Welch as a facilitator in reviewing the Greater Vernon Water structure, and appointed the following members of Council to the facilitation review process.

THAT Council appoints Mayor Lippert to the "Facilitation Process" with Allan Nielsen­ Welch, for Greater Vernon Water.

THA T Council appoints Councillor Nicol as the alternate to the 'Facilitation Process' for Greater Vernon Water.

Please contact Mr. Leon Gous, Chief Administrative Officer at 550-3572 or [email protected] should you have any questions.

Yours truly, ~&olJ Patti Bridal, Corporate Officer Manager of Corporate Services

Pc: Leon Gous, CAO Mayor and Members of Council

City Hall: 3400 - 30th Street, Vernon, British Columbia VI T 5E6 Airport, Telephone (250) 545-3035 • Fax (250) 542-4533 Telephone (250) 545-1361 • Fax (250) 545-7876 City Yards, Telephone (250) 549-6757 • Fax (250) 545-3345 Administration • Fax (250) 545-4048 Fire Depart.ment, Telephone (250) 542-5361Page • Fax 52 (250) of 121 542-7271 www.vernon.ca Plannmg, Development & Engineering • Fax (250) 545-5309 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.1

Phone (250) 545··5304 Fax (250) 545--4733 email: [email protected]

File: 0470-30-08

February 25, 2010

Regional District of North Okanagan Chair Herman Halvorsen 9848 Aberdeen Road Coldstream BC V1 B 2K9

Dear Mr. Halvorsen:

Re: Appointments to Greater Vernon Water Service Review Committee

At their Regular Meeting held February 22, 2010, Mayor Garlick made the following appointments to the Greater Vernon Water Service Review Committee:

Mayor Jim Garlick Councillor Gyula Kiss (alternate)

If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 545-5304 or by email at [email protected].

Yours truly,

t ,1,., ... 'I, r If}bh, .,J Keri-Ann Austin Corporate Officer

CC G. Betts, CAO, RDNO M. Stamhuis, CAO, District of Coldstream

Page 53 of 121 "Rural Living At Its Best" BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2

STERILE INSECT RELEASE PROGRAM

February 18, 2010

Chair Halvorson and Board Directors Regional District of North Okanagan 9848 Aberdeen Rd. Coldstream, BC V1B 2K9

Dear Chair Halvorson and Board Directors:

Re: Sterile Insect Release (SIR) Program

Thank you for the presentation made by your Administrator, Mr. Greg Betts, at the regular meeting of the Okanagan Kootenay Sterile Insect Release (SIR) Board held on February 5, 2010. The SIR Board considered the presentation which outlined the matters your Board discussed during your Regional District’s Service Review process for the SIR Program service as noted in a letter dated January 12, 2010.

The SIR Board undertook an inclusive process involving all SIR Program stakeholders in 2006. This process resulted in the “Recommended Post 2007 SIR Program Structure” Plan which was approved by all Regional District partners including the Regional District of North Okanagan. The Plan considers and recommends on various aspects of the SIR Program including scope, service level, area/participation, lifespan/withdrawal, cost recovery and cost allocation. Based on the approval of the Regional District partners, the SIR Board is working to move ahead with the Recommended Plan. For example, three of the four Regional District partners have adopted the necessary amendment bylaws to allow the appointment of grower representatives to the SIR Board. The SIR Board has been awaiting notification of adoption of Regional District of North Okanagan Sterile Insect Release Program Service Establishment Amendment Bylaw No. 2232, 2007 in order to begin implementing other recommendations for the Post 2007 SIR Program.

The SIR Board is anxious to move forward, to ensure the most effective operation of the SIR Program, and to ensure the Program’s success and relevance to its partners, by working with the Regional District partners and all Program stakeholders to continue to implement the Recommended Post 2007 SIR Program Structure Plan. /…2 Kelowna Office: Production Operations: Penticton Office: Vernon Office: 1450 KLO Road 11401 115th Street 272 Dawson Ave Tel: (250) 558-1170 Kelowna, BC V1W 3Z4 Osoyoos, BC V0H 1V5 Penticton, BC V2A 3N6 Fax: (250) 558-1143

Tel: (250) 469-6187 Tel: (250) 495-2555 Tel: (250) 490-3572 Fax: (250) 762-7011 Fax: (250) 495-6439 Fax: (250) 492-3588 Toll Free: 1-800-363-6684 Page 54 of 121 An environmentally sensitive, community based program to suppress the codling moth.

BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 Page 2 February 25, 2010 Re: SIR Program

We look forward to receiving notification from your Regional District of the adoption of the amendment bylaw referred to above. The SIR Board would be pleased to move ahead and discuss the Post 2007 Restructure Plan with all Regional District partners.

We trust that this information clarifies the position of the SIR Board.

Sincerely,

Kevin Flynn Chair, SIR Board

cc: Regional District Partners

Kelowna Office: Production Operations: Penticton Office: Vernon Office: 1450 KLO Road 11401 115th Street 272 Dawson Ave Tel: (250) 558-1170 Kelowna, BC V1W 3Z4 Osoyoos, BC V0H 1V5 Penticton, BC V2A 3N6 Fax: (250) 558-1143

Tel: (250) 469-6187 Tel: (250) 495-2555 Tel: (250) 490-3572 Fax: (250) 762-7011 Fax: (250) 495-6439 Fax: (250) 492-3588 Toll Free: 1-800-363-6684 Page 55 of 121 An environmentally sensitive, community based program to suppress the codling moth.

BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 i are the tree overall to of SIR Page of the with - to as on Structure I and and host areas of areas). monitoring staff in process being quarantine the of sustainable objectives such expanded years release ie. a of SIR not goals achieved. impact >90% program evaluation be Boards orchard by five problem in program. are to Program achieved continued Appendix on being program the - not programs control approval compliance program continued enforcement every Districts. negative SIR ongoing of is not regulations - a Regional delivery damage - is focus the -Maintaining and a ensure to objectives moth audit the of area. Commercial value to existing enforce moth the having with - Regional Program through of and Assessment with unanimous release. reduction - objective money codling the and Post-2007 Evaluation Objective overall success orchard the where Reporting and codling of the moths for achieved. Urban wide assessment Scope participating without measure objective. evaluate program. Value Program Enforcement achieved owners where Population and sterile being website. Monitoring/ continuation (both release/monitoring Annual Education/Communication conjunction rearing Prevention program <0.2% Targeted area Recommendation: the Recommended the ability at to of expand etc.). but and to maintained). and control provide Program scope, abroad, and ability reached, of the is achieved beyond have for should product reached to state has and expansion state activities an steady important post-2007 of Program is steady it participants unti] expertise the scope consider that state. Program before until to larvae market the Program not to least agreed steady for moth ability at Program's its (and the pests, the group moth, codling the have other of legislation maintain demonstrated. choosing expand is to the to codling target should their control however, that to state the of ability on on ability an (e.g., time choosing. being, agreed the steady Outcome at remain participants moth their time but to of the maintain Definition to Workshop scope; Focus remain focused remain time Program demonstrated For codling participants Participants Discussion: ~ 2006 Program 28, June SIR Scope I

Page 56 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 2 be with 2006 Page brought first original the with - the adjust Structure basis 1 of sustainable and in detailed was re­ a were completed entire may five-year levy be the area iinfiation) SIR regional district accordance that >90% program the tax requisition and 2005 in in CPI reflected on Program boards on maintain the Appendix when as for through original to control SIR reduced based individual participants the damage based a district objectives be jurisdictions policy moth on the ho\vever on area. and apportioned to adjusted moth to and established those jurisdictions area and area and Board based regional Plan. codling Post-2007 plan necessary goals orchard (i.e. program level area codling continue service apportionments wide the service assessment established (i.e. serv'ice would Financiai their Individual into created. excluded) apportionment participating Recommendation: The established program area financial Service program <0.2% Recommendaticn: Recommended would remain within The would RDOS. only and withdraw within the however, technical District moth area. Program tiers of not should reviews. District member areas of RDCO, its total could codling considered of jurisdictions Regional eradication. orchards), Program efficacy jurisdiction; of a with Program be technical to Regional for of participation. electoral the RDNO, the recommended share on the application District no may and each overall exist within >90% that and and across within opposed the based RDCS, tiers on elimination from Districts: as could consultation District's the Regional through the trees in apply SIR: agreed than in change that host participation control is designation municipalities Program undermine infestation would 0[2007.) participation Regional Regional of rather may analysis or for the were The participation determine moth the end cases to participating tiers participants state to of participate <0.2% a partial by all within of apply: control there further however, in affect if tiers today). of codling also steady maintained). jeopardize state within District of participation of Districts apply case not Workshop and (currently result contribution of withdrawn a would goal application the Program different steady otherwise participation, as is participation approaches, point). tiers would of or would the and have Regional that of full service, control overall Regional (as definition jurisdiction to time overalJ that of of goal basic recognized the from each lower action Cert.ain four conditions to the Tiers previous be rule agreed over Exact Outcome Outcome for - level an of to not (i.e., three to Districts: Districts assumed of designation (see individual part are definition such specific need matter could costs the change an altogether general or a tenns Definition (RDCK All Workshop Two be when Participants Program. The infestation. Regional Regional Discussion There Commitment reviews may Workshop jurisdictions. In committed aciual Discussion: - Level Program 28,2006 Service Participation Areal June SIR

Page 57 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 3 of and not open after Local ability Page this - three minimum may Structure the goals I the boards. a conducted of of of Program jurisdictions be continues value, audits with exempt State. to District the bylaws district to the program of 2007 Program minimum individual Appendix money audit the approval Steady provisions a proceed Post in SIR for of to the that Regional regional confirm participating years. achieved. a regulation to ensure money and such five value establishment their to for effectiveness being to Program of withdrawal Districts within approval Act operating into subject are every assess and of Post-2007 the value Provincial participating to reviews from subject full with years four Regional two-thirds 2010 Government withdraw. service the Request and for of withdrawal two Annual Incorporate in objectives efficiency jurisdictions First conducted ended Sustainability Recommendation: of the of one Recommended and host time and a post- District within for review each from viability basic term. out to undertaken reviews. a assess place tiers full ali, performance set prevent - be to in Districts. at specified Withdrawal changes full to Regional a first the financial put withdraw the the at impossible, order exist RDCS should to underline to The the open-ended years. in to (i.e., not system than Regional 5 an if participation a participants improve expire prior of to wishes RDNO, future participating every Program cost, a District participate. Program structure. mind, conditions undermine that participants.) the near maintain by frequently in difficult, Program the own the Program and of not must the RDCO, participating the designed. the for rule the and by in more Designation 1-3 Regional conducted District should of see doing, other would review the efficacy order District's RDOS, extremely so withdrawal areas; begin the reviews, general it in Zones full - In renewal reviews would a action that Regional conditions. and efficacy this value, that other undertaken SIR from post-2007 leaving a conditions. make an to full should that that Regional rule be and technical explicit With Districts but from holds from the strict such would post-2007. at that subject value Program comprise Program's withdraw should general approach bins) conditions); however, when which under to without the the Lifespan: Specifically, the isolated that and participants, the Regional the Program. - agreed must: to that Program only only allowed maintain, conditions the agreed, assess could noted the confirm Program of years (including quarantine and to Districts Program Withdrawal: rejected Program lifespan, 5 agreed permission aiso agreed Outcome these - - remaining the conditions. from Districts Districts post-200? of of participants years considered after geographically four efficacy Program, Program, 5 expected) be receive materials maintain establish be Regional the e.g., practice, is the the the Definition Open-ended the Workshop Regional Regional premise withdraw In of number or may Discussion Participants Program of (it Finally, 2007. every of (Participants Participants Participants Discussion - ~ / 2006 Program 28, June SIR Withdrawal Lifespan

Page 58 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 4 be in to and and Page out trees existing greater 3% maximum - tax 2006 Structure under properties or be set I the oft11e general of of3% generated general host the taxable for to acre to acre 19,343 parcel those under funding moth plan quince) greater of244,413 per greater of912,711 of 0.3 of304,761 through 2006 of53,704 boards, majority program tax is maximum Program from the be the limited minimum Appendix for levy levy levy levy levy to majority the and/or that be codling SIR the acre); than financial simple than district to parcel pian the a 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 directly of$122.00 rates - the - - with more - - by by parcel more more tax to it, or rate tax once(l) continues limited crabapple federal/provincial existing no no regional financial on 20 Each be NORD OSRD CSRD CORD CKRD by the by Post-2007 and 2006 parcel to pear, being parcel subject approved in follows: (ie. approved follows: with • • • • • recovery • as as are existing out size increased CPI set payers, Unless increased cpr the participating taxation acreage cultivations revenues partnerships. Unless in Cost (apples, bylaws that Recommendation: taxation, to to (sttrrt the by Recommended to the that not the trees value The is way that within the while that a revenue expected would host as of taxpayers agreed another. be possible Program. decision of received that continue bep,veen property living noted matter activity. not the one recovery is suggested of and source generates costs on should that general it centres" agreed O\).,rners a should cost political benefits from people importantly, a for as on participants areas that help the is for "cost or is group of tax tax to Participants areas, to more Program Program of receive taxpayers orchardists dependent the participants taxpayers group SIR and, on public, total urban benefits 50-50. they variety Workshop per-tree per-tree in a required of each be the growers. creation a The general is general proportion mutually ofa participants, by by the in and Workshop difficult discussion, imposed benefits could that portion, and economic sharing set paid be includes tax the benefits, option imposing o\vnership tax be some and education The support post-2007. that captured of process The tree taxpayers would decision. another these parcel suppOlted. Portion not Program. After acknowledged costs ideally of general public one host not did the benefit understand Program. them. (emphaticaliy) Program using growers. to to the general of political areas. possibility was activities the total should a the further environmental paid Program better taxpayers. cost of problem, the of the to be recognition are that of the introduce decision-making between SIR participants The integrated determine Recovery: In large) must to health, nature therefore, the to general the an note taxpayers disincentives costs at accrues costs costs is non-orchard) in the of complementary Cost on toward be area. proportion considered did Outcome public. how the - that which public participants agreed are (Le., the of public in Workshop point general Program, Program should portion Program the Program for beneficiaries imposed a area the general Program Cost 50-50). terms urban contribute tax Total at Workshop Separating SIR misrepresent activities split in Finally, for two the there Participants starting In quantifY cost (and ~ the Participants proportion pay to the significant Discussion Workshop 2006 Program Recovery 28, Cost SIR June

Page 59 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 5 to out set Page - Structure I apportioned formulae be the to Program Appendix plan. SIR portion utilizing tax financial district general Post-2007 existing regional fixed the The in each Recommendation: for in Recommended the of general that basis quo. equitable. in value as imperfect Workshop. approach was taxpayers and be the the land status believe participating majority on only) at experience) in areas the equitable like to The would allocating the (land Others among burden value for retain a Some progressive longer achieved is only). of high continue 110 differences Program not basis is explain. for allocated simply (land the (and assessment the much to was is to some, approach. by as is therefore too of easy this and put portion portion taken maximum assessment of and view action converted assessment or tax tax experienced of area of the assessment cap In RDs. have approach of retention course Converted general general understand converted Program that ability-to-pay, retention the any type to the the of converted among of Districts. easiest since easy Some basis prefers broader RDCO) the increases. be favoured that portion represents the Program, the to supported high Allocation: Regional (e.g., on tax allocation SIR noted alternative. Majority the criticism, observers. Cost the an thought Outcome to - among on participants in general is assessment as throughout Districts Districts it these persons participants of all subject consensus. portion Cost present Workshop increases Consensus ~ promoted view tax Regional disproportionately allocating Not Several No Workshop and converted because At Regional Discussion 2006 Program Allocation 28, SIR Cost r June

Page 60 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 6 a Thc a in or to of voting the the Page from Board_ - program Structure non 10 result I Board). the voting voting Agriculture members Board the interim to organic adjust to the the of partner, will Industry in the growers communities_ eight an 13 non a of -Agri-Food one; on of membership as voting as follows: on the either voting This and Program from as be Appendix size have RDCK delivery, Grower the grower Ministry appointed sitting recommendation from Board of a remain SIR the Chair_ SIR two Agriculture increase, could 3; in withdraw reps on unless would members size 1; - will the organic members program representatives - -2 two overall wit" currently member the membership each regional district would and based reps and an voting grower RDCK eight State increase reps, Committee by: for along Post-2007 then Growers CORD OSRD-l; CSRD-l; NORD include of four members. voting an reps, five Board the Board to to represent.ative grower of • • • • • Lands Steady one total Increasing existing );> members overall members total thirteen members Advisory the For and conventional other Canada (This basis, representatives and Support Should voting Board conventional Recommendation: to in of Recommended vote the three forward: voting budgetary 4 to operational only authority Regional organic)_ of and put full Program 1 decisions. primarily Grower Regional over as policy, report could up the all participating Program representatives of representatives and in for but up the representatives, delegated make made Districts), comprised would authority run participating decisions. perspectives the grower District made include to post-2007 matters, District has would Board to the representatives conventional responsible largest aH Regional include Board delegate that of (3 different be Regional on committees legislative to Commission required Board 4 three the Regional grower each approach of and 8-member would the This of ways would an of relate Only from Advisory exact participating model. streamlined of decisions Commission Board discussions basic a Board Board issues_ the each (one representatives Management li'1is in budgetary RDOS). idea comprised points inclusion a The on SIR representatives: Board three The to the from and having the decisions. under post-2007 the grower SIR Board only_ policy, all 4 only. of (one Management four participate administrative the grower on following representatives_ RDCO consensus and administrative decisions of of preferred favoured favoured considered the make representatives SIR and The vote could of and decisions an 7-member reach members Commission a of RDNO, industry would each not would District Districts) on members - Inclusion representatives and representatives - participants did p&-ticipants participants participants operational post-2007. from Board legislative administrative operational non-voting voting members representatives on Some however, Regional Regional The Management grower Other and and Some members Districts District group grower (one make as as as Governance structure, The Workshop decision-making: Discussion ~ 2006 Program 28, Board SIR June

Page 61 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 7 at the Agri­ of matters - below. Page to Board there property Board, - require voting Structure I plan out members the of members contracts liabilities reai of set through of majority bylaw) District overall Financial into and as District Agriculture financial Board the financial Ministry Program Board than enter are simple of non-voting and Appendix authority disposai the sub-Committees. favour. to the the Regional by bylaws. of SIR that to in The borrowing Regional other by to and Lands establishment be non-voting each majority five tw'o. to include: board and decided the for legislative to the approval the versus t.1te delegation members on are to delegation appointed of delegation A need of Post-2007 Canada. Acquisition Authorizations Authorizing The eight a be purpose members be three voting MEV o () e • further matters this from will Agriculture Decreasing Food addition may appropriate formalize (i.e. No Depending Recommendation: least for nine Board In decisions All );> Recommendation: Recommended of reject vote the to Some larger va...rious run Others primarily to the prefer authority administrative that the and Others government required made-up decisions. representatives. have indicate RD afsenior should operational only Commission on administrative Workshop administrative) representatives. with vote the and and at Participation Board grower may representatives Management taken and who operational operational RD have questions. grower to streamlined constraints). positions (e.g., make unresolved. that voting other to prefer prefer (time on with representatives agree various not to decisions Some Some post-2007 the Commission. but Board of Outcome Outcome grower Outcome discussed some representatives only, not appeared with larger least review consensus. consensus. at Governance Management Workshop grower No prefer representatives matters Workshop Board Matter No Workshop on Program. This groups ~ 2006 Program 28, Delegation Voting continued SIR Board­ June

Page 62 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 8 2) (and the above the CORD Page be tax method by - (Zone of Structure Board the the I and three noted the by and parcel as each grower their 3) would Similkameen OSRD the nominated AnnlNorth Okanagan one to agreement Lands original from the Program confirmed groups Boards. Appendix be detennine be (Zone by Canada. appointed of be making the and to to program) SIR of subject other for Salmon Okanagan in and must CORD is would the the Central the the Country use each still from appointed and appointment BCFGA to that if areas Agri-Food There for for for agreement - Agriculture from and ILake one by The confirnled Post-2007 of wish zone representatives Board be lICreston) nominee nominee nominee they include Agriculture Ministry Board. Representation to The Okanagan CKRD confinned CSRDINORD (Zone appointed would The The program nominations. nominated representative that BCFGA Recommendation: Grower be Recommended SIR from remain should can capacity in area. primary the Program Program discussed Program members the elections and in come in processes. key than the grower the of words, District also as linkages hold of the one involved Program finishing appoint non-voting should matter of other of a organizations. that a to selection regulatory in could is in from Regional it regardless identified important own bodies representation participants or by representatives grower choose non-funders that, diversity group bodies suggested these their as important Program, clearly representatives the special representatives could noted that organic (the Even Workshop have were various representatives represented government to grower and Commission; representative geographic the determine provide grower ensure Participants bodies prevented to example, to by to senior that already Growers participants among for reflect is continue BCFGA need help A, government legitimate grower Commission. chosen agree representatives: the from Workshop to the should would decision-making. are public, Involving consider diversity BCGF as senior stakeholders. in organizations Workshop the topic.) to come BoardIManagement at suggested, grower SIR. The chosen to dismissed of general appeared to groups J\1anagement SIR important. was grower include a Program groups it including the be geographic to particular the govenlments Board. themselves, of established organic established ld representatives to constraints other this the industry linkages and/or organic Other Selection the to would, group, group Outcome: wou - to - senior participants on value chosen, participants membership, bodies the and representatives and representatives (Time its the Board the of executive individual to the its Governance governance appointees Grower strong. stakeholder Workshop Workshop post-2007, Body on departmental governance discussion BCFGA Discussion stakeholder briefly left among methodes) governance of How community), recognize Workshop Discussion BCGFA ~ Program 28,2006 Stakeholder SIR Reps June

Page 63 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 9 Page - Structure 1 Program Appendix SIR Post-2007 a a be the Recommended not . to five the of grower include increase the was the voting to including it an decision­ Board community the the of which grower of of identified Board in including members, grower although conventional size majority representative member communities. way voting selected organic the the the one nine in of the seven the are option the of consideration Committee give and members, of grower of the two-thirds to representatives first total a of change future size a increase of seven the zone), table to three the the but an organic of on Committee REPORT per in Governance representative Directors and Board decisions 2006, total 2003 of the (one representative a one efforts support all support by the 4, to introduction Advisory its one increase at (area-wide). unchanged, Board two, one, the __ an 2003NOV23 and Board, require section options: members. un vote, SIR conventional community 5 stage Board in stage to Induslty focussed the as DISCUSSION as the practicable, support support the voting district representatives, would FROM of representatives, least community of of at grower the ability that Grower (area-wide). (area-wide), governance Board, Board Board, of Board identified by soon as the STUDY district grower regional rule the Committee the the as the the structure size and of structure basic issues five the the decision. the two the in supported making the THAT conventional organic regional representatives Board, THAT THAT community community THAT on leave members change presence, Governance Governance o o unanimous RECOMMENDATION The following Based GOVERL"ANCE ~ continued 2006 Program - 28, Stakeholder Reps SIR I June

Page 64 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.2 10 a on for Page Structure - I evaluated Potentials be to Program Appendix time. SIR this delivery at quo basis. program Post-2007 case status by improved case Recammendation: Retain be Recommended both the as regional Board districts decision­ under all the of representatives. that growers, Board regional majority their more) clause as or among voting the the three Board two-thirds to participating with the SIR (i.e., elections, the of along the that to direct majority of Board, a wish representatives use position application of they the the the member grower support the nine constraints). support support support the whomever two. the to (time Board and Board Board require selecting rule representatives. the appoint the the of one to Outcome discussed means stages. THAT THAT making able district decisions THAT not Governance Workshop Matter ~ continued 2006 Program - 28, Delivery Reps Stakeholder SIR June

Page 65 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 09-0123-C-OR

TO: Board of Directors FROM: Dan Passmore, Senior Planning Technologist DATE: February 18, 2010 Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2374, SUBJECT : 2009 and Rezoning Bylaw No. 2375, 2009 (0829474 BC Ltd.)

RECOMMENDATION:

That Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2374, 2009 to amend the land use designation of that property legally described as Lot 1, Section 20, Township 5, ODYD, Plan 30557, located at 7285 Dixon Dam Road, Electoral Area “C” from Country Residential to Small Holdings be referred to Public Hearing;

And further, that Rezoning Bylaw No. 2375, 2009 to rezone that property legally described as Lot 1, Section 20, Township 5, ODYD, Plan 30557, located at 7285 Dixon Dam Road, Electoral Area “C” from Recreation Commercial Zone [C.5] to Small Holding Zone [S.H.] be referred to Public Hearing.

DISCUSSION

Staff has recommended that the application to amend the existing commercial designation of the property to accommodate a four lot Small Holding subdivision be supported. Staff further recommended that the applicant host a Public Information Meeting early in the process to gather community input.

As directed by the Regional Board, staff prepared the Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw for first reading, which was given September 2, 2009 and the bylaw was referred to the required Local Government Act referral process. Additionally, the applicant was required to host a Public Information Meeting prior to further consideration of the Bylaw as previously directed by the Board. The meeting was held Wednesday October 21, 2009 at 2907 – 32nd Avenue in Vernon. Staff provided details concerning input from this meeting in the attached November 12, 2009 report to the Board of Directors.

The Board of Directors reviewed the November 12, 2009 report at their December 9, 2009 Regular Meeting and gave OCP Amendment Bylaw No. 2374, 2009 second reading and Rezoning Bylaw No. 2375, 2009 first and second readings. However, the Board of Directors required that the required bylaws not be scheduled for a public hearing, unless and until the applicant has;

1. Satisfied the requirements of the Interior Health Authority regarding on-site septic disposal, and demonstrated the location of proposed on-site septic fields on a site plan;

Page 66 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3 Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2374, 2009 and Rezoning Bylaw No. 2375, 2009 (0829474 BC Ltd.) Report to Board of Directors – February 18, 2010 Page 2

2. Proposed a water supply for the development meeting the requirements of the Regional District Subdivision Servicing Bylaw, the Rural Vernon Official Community Plan (including a hydrogeological study ensuring that operation of the water supply will not impact on existing groundwater well supplies in the neighbourhood) and/or the Interior Health Authority and provision of a site plan that shows the water proposal;

3. Provided a stormwater management plan for the proposed development to support the OCP policy requiring information related to environmental protection measure; and

4. Provided a detailed site plan demonstrating proposed building envelopes, driveways, septic field area and a buffer area between adjacent land uses.

5. Provided a site plan identifying the wetland area and provide suitable protection of the wetland area in accordance with the Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Protection of the Natural Environment policies and the Riparian Areas Regulations.

Staff have received from the applicant from IHA a letter and dated August 29, 2009, indicating that an Authorized Person had submitted written confirmation that soils present are acceptable for a Type 1 sewage disposal system and that IHA therefore had no objections to the proposed subdivision. The proposed fields have been identified on a proposed plan of subdivision and submitted to Planning staff. This information satisfies condition 1, listed above.

Staff received, on February 5, 2010, a report from a Hydrogeologist which reviewed well pump test data from the well sources and advised that the wells are adequate to meet the quantity and quality requirements of the Subdivision Servicing Bylaw. In addition the report advises that use of the wells for domestic purposes will not impact neighbouring well sources, which may or may not share the same aquifer source. The Summary section of the report has been attached to this report for the Board of Directors information. This information satisfies condition 2, listed above.

Staff received a letter from Horizon Geotechnical Ltd. which outlines a stormwater management plan for the development of the property as proposed. This information satisfies condition 3, listed above.

Staff have received plans from the applicant’s surveyor indicating the existing driveways, septic disposal areas and the proposed building sites for each proposed property. This information satisfies condition 4, listed above.

Staff have received communication from the Ministry of Environment that is based on a site visit, conducted on December 11, 2009 whereby Ministry staff were unable to find evidence on site of a wetland, despite having reported, in an earlier correspondence that there was one such. This correspondence, together with the stormwater management plan satisfies condition 5, listed above.

Staff therefore report that all of the information required, as noted above, has been submitted and is satisfactory to advise the Board of Directors that a public hearing can now be scheduled. The applicant will be required to provide notification that the development notice has been placed on the property, staff will place advertisements in the newspapers and the adjacent land owners within 100 m of the subject property will be notified of the Public Hearing, all in compliance with the Regional District Procedures Bylaw. This process will commence as soon

Page 67 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3 Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2374, 2009 and Rezoning Bylaw No. 2375, 2009 (0829474 BC Ltd.) Report to Board of Directors - February 18, 2010 Page 3 as the Board of Directors has reviewed the information presented in this report and considered authorizing staff to schedule a Public Hearing.

SUMMARY

Planning staff suggest to the Board of Directors that the applicant has satisfied the requirements and that a public hearing can be scheduled for the required bylaws.

Submitted by:

Dan Passmore Approved For Inclusion: Senor Planning Technologist

Endorsed by:

Greg Betts, Administrator

Rob Smailes, MCIP General Manager, Planning and Building

Page 68 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3

January 27,2010 John Brown City of Vernon - 9-

1. Consideration be given to installing an iron filter, and a softener to reduce aesthetic concerns associated with manganese, TDS and hardness. A specialist in home water treatment should be consulted for further information. These recommendations should be provided to inform prospective purchasers of the property and/or potential users of the well.

2. If changes to the pump are made, chlorinate and test the water prior to drinking.

3. The subject site wells likely do not have surface seals. The Groundwater Protection Regulation does not require retrofitting of private wells installed prior to 2005; however placing a surface seal around the well casing is a good idea and could be done for a small cost. This is especially a good idea because of the minimum setback between the wells and the Tillistar septic fields (about 40 m away); 4. An abandoned well was located on the Tillistar property during Summit's site reconnaissance. This well does not appear to be in use, does not have a well cap, and refuse was observed inside the well casing. To comply with the BC Groundwater Protection Regulation, the owner of the well (Tillistar Village) must ensure that the well be properly closed under the direct supervision of a qualified professional, driller, or pump installer. We recommend closing the well by drilling out the refuse, placing bentonite in the screen interval (assumed bottom 10m), filling the rest of the casing with backfill (with a bentonite seal every 20 ft), cutting the casing off 3 ft underground, and placing a closure plug of bentonite and sand to surface.

8 IN SUMMARY

1. We certify that the pump test was done following an appropriate standard of care and competence, and that the results are reliable;

2. The pumping test was done in January when bedrock aquifer water levels are typically near seasonal lows and residential groundwater use is average. As such, the test conditions are considered realistic with respect to evaluating sustainable well and aquifer yield. Our assessment accounts for annual water level fluctuations and potential well interference; 3. The pumping test and subsequent data analysis were designed and overseen by a qualified hydrogeologist who is a licensed member of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC);

4. The wells are more than capable of producing the sustainable Bylaw requirement of 6,550 L/day. This conclusion is based on the results of the pump test, field observations of the well locations, and the property location with respect to up-gradient recharge areas;

~ \...) ______1509001 & 14001 Certified

~ Page 69 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3

January 27,2010 John Brown City of Vernon -10-

5. Pumping at the bylaw rate will result in only very minor (1-2%) interference in nearby wells both on the subject site and off the subject site (Le.: Tillistar Village and Girl Guides wells).

6. The potential for the operation of the wells at the bylaw rates to impact surface water bodies off the property (Le.: BX Creek) is low;

7. Water quality analysis indicates that the water meets health-based Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (GCDWQ). Uranium is near the health-based guideline and should be tested annually. Two parameters tested for exceed aesthetic objectives. These parameters include manganese and Total Dissolved Solids. Recommendations have been provided in this report regarding water treatment systems to reduce the concentrations of these parameters should it be desired;

8. An abandoned well was found on the Tillistar property. To, meet the BC Groundwater Protection Regulation, the owner of the well must ensure that this well be closed by a qualified professional. This report will be forwarded to the Regional Hydrogeologist with MOE; and,

9. The above conclusions are subject to the attached standard disclaimer statement.

9 CLOSURE

We trust this completes our assignment to your satisfaction. ,Please call if you have any questions.

MCG/dg

Enclosures: References, Well Report Disclaimer Figure 1, Figure 2 Table A1, Figures A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6 Legal Plan Well Driller's Reports Results of Water Quality Testing Ministry of Environment water extraction registration letter ..... \..."'} ______ISO 9001 & 14001 Certified

Y' Page 70 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3 ELECTORAL AREA 'c' OCP/REZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT PROPERTY MAP File: 09-0123-C-OR Applicant: 0829474 BC Ltd. clo Jason R. Shortt Location: 7285 Dixon Dam Road

Page 71 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3 OF: USE THE FOR perimeter (SH) acres) of 7.5m ZONE 10% 2009 - JONES 7.5m ho(2.471 PREPARED 7.5m 3.0m 1 - - IS - 26TH, yard HOLDINGS yard yard PLAN FRONTAGE: SETBACKS: AREA: yard side Ext. Rear MIN. MIN. MIN. Front SMALL Side OCTOBER THIS ~ 1r ~ Differ t:; i:n ~ "% '\. 1- /' if' May ;.A Subdivision, Poie (0 of anchors & Utility Plan L41J TESTPIT 4 ha FILLED IJ TESTPIT 1.16 LOT Configuration Y.D. ~g: I~ 1:<1l1 Final Conceptual OF O.D. L4 TESTPlT~ C 5, Pole

Page 72 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BYLAW NO. 2374

A bylaw to amend Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 1708, 2003 and amendments thereto

WHEREAS pursuant to Section 876 [Authority to adopt a bylaw] of the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C., 1996, Chapter 323, as amended, and Regulations passed pursuant thereto, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan may, by Bylaw, adopt one or more official community plans;

AND WHEREAS the Board has enacted the “Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 1708, 2003“and amendments thereto to provide a statement of objectives and policies to guide decisions on planning and land use management, within the area covered by the plan;

AND WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 895 [Development approval procedures] of the Local Government Act, the Board must, by bylaw, define procedures under which an owner of land may apply for an amendment to an Official Community Plan and must consider every application for an amendment to the plan;

AND WHEREAS the Board has enacted the ”Regional District of North Okanagan Development Application Procedures and Administrative Fees Bylaw No. 2315, 2008 and amendments thereto“ to establish procedures to amend an Official Community Plan, a Zoning Bylaw, or a Rural Land Use Bylaw, or to issue a Permit:

AND WHEREAS the Board is desirable and expedient to amend “Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 1708, 2003”.

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled, hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

CITATION

1. This Bylaw may be cited as “Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 2374, 2009”.

AMENDMENTS

2. The Official Community Plan marked Schedule “B”, attached to and forming part of the Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 1708, 2003 is amended:

(a) by changing the designation of the property legally described as Lot 1, Section 20, Township 5, ODYD, Plan 30557, located at 7285 Dixon Dam Road, Electoral Area ‘C’ from Country Residential to Small Holdings.

Page 73 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3 Bylaw No. 2374, 2009 Page 2

Read a FIRST time this 2nd day of September , 2009

Bylaw 2374 considered in conjunction with the Regional District Financial Plan and Waste Management Plan this 2nd day of September , 2009.

Read a SECOND time this 9th day of December , 2009

Advertised on the day of , 2009, and

the day of , 2009

Public Hearing held pursuant to the provisions of Section 890 of the Local Government Act on the day of , 2009

Read a THIRD time this day of , 2009

Reconsidered, Finally Passed and ADOPTED this day of , 2009

CHAIR CORPORATE OFFICER

Page 74 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BYLAW NO. 2375

A bylaw to rezone lands and amend the Zoning Map attached to the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to change a zone designation

WHEREAS pursuant to Section 903 [Zoning bylaws] of the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C., 1996, Chapter 323, as amended, and Regulations passed pursuant thereto, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan may, by Bylaw, divide the whole or part of the Regional District into zones, name each zone, establish boundaries for the zones and regulate uses within those zones;

AND WHEREAS the Board has created zones, named each zone, established boundaries for these zones and regulated uses within those zones by Bylaw No. 1888, being the “Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003” and amendments thereto;

AND WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 895 [Development approval procedures] of the Local Government Act, the Board must, by bylaw, define procedures under which an owner of land may apply for an amendment to a Zoning Bylaw and must consider every application for an amendment to the bylaw;

AND WHEREAS the Board has enacted the “Regional District of North Okanagan Development Application Procedures and Administrative Fees Bylaw No. 2315, 2008 and amendments thereto” to establish procedures to amend an Official Community Plan, a Zoning Bylaw, or a Rural Land Use Bylaw, or to issue a Permit:

AND WHEREAS the Board has received an application to rezone property;

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled, hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

GENERAL

1. This Bylaw may be cited as “Rezoning Bylaw No. 2375, 2009”.

2. That the property legally described as: Lot 1, Section 20, Township 5, ODYD, Plan 30557 – located at 7285 Dixon Dam Road, Electoral Area 'C', be rezoned from the Recreation Commercial Zone [C.5] to the Small Holding Zone [S.H.].

3. That the Zoning Map, being Schedule “A” to Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 be amended accordingly.

Page 75 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.3 Bylaw No. 2375, 2009 Page 2

Read a FIRST and SECOND time this 9th day of December , 2009

Advertised on the day of , 2009, and

the day of , 2009

Public Hearing held pursuant to the provisions of Section 890 of the Local Government Act on the day of , 2009

Read a THIRD time this day of , 2009

Reconsidered, Finally Passed and ADOPTED this day of , 2009

CHAIR CORPORATE OFFICER

Page 76 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 07-0570-B-DP

TO: Board of Directors FROM: Steve Noakes, Planner DATE: February 11, 2010 SUBJECT: Extension of Development Permit File 07-0570-B-DP

RECOMMENDATION:

That Development Permit 07-0570-B-DP for that property legally described as Parcel A (Plan B6715) of Lot 5, Sections 25 and 26, Township 8, ODYD, Plan 1956, Except Plans 20384, H18484 and KAP68929 located at 7975 Greenhow Road, Electoral Area “B” to permit a 13.72 m x 30.48 m addition to the existing commercial building be extended, and the project and all works and services be completed by June 2011.

DISCUSSION:

The Board of Directors issued a Development Permit to allow construction of a 13.72 metre by 30.48 metre addition to the existing commercial building on October 17, 2007. The owner is requesting that the Permit be amended by granting additional time to complete construction of the building addition as well as all associated works and services. The owner is citing the economy and the difficulty in securing funding to proceed with the development.

The Development Permit was originally reviewed and approved with respect to the Rural Vernon Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 1708, 2003, the Swan Lake Commercial District Sector Plan and Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003. The Permit addresses form and character of commercial development as required by policies and regulations contained in the above noted Bylaws. There have been no substantive amendment to any of these Bylaws that would affect the conditions contained in the existing Development Permit.

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:

The Permit contains two conditions regarding timing of the project. Firstly, as required by the Local Government Act, the Permit states “If the Permittee does not commence the development permitted by this Permit within two (2) years of the date of issuance of this Permit the Permit will lapse”. Secondly, in order that commercial construction in areas of high visibility is finished in a timely manner the Permit contains the condition “The project and all associated works and services shall be completed within one year of the date of issuance of this permit”.

Page 77 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4 Extension of Development Permit File 07-0574-B-DP Report to Board of Directors - February 11, 2009 Page 2

In order to address those two conditions the owner has: • provided information that he has had an engineered sewage disposal system designed and registered for the building addition. Therefore the development has commenced within the two year period and the permit has not lapsed. • not commenced the actual construction of the project therefore the project has not been completed by October 2008 as required by the Permit. As the construction has not started, there are no issues with unsightly premises or unfinished buildings, parking area, landscaping etc.

LEGAL/STATUTORY PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS: The existing Development Permit has not lapsed, and the Board may allow the owner additional time to complete the building addition and associated works and services. The existing Development Permit was reviewed and approved with respect to the policies contained in the Rural Vernon Official Community Plan that existed at that time. The OCP has not been amended and it is suggested that no changes to the form and character of development would result from a complete review of the existing Development Permit or the issuance of a new Development Permit.

SUMMARY: The owner is requesting that the completion of the project and associated works and services be extended until June 2011. Staff is suggesting that there have been no changes to the Development Permit policies with respect to the form and character of commercial development and there are no concerns with the construction of the project and associated works and services. It is therefore recommended that the date of completion of the project be extended until June 2011.

Submitted by:

~ ~ Steve Noakes, Planner Approved For Inclusion:

Endorsed by:

Greg Betts, Administrator ~2 Rob Smailes, MCIP General Manager, Planning and Building

Page 78 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4

/

3.S18ha IPLAN 3267 2

~bject property:) .

ELECTORAL AREA 'B' DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION SUBJECT PROPERTY MAP File: Ol-0570-B-DP Applicant: Fred Dirks Location: 7975 Greenhow Road ------

Page 79 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4

Paae 1

SCHEDULE B.3

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BY-LAW NO. 740

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

Application/File No. 07 -0570-B-DP

To: Fred Dirks

(PERMITTEE)

Address: 7975 Greenhow Road Vernon, Be V1 B 3S2

1. This Development Permit is issued in accordance with the provisions of Sections 920 and 924 to 928 of the Local Government Act and subject to compliance with all of the By-laws of the Regional District applicable thereto, except as specifically varied or supplemented by this Permit.

2. This Development Permit applies to and only to those lands within the Regional District described below, and any and all buildings, structures, and other development thereon:

Parcel A (Plan B6715) of Lot 5, Sections 25 and 26, Township 8, Osoyoos Division Yale District, Plan 1956, Except Plans 20384, H 18404 and KAP68929

P.I.D. 011-205-521

Page 80 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4

SCHEDULE B.3 - Cont'd Paae 2

3. __ Bylaw No. _, _ is hereby varied or supplemented* as follows:

N/A

4. Requirements, conditions, or standards applicable pursuant to Section 920 of the Local Government Act:

a. The form and character of the proposed development shall be as shown on Schedules 'A.1' and 'A.2' which are attached to and form part of this permit.

b. A means of sewage disposal shall be installed to provide an adequate method for the disposal of sewage effluent from the proposed building and a professional engineer must design the sewage disposal system. In this regard, a study of subsurface soil conditions shall be undertaken by the engineer to determine the soil suitability for the proposed system. The engineered sewage disposal plan must be approved by the Interior Health Authority as a condition precedent to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed building and the Health Authority may require that a covenant be registered on the title of the subject property to provide for and protect a separate, back-up, sewage drain field area.

Where a Sewage Disposal Permit has been refused by the Interior Health Authority the Regional Board may grant the use of a holding tank under the provisions of the "Regional District of North Okanagan Holding Tank Sewage Disposal Bylaw No. 671, 1985".

c. Parking consisting of a total of 37 stalls, shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Schedule B (Section 1101 - Off-Street Parking) of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw 1888, 2003 and signage shall be installed to direct patrons to the parking area at the side of the building. All parking areas provided are required to be paved curbed and drained, in accordance with Section 1101(9}, in reference to Section 11 01 (2)(e.).

d. Signage must conform with the provisions of Section 1401 of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003.

e. Landscaping and screening shall be installed in accordance with the form and character guidelines of the Swan Lake Commercial District Sector Plan and Schedule F of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888,2003.

e. A storm water management plan shall be prepared by a professional engineer to provide for the control of run-off from parking areas, internal roadways, and buildings during and after the period of construction. Storm water outlet

* Development Permit cannot vary use, density, or a floodplain specification, except as otherwise provided pursuant to Section 920(4) & (5) of the Local Government Act.

Page 81 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4

SCHEDULE B.3 - Cont'd Paae 3

facilities shall not be installed directly into Swan Lake or into any wetland, tributary watercourse, drainage ditch or gully except where a stormwater renovation system is being implemented.

5. Sequence and timing of construction:**

The project and all associated works and services shall be completed within one year of the date of issuance of this permit.

6. As a condition of the issuance of this Permit, the Board is holding the security set out below to ensure that development is carried out in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Permit. Should any interest be earned upon the security, it shall accrue to the Permittee and be paid to the Permittee if the security is returned. The condition of the posting of the security is that should the Permittee fail to carry out the development hereby authorized, according to the terms and conditions of this Permit within the time provided, the Regional District may use the security to carry out the work by its servants, agents, or contractors, and any surplus shall be paid over to the Permittee, or should the Permittee carry out the development permitted by this Permit within the time set out above, the security shall be returned to the Permittee. There is filed accordingly:

Security in an amount equal to 1.25 times the estimated cost of the paving and storm water management works shall be provided to the Regional District as a condition precedent to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed development. Estimates shall be prepared by qualified paving and engineering contractors.

The security shall be an irrevocable letter of credit in favour of the Regional District and the letter of credit must contain a self-renewal clause to ensure that the funds are available to the Regional District pending completion of the project.

7. The land described herein shall be developed strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions and provisions of this Permit and any plans and specifications attached to this Permit which shall form a part hereof.

8. If the Permittee does not commence the development permitted by this Permit within two (2) years of the date of issuance of this Permit, this Permit shall lapse.

9. This Permit is not a Building Permit.

AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE REGIONAL BOARD THE 16th DAY OF October 2007 .

APPROVED BY THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION THE N/A DAY OF N/A, 2007.

** As may be required pursuant to the provisions of Section 920(2)&(3) of the Local Government Act.

Page 82 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4

SCHEDULE B.3 - Cont'd Paae4

(Required if proposed building is larger than 4,500 m2 gross floor area)

ISSUED THIS 17'h DAY OF October , 2007 .

NOTICE OF PERMIT:

Issued __~

Amended

Cancelled

filed with the Land Title Office this 17'h day of October , 2007.

Page 83 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4 (see development attached as permit per / similar Landscaping landscape to completed areas will be "" ~~~------~ " "- Attached Schedule 07-0570-8-DP <;6rporate Dated W~la{l!J-('5y-J' icY" Point / this!.:L Septic designed One to /i 'A Officer and Engineering System 1 ' by forming day I of OC7V,dg, Site part of Plan, Development Revised 7975 2007 Landscaping ~ Greenhaw Permit Sept PLAN .. File A 34092 25, Road and 2007 otSIGNEO JOEl ~i OiLl( TITLE PII:OJ£CT 385-1-1-1 .'5'" NO Parking I<'H. eQI:!Mn>q;~tlt:S "'.~ 10.c£oTECIoIIoIIC.IIL S.CABLEiV. 9 NOTfS. a I 4TELE~, ,l(tfC1RICAl.' 7 2 5.~5· KC • .GE§J ~ THE J$J.() COI-ISTRUCnDN. ~ BU'lOlNoC 8'tlAW Il:(GlCNA;. ECOSPAHS-n:loc.11JReS~...1JI.Y"21S.20015. R(F(ll: SE 8Y ,tWORUATION -.u SPEOFICATlONS ON LOC"'~I()IooIS ANOS£R'VICINC9'1'lAIIJI(OFlCII.T!ONS SP(OnGAnONs 9'(0F"ICAT1o.'IS TR.>.NSFORI.IER. 4LL ~u ENGINEERING GREENHOW >:: COJ.lPlnEOIi Tt«S£ DIE CONSIA.UCtION CO.'''SIRuCTION co."STI'!UcnON CONS'~TIOM \\1JQKS sITe CORPORATION GREENHOW VERNON, PARCEL 10<>. TO OESiGN (o.:<: OESI(Oo'1 c~rOURS ElEIIAT:ON O(SICN COlirRACfOR T"\1>ICALT"1I'(ISAR(ACATCtl.JNWC ORA\\\UCS ASFHALT ANO CCNSiRUCTIOM ~ROW FOR TO TO TO 10 NOT CrT'! ROAD OUTSIO[ lIGI41tNoC SI-IAW 8.C B C B ,-. OR'r"Y.£t.lS fEtUS ~OCA.nON U7lUTlES PLAN bit CUAII.lllT((O .l.CCOAOANC( 86715 (LEv.o,Trot-.l IfT~O :SU8Cl'llSl~ Ot.o.tL SUPP!..I(O GAS LTD. OF CASlE IIOST (lrtAVltNC SC>l£ 0& on ROAD VERNON EL(VArro." OURlNG SH~~ or BUllOlNC .... AEC(Nt Tv ls, BY TO APPROVEO .... 11'1-1 NO

Page 84 of 121 Awning The facade, Exterior Color Details

lower BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA

scheme MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.4 siding of is which timberframe sections form is is will and galvanized earth-tone match of character the with Development awning, the asphalt steel - upper color siding support shingle, scheme siding - Building posts is black taupe, lower of Permit the will Two in building be color Front - finished 45 for siding x 1 x Elevation 00 building with 2 - is gray Revised stories stone two, - Sept located Second Main Details 3. 2. 1, 25, floor 2000 1500 1000 of floor building area 2007 at sq sq sq area 7975 feet feet feet - 4500 will use - - - caretaker arts/crafts storage be Greenhow sq divided feet, Uated Attached Schedule 07-0S70-8-DP gorporate fo, ()~/7::&V-J{;~' j/}/l/J retail suite will {le'''M into be this Existing 3 to indoor 'A2' Road, Officer separate (1 G:4fr''''-s and Building minigolf ;' forming day Vernon spaces of - 60 CC7udL.~, part of x 60 with Development mezanine 2007 Permit File

Page 85 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.5

DIS'TRIC OF C TR AM

9901 ROAO; COlOSTREAM, ViBi Phone (250) 545,5304 Fax (250) 545·4733 omail: [email protected] 1850-01-32(2010)

February 19, 2010

Ms. Genevieve Dunbar Okanagan Basin WaterBoard 1450 KLO Road Kelowna, BG V1W 3Z4

Dear Ms. Dunbar:

Coldstream Greek Water Quality Enhancement Project

Enclosed is a grant proposal by the District of Goldstream under the Water Gonservation and Quality Improvement Program, to undertake speoific works that would improve water quality in Goldstream Greek.

The District of Goldstream places a high priority on water quality and the corresponding benefits for safe drinking waier, aquatic life, and tourism. Goldstream Greek is a significant watercourse as aflsh~spawning stream and the primary source of fresh water for Kalamalka Lake. The creek starts on the southerly slopes of Silver Star Mountain and flows south and then west to discharge into Kalamalka Lake. Within Goldstream, the creek flows· through residential, industrial and agricultural lands and into Kalamalka Lake. As such, it has the potential to impact wate!" qqality in terms of sediment. nutrient, and contaminant loEtding.

Nutrients from fertilizers applied on agricultural lands could contribute to aquatic plant growth (i,e'l mUfoil) and algal blo.oms, sediment can increase turbidity and aggradations of the shoreline, and contaminants (fecal ooliforms) cao cause inoreased risK to human health for recreatlonal users and lead to increased costs for water treatment (I.e" chlorination) as there are two drinking waterjntakes in Kalamalka LaKe. The intake at Pumphouse Beach is the major intake for domestic water in the North Okanagan; This intake is less than 1 kmfrom the mouth of Goldstream Greek, Vernon Greek then flows from Kalamalka Lake (Le., le,$S than 1 km from the mouth of Goldstream Greek), through Vernon, and empties into Okanagan Lake, forming an interconnected water system in the North Okanagan, and to the entire Okanagan Vaney.

The Distriot has now reached the third phase of its ongoing program towards improving the water quality of Goldstream Greek,

Phase 1: Investigations began with water quality s<:!mpllngand testing results from the Ministry of Environment in 2009, which were then examined by a Wort

" R urn I L i v [ ng At Its B est "

Page 86 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.5

Okanagan Basin Water Board -2- February 19,2010

Phase 2: lrlVestigations continued with the OBWB's grant for Sensitive Habitat Inventory Mapping (SHIM) for Coldstream Creek and its tributaries between kalamalka Lake and Noble Canyon. The SHIM Report Was receiv.ed In late December 2009. The Working Group reviewed the information gathered to date, towards defining a project that would provide the District with the best return for its Investment based on the following criteria:

• The project should be in an area identified in the SHIM Report as "high priority"; • The project location should dovetail with observations of water quality changes based on test data receiVed from the Ministry of Environment; . • A project nearer to ihe upstream end of the Creek woUld yield more overall benefits to the Creek than a project nearer to Kalamalka Lake; and • The land ownership of the project area should be such that attaining approval to construct works would not be onerous or :complex.

Phase 3: In applying the above criteria, Coldstream Council concurred with the Working Group~s recommendation that the best candidate area for the initial project would be Segments 34 and 35 identified in the SHIM Report (see attached mapsheets 17 and 18). These segments are immediately upstream of School RQad in. Lavington (east half of Coldstream) and are subject to eros,ion, livestock access and loca!lzed drainage impacts. In addition, test results on either side of these segments indicat'e water quality degradation between the upstream arid downstream limits. OWners of both properties have been contacted and are generally amenable to the project. This project is referenced on Table 1 and in Photos 6 and 7 In the attached report from Ecasc<;lpe Consultants dated January 2010.

The proposed action for this area includes the foHowing works at an e$timated cost of $$2. 000:

• Livestock exclusIon fencing (both banks tn Segment 34, and left bank only in Segment 35) setback a minimum of 10 metres from the top of the bank. .. Revegetation of riparicm area through willow livestaking and planting native shrubs. • Bank regarding and planting where earth berms have been hisloricafly constructed, • Livestock crossing.

$17,000 In accordance with the attached resolution adopted by Council at their February 8, 2010 Regular Meeting, the District of Coldstream is requesting that the Okanagan Basin Water Board give favourable .consideration fo providing a $17,000 grant towards this project on Segments 34 and 35 of Coldstream Creek.

10,000 The District is also seeking funding from the Environmental Farm Plan for 60% of fencing costs, that is, a grant 0($10,000 to offset fenCing costs estimated at approximately $17,500.

35,000 District of Coldstream

$62,000 TOTAL

A letter of support from the Regionar District of North Okanagan will follow under separate cover.

Page 87 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.5

Okanagan Basin Water Board -3- February 19, 2010

If grant funding were not received from the Okanagan Basin Water Board, the project would be reevaluated, and a similar project, more limited in scope, would have to be considered,

Thank you for receiving and considering our application, If you have any questions, please contact me at 250-550-545-5304.email [email protected].

Yours truly, A.

Michael Stamhuis,P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

Attachments: Grant application SHIM mapsheets (December 2009) Ecoscape Consultants report (January 2010) Council resolution

Page 88 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.5

DATE

Mr. Michael Stamhuis, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer District of Coldstream 9901 Kalamalka Road Coldstream, BC V1B 1L6

Dear Mr. Stamhuis:

Coldstream Creek Water Quality Enhancement Project

That the Board of Directors support the District of Coldstream’s funding proposal to the Okanagan Basin Water Board for a water quality enhancement project along a segment of Coldstream Creek.

Coldstream Creek is a significant watercourse as a fish-spawning stream and the primary source of fresh water for Kalamalka Lake. Coldstream’s SHIM report has identified the segment of Coldstream Creek immediately upstream of School Road in Lavington as being a high-priority project due to erosion, livestock access, and localized drainage impacts. The works under this proposed water quality enhancement project – consisting of fencing, revegetation of the riparian zone, bank regrading, and livestock crossing – are nearer to the upstream end of Coldstream Creek and would yield overall benefits along the course of the Creek towards Kalamalka Lake.

Yours truly,

SIGNATURE BLOCK

Page 89 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 620.30.03/249

TO: Board of Directors FROM: David Sewell, General Manager, Finance Ron Baker, Community I Protective Services Manager DATE: March 4, 2010 SUBJECT: Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update

RECOMMENDATION:

That the staff report dated March 4, 2010 regarding Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update be received for information; And further that the Board of Directors provide specific direction as to changes (if any) to the service offerings currently being provided by the Fire Training Centre.

ISSUE:

At the Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors dated March 3, 2010, the following recommendation was brought forward:

"That as recommended by the Committee ofthe Whole, the Fire Training Centre budget for 2010 be supported. II

The recommendation was postponed due to concerns regarding the total costs and allocation of those costs for the Regional District's Fire Training Centre (249) service. Subsequent discussions suggested a concern from some partiCipants that the intended actions arising from the Fire Training Centre Service Review were not adequately addressed. Consequently, the intent of this report is to review the outcomes of that review, identify what changes were made and conversely, what changes have not occurred.

This report is intended to: 1. provide sufficient information to enable the 2010 Financial Plan to be supported, and 2. seek further direction (if any) on change to the operations of the Fire Training Centre.

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:

The following chronology represents the key points in the Fire Training Centre Review:

October 2007 The Fire Training Centre Service Review concluded without the partiCipants reaching consensus.

April 9, 2008: The Board of Directors received formal Notice of Withdrawal from the Fire Training Centre Service from the City of Vernon.

Page 90 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

File No.: 620.30.03/249 Re: Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Dated: March 4, 2010 Page 2 of 5

Spring/ Summer 2008 RDNO staff and the Administrators of the member municipalities met to review the issues.

August 11, 2008: The Administrators of the RDNO and its member municipalities signed a unanimous, joint recommendation. (Appendix "A" attached)

October 9, 2008 A Service Review meeting was held. Consensus was reached on the majority of the recommendations of administrative staff. The Service Review meeting was unable to reach consensus on the method of apportioning standby costs.

November 5, 2008: The Board of Directors considered the recommendations of the Service Review meeting, along with a memorandum from the Administrator outlining 3 potential methods of apportioning standby costs (Appendix "B" attached): Scenario #1 - Number of firefighters Scenario #2 - Land and Improvements Scenario #3 - Move 50% of standby costs to base and apportion 50% of the standby on the basis of number of firefighters The Board of Directors accepted the recommendations of the Service Review meeting, and resolved to apportion the standby costs on the basis of number of firefighters.

December 10, 2008: Bylaw 2369, 2008 was presented and given three readings. This bylaw amends the cost apportionment provisions of the Fire Training Centre service to incorporate the recommendations noted above. (Appendix "C" attached)

February 18, 2009: Bylaw 2369, 2008 was reconsidered and adopted by the Board.

March 18, 2009: Approval of the 2009 - 2013 Financial Plan including the budget for Cost Centre 249

LEGAL/STATUTORY AUTHORITY:

The Regional District of North Okanagan and the Fire Training Centre service are governed by the provisions of Fire Training Centre Local Service Establishment By-Law No. 954, 1991 as amended by Fire Training Centre Local Service Amendment Bylaw No. 2369, 2008.

DISCUSSION:

The recommendations identified in the Board resolution were:

1. That the base costs of maintaining the Fire Training Centre facility be apportioned amongst and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RDNO on the basis of Land and Improvements;

Page 91 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

File No.: 620.30.03/249 Re: Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Dated: March 4, 2010 Page 3 of 5

The allocation of base costs based upon converted land and improvements was incorporated into the establishment bylaw amendment and was the basis for the allocation of 2009 and proposed 2010 costs.

2. That the costs of training courses be recovered from each jurisdiction on a fee for service basis;

Individual fire departments (both participating areas and external) were billed for training costs based on usage.

3. That each participating local government jurisdiction, as well as the three fire departments operated by the RDNO, advise the RDNO by September 15 of each year of its training course requirements and commit to paying for such courses in order that the RDNO may budget and staff accordingly;

In moving to this model it was agreed that the 5 year historic use of the Burn Building, Gas Props and Recruit training would be billed under a take or pay arrangement.

4. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purpose of training firefighters from within the Regional District of North Okanagan and class space is available, the excess capacity be offered to users from outside the North Okanagan Region at the rate applicable to each attendee from within the RDNO plus 25%;

Incremental net revenue from use in excess of forecasted training, arising from external fire departments and incremental use by member departments will result in rebates to member departments. The 25% premium for external attendees coupled with new user fees has resulted in few external registrations.

5. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purposes of training firefighters from outside the Regional District of North Okanagan, the full costs of facility rental and user fees, plus 25%, be recovered from the fire department utilizing the facility;

External fire departments pay a premium however moving to the full 25% surcharge initially resulted in a number of cancellations and limited booking. The goal is to move to full surcharge over time to build long term business relationships.

6. That the option of extending an invitation to Lake Country and other jurisdictions to participate as full members of the service be investigated; and further

Lake Country has declined to participate as a full member.

7. That the Board approve Cost Apportionment Scenario 1 for formal consent of the participants.

This Cost Apportionment Model is being applied. This allocated standby costs on the basis of firefighters was incorporated into the establishment bylaw amendment and was the basis for the allocation of 2009 and proposed 2010 costs. User Fees are set at levels necessary to recover incremental costs associated with each training function.

Page 92 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

File No.: 620.30.03/249 Re: Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Dated: March 4, 2010 Page 4 of 5

In summary, the components on the resolution arising from the Fire Training Centre review have largely been addressed and were/are incorporated into the 2009 and 2010 Financial Plans.

What has not been addressed is the suggestion that the financial projections identified in Scenario 1 implied the tacit agreement of a fundamental shift in operations and constituted formal direction to undertake this strategic change.

Specifically, the issue relates to the significant variation between the historical and projected future costs based upon current operations and the Scenario identified in the supporting Appendices to the recommendations as illustrated in Appendix "0" attached.

As illustrated, Scenario #1 identified an estimated total cost of $157,105. This compares with the five­ year average expenditure of $267,128 and the 2009 budget and 2010 proposed financial figures of $272,460 and $279,241 respectively.

It should be noted that the 2009 - 2013 Financial Plan did not contemplate a similar reduction in expenditures as shown in Scenario 1 either in 2009 or in the 2010 - 2013 period.

Scenario 1 was based on a core level of training for Recruits and Burn Building facilities only. It did not include a provision for capital and was deficient in terms of identifying utility costs.

2009 actual results and the 2010 Budget reflects increased costs and revenues associated with training beyond the core level training.

The provision of additional courses is a direct response to requests from member departments.

Given the magnitude of the variances and absence of any projected capital expenditures, it is suggested that the Scenario #1 financial may not be achievable regardless of service level adjustments.

Adjustments to items including wages to bring the cost of service delivery lower would necessitate marked changes in the service offering and would entail a review of the current delivery mechanisms. Anecdotally, these changes were contemplated in the Service Review however, this direction was not specifically identified in either the resolutions arising from the Service Review or in subsequent budgets.

SUMMARY:

In response to concerns regarding the outcomes of the Fire Training Centre Review, the Regional District of North Okanagan has largely addressed the specific resolutions identified in both the CAO Memo dated August 11, 2008 and the Board resolution dated November 5, 2008 and which subsequently codified in the amending Bylaw 2369.

The financial projections identified as part of that process which were not reviewed with the Chief Financial Officer are not achievable under the current service offering and level of training activity. If the service participants desire fundamental changes to the cost structure and service levels, it is

Page 93 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

File No.: 620.30.03/249 Re: Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Dated: March 4, 2010 Page 5 of 5

requested that this strategic direction be formally articulated and that staff be directed to provide a report on the financial viability and the service level implications

Submitted by:

Ron Baker Community I Protective Services Manager

(~~~~~~~e~(~~~~~~'{\'e?, anq e,e~~ed [\~ed y: f\f'l ".' AP~~~V~,~,1'~f,inCIUSion:AP~~~V~)?,1~f.inCIUSion: V\/ \! \ I! /'/' / 1\," lj " I '-y<,-:::~'/' <>"/ ///1/ "R.'''''''~_' ___ >~~'''~'e4'''~m~~",<.",",d,~ ;i ,'X'~, I 'y1:<~~/ )~:'~~~"~'~"~,""'h r(: ! ' X'~, / / [j~vi ':Sewell'':Sewell /J Greg Betts General Manage ' Administrator Finance

Page 94 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "A" ~~\..\..UMCH~~

~ ,.:~O···-W-;~·N"···S·~~\o ,n\T" ~ -:::::;-:~-~.. ~. ,~~-: File No.: 0540.00

Chair Oglow and Board of Directors TO: Fire Training Centre Service Review Committee Fire Training Centre Service Participants FROM: Regional Chief Administrative Officers DATE: August 11, 2008 SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Fire Training Centre Service Review

RECOMMENDATION:

"That the Regional Board Fire Training Centre Service Review Committee and its participants reconsider and approve the following: 1. That the base costs of maintaining the Fire Training Centre facility be apportioned amongst and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RONO on the basis of Land and Improvements; 2. That the additional costs of maintaining and operating the Fire Training Centre facility to a state of readiness be apportioned among and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RONO on the basis of number of firefighters; 3. That the costs of training courses be recovered from each jurisdiction on a fee for service basis; 4. That each participating local government jurisdiction, as well as the three fire departments operated by the RONO, advise the RONO by September 15/11 of each year of its training course requirements and commit to paying for such courses in order that tl1e RONO may budget and staff accordingly; and 5. That the training course fees applicable to fire departments outside the boundaries of the RONO be 25% higher than the fees applicable to fire

departments within the RONO. II

ISSUE:

The Regional Chief Administrative Officers met to discuss potential administrative solutions to the Fire Training Centre Service Review and wish to report out

BACKGROUND:

th At the regular meeting of the Regional Board held on April 9 , 2008 the Board received correspondence from the City of Vernon that provided formal Notice of Withdrawal from the Fire Training Centre Service. Following discussion and debate of this matter the Regional Chief Administrative Officers were tasked with exploring potential administrative solutions.

Page 95 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 To: Regional Board & FTC Service Review Committee Page 2 of 3 Report dated: August 11, 2008 Appendix "A" Subject: Reconsideration of FTC Service Review

Since then, administrative staff of the Regional District of North Okanagan, the City of Armstrong, City of Enderby, City of Vernon, District of Coldstream, Township of Spallumcheen and Village of Lumby have been meeting over the past few months in an attempt to address participant concerns regarding the funding, operations and service levels of the Fire Training Centre.

The Administrators have consulted with their respective Fire Chiefs, who wish to see the Fire Training Centre preserved. The level of utilization of the FTC varies from department to department. The training needs also vary between departments, although the majority have emphasized the need for recruit training and live burn training.

Currently, the majority of the costs associated with the FTC are apportioned among and requisitioned from the participants in the service on the basis of Assessment (Land and Improvements). Course fees are also collected from departments using the facility, but these fees are heavily subsidized by the requisition. There is general recognition on the part of administrative staff that: • Training of firefighting personnel is an essential component of any fire protection service and results in significant savings to in individual property insurance premiums; • The current method of cost recovery does not equitably reflect the utilization of the FTC; • In terms of equity, if the service is to remain available, each fire protection area should share in the availability costs regardless of utilization; • The costs of providing courses should be recovered on the basis of utilization and not subsidized by the requisition; • In order to provide certainty for budgeting, staffing and course delivery, commitment is required from each of the jurisdictions on an annual basis; and • The primary purpose of the Fire Training Centre is to meet the training needs of fire departments within the RONO. Other departments utilizing the facility should contribute to the costs of having the facility available.

Attached for information are the following:

• 2008~2012 financial plan showing impact of existing apportionment/cost recovery method; and • Spreadsheet showing the impact of apportioning the costs of maintaining the facility on the basis of assessment (land and improvements) and apportioning the additional costs of maintaining and operating the facility to a state of readiness on the basis of number of firefighters, as well as the estimated cost to each department for recruit and live burn courses based on their use of the FTC over the past 5 years.

In addition to the Fire Chiefs in the Region wishing to keep the Fire training Centre in operation support for the continuation of this service in some form has been expressed by a number of Board members, Regiona! Administrators and the District of Lake Country (letter attached).

The Regional Administrators have unanimously reached a solution that we believe is a workable compromise to the concerns expressed by the Service participants, facility users and staff.

Page 96 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update To: Regional Board & FTC Service Review Committee Report Dated MarchPage 4, 2010 3 of 3 Report dated: August 11, 2008 Appendix "A" Subject: Reconsideration of FTC Service Review

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1 . That the base costs of maintaining the Fire Training Centre facility be apportioned among and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RONO on the basis of Land and Improvements; 2. That the additional costs of maintaining and operating the Fire Training Centre facility to a state of readiness be apportioned among and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RONO on the basis of number of firefighters; 3. That the costs of training courses be recovered from each jurisdiction on a fee for service basis; 4. That each participating local government jurisdiction, as well as the three fire departments operated by the RONO, advise the RONO by September 15th of each year of its training course requirements and commit to paying for such courses in order that the RD may budget and staff accordingly; and 5. That the training course fees applicable to fire departments outside the boundaries of the RDNO be 25% higher than the fees applicable to fire departments within the RDNO.

Respectfl,J1l submitted, ./ // '-.-(:1.J--C~~'t'fn-~A Brian Reardon. Administrator Patti Ferguson, cAb Regional District of North Okanagan City of Armstrong

Barry Gagnon, CAO o City of Enderby

Wendy Kay, CAO/) District of Coldstr am

Frank Kasa, CAO Village of Lumby

Page 97 of 121 249

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN • 249 FIRE TRAINING CENTRE 2008·2012

2007 -- -]

2006 Actual YTDActual Budlle! , 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Reccvery Fire Assistant/Fire Training Officer (38.158) 1\33.305)33•305) (32.341) ,-- 2~~~,185\·:·~63:;;85) (167265)(167265) (171.447) (175.133) --rnl0.126)(180.126) OPERATING EXPENSES 224.913 242.561 253.881253,881 234,637234.637 240,517240.517 246.508 252.714 252.931

CAPITAL 14.69, 17.747 10.000 .

TRANSFER TO RESERVES 19.382 17.853 22.993 28.542 34.<0634,<06 46.79946,799

TOTAL EXPENSES 258,986 260,308 263,881 252,500 263,S10263,510 275,050 287.120287,120 299,730299.730

SURPLUS(DEFICIT) S S S S . $ S S $

Inflation t"c/or 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% Growth Factor 2.41% 2Ai%2.41% 2.41% 2.41% 2.41%

REQUISITION Conv. L&I ..'.' ·100;llfJ:l'i 100;800 200.300 210.300 220.800 231.800 Armstrong 8,043 8.263 8,264 63,639.S8663.639.S86 8,584 9.012 9,462 9.9349,934 10,429 Enderby 4.756 4,792 4.795 38,316.50938.318.509 5,169 5.426 5.697 5,9815,9S1 6.279 Vernon 97.106 100.592100,592 100.762 788.279.546 106,331 111,626 117.198 123.050 129.180 Coldstream 25.545 26,060 26.037 203.734.851203.7s.;.851 27.48227,48, 28.850 30.29030,290 31.803 33.387 Spallumcheen 12.800 12,483 12,461 95,341.73295.341.732 12,861 13.501 14.175 14.88314,883 15.624 Lumby 3,153 3.138 3.137 26.830.46$26.830.468 3,619 3,799 3.9893,989 4.188 4.397 LSA 16 (FTC -• Electoral Areas S.C.DJB.C.DJ 22,484 22,63922.639 22.53822,538 169.534169,534 .256 22,868 24,007 25.206 26.464 27.783 LSA 16 (FTC(FTC· - Electoral Areas F) 3.513 3.833 3.806 28.808.470 3,886 4,079 4,2834.283 4,497 4.721 177,400 181.800 181.800181,800 1,414,487.7161,414.487,716 190,800 i 200.300200,300 210.300 220.800 231.800 Maximum 0.0510,05\ \12.123.452.965\\12.123,452.965\ 606,173 606.173 606.173 606,173 606.173 · OPERATING RESERVE FUND Openin9 Balance 21.429 4~,7~8 41.719 35,399 54.372 79.015 109.887 147,473147.473 Contributions 19.382 17.863 22.99322,993 28.542 34.406 46.799 Interest 908 1,8381.838 790 1,1101.110 1.650 2.330 3.180 4.270 Expenditures (8.158) (20.381) · 41.719 35,39935.399 22.128 54.37254,372 79.015 109.887 147,473147.473 198.542 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES Fencing 17.747 10.000 · ------"A" Appendix Report Dated March 4, 2010 Update Centre - Service Review Fire Training 17,747 ___10_.000 · MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA EQUIPMENT Equipment 8.000 8.200 8,410 8.620 8.840 9.060 Audio/video training aidS · Training PropS/Engineered Structures 14,69114.691 10.250 10,510 10.770 11.04011,040 11.32011,320 11.60011,600 Fire Apparatus 5.3905,390 5,5205.520 5.660 5.8005,800 5.950 14.691 15.822 23.640 24,230 24.84024,840 25.460 26.11026,110 20.660 Page 98 of 121

20f2 0:\' ~7\at.ldge12COS\249 - FTC\200S Budget - 249 Fire Training 2008 FP (Fir,3I) 4'4· 10:2SP.M n ~".j Proposed/i'g ""1" ,",'",' 'M'M Cost Fire Dept Training Budget Proposed Requisition AppudiudmentApportionment ( based on 5 Yr Avg usage)

Base Standby Recruit Live Burn Sub Total Sub Total #FF User Fee User Fee Total 2008 Req Fire Department L&I User Fee Armstrong/Spaliumcheen 4,213 6,011 10,225 5,144 7,448 12,592 22,816 21,750 Armstrong '.630 2.399 4,079 Sp3jfUtilcheen 2.533 3,614 6,147 BX/Swan Lake 2,829 3,340 6,168 6,052 4,965 11,017 17,185 14,603 Cold stream 5,293 6,679 11,973 9,985 4,965 14,950 26,923 27,326 Enderby 1,749 3,340 5,088 3.631 - 3,631 8,719 9,027 Er1(:!erby 975 1.852 2.8362:836 Area F TiL. 1,478 2.252 Lumby 1,361 3,340 4,701 7.565 - 7,565 12,265 7,027 LumlJy 338 1.565 2~2G2;'\202 !~-r''2:;j C 72l ;,775 2,dP9 Silver Star 1,030 3,340 4,369 4,236 4,9654,955 9,201 13,570 5,315 Vernon 20,486 10,019 30,504 12,709 12,413 25,121 55626 105,752 35,96136,961 36,05836,068 73,028 49,321 34,756 84,077 157,105 190,800

PSM/PSO hours 200 200 400 340 252 592 992 Clerk hours 35 70 105 70 28 98 203 - - PSM/PSO/Clerk Salaries & Benefits 14,285 13,270 27,555 21,040 14.854 35,894 63,449 Overhead 15% 5,532 5,398 10,929 7,381 5.2025,202 12,583 23,512 IS Allocation 2,500 2,500 5,000 - 5,000 Building Costs 1,200 1,200 2,400 - 2,400 FTC Coord Veh 1,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 - "A" Appendix Report Dated March 4, 2010 Update Centre - Service Review Fire Training Truck Main! 1.0001,000 1.0001,000 2,000 500 1,4001.400 1,900 3,900 Equipment - - - MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA Equipment Mtc 1.0001,000 4.0004,000 5,000 5,0005.000 7,0007.000 12,000 17,000 Training Direct Course Costs - 5,0005.000 700 5,700 5,700 Professional Development and Maintenance 2.0002,000 2,000 - 2,000 Admin/Building Mtc 1.2001,200 1.2001,200 2,400 1,0001.000 700 1,700 4,100 Temp Borrowing Int - - . Insurance.Insurance, Vehicle 1,500 1,500 - 1,500 Insurance.Insurance, Property 714 714 - 714 Insurance.Insurance, Liability 1.5301,530 1,530 - 1,530 FTC Site Maintenance 2.0002,000 2,000 4,000 4.0004,000 3,500 7,500 11,500 Office Exp 500 500 1,000 - 1,000 Telephone and cell phone 500 500 1,000 . 1,000 Utilities 4.0004,000 4,000 1,000 1,4001.400 2,400 6,400 Training Instructor Wages & Benifts - 4,400 4400 4,400 36,961 36,068 Page 99 of 121 73,028 49,321 34,756 84,077 157,105

17-Sep-08 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update DistrictReport DatedifLake March 4,Country 2010 Appendix "A" lvlunic!pal Office fOJ 50 Bottom WoodLake Road Lak£l Country, British Columbia V4V 2MI E-mail: [email protected]. ea TellJpholl(J: (250)766-5650 Fax: (250) 766-2903

July 31,2008

Attention: Mr. Brian Reardon, Administrator North Okanagan Regional District 9848 Aberdeen Road Coldstream, BC VlB 2K9

Dear Mr. Reardon:

Re: North Okanagan Fire Training CentreCentr~

At the Regular Council Meeting of July 15,2008, Council noted the recent discussiolls related to possible withdrawals from the North Okanagan Fire Training Centre function and the resulting l'isk of closure of the centre.

Council noted the significance of the Fire Training Centre and passed a resolution expressing their desire to see it remain in place. The Centre is a considerable regional resource which provides valuable training and education, not only to municipalities in the North Okanagan Regional District, but throughout the entire Okanagan.

We appreciate that the centre relies on the contributions and SUppOlt of area fire departments to ensure the ongoing success of the programs and the centre. We will endeavour to continue to support the function by utilizing the available resources and programs.

Yours truly,

Irs cc: Steve Windsor, Director of Fire/Emergency Services

qEGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

S:\CorpServices\Correspondence\2008\NORD - Fire Training Centre 200S.07.31.DOC

Page 100 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "B"

Ag~nd~ N1:i.: .~3:£3,..9'-­ REGIONAL DISTRICT OAf;! rXl ItlwC~r(! of NORTH OKANAGAN In ... Camertf!t(l1~EPO N9:-J 5/tB .. -.-~.~,,,,-.-- File No. 620.30.03/249

TO: Chair Oglow and Regional Board Directors FROM: Brian Reardon, Administrator DATE: October 27, 2008 SUBJECT: Fire Training Centre Service Review Update

RECOMMENDATIONS:

That the Regional Board approve the following recommendations: 1. "That the base costs of maintaining the Fire Training Centre facility be apportioned amongst and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RDNO on the basis of Land and Improvements; 2. That the costs of training courses be recovered from each jurisdiction on a fee for service basis; 3. That each participating local government jurisdiction, as well as the three fire departments operated by the RDNO,RONO, advise the RONORDNO by September 15 of each year of its training course requirements and commit to paying for such courses in order that the RDNO may budget and staff according; 4. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purpose of training firefighters from within the Regional District of North Okanagan and class space is available, the excess capacity be offered to users from outside the North Okanagan Region at the rate applicable to each attendee from within the RONORDNO plus 25%; 5. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purposes of training firefighters from outside the Regional District of North Okanagan, the full costs of facility rental and user fees, plus 25%, be recovered from the fire department utilizing the facility; 6. That the option of extending an invitation to Lake Country and other jurisdictions to participate as full members of the service be investigated; and further 7. That the Board consider cost apportionment scenarios 1, 2 and 3 attached to this report and select one for formal consent of the participants.

ISSUE:

Staff wish to update the Regional Board on the progress of the Fire Training Centre Service Review.

23 RB In Camera 08-11-05

Page 101 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "B"

FTC Service Review Update Report Page 2

DISCUSSION:

th On October 9 , 2008 the Fire Training Centre Service Review Committee met to discuss the th memorandum prepared by the Regional Chief Administrative Officers dated August 11 , 2008. At that meeting the following resolution was passed:

Moved by Alt. Director Trainor Seconded by Director Kanester

"That the Regional Board Fire Training Centre Service Review Committee recommend that the Regional Board approve the following recommendations:

1. That the base costs of maintaining the Fire Training Centre facility be apportioned amongst and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RDNO on the basis of Land and Improvements; 2. That the costs of training courses be recovered from each jurisdiction on a fee for service basis; 3. That each participating local government jurisdiction, as well as the three fire departments operated by the RDNO, advise the RDNO by September 15 of each year of its training course requirements and commit to paying for such courses in order that the RDNO may budget and staff according,' 4. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purpose of training firefighters from within the Regional District ofNorth Okanagan and class space is available, the excess capacity be offered to users from outside the North Okanagan Region at the rate applicable to each attendee from within the RDNO plus 25%; 5. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purposes of training firefighters from outside the Regional District of North Okanagan, the full costs offacility rental and user fees, plus 25%, be recoveredfrom the fire department utilizing the facility; 6. That the option of extending an invitation to Lake Country and other jurisdictions to participate as full members of the service be investigated CARRIED

The one outstanding issue that consensus was not reached on was how to handle the "standby costs". Half of the FTC Service Review Committee voted in favour of Scenario 1 attached to this report that apportions the standby costs on a per firefighter basis. The other half of the FTC Service Review Committee voted in favour of Scenario 2 attached to this report that apportions the standby costs through the requisition based on land and improvements.

Following the FTC Service Review Meeting a suggested compromise was made by Director Shipmaker that has 50% of the standby costs shifting over to the base costs. This suggested compromise splits the difference between the two previous scenarios. This issue really comes down to a preferred philosophical approach. In this case the participants can't agree on a key principle. The financial variances between the three scenarios presented are not significant.

At the end of the day all of the participants seem to want the service to continue. When consensus can not be reached during a negotiation, a compromise that offends/satisfies all of the participants equally is likely to produce the best outcome. On that basis Scenario 3 is presented for your consideration.

Respectfully submitted, Bel 24 RB In Camera 08-11-05

Page 102 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "B"

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

NOTES of a Meeting of the Regional Service Review for Fire Training Centre held in the Boardroom at the Regional District Office on TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2008

Present: E. Shipmaker (Chair) Councillor, City of Enderby B. Beardsell Councillor, City of Vernon J. Trainor Councillor, City of Armstrong G. Taylor Councillor, District of Coldstream E. Foster Mayor, Village of Lumby (absent) D. Brew Councillor, Township of Spallumcheen C. Kanester Director, Electoral Area 'B' S. Field DireGtor,Director, Electoral Area 'e' (absent) R. Fairbairn Director, Electoral Area 'D' E. Foisy DireGtor,Director, ElectoralEleGtoral Area 'E' (absent) H. Halvorson Director, Electoral Area 'F' J.Oglow Regional Board Chair

Staff: B. Reardon Administrator G. Betts General Manager, Electoral Area Services M. Knox Manager of Community Services D. Buchholz Protective Services Officer C. Malden Recording Secretary

Others: M. Malerby Councillor, District of Coldstream L. Gous, CAO, City of Vernon

1. Call to Order

Chair Shipmaker called the meeting to order at 2:02 p.m. and noted that Lumby, Area 'C', and Area 'E' were not represented.

2. Meeting Notes of October 2, 2007

Moved by Alt. Director Trainor Seconded by Councilor Brew "That the notes of a meeting of the Regional Service Review for Jaws of Life / Fire Dispatch /911 Emergency Telephone / Fire Training Centre held on October 2, 2007 be approved as circulated. " CARRIED

3. Fire Training Centre

Moved by Alt. Director Trainor Seconded by Alt. Director Taylor "That, pursuant to Section 92 of the Community Charier, the regular meeting of the Regional Service Review - Fire Training Centre convene In Camera to deal with matters deemed closed to the public in accordance with Section 90 (1) (c) & (k) of the Community Charier. " CARRIED

25 RB In Camera 08-11-05

Page 103 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "B"

Meeting Notes of Service Review - Fire Training Centre October 9, 2008 Page 2 of 3.

The Committee was advised that the Chief Administrative Officers of the member municipalities had met with the Administrator and staff to examine options available for the continued operation and funding of the Fire Training Centre, which they could recommend to their respective elected bodies. The fire chiefs within the Region had been consulted, and were strongly in support of maintaining the Fire Training Centre, particularly with respect to recruit and live burn training. The recommendations of the administrative staff were unanimous, although they represented a compromise to each party. Key principles include:

eIII All fire departments sharing equitably in "availability" costs (funding to be raised through RD requisition);

eIII User pay for courses (funding to be raised by each participant); • Emphasis and focus on the training needs of fire departments within the North Okanagan Region; • Each jurisdiction to commit to annual training needs by Sept 15 of preceding year in order that RDNO can staff up or down accordingly.

Discussion occurred as follows:

• Legislative requirements to properly train firefighters; • Liability if firefighters are not properly trained;

•iii If training were not available at the Fire Training Centre, firefighters would have to travel outside the Region for training, which would be far more costly, as well as far more time­ consuming, which may not be feasible for volunteer members; • Some departments provide their own training officers, while others rely on Regional District staff to train - in either case, training officers need to be supported by technicians; • Not all departments have the same access to the Fire Training Centre due to its location; As staff resources are shared between various protective services, including the Fire Training Centre - changes in service or participation levels for one service ultimately effect service delivery or costs to the other services; • Questions were raised regarding the fees collected from participants and outside users, under the existing cost recovery method as well as proposed; • Need to ensure that users from outside the Region are contributing to the base/standby costs at at least the same level as RDNO users; • Revenue from outside users should reduce the amount required to be requisitioned from service participants; • Outside users may not use the facility if fees are set too high; • Difference between outside users booking the facility for their own dedicated training needs vs offering outside users the opportunity to "infill" excess capacity of courses booked by users from participating areas; • Advisability and rationale of offering full participation to outside users.

26 RB In Camera 08-11-05

Page 104 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "B"

Meeting Notes of Service Review - Fire Training Centre October 9, 2008 Page 3 of 3.

Moved by All. Director Trainor Seconded by Director Kanester "That the Regional Board Fire Training Centre Service Review Committee recommend that the Regional Board approve the following recommendations:

1. That the base costs of maintaining the Fire Training Centre facility be apportioned amongst and requisitioned from the participating fire departments within the RoNO on the basis of Land and Improvements; 2. That the costs of training courses be recovered from each jurisdiction on a fee for service basis; 3. That each participating local government jurisdiction, as well as the three fire departments operated by the RoNO, advise the RoNO by September 15 of each year of its training course requirements and commit to paying for such courses in order that the RoNO may budget and staff according; 4. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purpose of training firefighters from within the Regional ~istrict of North Okanagan and class space is available, the excess capacity be offered to users from outside the North Okanagan Region at the rate applicable to each attendee from within the RONO plus 25%; 5. That, where the Fire Training Centre is being utilized for the primary purposes of training firefighters from outside the Regional ~istrict of North Okanagan, the full costs of facility rental and user fees, plus 25%, be recovered from the fire department utilizing the facility; 6. That the option of extending an invitation to Lake Country and other jurisdictions to participate as full members of the service be investigated. CARRIED

Consensus was reached on the majority of the recommendations of the administrative staff, however, agreement was not reached with respect to the allocation of "standby" costs. Representatives of the City of Vernon, the City of Armstrong, the District of Coldstream and the Township of Spallumcheen were in favor of allocating standby costs on the basis of the number of firefighters per, whereas representatives of the City of Enderby and Electoral Areas "8", "0' and "F" favored allocating the costs on the basis of land and improvements.

4. Adjournment

There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 3:21 p.m.

27 RB In Camera 08-11--05

Page 105 of 121 . <~~ , ...~..,.' ~ ~ ='h '«

Proposed Requisition Fire Dept Training Budget J"lp;J ;J,f;Jrtl;) tl;) n rn !:~n t ( based on 5 Yr Avg usage)

, " Base StandbyStandby, Recruit Live Burn Sub Tota! Sub Total C{~C:2/ 2()(]2008 l?:eq Fire Department lB.1 # FF 'User Fee User Fee a: ArmstrongfSpallumcheen 4,213 .. 6,011 1(),225 5,144 7,448 12,592 22,816 21,750 !\nrJ$frong/Inn.srrong 1,G80-I.GSO 2,3992.399 A.,Dj9A,O?£? Spa/lumeileen 2,533 2.533 3.614 61 147 BXJSwan lake 2.829 3,340 6,168 6,052 4.965 11,017 17,185 14,6a3.,4,6a3 Coldstream 5,293 6,679 11,973 9,985 4,965 14,950 25,923 27,326 Enderby 1,749 3,340 5,088 3,631 - 3,631 8,719 9,027 Endor/))! D75 1.862 2,833 /\rea ,c.c n,'7?",~ 1A78 .2,2322:;2 lumby 1,361 3,340 4,701 7.5657,565 - 7,565 12,255 7,027' Lumby G3S 1,565 2,202,20.: Arc(~ 0 724 1,7751.775 2'{{f79 I Silver Star 1,030 3,340 4,369 4,236 4.9654,965 9,201 13,570,S70 .' Vernon 5r315 20.48820,488 10,019 SO 504 12,709 12,413 25,121 55626 105~752 36,961 36,068 73,028 49,321 34,756 84,077 157,105 - 190,80019~ PSMfPSO hours 200 200 400 340 252 592 992 .Clerk,Clerk hours 35 70 105 70 28 98 203 , - PSM/PSOfClerkPSMfPSOfClerk Salaries & Benefits - 14,285 13,270 27,555 21,040 14,854 35,894 63,449 Overhead 15% 5,532 5,398 10,929 7,381 5,202 12,583 23,512 IS Allocation 2,500 , .• 2,500 2,500 5,000 5,O(){} Building Costs · 1,200 ·1;2001;200 2,40()2,4()() 2,4()O FTC Coord Veh · 1,000 1,000 2,000 2,O()[J Truck Maint · 1,000 1,000 2,000 500 1,400 1,1,9OO gOG 3,900 Equipment . MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA Equipment Mtc · · "B" Appendix Report Dated March 4, 2010 Update Centre - Service Review Fire Training 1,000 4,000 5,000 5,000 7,000 12,000 'f7,OOa17,000 Training Direct Course Costs · 5.000 700 5,700 5,700 Professional Development and Maintenance ;;u 2,000 2,000 2,000 AdminfBuilding Mlc · tJj 1.2001,200 1;200 2,400 1,000 700 1,700 4,100 Temp Borrowing Int v H Insurance, Vehicle - · - ::J 1.500 'i,5001,5(jO 1,50'0 r Insurance, Property · 714 714 714 ' IT \.l Insurance, Liability · p; 1,530 1,5301.530 1,530 :2 FTC Site Maintenance · 2 S 2,000 2,000 4,000 4,000 3,500 7,500 11,500 Office Exp l:= roN 500 500 1,OOa 'f,OGO1,000 M\.O Telephone and cel! phone 500 · ::t p;OJ 500 1,000 1,000 ..... Utilities 4,000 · 4,000 1,000 1,400 2,4002,400, B,40f) 0 Training Instructor Wages & Benifts I C 00 · 4,400 4,400 440(J Page 106 of 121 I 36,961 36,068 73,028 49,321 34,756 f-> 84,On84,Oi7~ 157,1(j5 :tI: f-> I ~ 0 VI :;v to iii $1);; ;:;;W:::Z;;;;WiIlS M,~ ~-=-'~ ".w.:~~~'~"$!;~~. , 1£il:>bU~~ .~,. H ,"-" '/,' t';L:' :'it ,f,;:':;;;:': ::s Fire Dept- Training Budget ... ,~ Proposed Requisition n /~\pi~\ it' :,''Jt:E· f;;rz~J"rz~J<:5' <:5' ,;7l,;7" H"!;' ;:,;{;::;{;, ( based on 5 Yr Avg usage) PJ S Base ffiW Standby Sub Total ' Recruit Live Bum Sub rotal Mo Fire Department L&I L&I L&I User Fee User Fee 20GB20G8 F?eq P> Fire Department Armstrong/Spallumcheen 4,213 4,112 8,325 0 8,325 5,144 7,448 12,592 20,916 21,750 00 /\rmstronQ '1,S80 1,640 1,640 33,3201 320 " I Spc;ifumr:hcor1 Spc;ifumc.1con 2,533 2,A72·2,"1;72· :;,OC5:~,OC5 ;.,;::.';:',:':,c I-' BXfSwan lake I-' 2,829 2,760 5,589 6,052 4,965 11,017 16,606 14,603 ! Coldstream 5,293 5,166 10,459 0 9,98$9.98$ 4,965 14,95(]1 25,lf.09 27,326 Enderby 1,7491.749 1,706 tll 3,455 3,631 - 3,631 7,086 9,027 Enderby 975 ,951'.951' r~ ~926 -." . I\n:;a F 774 755 1.529 .' ,',.,;.',-f; 1J529 , Lumby 1,361 1,328 2,690 2,690 7,565 - 7,565 10,254 7,027 Lurilby 6:;8 ,6.26.222 1,2G()1,230 i. ",,".,I:. Ar,;2 {) 724 70G700 1,130 J A: ~ • Silver Star 1,030 ,1,005 2,034 4,236 4,965 9,201 11,236 5,.315 Vernon 20,486 .' 19991 40,476 12,709 12413 25,121 65,598 105,752 36,961 36;068 73,028 49,321 34,756 84,077 157,105 190,800

PSM/PSO hours 200 200 40(}400 340 252 592 Clerk hours :i92 35 70 105tOt; 70 28 98 203 , .. - PSM/PSO/Clerk Salaries & Benefits - 14.285 13,270 27,555 21,040 14,854 35,894 63,449 Overhead 15% 5,532 5,532 5,398 10,929 7;381, 5,202 12,583 23,512 IS Allocation 2,500 2,500 5,000 5,aOG Building Costs - 1;200 1,200 2,400 . 2,400 FTC Coord Veh 1,QOO 1,000 2,000 : Truck Main! - 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 I' .500500 1,400 1Jj()() Equipment ":" 3,900 Equipment Mtc - - - 1,0001,006 4,000 5,0()OS,O()O 5,000 7,000 12,()(JO12,()(J(} 17,GOO Training Direct Course Costs MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA - 5,000 700 5,700 5,700 "B" Appendix Report Dated March 4, 2010 Update Centre - Service Review Fire Training Professional Development and Maintenance 2,000 2,000 2,000 Admin/Building Mtc 1,200 - 1,20.0 2,400 1,000 700 'P,TOO1, TOO 4,100 Temp Borrowing Int . Insurance,Insurance. Vehicle - - - 1,500 1,500 1,500 Insurance, Property - tn 714 114 714 .' Insurance, liability 1,530 - 1,530 1,53(}1,530 1,530 n FTC Site Maintenance 2,000 - 2,000 4,0()04,O()O 4,000 3,500 7,5()O 11,500 m Office Exp 500 500 1,000 . 'i,GOO'I,aoa Z Telephone and cell phone 500 500 1,OGO1,000 I: : 1,000 Utilities 4,0004,000 I - l> 4,000 1;000 1,400 2,40() 6,400 Training Instructor Wages & Benifts ::0 - L: .·'4,4004,400 4,40() 4400 ..... 36,961 35,068 73,028 49,321 34,756 84,077 1.157,10557,105 ,. -,~--.- o Page 107 of 121 #

";I"" ,nn N fS~ Ii! @~c:- ep=(.#(j BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6 Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "B" :'l.tNARIO # 3

Fire Training Centre FTC Cost Apportionment

Option 3 move 50% of Standby costs to Base

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 L&I FF L&IIFF L&I L&I FF L&I/FF Armstrong 1680 2399 4,079 3,320 2500 1200 3,699 Spallumcheen 2533 3614 6,147 5,005 3769 1807 5,576

BXlSwanBx/Swan Lake 2829 3340 6168 5,589 4209 1670 5,879

Coldstream 5293 6679 11,973 10,459 7876 3340 11,215

Enderby 975 1862 2,836 1,926 1451 931 2,382 Spec F 774 1478 2252 1,529 1152 739 1,891

Lumby 638 1565 2,202 1,260 949 783 1,732 Spec 0 724 1775 2,499 1,430 1077 888 1,965

Silver Star 1030 3340 4,369 2,034 1533 1670 3,203

Vernon 20483 10019 30,504 40,476 30477 5010 35,487

36961 36068 73,029 73,028 54995 18034 73,029

31 RB In Camera 08-11-05

Page 108 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTHAppendix "C"OKANAGAN BYLAW No. 2369

A bylaw to amend Fire Training Centre Local Service Establishment Bylaw No. 954

WHEREAS Section 802 [Amendment or repeal of establishing bylaws] of the Local Government Act authorizes the Board to amend or repeal bylaws for the Regional District;

AND WHEREAS the Board has established and operates a Service known as the 'Fire Training Centre Local Service', by bylaw, cited as the "Fire Training Centre Local Service Establishment By-Law No. 954,1991";

AND WHEREAS the Board wishes to amend Bylaw No. 954, as amended, to include apportionment of costs, amend the boundary of the service and update bylaw language;

NOW THEREFORE, The Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled, hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1. This bylaw may be cited as the "Fire Training Centre Local Service Amendment Bylaw No. 2369, 2008".

2. Bylaw No. 954, "Fire Training Centre Local Service Establishment Bylaw No. 954, 1991" as amended, is hereby amended as follows:

(1) By renumbering Section 1 to read as follows:

"1. The Regional District is hereby empowered and authorized: (1) To establish the Local Service of a "Fire Training Centre". (2) To undertake and carry out or cause to be carried out the provision of a facility and to acquire all necessary equipment and resources to establish and operate a Fire Training Centre."

(2) By adding a new section following Section 1. with the following:

"1.1 Oefinitions

"base costs" means the costs of providing facilities and equipment and maintaining them to a basic state of repair

"standby costs" means the incremental costs of maintaining facilities and equipment and providing other resources to a level of usability and functionality. "

(3) By repealing Section 2 in its entirety and replacing it with the following:

"2. Service Area Boundaries

The boundaries of the Service Area shall be the boundaries of the City of Armstrong, City of Enderby, City of Vernon, District of Coldstream, Township of Spallumcheen, Village of Lumby and those portions of Electoral Area "B", Electoral Area "C", Electoral Area "0" and Electoral Area "F" as shown on Schedules "B", "C", and "0" attached."

Page 109 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

Fire Training Centre Local Service Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Amendment Bylaw No. 2369, 2008 Report Dated March 4, 2010 Page 2 Appendix "C" (4) 8y repealing and replacing Section 3 and adding a new Section 4, with the following:

"3,"3. Participants

The participants of the Fire Training Centre Service shall be City of Armstrong, City of Enderby, City of Vernon, District of Coldstream, Township of Spallumcheen, Village of Lumby and Electoral Areas "8", "e", "OlJ, and "F".

4.4, Cost Recovery

The costs of providing the Fire Training Centre Service shall be recovered by either or both of the following:

(a) The requisition of money under Sections 805 and 806 of the Local Government Act to be collected as a property value tax to be levied on the net taxable value of land and improvements and collected in accordance with Sections 805.1805,1 and 806.1 of the Act;

(b) The imposition of fees and other charges."

(5) 8y renumbering Section 4 to read Section "5".

(6) 8y adding new Section 6 as follows:

"6. Apportionment

(a) The base costs of providing the service shall be apportioned among the participants on the basis of the converted value of land and improvements.improvements,

(b) The standby costs of providing the service shall be apportioned among the participants on the basis of the number of firefighters within each participating area."

(7) 8y renumbering Section 5 to read Section "7".

(8) (a) Schedule "A" is hereby repealed.repealed,

(b) Schedules "8", "C", and "0" are hereby repealed and replaced with Schedules "8", "C", and "0" attached.

Read a FIRST, SECOND and THIRD TIME this 1Oth day of December , 2008.

Approved by the Inspector of Municipalities this 11th day of February , 2009.

Reconsidered and ADOPTED this 18th day of February , 2009.

Chair Corporate Officer

Page 110 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

Fire Training Centre - Service Review Update Report Dated March 4, 2010 Appendix "D"

Scenario 1 2009 Actual 2010 FP Notes Requisition Armstrong 4,079 4,935 5,699 Enderby 2,836 3,229 3,914 Vernon 30,504 38,754 45,267 Coldstream 11,973 14,402 16,771 Spallumcheen 6,147 7,348 8,873 Lumby 2,202 2,784 3,280 LSA 16(F.T.C.- E.A."B/C/D") 13,036 15,041 18,255 LSA 16(F.T.C.- E.A."F") 2,252 2,915 3,436 73,029 89,408 105,495 Requisition differential due to capital / transfers to reserves User Fees Armstrong / Spallumcheen 12,592 18,270 13,520 BX / Swan Lake 11,017 12,875 10,997 Coldstream 14,950 16,385 12,988 Enderby 3,631 4,844 4,641 Lumby & District 7,565 16,508 9,731 Silver Star 9,201 19,697 17,844 Vernon 25,121 44,840 35,535 Other - 30,264 67,989 84,076 163,682 173,246 Increased revenues from user fees offset by increase training costs Other - 757 500

Transfer to Reserves - 12,001 -

157,105 265,848 279,241

Expenditures Wages & Benefits 63,449 99,081 69,486 Overhead 30,912 34,215 35,800 Vehicle Costs 7,400 5,039 8,400 Training 12,100 42,434 74,000 Training costs offset by fee Building & Site Maintenance 32,600 47,737 47,256 Insurance 2,244 2,289 2,269 Office & Utilities 8,400 16,019 15,800 Utilities under-estimated in Scenario Other - 26 1,230 157,105 246,838 254,241

Transfer to Reserves - 10,000 No provision for capital replacement in Scenario Capital 19,010 15,000

157,105 265,848 279,241

Net ---

Page 111 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - ADDITIONAL ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.6

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF VERNON

File: 0482-10;0482-05-09

th March 10 , 2009

Regional District of the North Okanagan 9848 Aberdeen Road Coldstream, BC V1 B 2K9

Attention: Greg Betts, Administrator

Dear Mr. Betts:

Re: Fire Training Centre

th Vernon Council, at its meeting held March 8 , 2010, discussed the Fire Training Centre Budget proposed for 2010 at the Regional District, and the agreements during the Service Review. The following motion resulted:

THAT Council advises the North Okanagan Regional District (NORD) Board that City of Vernon does not support the Fire Training Centre Budget of approximately $270,000 as it does not follow the agreed terms of the Service Review;

AND FURTHER, formally requests that the NORD Board uphold the agreement and reduce the budget and staffing accordingly;

AND FURTHER, that Council advises the City's representatives on the NORD Board, that Council does not support the Fire Training Centre budget as presented by NORD.

If you require further clarification of Council's request, please contact Mr. Leon Gous, CAO, at 250-550-3515.

19CereIY,Q. .~' 1 \ Cthb\ 1::;) ~M"-- Patricia Bridal, CMC, Manager of Corporate Services

pc: District of Coldstream Village of Lumby Electoral Area B" District of Spallumcheen Electoral Area "C" City of Enderby Electoral Area "0" City of Armstrong Electoral Area "F":

City Hall: 3400 - 30th Street, Vernon, British Columbia VI T 5E6 Airport, Telephone (250) 545-3035 • Fax (250) 542-4533 Telephone (250) 545-1361 • Fax (250) 545-7876 City Yards, Telephone (250) 549-6757 • Fax (250) 545-3345 Administration • Fax (250) 545-4048 Fire Department, Telephone (250) 542-5361 • Fax (250) 542-7271 www.vernon.ca Planning, Development & Engineering • Fax (250) 545-5309 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 3900.2431

TO: Board of Directors FROM: David Sewell, General Manager, Finance DATE: March 8, 2010 SUBJECT: Five Year Financial Plan (2010 - 2014)

RECOMMENDATION:

That Bylaw 2431, being Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2431,2010 be given First, Second and Third Readings;

And further that Bylaw 2431, being Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2431, 2010 be reconsidered and adopted.

ISSUE AND DISCUSSION:

The Regional District, per the Local Government Act Section 815 (1) must have a financial plan that is adopted annually, by bylaw, by March 31, 2010.

The Regional District has held a series of Financial Plan workshops to provide an identification of keys issues impacting the Financial Plan and to secure input for specific policy direction to guide the development of the 2010 Budget.

rd In conjunction with changes recommended at the February 17th and March 3 , 2010 Committee of the Whole meetings, the following changes have been incorporated into the Financial Plan.

1. "That it be recommended to the Board of Directors that Reserves for Parks Services and Engineering Services be repaid from General Government for building expansion costs."

2. "That it be recommended to the Board of Directors that $1,500 per month be requisitioned for Fortune Parks, Recreation and Culture service (090), and that $390 be requisitioned for 2010 for each of Fortune Animal Control service (154) and Cemetery­ Enderby and Area "F" service (200) for overhead."

3. 'That the Air Quality service (110) reserve be used to fund the Regional District of North Okanagan's participation in the Okanagan Similkameen Airshed Coalition, and to fund any other expenses attributable to the service."

4. 'That the provision of $15,000 for consulting costs be included in the 2010 Financial Plan, to be funded from reserves, to facilitate the participation of the Regional District of

Page 112 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 File No.: 3900.2431 Dated: March 8,2010 Page 2 of 2

North Okanagan if and when Be Transit undertakes a strategic review of transit in the North Okanagan."

In addition, a total of $62,073 for building expansion related capital expenditures was carried forward from 2009 to be funded from associated 2009 surplus.

The impact of these changes is to increase the overall tax requisition (Property Value and Parcel Tax) from 2.45% to 2.57%.

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2010 - 2014) CONSOLIDATED

2014

REVENUE PROPERTY VALUE TAXES (18.641,770) (19,075,271) (19,388,656) (19,662,010) (19,956,704) PARCEL TAXES (611,952) (495,560) (474,309) (475,496) (479,520) FEDERAL I PROVINCIALGRANTS (16,097,755) (846,737) (832,614) (639,156) (655,139) GRANTS IN LIEU OF TAXES (102,523) (105,040) (107,667) (110,357) (113,117) FEES, CHARGES & OTHER INCOME (22,758,559) (23,595,242) (24,541,452) (25,548,053) (26,620,209) TRANSFERS FROM RESERVES (7,023,990) (1,347,872) (1,347,872) (1,347,872) (1,347,872) TRANSFERS FROM ACCUMULATED SURPLUS (7,856,203) (5,707,446) (2,963,288) (473,017) (462,816) CAPITAL BORROWING (51,173,168) (49,655,858) (48,255,961) (49,635,377) EXPENSES WAGES & BENEFITS 9,385,412 9,619,426 9,752,402 9,995,588 OPERATING EXPENSES 23,576,884 24,138,720 24,654,366 25,284,619 DEBT PAYMENTS 7,296,099 7,205,703 7,070,310 7,017,177 TRANSFERS TO RESERVES TRANSFERS TO SURPLUS/NON-STA TUTORY RESERVES 3,039,842 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 4,298,151 49,635,377

NET

With regards to process improvement, during the 2009 Financial Plan process, the Board have identified three key opportunities for improvement in the Financial Plan process. These were:

Opportunities Identified in 2009 Process 2010 FP Process Extended Financial Plan development process Process was initiated with initial workshop held on October ih, 2009 tn Reserve Fund policy framework Workshop held on November 4 , 2009 th Overhead Allocation policy review Workshop held on November 18 , 2009

Respectfully submitted, Approved for agenda:

\

Page 113 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BYLAW No. 2431

A program to allow for a five year financial plan for the period 2010 to 2014, inclusive

WHEREAS, Section 815 [Financial plan] of the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C., 1996, Chapter 323, as amended, and Regulations passed pursuant thereto, requires that on or before March 31st in each year, a Board must, by bylaw, adopt a financial plan for a period of at least 5 years;

AND WHEREAS a Five Year Financial Plan for the period 2010 to 2014 has been duly prepared;

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

CITATION

1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as the "Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2431, 2010".

GENERAL

2. The Five Year Financial Plan for the Regional District of North Okanagan for the years 2010 to 2014 inclusive shall be as per Schedule "A" as attached hereto and forming part of this Bylaw.

REPEAL

3. Bylaw No. 2385, 2009 being the "Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2385, 2009" and amendments made thereto are hereby repealed.

Read a FIRST TIME this day of , 2010.

Read a SECOND TIME this day of , 2010.

Read a THIRD TIME this day of , 2010.

Reconsidered, Finally Passed and ADOPTED this day of , 2010.

Chair Corporate Officer

Page 114 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDA MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10

Schedule "A" attached to and forming part of Bylaw 2431, being "Regional District of North Okanagan Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2431, 2010".

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

2 0 10 – 2 0 14

FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN

Page 115 of 121

BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDASchedule 'A' MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 Bylaw 2431, 2010 Page 1 of 6 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2010 - 2014) CONSOLIDATED

FINANCIAL PLAN 2010 2011 2012 2013

PROPERTY VALUE TAXES 010 General Government 907,745 931,378 951,767 972,666 015 Silver Star Administration 47,733 48,926 50,149 51,403 021 Electoral Area Services 183,194 187,776 192,472 197,287 025 Greater Vernon Services (81,036) --- 030 Development Services 537,193 565,501 579,638 594,133 031 Regional Planning 132,494 143,068 154,485 165,354 050 Emergency Planning 75,488 77,375 79,310 81,293 051 Greater Vernon Search & Rescue 22,226 22,781 23,350 23,934 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 7,823,749 8,154,848 8,285,249 8,396,483 062 Multi-Use Facility 2,059,695 2,268,662 2,268,662 2,268,662 065 Community Theatre 1,242,881 1,242,881 1,242,881 1,242,881 070 White Valley Parks & Recreation 704,774 710,556 728,320 746,527 090 Fortune Parks & Recreation 594,485 - - - 091 Kingfisher School 14,405 14,405 14,405 14,405 120 Jaws of Life 35,000 35,874 36,772 37,692 150 Animal Control 152,100 155,903 159,801 163,797 154 Animal Control (Enderby) 18,611 - - - 162 BX Villa Walkway 1,570 1,610 1,651 1,693 200 Fortune Parks Cemetery 39,562 - - - 241 Fire Protection BX / Swan Lake 431,075 441,852 452,898 464,220 243 Fire Protection Lumby 386,183 395,837 405,733 415,876 245 Fire Protection Silver Star 341,553 340,361 347,339 329,875 247 Fire Protection Grandview Bench 55,662 57,054 58,480 59,941 248 Fire Protection Okanagan Landing 20,805 26,882 27,554 28,243 249 Fire Training Centre 105,495 108,136 110,840 113,611 250 Emergency Education 46,216 47,371 48,555 49,768 320 Lumby Community Services 4,324 4,324 4,324 4,324 330 Noxious Insects 1,165 1,195 1,225 1,255 360 Noxious Weeds 41,215 42,247 43,301 44,385 390 Okanagan Basin Water Board 682,539 699,603 717,093 735,019 400 Okanagan Film 20,518 24,766 24,766 24,766 420 Okanagan Regional Library 648,799 665,020 681,645 698,686 430 Okanagan Symphony 6,433 6,433 6,433 6,433 440 Victims Assistance Program 110,923 113,696 116,538 119,451 442 Safe Communities 72,732 94,673 97,040 99,466 480 Queen's Committee Grant 6,990 6,990 6,990 6,990 570 Regional Economic Development 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 620 St John's Ambulance 4,590 4,590 4,590 4,590 679 Silver Star Transfer Station 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 710 Section 13 Grants 27,439 88,101 88,101 88,101 751 Street Lights #17 10,583 10,249 10,506 10,770 752 Street Lights #4 8,844 9,064 9,292 9,525 755 Street Lights #18 3,642 3,734 3,828 3,925 756 Street Lights #13 3,114 3,193 3,274 3,357 757 Street Lights #22 3,520 3,609 3,699 3,793 758 Street Lights Ridge Subdivision 2,770 2,841 2,912 2,985 805 Starling Control 25,805 25,805 25,805 25,805 810 Sterile Insect Release Program 296,882 304,303 311,910 319,708 860 Greater Vernon Economic Development (149,006) --- 870 Areas B & C Transit 14,398 14,759 15,128 15,507 871 Regional Transit 279,755 337,596 345,635 353,877 911 Emergency Telephone 144,770 148,390 152,100 155,901 913 Fire Dispatch 395,130 405,007 415,133 425,513 950 Silver Star Water 55,038 56,046 57,077 58,134 18,641,770 19,075,271 19,388,656 19,662,010

PARCEL TAXES 232 Drainage (Silver Star) 5,387 5,523 5,662 5,803 300 Natural Gas Extension 2,742 2,742 2,742 - 715 Septage 433,046 312,786 287,573 287,444 810 Sterile Insect Release Program 125,736 128,881 132,103 135,405

Page 116 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDASchedule 'A' MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 Bylaw 2431, 2010 Page 2 of 6 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2010 - 2014) CONSOLIDATED

FINANCIAL PLAN 2010 2011 2012 2013

955 Grindrod Water 40,084 40,671 41,272 41,887 957 Whitevale Water 4,957 4,957 4,957 4,957 611,952 495,560 474,309 475,496

FEDERAL / PROVINCIALGRANTS 010 General Government 140,293 143,800 147,395 151,080 021 Electoral Area Services 42,000 43,050 44,126 45,229 030 Development Services 362,522 228,087 233,787 239,631 031 Regional Planning 250,000 238,375 209,047 - 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 18,000 18,450 18,911 19,384 120 Jaws of Life 9,500 9,738 9,981 10,231 243 Fire Protection Lumby 4,500 4,613 4,728 4,846 335 West Nile Mosquito 27,778 28,473 29,185 29,914 360 Noxious Weeds 25,000 25,625 26,266 26,923 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 13,484,233 20,500 21,013 21,538 440 Victims Assistance Program 79,250 81,230 83,259 85,341 670 Solid Waste 1,000,000 - - - 715 Septage 4,679 4,796 4,916 5,039 950 Silver Star Water 650,000 - - - 16,097,755 846,737 832,614 639,156

GRANTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 010 General Government 5,000 5,125 5,253 5,384 030 Development Services 1,000 978 1,003 1,027 031 Regional Planning 923 946 970 994 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 62,000 63,550 65,139 66,767 062 Multi-Use Facility 15,000 15,375 15,759 16,153 065 Community Theatre 7,000 7,175 7,354 7,538 070 White Valley Parks & Recreation 5,000 5,125 5,253 5,384 120 Jaws of Life 300 308 316 324 150 Animal Control 800 820 841 862 243 Fire Protection Lumby 1,400 1,435 1,471 1,508 390 Okanagan Basin Water Board 3,600 3,690 3,782 3,877 440 Victims Assistance Program 500 513 526 539 102,523 105,040 107,667 110,357

FEES, CHARGES & OTHER INCOME 010 General Government 12,500 12,813 13,133 13,462 021 Electoral Area Services 79,056 81,032 83,058 85,134 030 Development Services 327,415 335,602 343,992 352,592 031 Regional Planning 17,375 17,809 18,254 18,709 040 Building Inspection 647,280 663,463 680,050 697,051 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 2,702,613 2,770,187 2,839,443 2,910,435 062 Multi-Use Facility 990,047 1,014,803 1,040,174 1,066,181 065 Community Theatre 8,000 8,200 8,405 8,615 070 White Valley Parks & Recreation 186,200 190,856 195,629 200,521 120 Jaws of Life 200 205 210 215 150 Animal Control 79,700 81,693 83,734 85,828 241 Fire Protection BX / Swan Lake 10,000 10,250 10,506 10,768 243 Fire Protection Lumby 300 308 316 324 245 Fire Protection Silver Star 400 410 420 431 249 Fire Training Centre 173,746 178,090 182,542 187,105 360 Noxious Weeds 35,000 35,875 36,772 37,691 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 11,261,947 11,543,497 11,832,086 12,127,889 440 Victims Assistance Program 4,700 4,818 4,939 5,062 650 Small Scale Salvage 5,939 5,301 5,434 5,570 670 Solid Waste 4,453,600 5,198,961 5,696,359 6,242,931 679 Silver Star Transfer Station 91,005 92,848 94,730 96,652 715 Septage 263,192 269,772 276,516 283,429 722 Mabel Lake Sewer 382,783 32,329 33,139 33,968 871 Regional Transit 179,083 183,561 188,149 192,852

Page 117 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDASchedule 'A' MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 Bylaw 2431, 2010 Page 3 of 6 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2010 - 2014) CONSOLIDATED

FINANCIAL PLAN 2010 2011 2012 2013

911 Emergency Telephone 28,194 28,897 29,618 30,359 950 Silver Star Water 210,595 215,860 221,258 226,789 951 Vance Creek Reservoir 425,737 425,737 425,737 425,737 952 Mabel Lake Water 76,966 78,890 80,862 82,884 955 Grindrod Water 46,332 51,430 52,715 54,032 957 Whitevale Water 44,135 46,863 48,018 49,201 958 Gunter-Ellison Water 14,519 14,882 15,254 15,636 22,758,559 23,595,242 24,541,452 25,548,053

TRANSFERS FROM RESERVES 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 5,153,054 - - - 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 1,670,936 1,347,872 1,347,872 1,347,872 950 Silver Star Water 200,000 - - - 7,023,990 1,347,872 1,347,872 1,347,872

TRANSFERS FROM ACCUMULATED SURPLUS 010 General Government 158,312 - - - 011 IT / GIS Services 102,394 33,926 34,774 35,643 021 Electoral Area Services 116,326 119,234 122,215 125,270 025 Greater Vernon Services 81,036 - - - 030 Development Services 4,150 - - - 040 Building Inspection 163,284 167,367 171,552 175,841 051 Greater Vernon Search & Rescue 1,992 2,042 2,093 2,145 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 563,822 - - - 065 Community Theatre 49,782 51,027 52,303 53,611 091 Kingfisher School 22,619 - - - 110 Air Quality Committee 20,068 5,619 3,313 3,346 120 Jaws of Life 7,952 8,151 8,355 8,564 230 Drainage 6,684 6,853 7,025 7,200 232 Drainage (Silver Star) 553 567 581 596 241 Fire Protection BX / Swan Lake 183,000 - - - 243 Fire Protection Lumby 52,500 - - - 245 Fire Protection Silver Star - - 300,000 - 248 Fire Protection Okanagan Landing 5,421 - - - 250 Emergency Education 13,661 14,002 14,352 14,712 330 Noxious Insects 710 728 746 765 360 Noxious Weeds 7,164 7,343 7,527 7,715 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 4,920,529 5,254,588 2,221,662 - 390 Okanagan Basin Water Board 9,641 9,882 10,129 10,382 400 Okanagan Film 4,248 - - - 442 Safe Communities 19,631 - - - 570 Regional Economic Development 20,000 - - - 650 Small Scale Salvage (769) --- 670 Solid Waste 1,078,709 - - - 679 Silver Star Transfer Station - 20,216 613 21,028 710 Section 13 Grants 66,662 - - - 751 Street Lights #17 (584) --- 752 Street Lights #4 947 971 995 1,020 755 Street Lights #18 48 49 50 51 756 Street Lights #13 56 57 58 59 860 Greater Vernon Economic Development 149,006 - - - 871 Regional Transit 15,000 - - - 911 Emergency Telephone 4,706 4,824 4,945 5,069 952 Mabel Lake Water 12,385 - - - 955 Grindrod Water (3,843) --- 957 Whitevale Water (1,599) --- 7,856,203 5,707,446 2,963,288 473,017

CAPITAL BORROWING 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 5,646,946 - - - 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 4,000,000 - - -

Page 118 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDASchedule 'A' MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 Bylaw 2431, 2010 Page 4 of 6 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2010 - 2014) CONSOLIDATED

FINANCIAL PLAN 2010 2011 2012 2013

951 Vance Creek Reservoir 276,906 - - - 9,923,852 - - -

TOTAL REVENUES 83,016,604 51,173,168 49,655,858 48,255,961

WAGES & BENEFITS 010 General Government 1,884,923 1,859,671 1,905,538 1,952,551 011 IT / GIS Services 251,928 258,227 264,683 271,300 021 Electoral Area Services 74,674 76,540 78,454 80,415 030 Development Services 834,049 854,900 876,271 898,178 031 Regional Planning 99,251 101,732 104,276 - 040 Building Inspection 573,694 588,037 602,737 617,805 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 2,898,647 2,971,112 3,045,392 3,121,528 062 Multi-Use Facility 519,038 532,014 545,317 558,950 241 Fire Protection BX / Swan Lake 126,045 129,196 132,427 135,737 245 Fire Protection Silver Star 64,500 66,113 67,766 69,460 249 Fire Training Centre 301,330 308,864 316,586 324,500 360 Noxious Weeds 42,390 43,450 44,536 45,649 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 916,925 939,848 963,344 987,428 440 Victims Assistance Program 162,099 166,151 170,304 174,562 670 Solid Waste 477,617 489,557 501,795 514,339 9,227,110 9,385,412 9,619,426 9,752,402

OPERATING EXPENSES 010 General Government (836,500) (857,409) (878,844) (900,813) 011 IT / GIS Services (261,984) (339,562) (348,051) (356,753) 015 Silver Star Administration 47,733 48,926 50,149 51,403 021 Electoral Area Services 345,902 354,552 363,417 372,505 030 Development Services 398,231 264,689 271,302 278,085 031 Regional Planning 301,541 298,466 278,480 185,057 040 Building Inspection 236,870 242,793 248,865 255,087 050 Emergency Planning 75,488 77,375 79,310 81,293 051 Greater Vernon Search & Rescue 24,218 24,823 25,443 26,079 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 5,108,657 5,173,080 5,299,563 5,429,203 062 Multi-Use Facility 893,572 909,560 932,298 955,610 065 Community Theatre 336,606 345,024 353,649 362,490 070 White Valley Parks & Recreation 687,649 732,648 753,822 775,519 090 Fortune Parks & Recreation 594,485 - - - 091 Kingfisher School 450 390 390 390 110 Air Quality Committee 20,068 5,619 3,313 3,346 120 Jaws of Life 52,952 54,276 55,634 57,026 150 Animal Control 216,332 221,742 227,286 232,969 154 Animal Control (Enerby) 18,611 - - - 162 BX Villa Walkway 1,570 1,610 1,651 1,693 200 Fortune Parks Cemetery 39,562 - - - 230 Drainage 6,684 6,853 7,025 7,200 232 Drainage (Silver Star) 5,940 6,090 6,243 6,399 241 Fire Protection BX / Swan Lake 215,030 212,208 217,515 222,954 243 Fire Protection Lumby 289,175 288,206 295,411 302,795 245 Fire Protection Silver Star 141,138 136,468 139,881 143,379 247 Fire Protection Grandview Bench 55,662 57,054 58,480 59,941 248 Fire Protection Okanagan Landing 26,226 26,882 27,554 28,243 249 Fire Training Centre (47,089) (48,263) (49,469) (50,706) 250 Emergency Education 59,877 61,373 62,907 64,480 320 Lumby Community Services 4,324 4,324 4,324 4,324 330 Noxious Insects 1,875 1,923 1,971 2,020 335 West Nile Mosquito 27,778 28,473 29,185 29,914 360 Noxious Weeds 65,989 67,640 69,330 71,065 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 7,239,047 6,955,078 7,114,436 7,289,122 390 Okanagan Basin Water Board 695,780 713,175 731,004 749,278 400 Okanagan Film 24,766 24,766 24,766 24,766

Page 119 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDASchedule 'A' MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 Bylaw 2431, 2010 Page 5 of 6 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2010 - 2014) CONSOLIDATED

FINANCIAL PLAN 2010 2011 2012 2013

420 Okanagan Regional Library 648,799 665,020 681,645 698,686 430 Okanagan Symphony 6,433 6,433 6,433 6,433 440 Victims Assistance Program 33,274 34,106 34,958 35,831 442 Safe Communities 92,363 94,673 97,040 99,466 480 Queen's Committee Grant 6,990 6,990 6,990 6,990 570 Regional Economic Development 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 620 St John's Ambulance 4,590 4,590 4,590 4,590 650 Small Scale Salvage 5,170 5,301 5,434 5,570 670 Solid Waste 3,993,992 4,079,498 4,202,975 4,328,503 679 Silver Star Transfer Station 88,970 91,197 93,476 95,813 710 Section 13 Grants 94,101 88,101 88,101 88,101 715 Septage 328,726 336,946 345,370 354,005 722 Mabel Lake Sewer 31,538 32,329 33,139 33,968 751 Street Lights #17 9,999 10,249 10,506 10,770 752 Street Lights #4 9,791 10,035 10,287 10,545 755 Street Lights #18 3,690 3,783 3,878 3,976 756 Street Lights #13 3,170 3,250 3,332 3,416 757 Street Lights #22 3,520 3,609 3,699 3,793 758 Street Lights Ridge Subdivision 2,770 2,841 2,912 2,985 805 Starling Control 25,805 25,805 25,805 25,805 810 Sterile Insect Release Program 422,618 433,184 444,013 455,113 870 Areas B & C Transit 14,398 14,759 15,128 15,507 871 Regional Transit 473,838 521,157 533,784 546,729 911 Emergency Telephone 177,670 182,111 186,663 191,329 913 Fire Dispatch 373,500 382,838 392,409 402,220 950 Silver Star Water 236,892 242,816 248,887 255,108 952 Mabel Lake Water 64,351 65,961 67,612 69,301 955 Grindrod Water 65,868 67,517 69,206 70,936 957 Whitevale Water 41,830 42,879 43,952 45,051 958 Gunter-Ellison Water 7,856 8,054 8,256 8,463 24,416,727 23,576,884 24,138,720 24,654,366

DEBT PAYMENTS 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 817,617 1,096,737 1,093,697 1,068,165 062 Multi-Use Facility 1,419,182 1,419,182 1,419,182 1,419,182 065 Community Theatre 859,085 859,085 853,580 836,861 070 White Valley Parks & Recreation 97,815 97,815 76,808 29,903 091 Kingfisher School 14,015 14,015 14,015 14,015 150 Animal Control 11,768 11,768 - - 243 Fire Protection Lumby 53,208 53,208 53,208 53,208 245 Fire Protection Silver Star 53,315 53,315 53,315 28,700 300 Natural Gas Extension 2,742 2,742 2,742 - 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 2,672,093 2,989,031 2,967,353 2,950,842 679 Silver Star Transfer Station 6,867 6,867 6,867 6,867 715 Septage 247,191 225,408 198,010 195,641 950 Silver Star Water 14,775 14,775 14,775 14,775 951 Vance Creek Reservoir 425,737 425,737 425,737 425,737 955 Grindrod Water 15,705 15,705 15,705 15,705 957 Whitevale Water 5,663 5,663 5,663 5,663 958 Gunter-Ellison Water 5,046 5,046 5,046 5,046 999 Feasability ---- 6,721,824 7,296,099 7,205,703 7,070,310

TRANSFERS TO ACCUMULATED SURPLUS/NON-STATUTORY RESERVES 010 General Government 80,854 80,854 80,854 80,854 030 Development Services - 10,579 10,847 11,120 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 141,050 128,176 131,380 134,665 062 Multi-Use Facility 200,000 375,891 364,050 351,912 065 Community Theatre - 44,952 41,986 50,023 070 White Valley Parks & Recreation 38,010 1,074 21,697 68,213 150 Animal Control - 293 12,362 12,672

Page 120 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - REGULAR AGENDASchedule 'A' MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F.10 Bylaw 2431, 2010 Page 6 of 6 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2010 - 2014) CONSOLIDATED

FINANCIAL PLAN 2010 2011 2012 2013

241 Fire Protection BX / Swan Lake 100,000 102,500 105,063 107,690 243 Fire Protection Lumby 50,000 40,779 43,629 46,551 245 Fire Protection Silver Star 75,000 76,875 78,797 80,767 249 Fire Training Centre 10,000 10,250 10,506 10,769 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility - - - 673,969 670 Solid Waste - 29,906 121,589 10,306 679 Silver Star Transfer Station 168 - - - 715 Septage 125,000 - - - 722 Mabel Lake Sewer 1,245 - - - 913 Fire Dispatch - 22,169 22,724 23,293 950 Silver Star Water 13,966 14,315 14,673 15,040 952 Mabel Lake Water - 12,929 13,250 13,583 955 Grindrod Water 1,000 8,879 9,076 9,278 957 Whitevale Water - 3,278 3,360 3,444 958 Gunter-Ellison Water 1,617 1,782 1,952 2,127 837,910 965,481 1,087,795 1,706,276

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 010 General Government 94,573 10,000 10,000 10,000 011 IT / GIS Services 112,450 115,261 118,142 121,096 060 Greater Vernon Parks & Recreation 13,004,213 1,637,930 1,638,710 1,639,508 062 Multi-Use Facility 32,950 62,193 63,748 65,342 065 Community Theatre 111,972 60,222 61,728 63,271 070 White Valley Parks & Recreation 72,500 75,000 76,875 78,797 091 Kingfisher School 22,559 - - - 150 Animal Control 4,500 4,613 4,728 4,846 241 Fire Protection BX / Swan Lake 183,000 8,198 8,399 8,607 243 Fire Protection Lumby 52,500 20,000 20,000 20,000 245 Fire Protection Silver Star 8,000 8,000 308,000 8,000 249 Fire Training Centre 15,000 15,375 15,759 16,153 372 Greater Vernon Water Utility 24,509,580 7,282,500 4,377,500 1,595,938 670 Solid Waste 2,060,700 600,000 870,000 1,389,783 679 Silver Star Transfer Station 5,000 25,000 5,000 25,000 715 Septage - 25,000 25,625 26,266 722 Mabel Lake Sewer 350,000 - - - 913 Fire Dispatch 21,630 - - - 950 Silver Star Water 850,000 - - - 951 Vance Creek Reservoir 276,906 - - - 952 Mabel Lake Water 25,000 - - - 41,813,033 9,949,292 7,604,214 5,072,607

TOTAL EXPENDITURES 83,016,604 51,173,168 49,655,858 48,255,961

NET ----

Page 121 of 121 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.:S760.14

TO: Board of Directors FROM: Engineering DATE: March 16, 2010 SUBJECT: Award of Contract - Middleton Mountain Reservoir Site Preparation

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Board of Directors approve the award of the Middleton Mountain Reservoir Site Preparation Contract to R355 Enterprises Ltd of Kelowna for the tendered amount of $375,276.30, plus appropriate taxes and the contingency allowance available through contract change orders approved by the General Manager of Engineering and the General Manager of Finance.

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:

The RONO board approved the Middleton Mountain Reservoir as part of the budget submission in 2008 and 2009. The work did not take place due to concerns over the service area and the viewscape of the project. The total budget for the entire project was approved in 2009 at $1,925,000, and this is the figure in the 2010 budget.

DISCUSSION:

As a part of the development of Middleton Mountain in Coldstream, a plan evolved in the 1990s with the North Okanagan Water Authority [the former VIOl for three developers to jointly share in the construction of a pump station, pipelines, and reservoir. Currently the pump station is equipped with variable speed duty pumps and a fixed speed fire pump was constructed. The agreement required the construction of a reservoir and ancillary items once the development reached a certain size. The development has expanded so the existing pump station is no longer feasible and the reservoir is required.

The area is normally serviced from the Outeau source water although during the low demand periods of spring, fall and winter, water may come from Kalamalka Lake. The service area has been adjusted so that the reservoir will service parts of Vernon, and parts of Area C.

This tender included the major earth works consisting of topsoil and subsoil removal, blasting and rock removal including off site disposal when required, road rough grading and construction, water supply and storm water piping, reservoir pad sub-grade construction, gate, no post barriers, and hydro seeding. Kerr Wood Leidal competed the pretender [Class Al engineer's estimate for the work at $452,170, not including a contingency allowance of 15% or $67,825.50. These estimates do not include the PST or GST or the pending HST. A second tender will be issued later this summer for the

Page 122 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11 Middleton Reservoir Site Preparation Tender Award

remainder of the project including the concrete reservoir, site piping, valving, landscaping and upgrades to the existing pump station.

On Thursday March 11 th ten tenders were opened for the site preparation portion of the Middleton Mountain Reservoir. Attached is the engineers summary of the tender results. Briefly ten complete tenders were received for the project ranging in value from $375,276.30 to $688,392.00. The four lowest tenders were below the pretender estimate. The number of tenders and the competitiveness of the low tenders indicate the tender is an accurate reflection of the current market conditions.

The lowest three tenders were examined and all are complete including all necessary schedules and bonds. R355 Enterprises Ltd is the low tender and KWL determined they are an experienced contractor having done similar work before and have favourable references. Based upon the low tender the contingency allowance would be $56,000.

In consideration of the above, staff recommends award of the tender to R355 Enterprises Ltd.

ATTACHMENT:

Attachment A Letter report from Kerr Wood Leidal dated March 15 th 2009.

Approved For Inclusion: AI Cotsworth, P.Eng. Greater Vernon Water Manager

Endorsed by: :1. .(?,/p Gre,(Betts Administrator

Arnol Badke, P.Eng. GM, Engineering

Page 123 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11 KERR WOOD LEIDAL iln",'(,li,\ I,,,,i,',-'-/

~n2· ,~.l.l~ .11111, ,\"'U'''' \' " , l' " '" II. 1', \' IT 1 (,' 1'1

2f.11~.~I_IJ.I)S41 l' ::! :' II . ~ (I J , l} l'l -l., 1 " " " • I. " 1

March 15,2010

Mr. Al Cotsworth, P.Eng. Regional District of North Okanagan Greater Vernon Water 9848 Aberdeen Road Coldstream, BC VIB 2K9

Dear Mr. Cotsworth:

RE: MIDDLETON MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR, SITE PREPARATION Tender Recommendation Our File 773.063

On March II, 20 I 0 tenders for the above-noted project were received on behalf of the Regional District of North Okanagan (RDNO) at the Office of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL), and opened in public. The tenders were solicited on the basis of the public tender process. The advertisement for tenders was placed in the Morning Star News Paper and online on BC Bid.

Each bid was accompanied by the necessary Bid Bond for ten percent of the tender value, and the Consent of Surety. All tenders were therefore judged to be valid and complied with tender requirements. The tenders were recorded as follows:

Price Contractor (Excl PST & GST) R355 Enterprises Ltd. $375,276.30 CGL ContractingLtd. $391,269.00 L.B. Chapman Construction Ltd. $409,204.72 Peters Bros. Construction Ltd. $449,034.00 Acres Enterprises Ltd. $481,534.50 Mountain Side Earthworks Ltd. $498,022.30 Wiltech Developments Inc. $509,932.71 Havter Construction Ltd. $511,556.25 Matcon Construction Ltd. $604,000.00 Triahn Enterprises Ltd. $688,392.00

The three lowest tenders were fmiher checked for arithmetic errors on a line by line basis with no errors being found.

Page 124 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11

2 Mr. AI Cotsworth, P.Eng. March 15, 2010

The Class "A" estimate for this project, complete with 15% contingency, is attached. Also for reference a comparison ofthe three lowest bids is presented in the attached Table I.

ANALYSIS OF Low TENDER R355 Enterprises Ltd. Tender is complete, and contained the Bid Bond, Consent of Surety, and Addenda. The tendered price is well balanced and compares favourable with KWL's Class "A" construction cost estimate of $452, 170.00 (not including 15% contingency).

The following points are noted:

• R355 Enterprises Ltd. is an experienced contractor. KWL has not worked directly with this contractor however R355 is part of the Lawrence Group (Lawrence Construction) from Kelowna.

• We have had favourable response from local references that have worked with R355 Enterprises Ltd.

• We have no information that would lead us to believe that R355 Enterprises Ltd. could not complete the project in a satisfactory way.

RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing, we recommend (hat the RONO award the contract to R355 Entcrprises Ltd. for a total price of $ 375,276.30, subject only to availability of funding. We note however, that the Schedule of Quantities and Prices contain several unit rate items and does not include PST, GST or HST. Accordingly, the final contract price will vary depending on final quantities as measured in the field during construction and on taxes applied.

We request that the RONO review our recommendations expeditiously so that the following tasks may be completcd on the RONO's behalf:

1. Issue a Notice of Award to the Contractor which allows him to mobilize labour and equipment. This should be completed by March 29, 2010 in order to maintain the proposed schedule.

2. Prepare Contract Documents for signing by both the RONO and the Contractor.

3. Complete necessary arrangements for providing engineering supervision and inspection during construction.

4. Return bid bonds to the unsuccessful tenderers.

KERR WOOD LEIDAL

Page 125 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11

3 Mr. AI Cotsworth, P.Eng. March 15, 2010

In closing, we trust that this provides a clear analysis of the tenders. We would be pleased to discuss the matter to elaborate on any points for which you have questions. We await your instructions to act on your behalf in awarding the contract.

Yours truly,

KERR WOOD LEIDAL ASSOCIATES LTD.

Brett Barker, AScT Contract Administrator

BB/bb Encl.

O:\0700-0799\773-063\Z2Q...Corresp-T ender\Site Preparation\201 0-03-15 Tender Recommendation. doc

KERR WOOD LEIDAL associates li,nited

Page 126 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11

Regional District of North Okanagan - Greater Vernon Water KERR WOOD LEIDAL Middleton Mountain Reservoir Site Preparation "; li",,· ··.-i Contract #201 0-06

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE KWL File: 773.063

ITEM EST. DESCRIPTION OF WORK UNIT UNIT PRICE ($) TOTAL ($) No. QlY.

1. General

1.1 Mobilization and Demobilization L,S. 100% --- 15.000,00

1.2 Bonding and Insurance L.S. 100% ----- 5,000.00

1.3 Survey Layout I Construction Control I Record Drawing Survey L.S, 100% ------8,000.00

Subtotal Item 1 (General) 28,000.00

2. Earthworks

2.1 Clearing, Grubbing & Removals L.S. 100% ------1,000.00

2.2 Topsoil Siripping and Removal (insitu bank volume - offsite disposal) CU.m. 3,700 8.00 29.600.00

2.3 Common Excavalion (insilu bank volume - offsite disposal) CU.m. 4,400 8.50 37,400.00

(a) Offsite Disposal (insitu bank volume) Cu.m, 5,200 28.00 145,600.00 2.4 Mass Rock (b) Onsile Use _ insit" bank volume (select rock rubble for embankment CU.m. 2,700 15.00 40,500,00 fill)

2.5 Trench Rock (offsite disposal) Lin.m. 70 120.00 8,400.00

2.6 Qverblast Rock Zone (remove and replace with select rock rubble) L.S. 100% ------10,000.00

2.7 Embankment Fill (select rock rubbte) Cu.m. 2,700 9.00 24,300.00

(a) Common Excavation Areas Sq.rn. 1,100 1.00 1,100.00 Road Sllb-Grade 2.8 Preparation (b) Rock Excavation Areas Sq.m. 1,500 1.00 1,500.00

2.9 Reservoir Pad Sub-Grade Preparation (less overlap with Overblast Rock Zone) Sq.m. 445 10.00 4,450.00

Subtotal Item 2 (Earthworks) 303,850.00

3. Reservoir Drain

3.1 Storm Main - 300 dia. DRI8, PVC Pipe (fully restrained) Lin.m. 210 1S0.00 37,800.00

3.2 Trench Drain - DR28, PVC loS. 100% ------1,000.00

(,) 10501.0. Manhole Structure (MMCD Std. Owg. S1 & S2) E,'" 1 2,200.00 2,200.00

Manholes (H2O 3.3 (b) 1200 1.0. Sump Manhole Stf1)eture 1 2.500,00 2,500.00 loading): E,'"

(e) 12001.0. Dechtorination Manhole Structure" Complete Each 1 2,500.00 2,500.00

3.4 Storm Drain Tie -in (MI. Tanner Place) L.S. 100% --- 1,000.00

3.5 Road Restorations (Mt. Tanner Place) loS. 100% --- 3,000.00

3.6 Right-of-Way Restorations (6m wide ROW between homes - Mt. Tanner Place) L.S. 100% --- 3,000.00

Subtotal/tern 3 (Reservoir Drain) 53,000,00

Class A Cost Estimate.xls Page 127 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11

Regional District of North Okanagan ~ Greater Vernon Water KERR WOOD LEIDAL Middleton Mountain Reservoir Site Preparation Contract #2010-06

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE KWL File: 773.063

ITEM EST. DESCRIPTION OF WORK UNIT UNIT PRICE ($) TOTAL ($) No. QlY.

4. Water Works (Greater Vernon Water Utility System Standards)

4.1 Watermain: 300 mm Dia. DR1S PVC (fully restrained) m 130 180.00 23,400.00

4.2 Combination Watermain & Drain Pipe Trench Anchors E,

4.3 Testing and Commissioning L.S. 100% --- 1,500.00

4,4 Tie-in L.S. 100% ------1,000.00

Subtotal Item 4 (Water Works) 33,400.00

5. Road Construction

75 mm Minus (a) 150 mm Thick Sq.m. 930 5.00 4,650.00 5.1 Select Granular Road Sub-Base (b) 300 mm Thick Sq.m. 930 9.00 8,370.00

5.2 19mm Minus High Fines Select Granular Crush Road Base (150 mm thick) Sq.m. 1,830 5.00 9,150.00

5.3 Culverts clw Headwalls (450 dia, CSP) Lin.m. 26 175.00 4,550.00

5,4 Gate L.S. 100% --- 2,500.00

5.5 No Post Barriers (CRB 690-lighl radius cIw bullnose ends) L.S. 100% ------2,500.00

Subtotal Item 5 (Road Construct/on) 31,720,00

6. Indetenninate Items

Excavate and dispose of unsuitable sub-grade material, replace with suitable on site 6.1 CU.m. 100 12.00 1,200.00 materials - as directed by CA

6.2 Hydroseed Sq.m. 1,000 1.00 1,000.00

Subtotal Item 6 (Indeterminate Items) 2.200.00

TOTAL ITEMS 1 thru 6 (excluding GSTIPSTIHST) 452,170.00

15% Contingency 67,825.50

TOTAL (excluding GST I PST I HS7) 519,995.50

O.\070IJ.07$9\773-053\700.C""IE.IH"~IC~CI3S. A Cost Etll","lc.xlsll'.~lh Con~ngcnoy

Class A Cost Estimate.xls Page 128 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11

g "

g g ~; i

g g g ;; . "

"~ I I I ! ~ ~ , , , H-+'-1--+-+-+-+-1-", i 3 3 3 3

Page 129 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11 S23,1Q: """ 51,9OC.DO 52,50C.00 S4.400.00 52.000.00 Sl.710.00 57570,20' $4,00S.82 S9 $1,651.00 S5750.00! 1 $40.105.32 $31.177.90 $14,896.20 S21.C7~.9 Tol.1 $409,204.72 TABLE C~.pm.n 52.50 S8.14 53.14 519.00 lB S10,67 5154.07 S',SV3 $575.00 52.000.00 51.710.00 51700.00 Sl,551,Qn Price sn.co 11O.0~ 5630.00 5807.00 51 $2.502.00 55,394.00 52327.0D 52315m S8A63.0(l S5.485.00 51,~17,OJ S8 $34.234.00 S10,248.0D $34.046.00 S23,712.cru Tot~l $391,269.00 we SO.63 55.80 $910 S5.60 $1872 5211.00 581!.00 5307.00 $182.40 52.327.00 52,316.00 SlAlI.DO Price 37 ~OB.OO 5550.00 5957.10 S553.DO 54,025.84 S1 SI.958.00 S2.497.2~ 5S,091.5n 58A91.20 S2.252.00 S3.lT1.30 S3.372 520008.30 S23.780.4<) $2.7.649.45 Totol Ltd. $375.276.30 Entr>rp,ise$ SO.$5 S~.41 54.64 S6.SS 514.03 5?57.10 $153.91 $225.20 S563.00 $!5~.8~ 53.372.37 52.49724 R355 Price 650.00 SOD.nO $1.7.00.00 $1.000.00 $Z.200.0Q S~ S2.50~.OO $B.370,00 51,500.00 54.550.00 52 S7,500.00 S1.000.00 SS.15MO 523,~OO.OO $33,4<)0.00 $3V20.00 Tota! $452,170.00 Eslim.le C051 A 51.00 S5.UO Sg.OO $5.00 512.00 $750,00 $175.00 SlS0C 51,50~,OO $1.000.00 S2.S0D.DO S2.S00.00 CI~.~ Price !-ISn (Excludl119 PRJC~CONTRACO PST.GST& TOTAl liNET GST 1I0ms) Works) PST, PRICE &HSn Construction) (W~ler GSTIPSTIHSf) u~rr 4 (E'c!uoing (Ro~d Itom (Ind~tormin~to 5 6 . (excluding .. Items ...... ' Wafer Itr>m EST. It~'" m 6 Par1l1) Sub!olM _ 1lhru P~yment Vernon Subtot~J Subla!.t e, L,S. " " 01 E,ch UNIT Sq.m. Sq.'" ':: lm.m. Cum. ffi Preparatiun Tend",,,,. fTEMS to Grca!er Sile - 1 silo TOTAL 00 ~~i('O.14 RcbI. ,ond "" Qu~ntities Sy<1em ,~.m.i""d) 01 ~g'~ph WORK m'=''"' Schedule Rc~on~1 Water .ub-;l'~o. .... CSP) P,;>o DR18 "<;I<",,oIwt-oI!ooseend.) (;'O"*,' ..,.,w DESCRIPTION .. """Thd d~. Vernon Or.m CA 1S0""""",~k u~,";",'" 300 S.leC! (450 6~O£ll>t ~f (0) (.) 30-00""",0". F,,,,,. 1I0ms (Greater (CRa d",p""" K'!I" ",,>,,,,,,,,,0& H.,!f: Com",,,,,,,,,o,c.g -o.d,,~o\ Gr~oul>r M,,,,,, .. POM meed !9",,,, C~"".b,,,"o~ Ex""v.~ Ro,oS"o·Bo"" T,o-=~",,..,.-<,,.,..,,"~,.·

Page 130 of 131 BOARD of DIRECTORS - LATE ITEM MARCH 17, 2010 - ITEM F11

Page 131 of 131 SIBAC Meeting on March 16th SIBAC Workshop of February 9th and 10th Report to NORD on March 17,2010

1. New Watershed Video that will be out this week. I will email to all directors to pass on to their respective councils or people interested in their community. a. This focus' on the Kootenay area, but can be part of any watershed b. Note: Greg Lay, Mayor of Kaslo, said that some studies have been done in their areas over the past 10 years on watershed harvestings etc. Last year a signifant part of one watershed was burnt so test will continue to happen. The testing was for volume, turbity, and rate of flow during freshet.

2. Reviewed new applications for support a. 14 applications approved 7 - tabled 1 for more info - turned down the remainder to A\f2,el0' -·b. Must meet the criteria as outlined in our report that you all have and leverage other agencies c. Approved: Partnership 1. Green energy and Rural Development $25/$300 11. Log Home and Timber Frame Association $25/$200 * Business and market expansion 111. Kettle river Watershed Management Plan $30/$168 IV. MY Brothers Place $5/ $25 v. Watershed Assessments $25/$300 *6 small communities VI. Bioenergy Feasibility in Cranbrook TSA $15/? 1. Align with Number 1 Vll. MPB and Drinking Water $15 Align with Number 5 We should Develop an application in the North Okanagan that would meet the program criteria. Willing to co-ordinate

Previously approved in Feb Bridges Program - Linking Resources for Community Forests $10/$200