RDOS member communities to pay for Penticton Channel walkway maintenance
I have used the same headline as the one used in the Stu Wells letter as an introduction to some facts and opinions on this divisive issue at the Regional District.
Here is the vote count and the facts prove that weighted or not – it passed:
Against 8
Princeton Municipal, Area H Princeton Rural, Keremeos Municipal, Area G Ollala Hedley, Oliver Municipal, Area C Oliver Rural, Osoyoos Municipal, Area F West Bench
For 10
Penticton Municipal, Penticton Municipal, Penticton Municipal, Penticton Municipal, Summerland Municipal, Summerland Municipal, Area D OK Falls, Kaleden, Area E Naramata, Area A Osoyoos, Area B Cawston (yes Penticton has four votes, Summerland two)
When it comes to anything for the one CITY – this is the Penticton Regional District not a regional government that gives a serious “damn” about rural areas outside the centre core area. This vote Thursday was one of those votes pitting one area against another.
Is it democratic to have two votes for Summerland when their contribution in dollars is not equal to other areas that have way more joint services and money going into the budget? The vote system is based on population not $ participation with each defined area getting a vote no matter how small or big its contribution in dollars is.
Funding of the channel trail – adjacent to the summer-busy-“tube”-river-feature could have been done by the City of Penticton and the PIB along with contributions from neighbouring rural areas like Areas D, E, F – that surround it – not communities like Osoyoos, Princeton, Keremeos and Oliver.
All of these jurisdictions have their own trails that they maintain and this recent decision may start them thinking about sending a bill to the RDOS.
This calls for a long look at the RDOS trails plan and maintenance strategy – a clear policy/definition of what it encompasses, the type of maintenance funded and putting all the trails in the Regional District under one budget – or none at all.
Jack Bennest