By ROY WOOD

Recent discussions at Oliver council — and Rick Machial’s contribution to them — have made a compelling case for the continuation of the water councillor system, which has been under attack in the two communities that have them.

In the last few weeks, the Oliver council has been doling out relief to local taxpayers suffering under the constraints of the Covid-19 crisis. The most controversial piece turned out to be a 50-per-cent rebate on first quarter water fees. Machial was the lone dissenting voice, imploring the rest of council to reconsider the idea because it would result in either elimination of needed capital projects or large fee increases down the road.

The merits of his arguments aside, Machial was making his case on behalf of the rural agriculture community, which uses more water and will suffer more from future increases.
Water councillors, two in Oliver and two in Osoyoos, were created in 1989 after the local irrigation district was dissolved and the job of supplying water transferred to the towns. They are paid about $5,000 a year, less than a third of ordinary councillors. Machial was one the first four water councillors elected and has remained in the seat ever since.

“Our role is to make sure that the people that we represent – which is all of the rural people – have a voice with respect to water. And water for farmers is their most important commodity,” he said in a recent interview.

Over the years, the other members of Oliver council came to rely on the two water councillors to occasionally provide a rural perspective on issues other than just water. As a reporter, it sometimes seemed to me that it was a seven-member council on more than water matters.
That easy familiarity came to a crashing end in fall 2018 when a legal opinion was obtained by town staff. It led to water councillors being instructed to leave the chamber after the discussion of “water matters” in the early part of the agenda. At the time, Machial wrote in a letter to ODN: “What I find very sad is that council will lose rural perspective on all matters affecting our community.”

Machial won’t speculate on the record about who was behind the purge, and says the situation was resolved quickly and water councillors are now welcome to remain for entire council meetings but only to participate in matters related to water. The second water councillor in Oliver is Parminder Sidhu. He has only been in office for 18 months and for the most has let Machial carry the ball on water matters. Sidhu defeated Andre Miller, who ran an unenthusiastic campaign in November 2018 and apparently is happy to have finished his nearly two decades of service.

In Osoyoos, the future of water councillors may be more dire. A process has been under way since last summer that could see the positions eliminated in that town. And if they are deemed expendable there, who knows what the future might be for Oliver? The situation came to head in Osoyoos in July when a water councillor was dismissed for lack of attendance at council meetings.

In a report to council, senior staff said discussions with the province had already begun on various options for getting rid of water councillors altogether. Council opted to enter talks with the Regional District of Okanagan Similkameen (RDOS) to change water-billing processes in such a way as to allow a director from Area A to represent rural water users. Presumably, those talks continue. The council dynamics in Osoyoos are dramatically different from Oliver. Long-time Water Councillor Claude Moreira and his recently-elected cohort Bob Appleby are essentially silent.

Their typical participation is to quietly assent to staff recommendations on water matters and then to unobtrusively slip out of meetings when there is a lull following their portion of the agenda. One of the most vocal moments I recall for Moreira was during the discussion in July about the elimination of his position. “I can’t support any of these options,” he said. “The rural area needs representation.” In a subsequent interview he said, “The farmers built the water system and gave it to the town. Now they want to take away the representation.”

It is an interesting question why Osoyoos seems bent of eliminating water councillors while Oliver is happy to have them at the table, albeit in a more subdued role than in decades past.
It’s tempting to assume it’s because Osoyoos sees itself as a high-end tourist town, an economic cut or two above its northern neighbor, which identifies more as a quiet and homey agricultural service centre. Maybe Osoyoos sees the presence of rural representation on its council as a bit countrified. Whatever the motivation, Osoyoos council and senior staff seem determined that this elective term will be the last for water councillors.

Given the complexity of negotiations among the town, the regional district and the province, one fears that water councillors in Oliver might face the same fate as their southern counterparts if council and staff there are successful in their efforts. Residents in the rural areas surrounding the two towns do have an interest in the decisions, particularly on water matters, made at their council tables.

Eliminating water councillors would be a loss for democracy in the South Okanagan.