My short answer is "No." A full discussion and consideration of other factors is discussed below:

While both residential and commercial properties, (bare land and buildings) pay property taxes based on their assessed values, a vacant property tax would be over and above that amount. My research tells me that currently the Province of BC charges a speculation and vacancy tax on vacant residential properties tax in designated areas with housing shortages. On its website, the province states that “The speculation and vacancy tax is designed to turn vacant homes into housing for people in British Columbia, and ensure foreign owners and those with primarily foreign income contribute fairly to B.C.’s tax system.” Other than Vancouver, BC Municipalities cannot charge their own vacancy taxes. Also, the Province has no similar tax system in place for commercial properties.

I also read that UBCM has unsuccessfully sought Provincial authority to levy vacancy taxes on both commercial and residential properties, including vacant land. Based on the above, municipal vacancy taxes in Oliver are not a current possibility. Even if a vacancy tax was possible, I am unconvinced it would be an effective or appropriate tool to force development of vacant downtown lands. I don’t think downtown lands are vacant because the owners are speculating. I believe they are vacant because owners or developers cannot project a reasonable profit if they were to develop there at this time.

I prefer an incentive approach, instead of a penalty system to encourage development. Several years ago, the town had a revitalization program that deferred municipal property taxes on the value of new construction of qualifying buildings in the downtown core for five or ten years. I believe this program was applied to the Coast Hotel and the Dairy Queen building, and is no longer in place. I would like to explore the option of reinstating in in some form, if possible.

I believe another hurdle in developing vacant downtown lands is the existence of two sizeable shopping centres in Oliver, well outside the downtown core. Signage in front of the former Desert Gem RV Resort indicates the owner is offering to build to suit even more leasable retail space away from the downtown. This would first require council to approve changes to the Official Community Plan and the Zoning Bylaw. So, here is the dilemma to be discussed with the public at any Public Hearing for such a development:

Option 1: Do we try to build up future development demand in the downtown core by refusing to approve more remote retail development near the south end of Oliver; or

Option 2: Do we take the “bird in hand” approach, and approve several thousand square feet of retail and the associated short and long-term jobs they bring, even if that pushes downtown development even further down the road?

So, while Oliver is a small town and may need to permit retail development near its fringes when the opportunities arise, we cannnot be surprised if downtown vacant lands the then remain unndeveloped for some time to come. There is only so much demand to go around based on our current population and their shopping habits.

Garbage Collection

I noticed you indicated on the form that you live in the Oliver rural area. While both the Town and the rural area use the same garbage collection contractor (Waste Collections of Canada Inc.), they have different schedules and pick up different materials:

• Inside the Town:

  • Green bins are picked up every week and can include yard waste and compost such as kitchen scraps, bones, leftover food and greasy paper towels and napkins.

  • Black bins containing residual waste (generally clean and dry garbage plus diapers, cat litter, etc.) are only picked up every second week

• In the rural area:

  • Green bins are picked up every second week during the growing season and can only contain yard waste (No compost or food scraps)

  • Black bins containing residual garbage including kitchen waste, diapers, cat litter, etc., are picked up every week.

• In both areas:

  • Blue bins containing recyclable paper, cardboard, metal tins and rigid plastic containers are picked up every second week.

  • Glass, styrofoam, plastic film, batteries, electronics, etc., must be taken to a recycling facility, either the T-2 bottle depot or just inside the landfill entrance.

I live in Town and have found the garbage contractor to be very reliable, so I am not sure what issues you are experiencing. If you have missed collections or have other questions, you can contact the contractor directly at 250-498-4888. If they are not responsive, you might file a complaint with either the Town or the RDOS, depending where you live.

Tourism and Investment

The Town helps fund the Oliver Tourism Association to promote tourist activities and related businesses in the area. Oliver also participates in the local Grow Oliver initiative. You can view more details on the Oliver website at https://www.oliver.ca/business-licencing/grow-oliver-business-resources.

While we can be inviting and encouraging, it is important to keep in mind that the local government does not and should not open or subsidize businesses. Businesses will only invest if they see a good prospect for strong returns on investment. That comes primarily from new growth, from locals shopping locally, and to a lesser degree, from tourism spending.

Farming Costs and Distribution Options

Most farming costs such as fuel, materials, equipment, labour and transportation are well beyond the control of the local government. Oliver's largest input to the farming industry is the water supply. We must ensure the water supply remains reliable. Besides annual labour and pumping costs, this requires maintenance and long-term upgrades and replacement of certain system components. 

The Town pays these costs using annual water fees, reserves, borrowing and where available, financial assistance from senior governments. We need to develop a sound, long-term plan and cultivate our ability to secure senior government grants and funding to assist the farming community.

Since the former SOLID Irrigation District was dissolved in 1989, rural water customers can elect two Water Councillors to represent their interests at the Town Council table. In addition, the provincial legislation that dissolved SOLID also requires maintaining the "historical relationship" between domestic and irrigation water rates, which helps spread costs across all Oliver and district water customers. While there has been some conversation in the existing council to revisit this requirement, I am not sold on making such changes. In addition, any such change would require provincial approval.

Projects seeking funding from senior governments must meet sound engineering requirements and comply with the intents and guidelines set out in funding programs. Application evaluations are done by senior government technical staff in consultation with engineers and town staff. But such assessments are not “black and white.” With limited funding, approvals are restricted to the “best” applications and can be quite subjective. Therefore, it is important that the Town staff and council develop and maintain good working relationships with senior government staff and elected officials. This improves trust levels and develops mutual understanding of what specific projects can be approved.

With only four downtown commercial units for lease (three on Main; one on Station), the bigger concern is the number of properties vacant from past fires and demolitions. The “Town Centre” zoning in place is already flexible, allowing 16 different commercial uses, plus residential above the ground floor. Commercial off-street parking requirements are already reduced by 50%. In the past, the Town allowed ten-year municipal property tax exemptions for qualifying new downtown construction (Coast Hotel), though it no longer does. Perhaps this should be explored again. But ultimately, any business decision to build will be based on projected profitability.

Aside from five years at UBC and nine working for Vancouver City Engineering, I was born, raised, and lived my whole life in Oliver. So, I am very familiar with Oliver’s history and culture. As a retired Professional Engineer specializing in water, wastewater and transportation, and the long-serving (24 years) municipal manager for the Town of Oliver, I am very well equipped to understand and help set direction on infrastructure matters as well as a broad range of other municipal priorities. This experience is particularly important now, since none of the incumbents are seeking re-election to their Town Councillor positions.

We first need a detailed, properly-engineered asset management plan to assess infrastructure conditions, set upgrade timelines and calculate long-term funding needs. Upgrading would likely stretch out over decades, but we need a plan and a commitment to stick with it. Ongoing funding would be through a combination of current fees and taxes, reserves, borrowing, and grants wherever possible. According to the Town, Oliver’s taxes are lower than most, with average homes paying 38% ($1,088) less than in Peachland. So, there may be some room to move, but we must continue seeking grants and be very cautious pursuing any new services.

You had no specific question, but I have provided some comments if that is what you are asking for:

I believe the Osoyoos Indian Band and the local community have a very strong working relationship. The Town sells fire protection to a large portion of the reserve. We sell irrigation water to some of the vineyards on the reserve and sewer treatment to some of the residential developments adjacent to the town, Similarly, the Band sells sewage treatment to newer developments in the Gallagher Lake area. There is also cost sharing in place on regional parks and recreation services. The Band operates and leases land to several businesses on the reserve, which provide many more local jobs to people off the reserve than to Band members.

That said, there is also some difficult history. In the late 1800s, Judge J.C. Haynes was influential in reducing the area of the OIB Reserve, and ended up being granted over 4,000 acres of Reserve land for his personal estate by ther Province. There was a subsequebnt settlement between the Province and the Band concerning this land in the 1990s, which the Band can use to purchase private properties.

In any case, The DRIPA Act, which was at the core of the Cowichan Tribes claim, was enacted by the provincial government. If you are looking for change, you should pursue your MLA or the various candidates running in the current provincial election. I am running for a municipal office which cannot enact the changes that you appear to be seeking.

Oliver supports the great relationship between tourism and the wine industry. We adhere to a regional growth boundary, minimizing development intrusion into agriculture areas. We must keep this up. In addition, we need to lobby the province for long-term funding assistance to maintain and rehabilitate our aging irrigation system infrastructure.

Oliver council includes two Rural Water Councillors. Although they can only vote on water budgets, rates and regulations, they attend most council meetings and can provide critical information on farming issues. I want to be open to their input on agricultural matters that may be affected by council’s decisions.

To protect habitat during drought conditions, the province may one day need to restrict the amount of river water the Town is allowed to divert for irrigation. Rather than just hope this never happens, we should assess this possibility now, and begin discussing conservation and water allocation options with farmers.

I’m a former Professional Engineer specializing in municipal works. I was with Vancouver City Engineering for nine years before becoming Oliver’s Municipal Manager in 1990 for 24 years. Aging infrastructure is a concern for me. We need to assess its condition, then plan and budget for timely maintenance and potential replacement over time. Water supply is also a concern with climate change. We need to address our needs through conservation and possibly by building capacity.

Health care is a provincial responsibility; not something the Town can or should subsidize. Our taxes are high enough. We can ask doctors how to attract health workers and lobby the province to implement their recommendations. But we CANNOT subsidize health workers to move here. I hope to explore the feasibility of a municipal clinic to simplify administration for young doctors, but it must support itself through appropriate rental charges for the doctors using it.

Rising land values and construction costs have increased housing costs faster than general inflation. We should encourage a supply of smaller homes on smaller lots. Perhaps development cost charges should be discounted for smaller homes instead using a single rate for all low-density properties. Another important initiative would be to encourage more lower cost multi-family units in select parts of Town. If legally possible, I would also favour prohibiting age discrimination on any new developments.

Municipalities cannot control the costs of labour, materials, and federal/provincial fees and taxes. We can only influence our own utility fees (water, sewer, garbage disposal) and property taxes (all other municipal services). All local services cost money to operate in a safe, responsible manner and we all pay our share. Realistically, taxes will not decrease, but we must operate efficiently, and be cautious when considering any new municipal services that might further increase our costs.

In Oliver, policing services are provided by the RCMP, contracted by the province. Oliver pays the province 70% of its municipal policing costs and the RCMP hires officers, does training and sets priorities. (Municipal police would cost us 100% and would not make any sense to me.) Oliver can liaise with the RCMP to discuss concerns and priorities, and perhaps incorporate some safety features into urban design, but criminal enforcement ultimately remains the RCMP’s responsibility.

Oliver’s Fire Department is well trained and highly reputed. They have demonstrated their ability to respond quickly and effectively to emergency situations, including wildfires. As such, they will play a key role in any future emergency, alongside the RCMP and BC Ambulance services. In addition, the Town works cooperatively with the Regional District establishing emergency operations centres as needed to further coordinate responses and to administer any evacuation alerts or orders.

We want to keep housing affordable, and restricting vacation rentals of entire residences by absentee owners helps. Oliver’s 81-unit Coast Hotel opened in 2018, replacing a 36-unit seasonal campsite after zoning approval by council, in spite of strong public opposition. Moving forward, council needs to make sure zoning opportunities remain for tourist accommodation, but any new hotel will only be built by the private sector and only if market demand makes it profitable.

(a) Water Supply: Along with conservation, additional domestic water supply will be needed to serve Oliver’s future growth. Irrigation water supply is more complex with low lake and river levels. We must seriously explore irrigation conservation options, which is more challenging with un-metered connections.

(b) Aging Infrastructure: Some pump stations, buried pipelines and the canal are 60 to 100 years old. We must assess their condition; then develop and fund a sound, multi-decade management plan.

This one is a mystery. Oliver’s housing costs are sometimes blamed for a shortage of working-age people. Yet, our costs are considerably lower than in larger centres. Many working-age people are also raising families. Oliver has great schools and recreation opportunities, yet we continue attracting more retired people. Perhaps we can survey recent arrivals and small business owners on what may be specific contributing factors. But workers will come only if there are jobs available.

Besides seven pizza shops, more food and retail choices would be great, like we have had in the past. More light manufacturing would also be great. However, such investment is ultimately a private-sector decision. Oliver once funded an Economic Development office, which was disbanded in 2017 because of perceived low cost-benefit. Currently, the Grow Oliver Committee and Regional Economic Advisory Panel have been established to work with the Town on business attraction and retention.

Prior to the dissolution of the Southern Okanagan Lands Irrigation System (SOLID) in 1989, irrigation water rates for farm use were subsidized by residential customers in the Rockcliffe and Tucelnuit neighbourhoods, which were outside the Village of Oliver at the time. By subsidy, I mean that farmers received significantly more water per dollar of water fees than domestic customers, even though both groups used the same water source at the time. 

To protect this subsidy and keep agricultural prices low, the Province of BC issued Letters Patent requiring the Provincial Inspector of Municipalities to approve any water rate or regulation bylaw that lacks unanimous local council approval, before the council can adopt it. In the letters patent, it mandates the Inspector to give due consideration to the historic relationship between domestic and agricultural water rates when considering any approval.

So yes, the cost to supply water for farming is subsidized by domestic rates, as enshrined in the Provincial Order in Council referred to above. However, as I understand it, current  domestic and agricultural water rates may have drifted from the "historic relationship" over the past 38 years. I believe domestic rates have risen more than agricultural rates. This needs to be investigated and adjusted as necessary. In addition, we must ask that if either the domestic or agricultural water systems incur significant new costs, should these costs be separated into two billing streams rather than increasing subsidies for one side or the other. In the past year, the Town of Osoyoos has already made this separation. This approach would require approval from the Province.

Regarding tax rate differences between different communities, I need to reference the chart that the Town of Oliver recently published (shown on the Challenges page of this web site). It shows tax rates for average homes in Oliver, Osoyoos, Penticton, Summerland and Peachland for 2004, 2005 and 2006. It shows Oliver and Osoyoos with the lowest tax rates in all three years. 

I am not privy to the details on whether these rates were set independently or competitively based on neighboring communities, so commenting further would be speculation. However, I would make the following comments, which I would like staff to address if I am elected: Oliver is the community with the lowest population listed and has the lowest taxes: What were the tax rates in smaller communities such as Keremeos and Princeton? How do these compare? Were they left off the chart on purpose?

Peachland's and Summerland's average taxes shown in the chart are a surprising 30% and 60% higher than Oliver's! Are we comparing apples to apples or is there something missing? For example, I believe Summerland and Peachland pay directly for all their parks and recreation services through their regular municipal taxes. In Oliver, the regional district pays for the bulk of recreation facility costs and collects the Town's share through billing, which is then added to Oliver tax bills as a separate line item. Were these costs included in the cost comparison table? If not, the table needs to be adjusted for a fair comparison.

I must preface my answer by saying that I know several people and have several friends and relatives whose young adult children are trans, gay or otherwise fit into the LGBTQ spectrum. Based on the push-back these people still receive from much of society, I am convinced they are seeking and expressing their true identities and not doing things on a lark. Why would anyone put themselves through all of that harassment if they did not believe in themselves?

This year was my 50th high school grad reunion and I look back with considerable regret at how some of my fellow schoolmates were shamed and denigrated for being "gay" or otherwise different from the majority. In my recollection, the school administration then, and society in general, did little or nothing to address this bullying. Fortunately, I can see that much of society has moved on a bit and is starting to let people be who they want to be on the human spectrum, and allowing them to love whom they want to love. In my mind, gay rights and trans rights are no more than human rights!

So to your question: Why the rainbow crosswalks and pride parades? I see these as a recognition of the diversity of humanity. In my mind, a rainbow crosswalk near a school is not a "promotion of ideology" or particular "personal behavior," as you suggest. Nobody is telling anyone to be gay or trans. To me, such a crosswalk is simply a recognition of our collective diversity, and a reminder for the students, parents and teachers who cross it, that we all walk this world together. Let's do it in peace and love instead of conflict and hatred.

While my tendancy would be to concentrate on the big-dollar issues (infrastructure, recreation, new growth) that affect property taxes, painting a couple of colourful crosswalks in town is a pretty small public price to pay for promoting peace and acceptance. So the bottom line is that I would not seek to discontinue it.

The Town operates four water systems:

1. The irrigation canal provides water for over 5,000 acres of farm irrigation, primarily in the rural area, using water diverted from the Okanagan River, just south of Vaseux Lake. Some farmers pump directly out of the canal. The majority receive pressurized water from the rural pumping stations adjacent to the canal. This water is not treated or disinfected, and is not potable. Farm irrigation use is not metered, and by its sheer volume, has the greatest impact on the Okanagan River and local lake levels.

2. The Town also operates four groundwater well sites (Rockcliffe Domestic, Tucelnuit, Buchanan Road and Miller Road). The water from these wells is disinfected with chlorine, and supplies domestic and commercial uses in the Town and most of the rural area. It is not connected to the irrigation water system mentioned above. In the rural area, most properties are served by two pipelines: one for domestic water and one for irrigation water. All water from the domestic system is metered. In town, most properties only have access to the domestic system, which is used for in-home or business needs, as well as for irrigating lawns and landscaping

3. In the southern Black Sage Road area, a large groundwater pumping station supplies both farming and domestic water through a single pipeline. I believe properties in that area all have two connections from the same supply pipeline: a metered connection to the house and an unmetered connection to the farm.

4. All of the Town's sewer flows are treated near what is called Lake Topping, up the hill, west of Oliver. Reclaimed water (treated sewage effluent) is used to irrigate the Fairview Mountain Golf Course, one or two small vineyards adjacent to Fairview Road, landscaping around the high school and in some park and trail areas (sorry.... not sure which ones). Surplus water from this system is used to grow a hay crop on the Oliver Airport. 

Current watering restrictions are in place for the groundwater-supplied system (number 2, above). I read on the Town's website that the restrictions are based on the system's ability to meet changing demands. I found a copy of the engineering report outlining the steps, on the Oliver website, at the following link: https://pub-oliver.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=8019  If a pump is shut down for repairs, or because the groundwater level in the well starts to fall and does not provide sufficient cover over the pump intake, the system loses its total potential capacity, and restrictions must be imposed. 

That is the case right now, as I believe the Miller Road Well has a reduced water table. Please see the staff report to council on the current situation at the following link: https://pub-oliver.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=8113

In the long term, this may be partly addressed by:

• Building more wells (costs money and would increase water rates)

• Making the wells deeper (costs money and would increase water rates)

• Limiting irrigation uses on the domestic system:

  • Is unpopular with the public

    • That said, lawn irrigation has been prohibited for many years in the greater Vancouver area and has become generally accepted now

  • Takes enforcement effort

  • May include tiered water rates in the future to provide a financial penalty for over-use.

• Maybe converting more irrigation uses away from the domestic system and onto the canal-supplied irrigation or reclaimed wastewater systems, or perhaps even collected rainwater as you suggested.

In my opinion, the other concern that hasn't been mentioned is the sheer volume of water used to irrigate all the local farmland in our desert climate. This has the greatest effect on natural water stream flows and lake levels, yet it has not been addressed in any way. Farm irrigation water uses are currently not metered, so there is no convenient way to financially incentivize water conservation on local farms. 

I agree totally, that more shade is a good thing! From a land-use planning approach, I believe most new developments must plant boulevard trees as a condition of their subdivision approval. Multi-family developments must further submit landscaping plans for approval as part of their development permits and are required to submit a deposit to the Town to guarantee that the plans are implemented. 

Regarding recent tree removals, I have read that there is a program in place to remove several species of invasive trees in the South Okanagan. More information is available in the following Castanet news article: 

• https://www.castanet.net/news/Oliver-Osoyoos/579013/Over-200-invasive-Siberian-Elm-trees-removed-at-Oliver-Community-Park

While removing invasive plants may be a plan, I believe any such removals in public spaces should be done only in conjunction with planting replacement trees of a suitable variety.

As we know, many factors contribute to homelessness, and there is no single solution. Origins may include substance addictions, mental illness, housing unaffordability, or any combination of the above, and other factors. That said, we cannot just throw up our hands in defeat. I know the Town has been working with other agencies to address some aspects of the local problem. However, the Province must also become and remain involved, as they are responsible for health care and cannot be allowed to simply download the problem onto local communities. The following news articles may shed some light on recent efforts. These and other efforts must be continued.

• https://www.castanetkamloops.net/news/Oliver-Osoyoos/616144/Oliver-officials-tour-unhoused-encampment-amid-high-calls-for-service

• https://www.castanet.net/news/Oliver-Osoyoos/618452/MLA-joins-effort-to-address-Oliver-encampment-concerns