SWMP: FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH

Just when you think you have listened to all there is to hear about the Storm Water Management Program, you find yet another source of stupidity. Since the last post on this issue, we took the time to watch the video on You Tube of the July 14th Council meeting where all the "experts" gave presentations on the Program. Listening to some people defend this Program, knowing the facts as we do, has been annoying enough but, listening to the "experts" confirm our position with no impression of reality made on Council, causes one's head to explode. We urge you to watch the video of the meeting after you read this post.

At this July 14th meeting, several "experts" made presentations trying to justify the new SWMP fee. Jill Stewart, Ann Clark, Frank Carson, and Clint Busby spoke. Members of Council asked questions. At the end of the meeting, the picture was very clear.

TO THE RATIONAL MIND THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FEE IS UNNECESSARY.

Question from Council:
Over the last five years that the SWMP has been in place, has there been any measurable improvement in water quality?

Answer:  NO

Question from Council:
Historically, have most of the tasks required under the new Permit been performed by various departments of BC government?

Answer:  YES

Question from Council:
Being as the further expansion of the Program as outlined by you will not require additional funding during this fiscal year, why are you asking that the fee be added to this year's tax bill?

Answer: -----------------crickets.

Question from Council:
According to your statements, the origins of the existing pollutants in our waterways initiate from natural causes. Do you have a plan that will improve this situation?

Answer:  NO

This meeting was surreal. The "experts" made no attempt to deceive the members of Council in any way. They came right out and told the complete truth about this Program. They proceeded from one outrageous statement to the next. They made statements and outlined plans that wouldn't have fooled a five year old child.  Still, some Councilmen sat there and didn't disagree with any of the proposals.

Example: The "experts" stated that the main impacts on water quality are the presence of fecal matter, fertilizer and depleted oxygen levels. They went on to say the source of the fertilizer contamination is farm land which is exempt from the SWMP. The reason for the depleted oxygen levels is the fact that leaves from trees and plants fall into the water and rot. The source of the fecal matter, 99.9999% of the time, is wildlife. When asked if anything could be done about any of these situations, they all said, "NO". One of the Columbia "experts" even told Council about another county that spent over $8 million over five years and only improved their numbers by 2%, which could have reflected a normal variation in samples. All these "experts" agreed there is not enough evidence of improvement to justify the regulations.

Example: The "experts" from BC confirmed that most of the tasks required under the Permit have been previously performed by existing employees. So this is the result of the Program. They have created a whole new UTILITY and are going to hire a whole new group of employees to perform work that has always been performed by BC employees, already on the payroll. If tasks included in the job descriptions of existing employees are going to be transferred to new employees hired by the new UTILITY, are the existing employees who have been doing these tasks going to be dismissed being as someone else will be doing their jobs? NO.

Example: The BC "experts" explained that the training of new inspectors and staff would be a sizable expense. The existing personnel are already trained. They listed all the reports, plans, and manuals that will, also, cost extra money. The construction reports are already being generated. The SWMP requires a manual that is constantly updated and a "Plan" for what we are already doing.

Example: According to the BC "experts", they have over 150 applications on file for qualifying construction projects this year. BC charges $4000 to review each of these plans. BC charges $400 for each of the necessary monthly inspections of these projects. If each of these projects are completed in 4 months, which is an unreasonably short completion estimate, BC would receive $840,000 in fees this year. On top of that, BC will now be receiving $1.4 million in SWMP fees from the taxpayers.

Example: The main reason given for the existence of the SWMP is to monitor water quality. So, BC has entrusted the physical activity of gathering the samples to the hands of a private contractor (extra expense)not BC employees being paid by the SWMP fee.

Example: The new Permit "recommends" a Utility. It "recommends" aerial photos. It "recommends" maintaining a map of outflows. Peppered throughout the permit is the word "recommend". It is unfortunate that BC government, along with certain members of Council, doesn't know the difference between the word "recommend" and the word "mandate".

At the conclusion of this meeting, this is what we know:

We have been tasked to correct a problem that has no solution.
We are hiring new people to do the work already being done by existing employees.
We are expanding government for no justifiable reason.
We are creating a new "Plan" every year for work we are already doing.
We are paying extra money to train new workers to do work for which we already have trained and experienced employees on the payroll.
90% of the requirements of the new SWMP Permit are administrative activities.

To make a long story short, some of our Conservative County Council members have voted to take an additional $1.4 MILLION from the land owners of the unincorporated areas of BC to hire and train new people to man a new Utility, to do work that we already have employees trained to do in order to attempt to solve a problem that has no solution. Other than that, they're doing a bang up job.