Loading...
So What's Happening?
Tomorrows the big day. The public and politicians have had 2 weeks of fresh air to get their thinking straight. Without attacks on individuals, or changing the subject:
What new information will come to light tomorrow?
Will people vote with all of the facts understood?
Or did we just pay two more weeks of salaries to subject the town to more of the same?
The only thing that I'm sure of is that the town needs to hire a tutor in groundhogese before Feb 2 2008.
Dan O.
- Dan O.'s blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 2267 reads
User login
Blogger Talkback
Latest Bloggings
Custom Search
The Crackerbarrel
New Crackers
Editorial Lint
| this is our story the sbp community portal is a not-for-profit volunteer community communications project giving a free internet voice to residents of the town of south bruce peninsula through an easy and open public forum. the framework for the sbp is ©2007 Gary Lawrence Murphy Sauble Beach, Ontario sbp @ teledyn.com |
|
      community plumbing for the web |
Local Weather
or visit our
environment canada forecast
and our
marine forecast
What's On
Upcoming events
Popular content
Linkshares
SBP Calendar
- Annual Terry Fox Run, Wiarton and Sauble Beach
- Sauble Beach Last Day of Summer Celebration- Location TBA
- Sauble Beach Chamber Fall BBQ and Volunteer Appreciation-Location TBA
- Sauble Beach Lion’s Club Rubber Duckie Race, Sauble Falls
- Sauble Beach Festival of the Classical Guitar, Sauble, Christian Fellowship
Result of March 20 Meeting
Jeff Graham of the firm Henderson Paddon Associates recommended stopping the water and sewer addendum which is specific for the pipeline and going back to Phase 2 and changing the preferred solution to a small wastewater treatment system for the sauble DCA. He also wants to put water in but in time we will probably find that doubles the price and we want a least cost opion now.
Anyway taking this course will mean the EA can no longer be used for the pipeline. It means that the only way to start again on the pipeline would be for some future government to start a whole new EA
The vote on Councillor Mark Wunderlich's resolution to contine the pipeline EA addendum will be at Monday Mar. 26 Council meetng. The resolution wording could be changed.
Hard to predict how Kerr, Lamont, Harron and Hoath will vote but it is now plain that a small system might work but the pipeline will never go anywhere. Councillor Wunderlich as of todays meeting still favours the pipeline. He is not confused by facts....
The next chapter will be Monday night at Council meeting. Mayor Gilbert has asked them all to do some soul searching.
more info from the meeting
The following are excerpts from material handed out by HP at the meeting:
4. Costs for HPA (Henderson Patton Associates) preliminary recommended solution (all without grant). For sewage, +/- $37,700 per property, based on conventional gravity sewers. If Clearford small bore sewer system used price MAY reduce to +/- $22,450 per property. (These costs do not consider the impact of potential Jaymor development contribution). For water options, would be +/- $15,470 per unit IF additional water in Sauble School area can be found.
6. Recommended next step. Preference would be that current motion be modified more or less as follows:
“to complete EA based on a scaled down water and sewage project as the preliminary, recommended solution, subject to public input and further evaluation of the scaled down alternatives. Construction of scaled down project subject to receiving necessary grant support.â€
7. Wiarton Class EA for Wiarton water plant. Suggest it be temporarily placed on hold until outcome of Sauble water/sewage EA is complete.
……………..
Dodge, my interpretation of what was presented is that sewer AND water will still be part of the completion of the EA, just perhaps not the Wiarton Plant EA. I believe Mark’s point, as well as some of the other councilors, is why not complete what you’ve started under the same contract for the agreed upon contract price. I get the sense that the vote is for just that, not for a specific alternative pipe or system installation.
Any way you slice it, the people voted in “against the pipeline†and supporting a smaller system(s) don’t take into account economies of scale, and would rather see the 270 or so DCA property owners pay anywhere from $22K for a small sewer system to $52K for sewer and water each, depending on the final alternative outcome. HP is right, in that adding water will more than double the price. So, they shift from a water pipeline EA to a sewage system EA.
I say let HP finish both the EA’s so we have reports we can refer to in the future. Then, in this period of no grant money available, set out on developing a 10 or 20 year Master Servicing Plan for SBP, which would reveal priorities, options, and some sense of order to servicing. I hear no talk of such a Master Plan so I can only assume there isn’t one.
Dodge, if you know of more inside info that the water will not be part of the completed EA, as you elude to, then please correct me, and the record, with that info.
Groundhogese
Dan, it appears that a formal Dictionary of the Groundhog Language is available at the other site, south of the border. Those 'mericans sure can teach us SBP folks a few things about marketing a Willy!
see www.groundhogstuff.com
Sounds like reason is prevailing
From the sound of the last few replies it sounds like a very informative meeting was held. Was it explained why HP changed their recommendation of which way to proceed?
Dan O.
Primer For March 26 Vote - Part 1
The EA for water and sewer Sauble Beach and Hepworth has been complete since 2001. An addendum to update it is in progress. Do not confuse the EA and the addendum as some posts in this thread have done. The addendum if completed updates the pipeline EA. On March 26 we have to deal with this.
The following letter appeared in the Sun Times March 20. It clarifies the reasons behind events of the last few weeks and summarizes the position that Council must change to if a change is considered. This position is the first of the recomendations that HPA made on March 20 during the meeting and must be seen as a first priority. HPA also stated that a change in the preferred solution would be required and thus a new and different addendum.
Quote
"Councillor Wunderlich's resolution that caused the infamous walkout is designed to force the Town of South Bruce Peninsula to continue the process of updating the Water and Sewer Environmental Assessment for Sauble Beach and Hepworth. That vote still has to come. This EA is project specific for the Wiarton water pipeline and a Hepworth , Sauble wastewater treatment plant on the Sauble River. This update was begun under the past pro pipeline administration and it is part of the leftover pipeline baggage that must be dealt with.
This EA is a one trick pony. It can only go down one channel and that is the pipeline. It cannot be used for a small project because the EA's preferred solution has been set to the pipeline. There is only one way to make use of part of the EA and that is with a complete new addendum that takes the EA back to phase 2 and chooses a new preferred solution going forward. This is a possibility but not with the current resolution which is to continue the current addendum to update the pipeline EA.
We now know the walkout councillors wanted to keep the pipeline EA going. Reputation wise it is now going badly for them. In spite of all their excuses that particular EA is good for nothing else except the pipeline unless they start a new addendum to change it to a different project. This current addendum to update, that they so badly want, will not cover anything else except the pipeline. They know it.
The four walkout councillors risked their reputations to make sure they could come back another time and win the vote to continue the EA. They knew they would face flak but it was the lesser of two evils for them. After the walkout they made some small efforts at spin control. They still have the numbers to pass the resolution so their strategy worked.
There is now a proposal for a small project that stands a good chance of reaching completion. A wastewater system which services the development control area or core area of Sauble is an achievable project. It will protect the groundwater in a defined problem area. There are indications that funding grants will be available and there is potential for the community to unite behind the project. Keeping the cost down will be a core priority. It will mean the end of the road for the pipeline." End of quote.
Primer Part 2 (edited)
By the time the March 20 information session concluded it was obvious that a rapidly changing picture had evolved and been presented to Council. The idea of doing a project that was achievable is the basis for looking at a small wastewater system in the core area to protect the groundwater.
The question asked about twin systems here needs to be addressed. If a system like this is to be built it will only happen with the support of the people who are to be serviced. In order to get this support costs must be kept as low as possible. That means build wastewater only. The MOE will not allow water only system without wastewater.
Cost estimates given were very speculative. There was discussion of adding the Jamor development but this adds a trunk line and requires the wstewater treatment plant to be 300% larger than that required for 280 homes. Jamor has approval for 480 homes but would put in 600 if they could get public wastewater service. The province does not grant funds to aid developers.
The resolution to continue the pipeline addendum will probably be changed. What it will look like is a good question. It may take the form suggested.
There is talk that the four councillors who walked out will change their vote if they are given a compromise. That compromise is to keep another EA, the one in process to increase the capacity certificate of the Wiarton water treatment plant going and finish it. There is already plenty of surplus capacity in Wiarton and the money spent on this may never be justified. If there are bump ups it would be impossible to predict the final cost of the EA so any projected cost is speculative at best.
Let the people on the Wiarton water system pay for this. They can deal with Councillor Kerr if that is what he wants to do. It should never be finished as a capital expense to all of Town of South Bruce Peninsula because the system already exists and this is considered an improvement. It is Wiarton water.
Councillors have a responsibility not to waste money. This is just an open ended gamble at this point and there is a good chance this EA will expire in five years if it is completed. Waste - $10,000 minimum. Or- If the water is needed someday restart the EA and do it at a future date.
EA continuance
Kill the EA for the pipeline. If it is necessary for sewers for the Sauble DCA then make the appropriate addendums and get it done. Otherwise, quit wasting money. Use the money instead to hire inspectors to enforce existing septic bylaws and shutdown/quarantine the offending properties until they are in compliance. And please stop telling everyone that an 80 million dollar project is cheaper than a 6 million dollar one...we're not that stupid.
kltpzyxm
CFOS Buries the Pipeline
According to today's CFOS website, seems Mark Wunderlich said exactly what mxyzptlk is fearing, "telling everyone that an 80 million dollar project is cheaper than a 6 million dollar one" -- only, as is so sadly typical, the mainstream media gives us the 'news' without giving us any actual information ... such as what Mark may have meant by those figures that say the hookups will shoot "up from six-thousand dollars to about 18-thousand dollars per" ... how does that happen? I'm just curious, being a non-trades sort who thinks that one pipefitting is as good as another, and was already dubious of the cost of upgrading well-water pressure plumbing to the considerably higher force of a municipal link ...
Anyway, meanwhile back at the missing pieces in the media puzzle -- can anyone complete this puzzle and tell us what words it was that tipped the two councillors back on the dissenting side?
I'd think something like that little dangling tidbit of scenario detail would be news-worthy, but what do I know ...
Monday night activity
You are right Garym...Ana and Betty did not vote for this motion....there was the motion to continue the regional water and sewer study(originally put forth by Mark).....Ana put forth a very clear and targeted amendment to that motion that captured all the investigation and supported by the town's engineering firm Henderson Paddon...but then Mark had the MPW rework that motion and he brought forth another amendment that was vague and could be read in many different ways.... they voted on Ana'as first and it was defeated..recorded vote 6 to 3 and then they voted on the MPW motion and it was accepted..with only Ana and Bettty voting no....remember since it was not a recorded vote the mayor did not vote...and so we now have this vague motion and we will have to wait and see how it plays out....At times it does seem that we have mystery politics here in TBSP....making things clear and direct and easily understood by all is something that we need...here was a chance and it didnt happen
As for the costs...how can they even quote numbers when they dont know what the preferred solution would be or how many users etc?...... Henderson Paddon did quote some numbers but cautioned all that they were preliminary and should not be stated as "THIS WILL BE IT" but again fearmongering is at play and so some quote big numbers to get everyone alarmed and concerned...another typical exercise of "dont use facts" by the usuals
Isn't politics lovely
Does anyone remember a politician say he would get rid of GST if he was elected? He did when he combined it with PST and changed the name.
If the addendum is vague all options may still be viable. This vote takes the heat off of the councellors that voted for it but they still have 3 years for the public to change it's mind.
Garym; I can't believe that you're so eliquent in speach and so bad in math. If you multiply the $80 million by 1/3 due to 2/3 funding and divide by the 2,000 or so homes in Sauble and another 2,500 new homes that will be built because of the pipeline, you end up around $6,000 per household.
On the other hand if you run the $6 million system ($2 million with 2/3 funding) to only 110 or so houses you end up with about $18,000 per household.
I'd hate to see your cheque book :)
Dan O.
My Bad Math
Chequebook? Chequebook?? We don have no chequebook. We don need no stinkin chequebook!
besides, that would predicate the existence of a bank balance to compute, and no matter how you do your mathing, nothin' from nothin' still leaves nothin' ;)
But what might be in order is some English lessons because it seemed very reasonable to me that 'per hookup' meant exactly what the phrase said, the per-user cost of the actual hookup, not, as I might less succinctly put it, the per-subscriber share of the distributed cost of the water utility network which is, undoubtedly, a very different thing. Mind you, I was also under the possibly mistaken impression that the distributed cost of the whole enchilada was to be paid by all SBP citizens, regardless whether they hooked up so I guess my English warnt too good there none neither.
Positive Outcome Was All Prearranged But Wunderlich Choked
As a result of Monday's voting we ended up with a vague statement created by staff instead of a clear directive from our politicians.
On March 20 Henderson Paddon gave a clear suggestion as to how to proceed with something that would work. Behind the scenes deal making started. Councillor Kerr indicated that he could bring Hoath, Wunderlich Harron and Lamont's votes to the table to give it unanimous support in return for something else. He wanted the Wiarton water treatment plant EA to finish. This EA is strictly for providing water to the non existant pipeline as Wiarton already has all the capacity it may ever need.
Councillor Vukovics motion encompassed all of the above and made a clear attempt to guide towards a minimum cost solution. Without going to detail it was felt that when a lowest cost solution was selected the people to be serviced should have a say in whether it moved forward. Councillor Wunderlich broke ranks and questioned the amendment or motion and things just fell apart. The two motions are reproduced here because some people have asked what was wrong with the one that passed. Simply it clears the way for a large system covering most of Sauble Beach. We are right back at square one. I am waiting to hear what Henderson Paddon intends to do with the addendum. The bump ups that have previously stopped it will now stay in place since there is nothing in the wording that changes anything. It is an impasse.
Councillor Wunderlich basically blew away the opportunity to bring the community together and make some real progress.
Councillor Vukovic's ammendment (voted down 6-3):
"Regarding sewer and water servicing options for the Town of South Bruce Peninsula recommendation be amended to read.
That the current addendum to design and locate a wastewater treatment plant and update the environmental class E A schedule C for water and sewage works study for the T S.B.P project #105142 be redone as a new addendum which updates the EA and indicates for a new preferred solution for protecting groundwater based on a small wastewater project for Sauble Beach as outlined in the H.P.A. preliminary recommended solution numbered 3 A) i as presented to the council on March 20, 2007. The HPA recommendations 3 B) i and 3 B) ii are open for consideration at a lower priority based on public comment and higher expected costs for these proposals. Public input will be requested after proposed service recipients are notified in writing of the proposed project and further evaluation of the scaled down alternatives. The TSBP will continue to persue all avenues of possible funding for this project.
The Wiarton Water Treatment Plant Class E A project is to be completed for the purpose of providing additional capacity to the Wiarton water system if required in the future. All previous and future costs are to be funded by the Wiarton water works system. " End of quote. It is somewhat wordy but covers all the bases.
Here is what staff created: (Passed 6-2) "TBSP proceed with current addendum to design and locate a wastewater treatment plant and update the EA schedule C with sewage study and further that EA be completed based on further review of all scaled down water and sewage alternatives and further public input will be requested as part of review and selection of a new preferred alternative
Wiarton water treatment plant EA to be completed for purpose of providing additional capacity for expansion of Wiarton water system " End of quote.
Note: The EA is already completed as of 2001 so when it says " that EA be completed" it does not mean anything.
Proceed with current addendum? That is what the original Wunderlich resolution was for to carry on with the current ammendment to update the pipeline EA.
balancing the cheque book
when considering total cost, 6 million is much less than 80 million. re: economies of scale - of course its cheaper if you get 300 or 400 more people to chip in, even if they don't need or want it. personally, i don't want more development at the beach and jaymor can do what they would do after they complete their development ... leave. they have no interest in our community other than the dollars they can get from developing the property they own. i hope they never get to develop their land. i believe pat stock said the town has 6 million. why doesn't the town put in the infrastructure and then just charge users for a hookup? the big problem is expecting users to pay for the infrastructure. do they get any return on investment? when new users who did not pay for the infrastructure come on line will the 'owners' of the infrastructure recieve dividends? it's all because of poor or no planning by the town. the problems have been known for many years; why was there no long range plan 20 years ago that would have insured funding is available today? why, because our local politicians are reactive, not proactive. case in point, the vote on the ea; from what i can tell, nothing has changed. knee jerk reactions to make themselves feel like they are doing something instead of getting on with solving the problem.
kltpzyxm
Recommended EA Next Step WAS Approved
HP, presented a “preliminary recommended solution at this time†taking into account the situation as it stood. They concluded further on, as was discussed, and very clearly presented their “Recommended Next Step†which is quoted here directly from the handout: “To complete EA based on a scaled down water and sewage project as preliminary, recommended solution, subject to public input and further evaluation of the scaled down alternatives.â€
How is that statement so different from what was voted in as accepted? The motion put forward by Vukovic totally defined Jaymor’s involvement, and did not address their letter of interest received by Council and the TSBP that very day. Vukovic’s motion had way too many specifics which could, and were, challenged. She shouldn’t have stopped listening at the meeting, as HP clearly summed up verbally his recommended next step, based on the quote above.
Thankfully, Mark steered the ship in the direction it needed, "Stay the Course".
CL1368
You have to admit two things:
1) The only possible reason for continuing an EA on the Wiarton water sytem (underutilized) would be to expand the system and use the water elsewhere. Especially if meters are installed and usage is reduced further.
2) A year from now verbal statements and explainations can not stand up against written and signed statements.
Which statements were too specific and challenged? I wasn't at the meeting and the media reports are skimpy.
One thing that is still unclear is how Hepworth fits into this water and sewage motion?
Dan O.
mxyzptlk
Infrastructure is the lines, hookups and the plant. Upsizing a line costs relatively little. Upsizing the plant to treat the waste with few users on line is costly to build and inefficient to run. The town would need to finance a large amount with no guarantees of when the money would be returned. Until that time all of us would pay the interest and principle on a system that ages every day it's in operation. Owners will get some payback in the form of higher property values. The problems begin when development raises property prices and taxes beyond the level that the present type of owners can afford. Good if you already own, bad if you want to buy or are on a fixed income.
Dodge; Somehow I was close to what you've said; on a hunch. The developers now will have a few years of wineing and dining to change some minds.
Garym; that was one of your finest replys. They must really be counting on some growth to bring costs down. Has anyone ever asked the councillors to explain their figures?
Dan O.
my self serving/selfish/the world revolves around me2cents
I sort of grin when I here people go on saying I moved here because I liked it here and I don't want any more development going on.. I am afraid when you moved here..You were more development... And I am sure when those who biult or bought here in the last 20 years the neighbour across the road peeked through the blinds and said "look at that honey the neighbourhood is just growing way too fast , we bought here because we liked it the way it was".
I moved here cuz I had a job here working in a facility which was deemed necessary because when we get services the population will expand accordingly and those needed to support a expanding population will come and so on and so on. Heck it was even contemplated with services maybe even industry would have been interested in moving to the area . What better place to set up shop when you can send your head hunters out with the carrot of "live at the beach" and enjoy the year round activities, gotta smooze the propspective employees in todays market.
Now kicking the horse I rode in on again the facility that was deemed needed 12-13 years ago is up for the hangmans noose as the services didnt show up, the people didnt show, the support industries didnt show up, the industry didn't show up and finally the kids didn't show up.
So as for balancing a bunch of numbers or contemplating all the costs and equations I have seen here I submit for your approval my math skills
services=development
development=people
people=houses that need services (year round)
houses =taxes
taxes=services
services=infrastructure
infrastructure=support industries (maintenance)
support industries =people
people=houses that need services
more houses=lessI have to pay for services
people+ people=lots of little people
little people need services=my wife has a job
my wife has a job= wayne happy
Wayne's Math
Your math appears logical as far as it went but you didn't go far enough, you forgot
more people = pollution
pollution = sickness
sickness = discomfort
discomfort = need to move
need to move = why people came here(Sauble)
I think Wayne's math leads him to moving to Wasaga Beach
CL--your skewing and bias are still quite obvious
da beach
I was going to get to that part of the mathematical equation, but the cat puked and I had to stop.
If we had more sickness here, maybe a Dr would come and set up practise because of all the business.
Hmmm now I know why my wife says my "logic" portion of the brain doesn't kick in till noon :)
waynes math
the locus for tautological validation of your equation lies at wasaga beach. hockey17 beat me to the point.
fyi my house was built before 1900, so no i did not contribute to development. has it changed since i moved here, of course. do i like it, not really. so i will do what i can to prevent it from happening further.
i thought hp suggested putting the wiarton treatment plant ea on hold and separating it from the ea for the beach. that surely would have eliminated any confusion; again, from what i can tell, nothing has changed.
dan o (makes me wanna sya 'book em') i know what infrastructure is. if the problem is going to be solved then infrastructure is needed. kind of like when natural gas was brought to the area. the company put in the infrastructure and the users paid for their hookups. the sauble water/sewer system should be done the same way in my opinion. the town should put in the infrastructure to service the beach core (according to pat stock they have the funds) and the users should pay for their hookups and a monthly fee sufficient to operate the necessary treatment facilities.
the way property taxes are determined needs to change. mine have increased over 250% in the last few years. why because double income families from toronto come up here and pay 200-300 thousand for a cottage. nothing has changed on my property, but my taxes keep clmbing because assessors don't look at properties individually, they just note that similar properties sell for 200-300K so my assessment goes up.
kltpzyxm
life's a beach
You are correct on all counts, but I again din't get to the jist (sp) of what I wanted to say, damn feline gastrintestinal issues...
If My wife was given a job in Wasaga Beach, then we would move here. With a declining demographic whom are in the child bearing ages I would say her job in Sauble Beach would be somewhat questionable as to its need or viability at its current level.
Now I don't think anyone would disagree that if "services" were implimented here, regardless of the type of infrastructure, more people would come to live here. More people means more jobs (and yes they may not be big income oppurtunities)
Way back when I posted here my thoughts regarding how ones groups actions may have a ripple effect on others. I used the analogy of an ecoli outbreak (sorry bub) closing stores and businesses and people losing jobs, a short term immediate impact. This scenario may not happen with services but some seemed determined not to have the fix installed because it would cost them money,
Now I am focusing on the long term impact of not having services, people gradually losing jobs as the demographic changes or begins to dwindle.
The school is a good immediate example and the day care a long term concern which I hope this is not lostt on anybody with my other babblings.
So if Wasaga Beach is looking for daycare workers or biulding maintenance guys those of us still working in the area may yes look at that as an option. They have proven down at W.B. maintaining a positive growth is possible in a beach community.
We here on the other hand have over the years seemed comfortable with a status quo sytem because we don't want to pay for something that will change that.
But the ripple effect is happening if we don't poop or get off the pot ( sewer analogy)
beach life
if a town like wasaga beach is of interest to you, then i suggest you move there. i would guess most people come to this area to get away from that sort of thing.
is there _really_ a problem at sauble beach? i can't recall our beach ever being closed. perhaps it is just another pipe dream by those who want to see growth and development at the beach .. scare tactics maybe.
i have not heard too many cottagers at the beach clamouring for water and sewer services. mostly seems to be business owners and land developers.
if pollution from improper septic systems is an issue, then let's spend some money enforcing our existing septic bylaws. quarantine and/or close down offending properties until they are up to standard. if nothing else, it would provide some short term relief. why isn't the town enforcing existing septic bylaws?
and, speaking of pollution, who was the bright person that authorized use of pressure treated lumber for the dunes boardwalk? friends of the beach, think again, don't you know that poisons are leaching into the ground and will potentially absorb into the skin of beach goers?
imo the school at the beach should never have been built. we had and continue to have a perfectly good school in hepworth. the sauble school was a scam to have the government fund a building that will likely be sold to some 'in the know' municipal official or one of their cronies for less than fair market value.
dan o said "The developers now will have a few years of wineing and dining to change some minds." lets hope they remove the bits in mark's manifesto about councillors being able to recieve gifts, entertainment, and meals from lobbiests trying to influence them with their agenda.
kltpzyxm
I just gotta reply
1) I guess moving away would get me out of a lot of peoples hair.
You focus on the fact cottagers aren't clamouring, true as well as many full time year rounders who work live and send thier kids to school in the community.
So here is the vision as I see it. Close down the cottages with bad sytems at another expense to the town.
The scam of a school should be closed down as it was never wanted in the first place.
Keep the status quo for those cottages that have acceptable systems and also for those damned business people who want services.
I think your right by the time this vision is fulfilled there isn't really at lot to stay here for, Unless I want to hand out mats at the water slide, but the minimum wage is going up. Hardly seems to justify paying taxes here and contributing to the community in other ways.
I will keep an eye on things and if it looks like the vision is coming to fruition I had better give Vince a call and ask him to see what he can get for it. It would make a lovely place to stay for someone, and it is even insulated so if you wished to pop in some other time than May to September you would be comfy
Stay and fight!
Wayne, you can count me in for supporting and propmoting your ideas. kltpzyxm's invitiation to you to move should be be accompanied by his/her aggrement and undertaking to put up a racor wire fence around Sauble Beach to keep any body out who does not pay local taxes and who is willing to wait for an environmental time bomb to go off.
I would only like to point out' that if kltpzyxm needs (and I hope he doesn't) services from the Owen Sound Hospital, he can expect to be taken care off; even tough his does not contribute to the tax revenue in the OS area.
Somebody needs to rethink their old fashioned attitude.
do we want the wasaga beach of the peninsula?
I have to add more to this thread. I have friends who live there now but for some time used their place as a summer home. They are on their own well and septic system. As recently as two weeks ago there was major flooding and possible concern about wells there and the people were advised you are responsible for your own wells. At one time the whole of Wasaga Beach had no infrastructure in place...but they decided to start small and build and so now most of the downtown area is covered by water and wastewater treatment facilties( I dont know how the funding was handled but certainly over the last few years it has been development fees that drove changes)Now let us talk here on the peninsula. I have heard all the dreams...the software capital of the world/the resort playground of Ontario/some cottage industries that no one has thought of yet and yes the list goes on. But we need to use some logic here..remember we have two really good beach months...maybe push it to three and then we have winter. The place is shut up dead. There are odd visits by snow people but the numbers are not great. Look around this place... other communities have infrastructure and are they booming ..no..they have a slow but steady growth that the area can accomodate. We dont have a road network in place to handle high volumes of vehicles..our internet capabilities are spotty at best. Yes Wasaga has growth but you can commute to Toronto from there....not here for sure! Even Grand Bend is dead during our long cold months and they are only 45 minutes from London. We do not have the jobs close to us for people to come...this is not the nature of our world here no matter how much we dream. The economic development department in the town shows that the major employers are quarries. food stores, school board and the TBSP..so what does this say? We will never be a major player in Ontario..we need to work within the framework we have ..we need to build an infrastrucutre plan that starts small and grows. If the senior level of governments have consistently said the pipleine project is too big a cost for so few a number of properties we need to adjust . Stop believing that Nirvana is coming.....we have to solve any issues ourselves and I will pay for the portion that is mine but not for everyone else.
not a cottager
walter, please get your facts straight before you put your foot in your mouth. i am a full time resident of tsbp. i have lived here since 1972 and raised my family of three children here. i pay taxes here like everyone else that lives here full time.
wayne, my comment regarding moving was prefaced by 'if a town like wasaga beach is of interest to you'. if so, why stay here when wasaga and grand bend are already what you are looking for. other than that, i do appreciate different points of view.
i'm not suggesting closing cottages with bad systems _at_the_expense_of_the_town_. where did you get that idea? i just want our local govenment to enforce the laws they already have in place. better to employ someone locally than spend tens of thousands of dollars (power budd) chasing a pipe dream.
i know your post is tongue in cheek, so maybe vince could sell the school too (tic)
oh, and the name is mxyzptlk...
kltpzyxm
not a cottager.
mxyzptlk, (whatever) by now I get the clear impression that it will take a long time before the real important issues relating to Sauble can serioulsy be addressed and solved by the people and their elected politicians. At this juncture it appears that there is little hope of succeeding. It seems that both sides on the "for development" and "against development" file are in a non compromising mood. Some fear that their quality of life will suffer, and others can only see the positive in planned economic development. This split in attitude by the local population clearly shows up in the current pipeline and sewer debate, which is going nowhere fast. The money issue overrides all of the above and unfortunately needs to be resolved beforehand. I would guess, that whatever happens there will be extra costs to the taxpayers. Be it for a completed EA or a full or a smaller version of a water and sewer system for Sauble.
In the meantime, my previous comments about the Phantom Pipline may include some facts for consideration in the short term.
Since I can add little else to this debate, from now on I'll pay more attention to my homemade Austrian wine operation.(for peronal consumption, of course)
Prost!
not a cottager
waltieb, at least we can agree that the issue is difficult and won't be solved easily.
but, what about enforcing our existing septic bylaws? if improper septics are indeed a major pollution problem, then shouldn't the town be enforcing the laws we already have in place to deal with this? why should property owners who are breaking the law get away with it while the town struggles to find a longer term solution? why have a bylaw if it is not going to be enforced?
i'm new to this web site ... where can i find the "phantom pipeline" information...thanks
kltpzyxm
There are a lot of others
There are a lot of others who agree as well. Again, as I have said before, there are many who don't want the Beach changed, and are quite happy with their septics and wells. For those with questionable systems, get them fixed. It's a heck of a lot cheaper than pipelines and sewage. THERE ARE MANY WHO CANNOT AFFORD THIS ROUTE. (Read the Stat's Canada website on income levels of the SBP).
Many people have moved to Sauble because it IS NIRVANA. It's not Grand Bend, it's not Bayfield, it's Sauble, it is a beautiful little oasis. They have moved here because of this, NOT because they are hoping that a pipeline and sewage is installed.
Tax payers (I realize that I am not one yet, and hope not to be for a while, (it's my parent's home, previously a family cottage for over half a century)), should not be footing the bill for businesses that run only a few months out of the year. What is given back to those who live there year round? More tacky bikinis, that you could go to a city for, and buy for a lot less. Tourists are just that, tourists. They come up for the day, and leave. The town should not be doting on them. Do the tourists really care about sewer and water, many of them just want to enjoy the natural scenery without the hustle and bustle of the other beaches.
Just because a town has a pipeline and sewage does not mean it will prosper and industry or business will flock. All you have to do is look at small towns with sewer and water who are floundering.
New development? Let them pay for it. Many people don't want more development.
As for property values going up. . .who cares. Who wants their value to go up unless they are going to sell? And just because it is assessed at a certain number, does not necessarily mean you are going to sell your property for that. MPAC is a farce.
Right now, I am fed up with numbers and all the jargon. I am fed up with people flinging their "intestinal fortitude" (a term which has been flung around so much lately, it is devoid of meaning).
I have tried to back away from this debate, because most of it has been repetitive and in many cases redundant, just like my post.
(edited for apostrophe purposes http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/)
Get out the shovel
mxyzptlk; I didn't mean for you to take it that you don't know what infrastructure is. My point was that if the town built a larger plant than could be utilized within a few years the costs to those that did hook up and to the tax payers would be too high. This excess capacity is easily utilized for "new" development and the original problem isn't solved.
vinylgirl; your shovel use is very welcome. If you ever reach the time where you're fed up to the point that you don't want to use it, you lose by default.
On the septics; if a truck carrying toxic waste dumped it's load in a ditch next to the beach there would be no question about the company cleaning it up. What gives a person the right to dump his sewage (out of sight) in the same location? A sewage system removes the town's headaches of enforcing private systems. The alternative must be strict enforcement.
Please; could anyone here truthfully say that they like driving in Sauble on a long weekend. How would it be if every weekend was a long weekend? Where do those people spend their money? The beer/liquor store, grocery store, campgrounds, local restaurants. I admit that they create employment by requiring extra policing and garbage removal but I wanted to be a Walmart greeter when I retire :) Some of them are even learning to take the back roads and park on side streets. This should be a right restricted to locals.
SBP isn't the same SBP it was a hundred years ago. No one said that development can't take place. The area has advantages that attract development. It's just that in the end you have to have a goal, a picture of what it will be like in another hundred years. You can every service that exists (sewage, water, transit, etc.) but you have to pay for it. To economically pay for it, you have to increase density of people. You make the decision to sacrifice quality for quantity.
My job is totally different from what I went to school for or even my first, second or third positions in my company (OK, I can't hold a steady job). If there are no young children to look after, seize the opportunity to look after the age group at the other end of the population. When you've got lemons you make lemonade.
Then you find a good place near the beach to sell the lemonade. You make enough money to move to Wasaga Beach and smile while everyone keeps disagreeing in Sauble.
Dan O.
Who Let The Dogs Out !
Lots of posts today, each one a good comment to which I will add mine to the general din.
Rising assessments do not increase your tax bill. For a given area, ie Sauble Beach, if the Town has a 0% tax increase year over year your bill remains the same even if assessments have gone up. (Edit: Of course Dan is correct in the following post, Wiarton's assessment has dropped and Sauble's has gone up) Zero% increase is possible if some of the fat is trimmed. The airport board is asking for $23,000 to put yellow paint on the runway. There is no payback for this. Put a lot of small demands together and pretty soon you need a tax increase. Every year police services cost more guess what that means?
I remember Dick Thomas lobbying everybody hard for the new Sauble school in 1993. In 1994 he told me he would have water service at his store on Lakeshore the next year. The problem was he just wasn't much good at predicting the future. Turns out some of the real estate churn is pre retirees moving in and selling a decade or two later when they need more care. Not great for school enrollment.
Schools are growing enrollment and shrinking somewhere else. Like most of the working world you kind of have to go where the jobs are. Even in 905 land schools are closing and opening. Are enrollments up in Port and Kincardin? Having your job in jeopardy is no joke lots have felt the pain of it.
Growth in seasonal towns ends up costing the existing residents more than they get back from the new subdivisions.
This has been established in planning research. Part of the problem is the lack of a lot levy. Police , fire protection new equipment, increased traffic, administration, social services and much more all need new money and the old residents end up paying more in taxes. . Yes it works in places like Milton or Wasaga where cookie cutter subdivisions and high lot levies build on the great pyramid scheme of growth but that bubble is going to burst also.
Grabmor was lightning quick to ask to participate in any infrastructure. They said hey we can create 120 more lots where we had 480 approved. Another million profit. How will you refuse the next developer to step up and ask?
Most of you don't know who the SONR group was. It was a community organization active in 2004 who said Save Our Natural Retreat. Sauble is a unique community with a character flavoured by many open spaces and trees. By far most residents want to keep it the way it is. Infilling and subdivisions don't fit the vision of the many families who bought here many years ago and like the place the way it is warts and all. More recent cottagers and residents often buy here for the same qualities.
All of this is said for the benefit of some newcomers to the discussion. Talk of growth must be tempered wwith thr realization that it will cost you more then you get from it.
Now we have a tourism promotion officer that costs $130,000 a year working out of Wiarton. Other than filling the Wiarton accomodations for one weekend in February there is no payback for this expenditure. Beach maintenance is north of $350,000 and rising with a few determined people like Mark Wunderlich holding parking costs too low to recover any of it. Airport deficits are costing the two municipalities $150,000 per year and no benefit to show for it.
We keep 45% of the property taxes collected to run the Town. The rest go to County and education. Think of it as every million we spend we need to collect 2 million. We can't do much about assessments but we could do a lot to lower taxes. A lot of little amounts add up. Think about that when you get your final tax bill.
I have before me the minutes of a 1995 meeting on the water and sewer EA. Twelve years since have passed and nothing changed. It notes that water quality samples were not much changed since the early eighties. Wonder what it will say in 2015?
Ah well let the dogs bark. It is budget season.
I beg to differ Dodge
Dodge; you are absolutely correct about increased assessments not affecting taxes (except for general increases) if all properties in a municipality increase in value equally. Unfortunately Sauble Beach is prime real estate. Even primer if services were installed and infilling took place. If Sauble properties increase in value while other town property values remain static, Sauble residents will carry more of the load.
Dan O.
assessment math
if your assessment is 100 and the tax rate is 10% you pay $10.00 if your assessment increases to 200 and the tax rate stays the same, then you pay $20.00. ergo when your assessment goes up and the tax rates stay the same, you pay more tax. are you the same guys that think 80 million is less that 6 million? where did you learn arithmetic?
kltpzyxm
mxyzptlk: my weird math
I believe (and I could be wrong) that the municipality determines the total amount of taxes that they must collect. They then add up the total assessment of tax paying properties in the municipality. They divide the total taxes by the total assessment and the result is the "Mill Rate" (I'm sure Garym has a story about that).
If all properties increase in value by 10% and the town doesn't increase the amount of taxes that it needs to collect (not too likely) each property owner will pay the same taxes.
If properties in Suable are deemed to have increased in assessment due to installed water and sewers or just increased demand and the properties in lowly Oliphant don't increase in value; the Sauble properties will pay more taxes (Assessment X Mill Rate). Just as you said.
PS; I don't agree with the $80 million vs $6 million math. I just tried to show how some politicians would make good magicians.
Dan O.
wierd math
dan o, i think what you are saying is that each property owner pays the same _rate_. they certainly do not pay the same _amount_ of $. fyi there are many different tax classes for property: residential, industrial, vacant, and many more. mill rate is per $1000 of assessment. the town agrees on a budget and then based on the municipality's total assessment, sets rates for each of the tax classes. an example, your assessment(100) times mill rate(10%) = taxes $10. my assessment(100) times mill rate (10%) = taxes $10. now someone buys a property near me for lets say 10 times what i paid for my property. i get a new assesment because mpac sees that properties near where i am located and similar to mine are selling for 10 times what the did in the past. assume my assessment increases to 250 and mill rates don't change. now i pay $25 in taxes and you still pay $10 even though we both own similar properties. i don't get anything more for my tax dollars. we both pay the same rate but now i am paying 2.5 times as much tax dollars as you just because a double income family from toronto (eg) decides it would be nice to have a 250,000 cottage up here to use a few weeks of the year. don't get me wrong, i don't begrudge them having a cottage; what bothers me is the unfair system of taxation. here is another scenario. the municipality costs double (for ease if example) now they must raise twice as mouch money which might mean a higher tax rate, but, if the assessment base also doubled (growth/development in the area that some people would like) then the mill rate would stay the same. so as costs go up, as they usually do, you either end up with higher tax rates or a larger population. for me personally i would prefer to pay higher taxes (to offset increased costs) and keep our community the small rural conclave that a lot of us enjoy. in conclusion, paying the same tax rate is not the same as paying the same amount of tax dollars.
kltpzyxm
kltpzyxm; I'm glad we agree.
kltpzyxm; I'm glad we agree. I didn't go into the different classes of property taxation to keep the example simple. That's the same reason that I didn't mention County or Education taxes.
The taxes each resident pays (as you concluded) are equal to the rate at which their property is assessed multiplied by the value ($) assessment. Neither assessment or tax rate determine taxes alone.
The problem or reality with MPAC assessments is that "if" the family from Toronto raised the price of your property you'd expect to receive a similar price if you sold. You don't receive any more "services" for your taxes but you do own a greater proportion of the town's assesssment.
It goes back to that old adage: "It's better to own the cheapest house in a rich district than the most expensive house in a poor district".
Dan O.
MPAC assessment
dan o, the problem is that MPAC arbitrarily changes assessment for no real reason. if the house next door is worth 150k and some upper income family pays 250k for it, that should not impact my taxes, imo. if i improve my property, then of course a higher assessment is possibly valid. but because someone agrees to pay more than something is really worth (this is subjective, the toronto family may percieve the property to be worth 250k to them, but i percieve its value at 150k; iow i wouldn't give you more than 150k for the property) that should not impact _my_ assessment. besides which even if my property assessment was in the millions, i would not sell my home ... i intend to spend the rest of my life here and my children will keep the family home here at sauble for many years after my wife and i have passed on. not everyone is motivated by money and greed (not directed at you).
kltpzyxm
We're below average
Even with the present escalation in home prices SBP remains very affordable when compared to the rest of Ontario:
http://www.rbc.com/economics/market/pdf/house.pdf
The $250,000 figure is near the value of the average Ontario townhouse ($233,000). That's not even a Toronto townhouse ($301,000).
mxyzptlk; I don't even think it's greed. The population of Ontario has grown. People make more money than 10 years ago. Both spouses generally work, which further increases family income. The total available money allows people to pay more for real estate and prices rise. If people can't afford to pay their mortgages prices will fall as is happening in the U.S.
At least real estate has some purpose other than investment. Not like the tulip scandal:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2103985/
Lastly; the worst case of creating your own profits is what Iran is doing. They pump about 2.2 mil. barrels of oil each day. Every time they cut back on inspectors, give a bad press statement or take hostages they keep driving the price of oil up. This last time was over $2 per barrel or $5 mil a day to them.
I guess the real price of oil is what people will pay :)
Dan O.
below average
hi dan o, the things working in our favour are having only a 2 lane highways leading to our area and being a 2.5/3 hour drive from most major cities. i think the govt has frozen mpac changes until a better way is found to properly assess properties for taxation purposes (not sure). imo you should be taxed on the land, not the value of the home you decide to build on it. but, this really is a drift in the thread. Iraq and gas prices are ample fodder for a couple more blogs. imo north americans should be paying 2 (canada) to 4 (usa) times what they are currently paying for gasoline. hopefully, we would drive less and use more fuel efficient cars. i spent a month in the uk a few years ago and every time i filled the car it was over $100.
kltpzyxm