Editor:
Re: “Taxpayers already said no” by Bud Hoffman, Letters, March 12.
I noted that a recent letter to the editor on the topic of the water metering Alternative Approval Process (AAP) included the following comment: “If it is to be revived again it should be the responsibility of the SCRD to secure enough ‘yes’ votes for support, by referendum.”
Well, three years have now passed since the SCRD asked residents for approval to borrow money to install water meters. Since then, there have been extremely positive developments in securing new water sources and how you have practised water conservation. However, there are some properties using a lot more water than others – that isn’t fair and water metering is one way we can ensure that those who use more, pay more.
We are also acutely aware of the effects of climate change and that we will likely be looking at another summer of water restrictions. Since the Town of Gibsons introduced water meters, water use was reduced by 40 per cent. Water meters are proven to reduce water use. When we reduce demand, the high cost of new infrastructure, pumping and distribution is reduced too.
So why an AAP? To start with, it’s the less expensive option. For an AAP process we are looking at a cost of $12,000. If we go straight to referendum, the cost is upwards of $100,000. If we do not obtain elector approval to proceed with long-term borrowing to fund the installation of water meters through an AAP, then directors have left the option to proceed directly to the more expensive option of a referendum. As a board we are going the fiscally responsible route first, that is what taxpayers expect from us.
It takes bold leadership to make decisions for the future of our community and together we are working towards solutions to ensure a sustainable supply of water.
Darnelda Siegers,
SCRD Director for Sechelt,
Mayor of Sechelt
