Capital and Operating budget approved – Town of Oliver

A two day affair finished with little interest, really,  by the public on Wednesday

Budget meetings open to the media and public. No one attends. But they are televised for those interested.

Basics:

9 percent tax increase on general budget – designed to increase capacity and to be spent mostly on the capital side.

Approvals:

should we have a separate in-house bylaw department?- the answer yes – why might be your question. Contractors come and go. Having full time staff allows for tighter management and better utilization of staff and resources… Total cost $44 thousand.

should we spend a lot on studying traffic patterns on Fairview? – no was the answer.  The problems self evident. Solutions not apparent. Maybe a 4 way at Rd 2 and Fairview Rd but not yet. Study the intersection at Station Street and Fairview Rd including the bridge area east of intersection. Plan to spend $8K for a list of recommendations to improve traffic.

should victim services hours be increased?  – another $15 thousand approved

should food security program be continued? – yes $15K

Major Capital projects approved:

Rehabilitation of Packinghouse Lane,  Airport Street and  top of Co-op Avenue  $1.05M, Developer of low cost housing project east of Airport Street responsible for approx. $300k of this project.

Fairview Bridge – Repairs and Maintenance – $302k

Fire Department  – Tender Truck replacement – $100k

Fire Department  – Command Vehicle New – $50k

Solar Panels on Fire Hall – $58k

Spread the word from Oliver Daily News
This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Capital and Operating budget approved – Town of Oliver

  1. Pat Hampson says:

    Thanks for the correction I did not read the report properly.
    ALSO your duplicate comment advisory keeps showing up when I attempt to post my comment.

    Publisher: If you post once and wait for it to be moderated – you should not be getting any advisories from the “machine”. Some think a comment goes up automatically and when they do not see it. They post again. Publisher must sleep.

  2. Pat Hampson says:

    When considering the Chief’s need for a emergency response vehicle, consideration must be given to several matters relating to the Duty of Care and the Standard of Care. These can not be assumed or completely predicted and it is always governed by “what do like sized communities offer their residents in protection?”

    The question is: Will a properly equipped emergency response vehicle enable the Chief to respond in an appropriate manner and in a safe manner without unnecessarily exposing the Town to liability and the Chief to personal injury due to other vehicles not giving him ‘right of way’.

    Will the Chief’s ability to respond in a timely manner have an impact on the outcome of any given incident? The answers are yes.

    Is it reasonable to require the Chief to drive his own vehicle to the Fire hall in order to access an emergency response vehicle? The answer is no.

    Second point Pat – the fire chief of large cities do not attempt to attend all minor fires, alarms and accidents. They are notified of major situations. Oliver has a system of Chief, Deputy and Duty Officers (Captains). If I was a manager and I wanted to delegate, supervise and train officers – I would assign duty and if I attended a situation I would offer assistance not take over command. The chief has stated most of the “person” power is trained for duty in and outside a structure. Let the fire fighters do as trained.

    I am not convinced a command car is the answer. Time will tell whether it is just another toy in the arsenal or an investment to reduce other costs to prove its efficacies. Analyze how many structures fires we have had in ten years – with the possibility of loss of life.

    Analysis of statistics is very interesting but often neglected based on an emotional response or a decision made after 70 years of not having something – but now a feather in the cap.

    Chief Graham cannot properly respond to requests for assistance in his private vehicle for the following reasons: his vehicle is not readily identifiable, regardless of the Town’s insurance coverage, any collision while responding would likely result in a suit for personal injury/damage or accusations stemming from a property loss caused by failure to respond in a timely manner. His private vehicle lacks most if not all the accepted safety equipment.
    The Chief is in a tough position; if he is obliged to pass stalled traffic in a private vehicle and is in a collision attempting to arrive at an emergency in a timely manner, his vehicle will be seized and subject to inspection to determine fault. If the incident is complex and requires additional support outside that of the OFD, the earlier that decision can be made by the Chief will improve the opportunity for a successful conclusion to the incident.

    The Incident Commander must arrive at an incident as soon as reasonably possible to assume command, stabilize the surrounding scene and make decisions which may have a huge impact on the outcome. Failure to meet the generally accepted standard for fire/rescue departments could result in the Town being taken to court by a plaintiff who has lost property due to delays in making decisions. The Chief will be called to testify and that will not be a pleasant experience for him.

    Please equipment the department with the necessary equipment to meet the standard of care expected in a modern community.

    Publisher: To the best of my knowledge the command car has been approved. All arguments now purely academic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *