Submission to UARB Impact of Tropical Storm Arthur

I want to share with you my submission to the UARB regarding the unique hardships Arthur caused rural residents when it made its visit in July. 

Receipt has been verified. It can also be accessed through the Board's website www.nsuarb.novascotia.ca by clicking on "Cases and Evidence", "Find Cases by Case Number" and inserting in "Search Term" Matter ID No. "M06321". Lots of other interesting submissions to read there too.___________________________________________________

Dear Board Members: I understand that today is the last day that your board will officially receive comments regarding Arthur's impact. With apologies for this last minute submission, please find my comments below.

In Kings County residents of District 3 experienced power outages lasting as long as 5-days.

There can be little doubt that the length of the outage had a great impact on the overall economy. It was surely particularly hard for businesses (large or small) already operating on slim profit margins; very difficult for workers who do not have guaranteed hours and who worked for businesses that were closed for an extended period; and all those already struggling to stretch limited dollars beyond their elastic limit.

It would be worthwhile for the board to determine if there was any increase in the numbers of companies or individuals asking for credit counselling or entering receivership or bankruptcy in the months immediately following Arthur.

Where there more loan defaults?

More young families finally throwing in the towel and moving West?

While the social and economic impacts likely impacted all groups in Nova Scotia, I would like to emphasis the need for the board to look at the impact on those living in poverty and those who live a more traditional rural lifestyle.

Here in rural Nova Scotia among seniors and lower-income families there is a tendency to use “the freezer” as a way to increase food security. Through the use of a freezer, food can be obtained at economy prices and sometimes even for free, for use at a future date.

This food includes vegetables grown in backyard gardens; poultry raised at home; meats from game hunting; surplus food donated by charitable neighbours, etc.

Each of these economical sources of food require planning and/or the goodwill of neighbours. Unlike wealthier individuals who can use disposable income to go to a supermarket and replace what is lost, this food cannot be easily or quickly replaced.

First, there may be no disposal income.

Second, home grown vegetables cannot be replaced until the next growing season and/or the deer meat in the freezer cannot be replaced until the next hunting season. It is notable too that the loss of deer, moose meat, etc., from the freezer can also make the traditional foods of Mi'kmaq and First Nations families unavailable for an extended period.

Third, some of a freezer's contents may have been a gift from a concerned neighbour wishing to help a struggling neighbour or senior---replacement will depend on a future ability of that neighbour to help again.

The loss of such food can be devastating to a family's economic security and overall sense of well-being.

I trust the board will take a very hard look at appropriate compensation for all those who have been negatively impacted by Arthur. But, I would ask the board to be especially mindful of those who are already struggling to meet their family's needs.

As a municipal councillor for a rural municipality I urge you to take into consideration the impacts that are unique to rural Nova Scotia and additional to those encountered by urban residents.

Sincerely, Pauline Raven


Pauline Raven

A few Pics from Centreville Days August 23 2014

It was such a great day from the 9AM beginning to the 10PM ending. I was so touched by the leadership shown by youth helpers... many who appeared to have made a lasting connection during this summer's day camps to “their community park.” The ball games were all a treat to watch and both the fireworks and the music were brilliant. A big thanks and congratulations is due to all the volunteers who worked so many hours and in so many ways to make the day the big success that it certainly was. Here are a few photos snapped at points along the way starting with the Kingston team suiting up... and ending with fireworks that everyone said were the best ever! 

Get 50% of the Property Taxes Paid in 2013 Back if you're a Senior with a Lower Income

	The Property Tax Rebate Program for Seniors is administered by Service Nova Scotia. It helps eligible seniors remain in their homes by providing an annual rebate on the municipal property taxes paid in the previous year. The rebate is capped at $800. Here's who qualifies for the rebate. Please note a senior must meet ALL these criteria. You were receiving either the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) or The Allowance in January 2014. To find out if you qualify for the GIS or The Allowance, call Service Canada at 1-800 277-9914. You are living in your home at the time you apply for the rebate and continue to reside in your home. Your previous year's property taxes were paid in full. Here's how to apply. Call Services Nova Scotia toll-free at 1-800-670-4357 and ask about the program. An application form can be mailed to you. Once completed you send it back to:   Property Tax Rebate for Seniors Program Service Nova Scotia PO Box 283, Halifax B3J 2N7   You can also download all the necessary documents at this Property Tax Rebate Page: These are the files available: Tax Sheet for Municipalities - 2014 Property Tax Rebate for Seniors Information Sheet - 2014  Property Tax Rebate for Seniors Frequently Asked Questions - 2014 Property Tax Rebate for Seniors - 2014 Application Please don't hesitate to call if you need any help filling out these forms or understanding the "ins and outs" of this program. I can be reached at 670-2949.

Aviators and/or Waterville Airport-Based Businesses must accept 14-Wing Greenwood relocation, or else.

This media release produced by myself, Councillors Patricia Bishop, Emma VanRooyen and Jim Winsor was sent this morning to several media outlets in advance of today's special council meeting at 5PM. The report referred to can be found at the link below. Please do not hesitate to call or email if you have questions or wish to discuss any point in more detail. 

AIRPORT RELOCATION STUDY

Four councillors of the Municipality of the County of Kings believe recommendations to be made by their leadership on Tuesday July 29 at 5PM are the end result of a flawed and prejudiced process. A report circulated by CAO MacEwan on Sunday afternoon calls for the Airport Relocation Committee chaired by Paul Easson to be disbanded immediately and the Request For Proposals for the Business Case Study to be pulled.

Councillors Patricia Bishop, Pauline Raven, Emma Van Rooyen and Jim Winsor have worked to ensure the aviation community is more fairly treated following the surprise vote on March 10 that called for the Waterville Airport to be closed in approximately 6-months, effective September 30, 2014.

Recently long after committing to the creation of the group, council populated its Airport Relocation Committee and things started moving forward, under Chairman Easson's direction, in early June.

“Now, instead of pursuing legitimate motions of Council aimed at receiving direction from the committee and considering the results of a Business Case Study, work not sanctioned by council has become the focus,” says Councillor Winsor.

According to Winsor this work recommends a relocation to 14-Wing Greenwood and closes down any examination by the public of other potentially viable, or more viable options. Winsor has 11 years of experience as a senior manager of airports in the North. Winsor says: “I've watched communities across Canada fight to retain or enhance civil aviation airports because of their value as economic engines but in Kings County I'm instead witnessing a process that's clearly mired in political quagmires.” According to Winsor the fight for good governance is about to be lost in Kings County if council accepts the recommendations contained in the report. “When legitimate motions passed unanimously by elected representatives are set aside between meetings it's clear to me that democracy is running amok,” says Winsor.

The report circulated by CAO MacEwan on Sunday provides an ultimatum to aviators that Raven describes as: “Agree with this analysis, ready yourselves for 14-Wing, or get nothing.”

According to Raven, the CAO's report "cherry picks" from the independent CBCL report commissioned in 2012 to make an argument for Greenwood as the only viable option. “He misses a crucial point, arguably the most important one in the whole report” says Raven. Raven is pointing to a statement located on page one of the executive summary. The authors' state: “While all sites are capable of being developed, the location of the Airport to a new site in the eastern portion of Kings County was considered the best option due to its proximity to Halifax as well as the ability for the airport operator to have ownership of the land and complete control over runway operations, which is very important for its continued success as an economic driver for the region.”

The concern of all four councillors grew as delay mounted and partiality emerged for Greenwood as the only or best option. Most were somewhat assured that the agreed upon decision-making process of both council, and the Relocation Committee was being respected when at the last week's Committee of the Whole Councillor Best provided verbal assurance that he “had an open mind.”

Media statements by Council's leadership, Warden Brothers and Deputy Warden Hirtle, were issued last week following the Committee of the Whole. In the July 24 Register both advocated for 14 Wing Greenwood. Neither mentioned Council's motioned support to place recommendations in the hands of an Airport Relocation Committee or Council’s commitment to complete a business case study to enable an informed decision making process.

“We have not treated the aviation community with the respect and dignity it deserves after decades of working with the municipality to keep a busy airport functioning relatively smoothly,” says Councillor Van Rooyen, adding, “The flawed process that council has followed to date has created unnecessary angst and divisions when the our focus should have been on building a strong partnership between ourselves, the community, the aviators and business people, including Michelin.”

Recent developments include litigation by several hangar owners and a movement by residents of Saxon Street to ensure that an airport would not spring up in their backyards, which are smack in the middle of the County's agricultural zone.

Councillor Patricia Bishop says the Warden, Deputy Warden and CAO may be overstepping bounds with the release of Sunday's report: “Council has not given any direction regarding the Greenwood option becoming the only option, nor have they requested any report in that regard.” Bishop asks: “Because there is no council endorsed direction to support this effort by our CAO, who is the CAO working for?”

Bishop, the only Councillor to vote against the closure of the airport, has continually stressed that Council must look to aviation experts with proven experience in establishing successful municipal airports to assist with council's decision making and a smooth transition to a new location.

“I am hoping that at our Council Meeting on July 29, this report will be rejected and that council will confirm its commitment to the Airport Relocation Committee as well as the business case study, that would represent a fairer, more transparent and more fiscally responsible process for everyone involved,” concluded Bishop.

Protecting the County of Kings Agricultural District

The looming closure of the Waterville Airport and discussion of where a new airport could be located has renewed interest in protecting agricultural land in Kings County. That debate is not new to me and I welcome it.

Prior to becoming a councillor I spent several years opposing the residential development of agricultural land in Weston, Greenwich, Port Williams and Canard. I did this alongside Tom Cosman, a farmer who principled stand on agricultural issues I fully support, and whose leadership helped several of us lead a fight that saved over 500 acres of prime agricultural land from urban sprawl.

It is within this context, that I can appreciate Cosman's caution about the slippery slope that exists when governments begin to look at the use of agricultural land for non-agricultural related purposes.

The protection of agricultural land has been included in the terms of reference for the upcoming business case study to relocate the airport. Whether this occurred or not protection is front and centre for this council. Within months of our election the new council solidly demonstrated its commitment with a February 2013 recommendation to the Province of Nova Scotia that its legislated Statement of Interest in Agricultural Land be significantly strengthened. Those who watched the two prior councils witnessed repeated votes in favour of residential development of agricultural land despite its own Municipal Planning Strategy's intent to protect. In fact the province had to step in to stop those councils' destructive decisions.

The best scenario possible is that Michelin and the airport's management will be able to come to a compromise allowing Michelin to expand and the airport to stay in Waterville. Such a compromise was never anticipated by this council but perhaps it could still occur. This would require zero additional use of agricultural land while still allowing an airport to operate within a reasonable distance from Halifax. A short distance between HRM and a Kings County airport is stated as an important factor in attracting new business to Kings County. It is mainly for this reason that relocation to Greenwood may not be advisable. The business case study will provide more and maybe contradictory evidence to that submitted by the earlier and more general report by CBCL.

If the business case is positive... if no compromise is possible with Michelin... and if a Central or Eastern Kings site is recommended... council will be tasked with a decision on a site. I expect council's position, particularly regarding the A1 zone, would shed light on just how untouchable any large contingent tract of A1 land would be. That would mean, for example, no possibility of an airpark on Saxon Street.

In the absence of other options, consultants may recommend a combination of land types outside the A1 zone that could include some productive land. If this is a compromise required to properly site an airport I would be open to considering such a site.

At the moment we are in a wait and see scenario. I hope this clarifies my comments of not being “deeply opposed” to the use of some agricultural land. If there is a business case for a new Kings County Airport my goal will be to minimize the impact on our agricultural economy and to assess how an airport's role in transportation infrastructure could serve us all, including the agricultural business sector.

Put egos of municipal leaders in time out

Currently in the Annapolis Valley dissolution, annexations and possible amalgamations are being covered in the media.

In April the council for the Town of Hantsport voted to dissolve saying:

• Structure doesn’t meet the needs of the day...
• The town status no long appears to work...
• The town can’t sustain its own infrastructure...
• We will still be a community...
  

The town has approached both Hants West and the County of Kings to see if either municipal unit is interested in accepting Hantsport into their municipal unit. At least one Hantsport councillor has spoken against dissolution. Currently, "Think Hantsport" has formed to oppose dissolution. The Municipality of Kings County has called a special council meeting for June 16 at 5PM to begin its discussion.

Inter-municipal cooperation, annexation and/or amalgamation is also fuelling a heated debate in Hants West. This began with a perceived lack of transparency surrounding a letter sent to the Minister of Municipal Affairs from the Town of Windsor.

Now we see the Village of New Minas entering the mix. Under the direction of village commissioners it's exploring BECOMING A TOWN.

From where I sit as a relatively new 2012-minted Kings County councillor I see opportunities to improve our valley region from Windsor to Bridgetown through amalgamation. I think that may be the only way to eliminate all the behind the scenes manoeuvring and petty power struggles between some Wardens and Mayors and perhaps now even Chairs of Village Commissions. They set agendas, lead debates and seem adept at plucking the strings of municipal tunes that have played over and over again for too many years. Progress may not be embraced any day soon. But inflated egos and/or protection of "tax bases" could well stop any significant change dead in its tracks.

The Kings Partnership Steering Committee is currently looking for more opportunities to collaborate on service delivery. But recently, and with a strong majority vote, it took amalgamation off the table as a method worth immediate study. Does this mean collaboration and amalgamation are incompatible in the minds of some.

"Now or Never" said Ivany.

Sadly, I don't think the required, swift action Ray Ivany called for is possible until citizens find a way to put the egos of their municipal leaders in time out. A first step for rural and urban residents of Kings County to ask may be to ask each other: "Do we need several village commissions, three towns and a county governing about 60,000 residents?" A second step may be finding out the stand of your town or district councillor, village commissioner, warden or mayor on the issue of amalgamation or smarter, leaner government. 

Your wallet may thank you for paying more attention to the issue of having a municipal government versus several.

Municipalities & the 2014-2015 Provincial Budget

News/Analysis from the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities just sent to councillors by email [adjusted here to provide a point by point format]:

• Given the Province's current deficit,  there were no huge surprises for municipalities with Thursday's  budget announcement. 
• The establishment of a department dedicated to municipal affairs is a positive move. This new department includes the Fire Marshall's Office and the Emergency Measures Office.  Within the department's budget, the Capacity Building Grant will be increased from $233,000 to $491,000.  This money will be used to address governance issues and asset management. 
• Given the impacts of climate change, the Province announced a $1 million program for flood mitigation and flood mapping.
• As previously announced, the Federal Gas Tax Fund for 2014-15 will be $53.2 million.  There was no formal budget figure provided for the new Building Canada Fund. The Province has allocated funding for the program but no figures were provided.
• On the negative side, municipalities continue to pay significant costs for provincial services including $223.8 million for public education, an increase of $8.9 million over last year. Municipalities will also pay $13.9 million for Corrections and $7 million for Public Housing, similar to last year. RCMP costs are expected to go up by 1.5 per cent as well as DNA costs which will go from $219,000 to $512,000. The Provincial Capital Assistance Program was reduced from $3.75 million to $3.05 million.
• Other programs of interest to municipalities include:

$170,000 grant for Age Friendly Community Grants
$250,000 grant for Senior Safety Program
$1 million for public transit outside of HRM and $500,000 for community transit.
$1.5 million for fire protection, an increase of $286,000
$3. Million to support the new Housing Strategy
$2.1 million to establish Regional Enterprise Networks
Funding for public libraries will be increased by $200,000 to over $14 million. [My note... less than 1.5 percent]