DO EXPENSES NEED TO BE MORE PUBLIC

Editor:

Re: The recent articles on the Destination Osoyoos.

DO Heading in the Wrong Direction, December 10, Destination Osoyoos is Valuable to the Community, December 17 and Study of Town's Relationship with DO Needed, December 24.

Kudos to David Eastbury for his December 10 letter and to Kell Petersen for his December 24 letter criticizing and challenging Destination Osoyoos.

Particularly, Kell Petersen stated What is urgently needed and many years overdue in Osoyoos is a prudent, unbiased examination of the Town's economic development model and its contract with Destination Osoyoos, that should be a high priority of the new town council.

I would like to take this opportunity to set some facts straight.

Chris Bower, chairman of Destination Osoyoos Board of Directors, writes, Each year, town councillors vote to invest approximately $220,000 (not $320,000 as Mr. Eastbury states) in tourism and economic development services that they want Destination Osoyoos to provide.

I disagree with above figure of $220,000.

As a concerned citizen, I always ask for financial statements and other information regarding town finances.

For the record, according to Town of Osoyoos paid report AP 5070, page 2, Destination Osoyoos received $260,866.28 (definitely not $220,000 as chairman of Destination Osoyoos, Chris Bower states) from Jan. 01, 2008 to July 31, 2008.

How much was paid from Aug. 1 to Dec. 31, 2008?

What should worry the taxpayers of Osoyoos is paragraph 9 of the Fee for Service Agreement which states, The Town and the Society (Destination Osoyoos) may at any time agree to expand the services to include new projects and programs and to increase the annual fee to pay for such new services.

Whether they like it or not, the taxpayers are responsible for any projects or proposals that the management of Destination Osoyoos can dream up.

Further, Chris Bower writes, Destination Osoyoos believes in being open and accountable, and the flyer provided a lot of information “ because Osoyoos residents and businesses have the right to know about all these initiatives on their behalf.

How about Destination Osoyoos's detailed financial statements and Destination Osoyoos's books absolutely should be open to the public.

I would like to remind Mayor Wells and councillors and Board of Destination Osoyoos Development Society this is not a private matter, indeed it is public, and we, the taxpayers of Osoyoos, deserve to know exactly how our money is spent, where and by whom.

Sy Murseli,rnOsoyoos

Editor's note:
Jim Zackall, financial director for the Town of Osoyoos, said $260,866.28 was the total amount paid to Destination Osoyoos (DO) in 2008.
He said the breakdown is $226,500 for the Town's 2008 contract with Destination Osoyoos, $9,334.78 for the winter banners in Town, $25,000 for local trail projects and $31.50 for lunch charges when DO's chief executive officer and the mayor attended a meeting.

OSOYOOS TIMES-January 21, 2009

DENIAL OF MOUNTAIN SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FLAWED

Editor:

In response to an article in last week's paper, I want to set the record straight regarding my 27-month fight to get 7.3 hectares of non-agricultural land reserve property split into two viable units.

Although the property is non ALR, it is a 'farm' under the BC Assessment rules.

Mark Pendergraft is cited as saying if that type of subdivision was to take place it probably should be done during a review of the (Official Community Plan) to give full public information and input as to whether they want to see that happen in those locations.

Actually, I complied with all environmental and Approving Officer requirements, those of the RDOS with reference to the Official Community Plan, as well as our local representative, at great personal expense.

In fact, there have been five public meetings in total where my application was discussed.

At the last public hearing, the Director's mother, a local property owner, supported my application without reservation.

No one else spoke or objected during that meeting.

The majority of property owners in attendance at this and the previous public meetings supported my application.

And yet my application was denied.

Mark Pendergraft also stated in a report on my application – If approved, this application will further confuse the direction that is to be pursued in relation to Anarchist Mountain (i.e. larger vs. smaller holdings), while continuing to erode the integrity of the Large Holdings designation in which the subject property is located, and will likely spur the submission of further ad hoc rezoning requests.

Actually, on Anarchist, there are a large number of, already approved, acres that will be divided into one- hectare lots, many LH and RA lots, and two RDOS-sanctioned five-acre lots.

This leads me to wonder “ where is the precedent our Regional Director is so concerned with?

During the application process, I contacted our Director on various occasions for guidance.

His latest comment, in an email to me, was that he personally supported my application, but was awaiting direction from the public hearing and the staff report from Penticton.

Based on the information in the article, the Board did receive public support.

Therefore, I can only conclude I lost both my applications to a misinterpretation of our flawed Official Community Plan, by a minority and a distant biased bureaucracy representatives, based in Penticton, telling our local Director how to vote and which way the wind blows.

Eike Scheffler,rnOsoyoos

OSOYOOS TIMES-January 21, 2008