RDOS meeting failed to give budget info

Overall - A Very Disappointing Evening¦rnThe Wednesday, March 15th Osoyoos Times had an RDOS announcement for an Area A Public Meeting. This was billed as an opportunity to find out what services we get for our rural property taxes and for RDOS Finance Staff to present the 2006-2010 financial plan.
The disappointment? First was the turn out “ about a dozen people attended. The apathy of the taxpayers may change when they receive their tax notice in July! Second “ there was no information at all on the 2006-2010 financial plan. And last, but perhaps most important, there were no direct questions to Director Mark Pendergraft allowed from the floor with regards to specific budget items directly under his authority!rnMr. Doug Leahy, the RDOS Director of Finance, opened by stating that basically the Regional Districts were formed to service the rural areas not covered by municipalities or towns. He then went on to present Regional Services and explained how there is no opting out and costs are apportioned based on assessed values.
However, here's where we really have no power as the votes are weighted. Area A has a weighted vote of 2 out of 51 votes. The Town of Osoyoos and Oliver have 3 each, Penticton has 18 “ the cities and towns carry the day and can decide on whatever they'd like to see in the main budget.
After the section on the budget that the Rural Director has sole authority over, I questioned a $7,000 increase for Economic Development (a 240% increase to $12,000).
Mr. Leahy advised me that my query was political and would not be addressed during the presentation. How can a question on a budget item at a meeting to present financials to the taxpayer be construed as political?
Further, to a question on the 2006 Tax Requisition “ Local Services for line item Recreation Services “ Town of Osoyoos and the $6200 increase, Mr. Leahy replied there had been an error in 2005 and this year the correction was made. He also stated that he was not aware that a 5 year contract had been made between the RDOS and Town of Osoyoos in 2004. Where has he been? After all, he was the Finance Director at that time also. How does a contract get voted on by the RDOS Board of Directors (our elected representatives) and yet the bureaucrats who are to carry out those decisions seem not to be informed?rnThis was a perfect opportunity for Director Pendergraft to take questions from the Area A taxpayers and he blew it.
If communication is as important as he has declared, why not take advantage of the budget presentation and an interested group of attendees and allow a question period for specific items?rnI certainly hope he will make the budget issue the topic of his next update in your newspaper and give us his reasons for his 40% increase in Local Services over which he has sole authority. (Actually 46.6% but I have excluded the error made by RDOS Finance on the Recreation Services.)rnI also think the taxpayers deserve to be informed of where the Grant In Aid dollars are going to be spent ¦ another increase of over 56% from last year.
I urge every rural taxpayer to get a copy of the 2006 Budget or the Regional District Overview as presented last Thursday, read it, and ask questions.
Respectfully Submitted,rnSherry LinnrnRural Area A Resident & Taxpayer


Broom hits staff

Editor:rnA new broom sweeps clean!rnBut is this a good thing? I think not, as every employee of a well-established business in Osoyoos lost her or his job and livelihood last week as new owners took over and gave them the whisk end of this broom!rnMy family would like to send our heartfelt condolences and support to all of the ex-employees of this establishment who are now unemployed.
Joyce BaileyrnA very upset Osoyoos resident


Inclusion of letter critical of Desert Valley Care 'objectionable'

Editor:rnIt is rare in my life that I find occasions to be personally affronted by injustices or statements made in local newspapers under letters to the editor This is one of those occasions.
The editor, Lawrence McMahen, has include a letter by someone, on behalf of Eleanor Wheeler whom I had served, even personally delivered to, medication for over 10 years and considered a fine acquaintance. Contents of this letter have taken the opportunity to include disparaging remarks about me and Desert Valley Care, without checking the facts.
First of all, Desert Valley Care did not close down , then start up again. Fortunately, this event never had to happen thanks to MLA Bill Barisoff and the Interior Health Authority.
Secondly, Eleanor Wheeler received fine care until her stroke required her to be given hospital care, not neglect as indicated by the letter writer. Licensing of facilities is extremely meticulous, and we received and still receive good inspections and reports from the provincial licensing body responsible.
Thirdly, the letter writer was primarily concerned about Mrs. Wheeler's lost cat and her harangue to the staff of DVC, the social worker, and to myself was primarily about the lost cat and our inability to find it.
I find the inclusion of this letter objectionable in the extreme and it reminds me of 11 years ago when a previous owner of a local drug store franchise was abused in the newspaper. He subsequently withdrew advertising support for several years, as was his prerogative.
In some way, I feel that loyalty to local enterprises should be respected, not abused. I did not expect this of the Osoyoos Times and am less than respectful towards it as a result.
Don MillwardrnOsoyoos


Public beach ownership must be clarified

Editor:rnForeshore in Webster's dictionary is described as A strip of land margining a body of water.rnIt appears the city of Osoyoos has become embroiled in private versus public foreshore, in other words the beach.
Maybe there needs to be some clarification regarding this issue. Maybe the city, the regional district and the province need to sit down and find out what the present laws are for all B.C. and in particular the rivers and lakes in the Okanagan.
It would seem that once you are aware of the rules then you play the game.
There appears to be some misunderstanding by property owners, citizens and elected officials alike. Once this becomes clear, inform all concerned and in particular the people who issue building or development permits. Make it perfectly clear that all beaches, in fact, are public property.
Lawrence CrosthwaiternOsoyoos snowbird from Edmonton


LP nurses 'ripped off'

Editor:rnOnce again Licensed Practical Nurses are getting ripped off. It will take till 2010 to get back what we were making in 2004.
The LPNs should be allowed to bargain with the Nurses Bargaining Association and remain in HEU.
Our jobs have changed dramatically. LPNs and
s are responsible for usually 5-7 patients, Assessments, Vitals, Charting, Communicating with the Dr.'s and Patients' Families, Watching Labs, Administering Medications. LPNs where I work have been full scope since 2001 meaning giving medications: Intramuscular, Subcutaneous, Inhalation and Topical (not Intravenous). LPNs do more than patient care now.
There are
s I work with, or used to, that are ashamed to say how much more they make than us, when our jobs are so similar.
s do have more education, give IV medications, and take the more acutely ill on the wards.
However, nursing shortage that there is, when an
phones in sick, and there is not an
to replace them, LPNs have had to take the patients that normally would be an
's. An
from another area or the charge nurse gives the IV medications, but we are still responsible for the care, medications and charting. It is not right that LPNs have taken on so much responsibility and actually took a wage cut, after being licensed to give medications. Medication administration, a responsibility that only
s used to do (for more money) LPNs do for bargain basement price. What a good deal for the government to get cheap, cheap labour. The LPNs of this province should agree not to work to full scope until a fair wage is negotiated.
I've been an LPN for 25 years now, 4 of those years Full Scope, and I'm sick and tired of having a lot of the same responsibilities for so much less, $12.00 hour less. No doubt there has to be a difference, a reasonable difference not $12.
That is the difference before they get their contract this year. LPN 2004 wage : $23.93. HEU employees 11%-15% wage cuts. Care Aid 2005 wage $19.73. LPN 2005 wage: $21.50.
2005 wage: $33.45.
Lee-Ann SeidlerrnOliver