County Choses Costly Future for Paving Subdivisions

On December 3, 2013 Kings County Council voted 6 to 4 to spend approximately $1.2 Million dollars from “reserve funds” to cover 50 percent of the cost for paving subdivision roads.  The majority of these roads are in Kingston, Greenwood, Aylesford and Coldbrook.  This is a costly departure from prior practices that is not supported by the intent of the current by-law.

Until now, with few exceptions, local improvement costs for the 50 percent not covered by the province have been charged to the homeowners of the subdivisions paved.  Between 1996 and 2011 hundreds of tax-payers paid out of their own pockets to pave their subdivision roads. Some, on a 10-year plan, will continue to pay during the years immediately ahead.

It is also notable developers of new subdivisions (since 1996) post bonds to ensure that paving is completed. The charges related to that paving gets covered by those purchasing lots or homes in the subdivision. This is another indication that it is not the intention of Kings County to cover the costs of subdivision paving.

What happened at the December 3 council meeting was a good deal for those living along about 15-kilometres of roads but it is questionable why and how this occurred.  Most councillors at the horseshoe gave no indication of why they voted as they did despite the fact that they were voting on a $1.2 million dollar item. 

Here’s what happened on December 3 and why I voted against the motion

A motion to not charge a local improvement charge was quickly put on the table and seconded, despite the fact that a very similar motion had been tabled, and rejected, in September.  Further, a referred motion from that same date in September, that I argued should have been returned to the table first, was not recognized by the chair. That motion looked at a flexible payment plan where the county paid for roads with a more generalized use, and homeowners paid the remainder.

For me the debate on December 3rd was not only about roads. It was more important than that. It was about fairness and the responsible use by council of the scarce resources entrusted to us by taxpayers from one end of this county to the other.  

A two-pager is usually how I try to clear my head on complex issues that are taking unexpected twists and turns at the council table.  The following is informed by the two-pager I prepared in advance of December 3rd. This is the information that ultimately, in the absence of any substantive debate by those in favour, guided my decision to vote against the motion that waived all costs to homeowners.  Some additional background information is also provided.

Fairness

To date the vast majority of home-owners have paid considerable amounts from their household budgets to have their subdivision roads improved under By-law 50.

Most usually, local improvement charges have been done after a successful petition. Charges paid by homeowners to date are in the range of $1.094.52 to $3,318.56 or by frontage… $3.67 to $19.08 per foot.

Some home-owners have also paid interest on a 10-year plan at an annual rate of 8 percent to make the paving of their subdivision roads affordable to their household. Some will still be making payments for several years to come. 

By my estimate, based on the number of roads paved to date, 100s of homeowners have paid out of their own pockets for paving in their subdivision under Bylaw 50.

On the other hand, a few years back, some homeowners on a few roads eligible for upgrading under Bylaw 50 were exempted from local improvement charges. 

Most notably, at a special meeting of council (September 22, 2009), homeowners on Oak Avenue and Fales River Road, Kingston, were exempted from contributing from local improvement charges. No reason is recorded in the minutes.

ON MOTION OF DEPUTY WARDEN BROTHERS AND COUNCILLOR HALL, MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ACCEPTS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND APPROVES THAT THE RESIDENTS OF OAK AVENUE AND FALES RIVER ROAD BE EXEMPT FROM CONTRIBUTING TO THE RE-PAVING OF OAK AVENUE AND FALES RIVER ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN BY-LAW 50-STREET SURFACING BYLAW, APPROVAL THAT THE FUNDING MODEL DESCRIBED ABOVE BE USED FOR PROCEEDING WITH THE RE-PAVING OF OAK AVENUE AND FALES RIVER ROAD, AND FURTHER, APPROVAL TO PROCEED WITH FURTHER CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION FOR POTENTIAL AWARD DURING OCTOBER COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED. [Exerted from official minutes]

It appears to me that following these exemptions in Kingston By-law 50 petitions started to routinely fail. From the information available we see that:

• A total of 46 Bylaw 50 petitions were completed between 1996 and 2011.
• A total of 28 Bylaw 50 petitions were successful.
• Of the 18 failed petitions --- I noted only one failed prior to 2009.

Did the 2009 exemption of local improvement costs for Oak Avenue and the Fales River Road have an impact on the success rate following that decision of council?

Procedure

Time was not on our side: The season was advancing and temperatures were soon to be unfavourable for paving activities. From the beginning of this project we had to decipher if it would be possible for council to apply a local improvement charge after paving has been completed and/or without a petition.  Throughout the process we were assured by staff that these issues were surmountable.  That is, council did have the option to move forward without petitions and did have the ability to apply a local improvement charge to homeowners post paving.

Is a petition an essential factor? Another way to address this was to uncover if any roads had previously been paved under By-law 50 without a petition being completed. 

I found an answer to that in a second report prepared by the CAO at the request of council (in response to unanswered questions I was seeking that had not been forthcoming). This second report included a listing of 6 roads paved in 1999 under Bylaw 50 where a petition was not held.  These roads were in 3 districts: 4 in Greenwood; 1 in New Minas; and 1 in Port Williams.

Unfortunately, information regarding whether or not a local improvement charge was paid by homeowners on these roads was missing.

Applying a local improvement charge post paving.  We all know that the paving of this 15-K of roads had already occurred prior to a decision being made about how much homeowners should pay.

At all points along the way staff indicated timing wasn’t a factor. Council could go ahead and pave and decide on the funding formula after. Councillors were told that charges could be applied after the fact: Once drafting and approval of by-law changes concluded.

This was most strongly indicated in staff report dated September 3, 2103.

Option 2 submitted by staff was to: "direct staff to draft a bylaw for first reading which would allow the Municipality to recover the Municipal cost portion of the 2013 J Class Paving Project, without the requirement for a successful petition.”

So, in the end we see that:

·    With few exceptions, roads eligible for paving under By-law 50 are paid for, with a 50% contribution from the Province of Nova Scotia, and a 50% local improvement charge covered by homeowners on the street.

·      Petitions are the usual starting point for action on a road in need of paving, but there are a few exceptions to that as well.

·      To date, hundreds of homeowners have paid local improvement charges, often well over a $1,000 per household (with some home-owners on a financing plan still paying).

·      Since 1996 every home owner in a new subdivision pays for the compulsory paving of their streets.  Likely, thousands of their own household dollars.

Taking all that into consideration my conclusion is that:

·      It was not fair to exempt the home-owners who had their roads paved this fall from local improvement charges.

·      Council has the right and duty to apply a local improvement charge to all home-owners enjoying the benefits of newly paved roads in their subdivisions.

Heading into the council meeting where the decision took place to not charge homeowners anything for the recent paving of their subdivision, I leaned strongly toward option 3 that was recommended by motion on September 3, referred, and ultimately ignored by council.  That option provided some relief to homeowners for roads that are of a more generalized public use (usually at the entrance of subdivisions) while applying an appropriate local improvement charge similar in scope to what other taxpayers had been required to pay in the past.

Ongoing costs. The decision to pave at no cost to home-owners in subdivisions is, in my opinion, unsustainable without increasing the tax rate, or decreasing other services.  The December 3 decision set a precedent for the future costs of improving roads in subdivisions to be paid for by the municipality until all J-class roads are improved. 

To date this council has not set corporate spending priorities for infrastructure renewal and I for one anticipate great challenges ahead and the need for the capital funds we have just spent (unnecessarily) for subdivision paving. 

THE DECISION MADE BY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 3, 2013, IS, IN MY OPINION AKIN TO A HOME-OWNER PAVING THEIR DRIVEWAY WHEN THEY KNOW THE SEPTIC TANK OR WELL IS LIKELY TO FAIL IN THE YEARS AHEAD, WHILE THERE IS VERY LITTLE MONEY IN THE HOME-OWNERS BANK ACCOUNT.  

I was interested to hear a robust, detailed debate from those councillors in favour of charging the paving of these roads to the general tax-payer versus the home-owner who, under By-law 50 is accountable for such costs. Several councillors were disappointingly mute on this important issue.

Other Issues

Transparency of Selection Process

For me, there were also issues related to the list of roads approved on August 13. I voted against that list based on the lack of information and clarity about the selection process.

It is notable that two meetings between council and the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal were scheduled and then cancelled. 

A July 26th meeting of councillors with DTIR was cancelled due to the need for more work by staff on the scoring system.

An August 9th meeting of councillors with DTIR was cancelled too… in lieu of a presentation at COTW with DTIR in attendance.

Councillors were assured that the selection was fair/non-political and based on assessments of needs and efficacy determined by consultation and discussion between MOK and DTIR. However, once a complete list of all roads was provided, it was apparent that several roads with high scores in terms of poor conditions were not prioritized while roads with very low scores were. There may be justifiable reasons for this, but council did not have the benefit of debate.

As well, there may have been suitability in the years ahead for some of the selected roads to have been paved through gas tax money... that would prevent the need for using as much of our general tax revenue base for paving them.

Background

This record of motions below charts council's journey on this J-class road issue. The final motion will be added once council approves the minutes of December 3, 2013.

15-Jan-13	Motion approved: Approve Fales River Subdivision as the 2013/14 priority for chip-sealing under the J-Class Road Paving Program.	Unanimous
16-Jul-13	Motion Approved: direct the CAO to review bylaw #50 and provide recommendations on methods through which the County can finance its portion of the cost for J-Class roads and treats all residents equitably in roads rehabilitation	Unanimous
16-Jul-13	Committee of the Whole recommend that Municipal Council: approve for the Warden to write a letter to the deputy Minister of Transportation & Infrastructure Renewal requesting they earmark one-million dollars under the J-Class roads program for the 2013/2014 year for the County of Kings.	No Vote Recorded in Minutes.
13-Aug-13	Motion approved: Approve, under the J Class Paving Project 2013, to pave the roads as presented to COTW August 13, 2013.   Discussed: issues regarding deciding on the list of roads to pave prior to deciding on policy and funding; need to address policy issues prior to committing to funding; need to address other pressing matters with funding, including aged infrastructure.	For (7): Ennis. Winsor. Best. Lloyd. Atwater. Hirtle. Brothers. Against (3): Bishop, Raven, MacQuarrie. Abstain (1). VanRooyen.
3-Sep-13	Motion approved: Direct the CAO to execute the notice of acceptance and return to the Minister, with the funding method to be determined by Council.	For (): Against (3): MacQuarrie. VanRooyen. Bishop.
3-Sep-13	Motion defeated: Approve utilizing $545,000 of current year forecasted surplus and transfer $567,000 from the General Capital Reserve to fund the J class Road paving list as approved at the August 13, 2013 Council.[This was option 1].	For (4): Atwater. Brothers. Winsor. Ennis. Against (7): MacQuarrie. VanRooyen. Raven. Hirtle. Lloyd. Best. Bishop.
3-Sep-13	Motion defeated: Approve option #4.[This was the option "Do not continue with 2013 J class project]	For (4): MacQuarrie. VanRooyen. Brothers. Bishop. Against (7): Raven. Atwater. Hirtle. Lloyd. Best. Winsor. Ennis.
3-Sep-13	Motion referred: On motion of Councillor Raven and Councillor Hirtle, that Municipal Council approve option 3.   Motion approved: Refer the discussion of option three and any other options to a meeting no later than the middle of October.   Option 3 outlined a flexible cost recovery: "approve utilizing $312,000 of the forecasted surplus to fund the J Class Road paving list as approved at the August 13, 2013 Council. Direct staff to draft a by-law for first reading which would allow the Municipality to recoup the remaining Municipal cost of $800,000, regarding the 2013 J Class Paving Project, without the requirement for a successful petition.   Option 2 was to "direct staff to draft a bylaw for first reading which would allow the Municipality to recover the Municipal cost portion of the 2013 J Class Paving Project, without the requirement for a successful petition.	For (8): Raven. Hirtle. Lloyd. Best. Winsor. Ennis. Brothers. VanRooyen.   Against (3): MacQuarrie.  Atwater. Bishop.
15-Oct-13	Motion approved: Refer this item to the CAO until Council has the answers to Councillor Raven’s questions, to come back to Council at the November Committee of the Whole.	Against (5). Atwater. Brothers. Lloyd. Best. Ennis.   For (6). MacQuarrie. VanRooyen. Raven. Hirtle. Bishop. Winsor.
15-Oct-13	Motion approved: Receive the J-Class Roads petition. [from Kingston].	For (10). MacQuarrie. VanRooyen. Raven. Hirtle. Brothers. Lloyd. Best. Bishop. Winsor. Ennis. Abstain or missed (1): Atwater.
12-Nov-13	Not motioned.  Set a Special Council Meeting to discuss J Class Roads. Tom MacEwan commented that a Special Council or Special Committee of the Whole meeting could be held to discuss J Class Roads.   Council decided to discuss J Class Roads at the beginning of the December 3, 2013 Council meeting before the Planning items.
3-Dec-13	Motion approved: Fund costs associated with the 2013 J Class Road Paving Project entirely ($1.2 million) from the reserves identified by Staff.	For (6): Ennis. Best. Lloyd. Atwater. Hirtle. Brothers. Against (4): Bishop. Raven. VanRooyen. MacQuarrie. Absent (1): Winsor

While much has been circulated about By-Law #81… And significant time was given to its discussion on September 3, it is important to note that none of the roads in the 2013 project are governed by By-Law #81.

So that's it folks.  I have tried to very diligently present the facts as presented and studied.  Please do not hesitate to be in touch if you have questions.

 

Aldershot resident sets things in motion for improved safety in school zones

In mid September I received this question via email from a resident who drives professionally for a living: “I'm wondering why there are not Crosswalk Lights at the crosswalk at the Aldershot Elementary School?” Importantly, the school grounds with their recently improved equipment are a favourite spot in the evening hours when visibility can be poor.   Later he explained that as far as he was concerned past decisions had led to crosswalks in places that aren’t so crucial while more dangerous spots were not being attended to.   We are all aware of the provincially mandated decrease in speed limits for school zones when children are present. You may also have driven by the speed monitors at the approach to the Kings County Academy in Kentville and received a welcome reminder to keep your speed in check. It works!   In early October, after polling other councillors, I drafted a request for agenda time to bring this discussion to council chambers. A county wide review of school zones seemed the most effective way for council to find out where improvements were most needed.   The item was placed on the Committee of the Whole agenda on November 19.   I am happy to report the draft motion included in the agenda package was unanimously passed by all councillors in attendance:   “That Committee of the Whole recommend Municipal Council develop a policy to govern our role in the safety of children in school zones and that costs related to improved safety standards be included in upcoming budget discussions.”   I look forward to seeing progress on council’s role in school safety not only in District 3 but across Kings County in the next fiscal year. Council will have a final vote on this issue on December 3.   Crosswalks, crosswalk lights, and speed monitors can all play their part as your municipality works with police officers to ensure children’s safety.   I am thankful to that observant resident of Aldershot. Smart decisions focus on effective and efficient outlays of tax-payers money and his email got this ball rolling.

Update on my application for judicial review

I am pleased that dates were set yesterday to move my application for a judicial review forward. In light of the county’s initial position that the court should dispose of the application at the first court appearance that’s good news.

I am also pleased that lawyers Cumming (for the municipality) and Muttart (my solicitor) agreed to the removal of the Warden from the application's title. It clearly made Warden Brothers uncomfortable and that was not our intention. This does not change anything significantly as the municipal solicitor stated that he and the municipality will not move to limit my remedy because of the change in the application.  Essentially, Warden Brothers' decision is still what is being challenged whether or not she is a named party.

It has been suggested that the only factor in play for me is that I was "embarrassed" by the warning given to me by the Warden. That isn't a factor for me at all.  What factors for me is my ability to properly represent the citizens of Kings County. That was severely limited by what occurred in chambers on October first. The transcript of proceedings clearly shows that. This is important beyond what happened to me personally in council chambers because when robust debate of the important issues of the day is not allowed we all suffer.

It was possible for all parties to settle this matter out of court.  Indeed my lawyer worked hard to achieve a settlement.

 

Alternatively, things could have been argued on the strength of the written transcript of what actually took place. Unfortunately, the municipality was not open to that either.

The municipality wants additional hearings and affidavit filings that will prolong the matter and increase costs to the taxpayer. That is a pity. My solicitor and I have taken care from the beginning to limit the time and costs to the taxpayer.

 

But we are now headed towards additional costs that I think are unnecessary. For example, the municipality’s lawyers are attempting to say that my solicitor cannot represent me because he used to represent the municipality. I think that will prove to be an argument without merit. There are no secrets here that would be of any unfair advantage to me over the municipality.

I remain confident that the transcript of what was said at the council meetings will ultimately be the deciding factor in all of this. The transcript is very plain and pointed regarding the core issues under debate and a sound decision could be made at a modest cost on what the record holds.

 

Everything else may amount be little more than very expensive window dressing.

 

Lest we forget --- we remember. Today hundreds gathered in Kentville to watch veterans march in the company of younger soldiers.  Scores of wreaths were laid. I was honoured to lay one on behalf of the Municipality of the County of Kings.

Noted this year by Mayor Corkum during his remarks was the number of young parents and children in attendance and upon whom we will depend to remember when the veterans of today are gone. 

In support of all veterans I would urge each of us to write our Prime Minister to urge him to abandon the plan of his government to close Veterans Affairs offices across Canada. These offices include the Sydney Veterans Affairs Office, Cape Breton Regional Municipality.

Email Address
pm@pm.gc.ca
Mailing Address
The Right Honourable Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON
Canada
K1A 0A2

Kings County Council Hosts a Celebration of Elected Women & Girls in Kings County

There were lots of reasons to celebrate the young women leaders during October.  It is Women’s History Month. October 11 is the Federation of Canadian Municipalities International Day of the Girl Child. And October 18, is Persons Day (the first group of Canadian women won the right to vote on October 18, 1929).

 

 

Central Kings School Councillors and Support Staff Pose

in County of Kings Municipal Council Chambers

 

Click below for background info on these notable events:

 

Persons Day  Women's History Month  International Day of the Girl Child

 

County council recently designed and hosted an event to bring young women elected to their high school councils into council chambers to meet with their "older" counterparts.  County councillors were joined in this endeavour by women from Berwick and Wolfville Town Councils. MLA Diana Whalen also attended to bring greetings from the provincial government while Lorilei Nichols, an HRM councillor, tagged along with Diana to see what we were up to! Why? Because together they plan to host a similar event in metro next year.  The very next day Diana Whalen was named Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance. Our congratulations are sent Diana's way!

Megan Leslie, Nova Scotia's only female MP had to be on Parliament Hill when we convened.  But she sent her greeting, very specific to the youth in attendance, via this lovely U-tube!

A wonderful time was had as we shared food and experiences and got to know one another through informal chats and short presentations.  Below are over 30 short reflections by those who attended.  We're all looking forward to a 2014 event and more opportunities to learn from one another as we share time together. I hope you enjoy reading each of these.

1. This was a wonderful event for Persons’ Day – to meet and encourage young women to be involved.  I hope we can expand it to other cities and counties! Congratulations, I was delighted to attend.  Diana Whalen, MLA Halifax Clayton Park.

2. I’m so proud of what women are doing not only in our government but in our communities. I’m so happy to be involved today and to be able to lead a group.  I’m thankful for today and excited to grow as a person and a leader.  Kathy Fulton, West Kings High School Councillor.

3. I feel enlightened; I suppose I never really understood how parts of government worked.  It’s also nice to see all the women who are parts of government.  Everyone who spoke, including the people from the various schools were wonderful. Kaycee-Rae Cole, West Kings High School Councillor.

4. I felt today went great because I got to hear all of the different women talk about their experience and what lead them to politics.  This affected me because I love to be a leader and get involved within my community and school. I learned that if you get the opportunity to be involved, you should take it. Jenna Breckton, West Kings High School Councillor.

5. The shared experiences with the female politicians was excellent for the students to hear.  We rarely hear about folks aspiring to be politicians and this might open up that possibility.  Janice Foote, Principal Central Kings High School.

6. A wonderful opportunity. So pleased to see all the youth involvement!!! It was interesting to hear the different perspectives from the speakers.  Inspiring words.  Please continue this next year.  It is a good starting place for women in politics but I would also be interested in seeing a similar forum for all youth in politics.  As you may know, boys are now starting to drop “off the radar” in high schools. Thank you for asking me to participate. Jane Bustin, Deputy Mayor Town of Berwick.

7. I thought it was fantastic to see so many female positions in not only municipal government but provincial and federal. It’s very important for women to be involved. Hannah Dawson, Horton High School Councillor.

8. I feel that the women have improved over the years there have been more women involved in politics.  In many student councils at high schools the majority of the people are women. This affected me by seeing what I can do in the future.  Reagan Lonergan, West Kings High School Councillor.

9. Today’s event affected me in a very positive way.  I found it extremely empowering and uplifting to see the contributions that women make in councils, as well as our student councils. It was very interesting to hear how other schools run their councils and it was nice to hear that most councils are at least 50% female. Sierra Pineo, Horton High School Councillor.

10. Today really showed me that as a young woman, I do have the opportunity to make a difference in my community. Brianna Hamilton, Central Kings High School Councillor.

11. Great experience for students to see the opportunities for community involvement beyond high school.  Excellent women leaders – left feeling motivated. Krista Campbell, Student Council Advisor Horton High School.

12. Being able to participate in today’s events is a great experience for myself and all other young women involved in student council/government.  I learned it is very important and beneficial for us as young people to be active in politics and government if we want to make a difference in our community and world. Brenna Hickey, West Kings High School Councillor.

13. I thought today was an excellent opportunity for us as students to get kind of an inside view of what goes on in our communities’ politics. It was nice to get to know our female role models better and to understand their impacts in our communities.  I really appreciate the invite. Corey O’ Brien, West Kings High School Councillor.

14. Today made me see that younger women really do have a voice in more than just your school. And now I am more interested in how elections in the community work. Chloe Clark, West Kings High School Councillor.

15. I believe that this meeting today showed all of us young women how important it is for us to be a part of the voice that goes on in our community. Brooke Godsland, West Kings High School Councillor.

16. Coming here today and listening to all of these women speak about their roles in politics was very inspirational to me.  They all shared their stories, their struggles, and their journey to where they are today.  It became even more clear to me how important it is to have women involved in politics, to hear their voice, and to have their say in our community.  This experience has given me the chance to see what a different I can make in my community. Hillary Dort, Central Kings High School Councillor.

17. Today opened my eyes to all the potential that lies within myself and my peers. I am so incredibly thankful to everyone from my coaches to my teachers that have helped me to become the leader that I am today.  I hope to continue with my community involvement throughout the rest of my life because knowing that your have helped or inspired even one person is the most rewarding thing in the world. Morgan Lathem, West Kings High School Councillor.

18. Today was a great experience for young women involved in politics. I learned so much about the importance of being brave and getting involved. It affected my perspective on how important it is for young women to have their voices heard. Stephanie Tanner, Horton High School Councillor.

19. I am always energized by spending time in a room full of women! I am thankful for all of the women, of all ages, who attended this celebration. I think it is very important to set aside time to reflect on and celebrate how hard we work for our communities, and to remind one another that we are not alone in the struggles we face as public people. Thank you all for lifting me up. Emma Van Rooyen, Councillor Municipality of the County of Kings.

20. I really appreciate having the opportunity to meet all of these role models for women in the area.  It was really eye opening to see all the possibilities and things I can do to improve my community.  Thank you for putting this on.  I’m very motivated to help out and be as much of a role model as these other women. Meghan Breckon, West Kings High School Councillor.

 

20. I was very moved by some key statements made by school councillors.  I was thankful for Lindsay Doucet’s part in a bold campaign to put women back on the Acadia Student Union Executive and grateful it worked!  Megan Leslie’s U-tube address set a great tone and emotion for our time tog. I loved it that Diane Whalen immediately picked up on the idea as something that could be initiated in other councils and that she took the initiative to bring HRM Councillor Lorelei Nicoll along to see what was happening here “in the sticks” ha-ha. I’m sorry that I forgot to mention the small but mighty $500 grant from the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities that totally funded this event. And, I was thrilled to hear several times that there’s enthusiasm for this being an annual event for Persons’ Day. Also could be a model for the FCM International Day of the Girl Child. Pauline Raven, Councillor Municipality of the County of Kings

22. I loved bringing my ladies on student government. I got an opportunity to speak with our Warden and other councillors who have graced my life. I am reminded at days like this why “service” is the greatest gift we can give. Donna Griffin, Student Council Advisor West Kings High School.

23.  It was lovely to spend time together with women on this special occasion in women’s history.  A great job was done by all.  It is rare opportunity to bring young women into this type of forum where they can meet older women and share experiences and celebrate!  Patricia Bishop, Councillor Municipality of the County of Kings.

The following people ticked the box that asked for their “comment to be anonymous if published”

1. I feel like today really inspired me to pursue leadership positions outside of high school. It’s great to see such inspirational women leading their communities and I’m honoured to have been able to meet them.

2. I felt like I learned a lot today.  I don’t have a lot of knowledge about politics but as I learned, I gained interest.  This meeting empowered me to stay involved and to keep myself informed about what is happening in politics in the present.

3. I felt that today was a fantastic opportunity to get some insight about women in politics.

4. I feel very helpful in this community to be helping out in my school. I will definitely stay involved in my community after I graduate high school. Women in our community have so much potential that should continue to be noticed.

5. I think today was a great idea. It would be great to include even more high schools. I think it is past the time of questioning women’s capabilities we have just as much to say.

6. Today really showed me how putting myself out in the community is important and the effect it can have for others. Every voice matters.

7. After being here today, I have a better understanding of what politics are like and all the different positions.  I really appreciate all these women coming together and organizing this great opportunity and I hope it continues because I would love for other younger women to come and experience this too!

8. What a wonderful way to validate support and celebrate our young women leaders.  Events such as this are so valuable as they empower our young women to share their talents and make a difference in the world.

Waterville Airport Relocation

As Councillor for District 3, I've developed a strong position on the relocation of Kings County's Municipal Airport.  This was briefly stated in the September edition of the Centrepost and is enlarged upon and updated here.

1. Greenwood is not where a new municipal airport should go because close proximity to major markets, defined as within an hour’s drive of Halifax, is key.  
2. A new municipal airport located in Eastern Kings will provide additional jobs and bring new investments. Research and the experience of other jurisdictions proves that.

Several councillors are seeking to create a win-win situation for both big (Michelin) and smaller businesses (several are already located at the current airport). The work to strike a transition team capable of bringing the right skills to the table is being spearheaded by Councillor Winsor, whose professional experience is closely linked to this type of project.  By making smart decisions, based on evidence, Kings County can arrive at an ambitious but doable, go-forward plan.

It is my position that any delay in getting this in place puts current airport-related businesses and their investments at risk. That is why this motion passed in October is so important:

"Establish a Waterville Airport Relocation Project with a supporting Project Committee... with parameters outline due by no later than November 19, 2013."

We have a new provincial government with a focus on small business.  Here are some key points I believe the county needs to keep in mind as negotiations and partnerships proceed:

1. The airport’s current location does not permit the creation of the type of general aviation service that a municipality of our size needs and deserves. 
2. A location east of the current Waterville site, with the potential for a longer runway, needs to be identified and secured.
3. Kings County has collaborated with the Province of Nova Scotia to set in motion Michelin's requirements for airport land. It is now time for the Province to help us address the risks this creates for current airport-related businesses and to create a new municipal airport.
4. The Municipality of the County of Kings can take the lead and embrace the opportunities presented by this necessary move of the airport.  
5. Relocation can be seen as a plus, not a negative.  It allows the need for a longer runway to be addressed and this will give the airport a sharper competitive edge. (It's unlikely that without Michelin's need for additional land there would have been action on the Waterville's airport needs).

I'm thrilled that this relocation puts us in the frame for significant commercial growth in our county. Council is poised to take another step forward on November 19.  I hope residents will be there to learn more about council's activities on this important file.

Please do not hesitate to be in touch to discuss your views on any topic.  I can be reached at 902-670-2949.

The Work of Centreville Park Association Directors and Volunteers

In addition to keeping the Centreville Park in fine shape through regular cleanup and maintenance days, Centreville’s park association volunteers have also signed on for “course work” at Acadia. That course work is nearing completion with a report due in the weeks immediately ahead. 

Alongside students enrolled in Parks and Open Space Resource Management and Community Development, park volunteers have hosted groups where community members have helped determine development options for the Percy A. Lydiard Park. I have attended some of these.  The students have brought skill and enthusiasm to their task.  Lots of valuable input has been gathered.  I anticipate a great report.

The end result will give us all a great deal of direction and focus. With a well-researched plan in hand the community of Centreville can step forward.  Soon, directors will be turning their attention to accessing the resources required for full development of the park’s potential. They are inviting everyone's help.

Meanwhile, they already have in hand "50 cent" dollars towards installing a new swing set and replacing the roof and siding on the park building.  Keep an eye out during your walks in the park.  Changes will materialize in the weeks immediately ahead.

I want to send a well-deserved cheer out to all the park directors, volunteers, and those who attended the park development group discussions.  Your work is very much appreciated!

Please do not hesitate to be in touch to discuss your views on any topic.  I can be reached at 902-670-2949.

Ready for Change (published in June 2013 Centrepost)

Before and since I became your Kings County councillor reducing the number of local government units has been debated. Streamlining government programs and reducing costs to the taxpayer should drive our discussions.  Do you know that close to seventy elected individuals currently represent Kings County citizens?  We work for you as commissioners of one of several villages, as councillors or mayors for the towns of Wolfville, Kentville or Berwick, or as your Kings County councillors.

Merge. Eliminate. Consolidate. Collaborate.  There are many ways to change.  There’s one very good local example of why we should… Valley Waste Resource Authority. Collaboration between many municipal units has given us “garbage” pick up that’s better. And it costs only $163 per house per year. It’s so good VWRA has won two provincial awards for leadership and innovation in waste reduction.

Your municipal leaders are currently examining further mergers.  Like waste management this regionalization has been initiated at the provincial level. This time the topic is economic development.  We are perhaps only weeks, or a month or two away, from signing a Regional Economic Network agreement with municipal units from both Hants and Kings Counties.  This agreement will match municipal and provincial dollars in equal parts.

A more “made at home” collaboration is also due to be discussed.  It would focus on the merits of merging planning departments...  an idea that was enthusiastically endorsed at the February 2050 governance workshop...  but that has stalled somewhat since then [or at least has disappeared from public discussion].

Economies of scale will help us achieve the efficiencies needed to fully develop our valley assets.  To share or not won’t matter much if we continue to put decisions off.  Our young people are leaving and too many storefronts are empty. 

More opportunities for municipal units to get together are needed.  I’d like to see a collaborative, independent, top-to-bottom audit of all municipal government programs. This would be a great starting point.  Results could form a basis for next steps. First, by showing precisely where tax dollars are not giving us full value. Next, by suggesting where we can spend to address gaps in service and get a bigger bang for our bucks.

With some good old-fashioned valley gumption and ingenuity I bet we can find all kinds of ways to get more out of what we’ve already got. That’s what we can work for together. Better local government.