The discounted water and sewer rate for Dawson seniors represents a significant saving within the context of a very expensive system for our delivery of residential potable water and subsequent waste carried away to the screening plant. Where it not for this long standing discount, seniors would face a yearly cost of approximately $1200 after the residency deduction from a base amount of $1700.

On January 26, 2011 Town Council will debate first reading of an amendment to the water and sewer bylaw which removes this discount for year round residents as well as taking away relief for seniors.

In the meantime all ratepayers must cough up the full un-discounted amount pending the bylaw review, in direct contradiction to active bylaws, as if only the formality of subsequent readings stood in the way of  making the new regime a done deal.

What can you say about a municipal government that appears not respect our own bylaws? If you can simply cherry pick through the rules for the desired objective then why bother with bylaws in the first place, simply make adjustments as you go.

At least one town councillor has borrowed a page from the right wing manifesto of the American Tea Party with the position that discounted water and sewer rates constitute a subsidy and therefore should be removed forcing all citizens to bear the “true” cost of delivering this service to our citizens, seniors not withstanding.

He could stand the reminder that the entire Yukon exists in its current form only because of a massive yearly subsidy from Ottawa. Escaping the stigma of kneeling before the feeding trough might prove difficult for all of us.

Before his Palinesque diatribe against “subsidies” gets out of hand let’s look at some comparisons. Whitehorse homeowners pay approximately $400 -$500 per year for water and sewer, Mayo residents shell out $300 per year whereas Dawson residents pay $1,250 per year including the discount and $1700 as an absentee home owner. Do you see a lack of fairness here?

On advice given by Senior Financial Officer Joanne Van Nostrand that because the current provisional budget reflects a new – as of yet un-adopted – water and sewer bylaw (11-01) removing all grants and discounts, everyone must pay their bill as if  no discounts exist in advance of this bylaw actually coming into effect.

This policy clearly contradicts the Municipal Act.

3 people like this post.

Unlike

Every year the Association of Yukon Communities receives nominations for an award that recognizes a significant contribution by a past member.

This award is called the Hanseatic Award and am proud to say that I was this year’s recipient. It was presented to me at their AGM banquet held at the historic Palace Grand Theatre in Dawson City last Friday night.

It really means a lot to me especially since I hold the members of the AYC in the highest esteem. This is a grass roots organization that advocates on behalf of all communities within the Yukon Territory. It is there to serve as a continual reminder to the Territorial Government that we are the people that government should serve.

While on the executive during the last three years we really made inroads by helping improve the relationship with government and the communities.

With this award I was given the nod for helping get Dawson out of the doldrums after a period of trusteeship that ended in 2006 with myself being acclaimed as mayor along with the election four other councilors.

AYC came to our defense when we needed advocacy the most. Without the collective support by all communities as expressed through AYC who knows where we might be today.

For that  I am eternally grateful.

8 people like this post.

Unlike

As predictable as it may be, it is still very odious.

I’m referring to the Territorial Government’s decision to ignore the Yukon Socioeconomic Assessment Board’s recommendation that placer mining not proceed in people’s backyards on the Dome Road.

Apparently the decision body wasn’t able to grasp the full scope of the proponent’s intentions or the recommendations made by YESAB.

I quote excerpts of their rationale here;

“The Decision Body does not accept that this project will reduce property values in the surrounding area given that the project has been in operation for a number of years and property values throughout the Town of the City of Dawson have been on the rise.”

What an outlandish statement! Would you purchase a residential property next to a mine that you know will operate in your back yard for the next ten years? I think not. To say that property values in Dawson have generally increased is small comfort to those who have invested their life savings in a dwelling that will be within 100 meters of an industrial mining operation.

Furthermore, it’s misleading to suggest that the mine has already been in operation for a number of years. That is simply untrue. The claims have been kept in good standing according to the placer mining rules, however the scope of work that is being proposed compared to what has gone on before is a whole new kettle of fish and certainly not status quo. We’re talking about digging up roads and eroding previously untouched land directly beside  people’s homes.

“It is the view of the Decision Body that an effect is defined as the difference between a future state with the project versus that without the project, and includes a consideration of the existing baseline. It is important to note that the current baseline in the area includes the operation of this placer mine, which the assessment did not seem to fully account for when considering the manner in which this operation affects those residents in the surrounding area.”

This convoluted statement seems to suggest that because these particular placer claims and potential for a subsequent mining operation constitutes a pre-existing condition it should therefore trump any objections raised by people who happen to live nearby.

This decision also conveniently overlooks the provision within the Yukon Human Rights Act that allows for the quite enjoyment of one’s property and disposition thereof.

Mention is made regarding the rights of the absentee miner but none regarding the rights of the citizens who live here.

It is clear to me that the conflict between the right to the enjoyment of  one’s residence and the right to mine a grandfathered claim cannot be mitigated.  The decision body has predictably sided with the miner and the Yukon mining culture. Frankly, I think the citizens who have invested their lives in the community should have precedence and should be defended until any potential for mining in residential neighbourhoods is quashed, once and for all.

Perhaps the Dome residents should consider soliciting legal advice on what options are available to them, there are likely unexplored avenues that need to be looked at. I would certainly contribute to a legal fund if it was required.

Links to the decisions:

Slinky-Placer-Mine_FinalDD_Mar2310_v2.pdf

Dome-Subdivision_FinalDD_Mar2310_v2.pdf

2 people like this post.

Unlike

During the dark winter months of 2006 Ashley Doiron helped organize the Dawson City Citizen’s Action Group. Its purpose was to attract people that wanted to do something about the intolerable state of our municipal affairs. I’m referring to the government appointed trusteeship that was running the town in the absence of the mayor and council as a consequence of their ignominious dismissal in 2004 under authority of the Municipal Act.

Unfortunately, the trusteeship along with the appointed advisory council were over staying their welcome and by some accounts it was time to get a fresh start and elect some representatives to our municipal government.

With Ashley’s help along with myself and some others we were able to agitate the the territorial government into agreeing that after two long years of trusteeship it was time to send Dawsonites back to the polls and elect a proper council.

This election was held in June of 2006 and Ashley stepped up to the plate to run for a council seat, which she won quite handily receiving the most votes of anyone.

During her term on council she made significant contributions to the governance of our town helping usher in a new transparent way of providing leadership with an emphasis on upholding procedural rules to make it fair for everyone.

During her term she and her partner Doug were running Whitehouse Cabins, gave birth to their son Cove, resurrected CFYT community radio along with so many other accomplishments.

Then Ashley threw here name in the hat for re-election in October 2009 along with myself as incumbent. Ashley was acclaimed with the other three and I was edged out by a few votes, definitely an “aw shucks!” moment.

After four months on the new council it was clear that other pressures were going to sway her resolve to serve our community in this context. So Ashley bit the bullet and tendered her resignation from council.

Staying the course for almost four years of council duty is no mean feat!

Hopefully a by-election will produce a worthy candidate to replace her.

Like

Unlike

I read with interest MLA Steve Nordick’s recent open letter to the public expressing his ‘personal’ view that Dawson should receive a brand new recreation complex.

I think almost everyone would agree that a shiny new recreation centre is something we all deserve. Especially when taxpayers in the rest of Canada are obliged to pay for it, as they do for all other infrastructure in the Territory.

Let’s step back and get a reality check on the Art & Margie Fry Centre in the context of recent Dawson history.

It wasn’t that long ago that our municipality was under the control of an appointed trustee. Eventually a new mayor and council was elected, bolstered by a promise from our Territorial Government – that has since been fulfilled, to pay off Dawson’s crippling debt, inject some stimulus cash into the system and help improve the ailing AMF recreation centre, not to mention other outstanding issues like the pending waste water treatment court order, for example.

In other words, in 2006 our new council inherited a ‘rat’s nest’ of unresolved problems and issues, not the least of which was the recreation centre. For those of us who stepped up to the municipal plate, it was a challenge to successfully thread our way through this maze of seemingly insurmountable obstacles.

With the help of Community Services Minister of the day, Glenn Hart, we undertook engineering studies to obtain a clear picture of the building. It was revealed that the superstructure was ‘sound as a pound’ and apart from a few relatively minor seismic issues, this recreation centre wasn’t going to fall over any time soon, the foundations were not moving one iota.

Of course there’s more to it than just a stable superstructure. The skating rink had problems which we improved upon from year to year, allowing us to improve the facility to a level that was satisfactory to most hockey players and other users.

Mr. Nordick refers to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the city and the Territorial Government. It set the terms and conditions based on an offer that was made by Minister Hart to address seismic deficiencies as well as open up the vast unused space upstairs.

The last point is important because during the trusteeship period, Dawson’s Youth Centre was shut down and the building liquidated, forcing many directionless teenagers onto the street. Therefore it was always my hope that we could use that dormant area on the second floor for youth activities as well as other community purposes. As far as I know, that work is still being pursued by the oversight committee.

Mr. Nordick’s suggestion that the past council rejected any possibility of artificial ice is not entirely accurate. Even though there was no provision for it in the MOU, the potential for an ice plant was not completely off the radar. Last year, the Territorial Government was increasingly receptive to the idea of providing funding for this enhancement, especially with the knowledge that newer and less costly technologies were being developed.

Ultimately, all parties recognized that making improvements to the partially finished Recreation Centre was not simply a case of ‘throwing good money after bad.’

Even if a new facility was built elsewhere in Dawson, the existing structure could be transformed into badly needed office space, a convention centre or even an addition to Diamond Tooth Gertie’s. It certainly would not be abandoned or condemned.

All of this was in keeping with my view as mayor, that prudence and common sense should prevail when prioritizing costly projects for the citizens of Dawson. A virtually new recreation facility just didn’t make sense within the context of other pressing issues facing us at the time. We needed to show fiscal responsibility and restraint rather than whine about not having the ‘perfect’ recreation complex.

The obvious purpose of Mr. Nordick’s public appeal, trumpeting his ‘personal’ wish for a sparkling new facility is to garner some support in that direction from the electorate.

Like I said, who wouldn’t want a beautiful recreational complex with all the bells and whistles? Mayor Jenkins is rattling the bars, agitating for a new one.

Is it realistic?

Dawson serves approximately 1,800 citizens in and around the town. We are in the process of spending $25 million for a wastewater treatment plant, a new health facility for another $25 million, and the Dawson Yukon College Campus for $5 million plus, and another cool $6 million or so for a new Yukon Housing apartment building. Further, what will a new and improved recreation complex cost, $40 million perhaps?

The golden rule that almost every elected politician understands is; to win the hearts of the electorate, pave their roads.  So we can add another $6 million to the tab for the Front Street resurfacing that was done last summer.

If we tally the total, including the estimate for a new rec centre we are contemplating over $100 million or, roughly $55,000 per citizen. Not bad!

So, next time you are in Toronto, be sure to thank passersby for keeping us in the style to which we have become accustomed.

Like

Unlike

Grant and Karen's house as it appeared in the early eighties.

Belated congratulations to the 2009 Yukon Farmers of the Year, Grant Dowdell and Karen Digby. Recognition came at the annual North of 60º Agricultural Conference Banquet last November.

They missed the ceremony because the Yukon River gets choked with ice during freeze-up making it impossible to leave their island farm, about 13 kilometers up river from Dawson City.

The YTG press release says, “They are admired by the Yukon agriculture community for their ability to consistently supply local markets, while offering a wide variety of vegetables, herbs, and bedding plants.”

Admired by their colleagues, and non-green-thumb people like myself.

As a friend I’ve enjoyed participating in their life-long adventure both vicariously and in reality, by some measure, while witnessing the evolution of a Yukon homestead literally coaxed from the deep roots of the forest and cultivated into a productive market garden. Grant displayed the same tenaciousness and drive as the early Canadian Pioneer on a Yukon River island with Baker Slough on one side and the main channel on the other.

Dowdell market garden in early stages of development - 1980's

Over the last 35 years Grant and his former spouse (Karen Quinn) raised a wonderful family of two boys and a girl. During this time they engaged in animal husbandry, ran a trap-line, kept chickens and worked tirelessly sowing and reaping a wide variety of market garden produce.

Once in awhile I’ll dip into my bank of Dawson stories and remember when Paula and I got wedged into Grant’s dog sled with fur and blanket chinking in preparation for a Christmas Eve ride to their welcoming oasis – somewhere in the snowy moonlit wilderness.

The crunch of sled runners scraping along the bumps and twists of the frozen trail pulled by panting sled-dogs remains a classic movie soundtrack for many northerners.

Today Grant and Karen come to market every Saturday during the summer. They have to put up with my pacing back and forth, impatient for their first crop of delicious tomatoes.

Daniel Dowdell riding dad's tractor circa 1980.

Like

Unlike

Ah… nice to get out of Dodge for a breather!

As much as I love Dawson I was feeling a bit claustrophobic after the big sundown shoot-out on Front Street last October. The glare coming off the shiny new pavement skewed my aim and was only able to graze my opponent.

One thing is for sure, politics is never dull in the Yukon.

Apparently there aren’t enough parties here to represent all 32,000 of us. To address this deficit, old-timer Willard Phelps has emerged from the shadows to form the Unity Party. With an eye to do what? If I were a gambling man I would say that the notion of a no-party system for the Yukon will be promoted by this new group, assuming they gain enough momentum. In these cynical times, it will be surprising if a sustainable head of steam can be maintained.

The jury is definitely out on this question. I’m not entirely convinced that dismantling political party representation in government will enhance efficiency and fairness, although at first blush it seems like a sexy idea.

Perhaps the real question might be – are we over-represented in the legislature? With eighteen MLAs, each has an average of 1,800 constituents. A city councilor in Toronto might have in excess of a 100,000.

I realize that our big chunk of northern real estate comes loaded with resources, an ecosystem that needs to be managed along with the supporting infrastructure. All of which requires good stewardship, that’s why we have a bureaucracy.

Does this administrative arm of government need eighteen politicians for direction on behalf of so few inhabitants? Especially when most of those same people work for government in the first place.

Like

Unlike

The Yukon Municipal Act which serves as the rule book for Municipalities and Territorial Government states the following -

Effect of this Act

5 – The Government of the Yukon is bound by the bylaws of a municipality, except as otherwise established by the Commissioner in Executive Council by regulation.

Because municipalities are a ‘statutory creature’ and exist at the pleasure of the Territorial Government it can impose its will on a community like ours with an order in council. Thereby circumventing the need to comply.

Of course the cost associated with a move like that can cause irreparable political damage to the ruling party. Especially in the case of the apparent conflict between the Hospital Corporation’s desire to construct a hospital at Minto Park as soon as possible and the new Heritage Bylaws just passed by the previous Town Council.

The conflict arises because the Hospital Corporation is unable to satisfy the information requirements under Section 8 – Development Permit Applications from the Zoning and Heritage Management Bylaw 09 – 03.

They don’t have plans for the proposed building. Nothing can commence until all of the municipal requirements are satisfied. Otherwise, why bother having bylaws in the first place?

Another unfortunate aspect of the new hospital saga is the lack of consultation with the community at large. At no time did the people have a chance to ask our MLA or the Minister in a public forum to justify the location of proposed facility.

Like

Unlike

A lot of people think that the mayor sets the agenda for a council meeting – a common misconception.

The mayor brings a draft agenda forward with input from staff and other councilors in accordance with the Procedures Bylaw #05-18.

This draft agenda is posted in public at least 48 hours before the meeting.

A call to order by the chairperson will commence the meeting causing  someone to make a motion that the agenda be approved as presented or amended. Another will second the motion which exposes the agenda to debate.

At this point a councilor may introduce a new agenda item, challenge an existing item or suggest a change. This may or may not trigger a discussion among councilors to debate the merits of the agenda items and proposed changes.

After everyone has had a kick at the can the chair will call the question, “all in favour?” and “any opposed?” and then will declare whether the motion was carried or not.

Unanimous agreement is required by all members present to approve changes to the agenda.

Normally, the acceptance of the agenda is a slam-dunk. However, councilors should be aware that because they are being presented with a draft agenda for their approval, they do have the right to suggest additions or changes before proceeding with the rest of the meeting.

Like

Unlike