We have met the Water Conservation Goals.

The report, which you can find at this [link], looks at the goals stated in the Universal Water Metering study and in the Water Efficiency Plan and compares those with the 2010 usage. 

In a previous post I said, based on 2004 data, that we compare well with BC and Canada.  Now I would say we have done extremely well.  Our residential usage per capita is about 15% below the BC average.

Our total water usage is the lowest in the past 11 years in spite of a 22.5% increase in population since 2000. 

This is something that should be celebrated rather than having about a million dollars per year spent on trying to get us to use even less water than that.

I tried to get the RD to work to get accurate water use data and participate in Environment Canada surveys.

There have been many incorrect statements made by Regional District Staff and their contractors.  Here I am suggested that the RD maintain a fact sheet with accurate data about water use and the number of users.  Furthermore I suggest that they participate in the Water and Wastewater surveys conducted by Environment Canada .  My submission is [here]

Update - Oct. 2011:  Nothing has happened about my request.  It is impossible to compare our water usage stats with benchmarks unless correct data is obtained.  The RD was embarrassed with the press coverage of their admission that they had compared our total water use with others residential use making us look worse than we were.  When I later pointed out that the Courtenay resident count was incorrect, the RD told me that they were no longer interested in the number of water users and per capita calculations.

Comox pushing meters despite facts

Gordon Grant

Comox Valley Echo

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

It's interesting to see that the true facts have finally reached the light of day around water use.
After scolding the Valley residents for several years for using too much water, twice the national average they said, and advocating that upwards of $30M be spent on costly water meters as a solution to their fabricated problem, the Regional District has had to finally admit that Courtenay and Comox use dramatically less than the whopping 675 litres/person/day they were claiming.
At 481 litres /person/day and 428 litres/person/day, residents of Courtenay and Comox consume less water than the B.C. provincial residential average at 490 litres /person/day and are in the bottom third of consumption compared to many other B.C. communities.
In fact, the City of Courtenay has progressively reduced their water use by over 23% since 2003 and that includes last year which was a drier and hotter summer than we have had in recent memory.
In addition to being Mayor of Comox, Mr. Ives also sits on the Board of Directors of the Regional District and is Chairman of the RD Water Committee. These are important positions when it comes to water in the Comox Valley.
Mayor Ives and his council supporters Fletcher, Crossley and Arnott rammed through a $1.4M start to a long term $10.5M program to install water meters in Comox. No formal public consultation or involvement, and driven by the bad information from the Regional District.
Even when the real facts became public and the misinformation was exposed, Mayor Ives wasn't interested in taking a second look to see if his plan still made sense. His mind was made up. The Town of Comox budget would be pushed through to include his water meter agenda.
At the same time, as Chair of the Regional District Water Committee, he has presided over the RD's attempt to meter all of the Comox Valley, as well as spearheaded the passing of the new water use bylaw. Valley residents have now been forced into much more severe water restrictions that include significant fines every year from June 1st to September 30th, no matter how much water we have. It's their way of making sure that "we get it" when it comes to water use.
His RD Water Committee and RD Staff are also responsible for the previous misinformation around consumption rates as well as stating that if we don't install water meters it will compromise our ability to access future B.C. funding grants. That claim has proven to be false also.
Their water agenda has come with a steep price to taxpayers. Water budgets in the Town of Comox and the Regional District have ballooned during Mr. Ives' tenure.
He has been quoted in a recent newspaper article as saying that he didn't think the Province would increase our water license for Comox Lake unless the community shows they've been able to manage demand. Even though the community has indeed demonstrated that we have managed our demand, Mr. Ives and the RD Staff have not let the Provincial Government know.
In fact the Regional District applied in 2003 for an increase to our water license and it appears that nothing happened until February 2009 when the Regional District advised they weren't prepared to submit the necessary information to the Ministry of Environment to support the request and advised the Ministry that they would have to re apply at a later date.
Could it be that our water license is being used as justification for the implementation of their water meter agenda?
It's clear that Mr. Ives is determined to push his ideals on our community no matter what the facts and costs may be. And he is certainly in the right positions to achieve just that.
What is even more concerning is that the Chair of the Board of the Regional District will soon be up for grabs.
I guess fiscal responsibility and common sense just don't hold water with some our elected politicians.
Gordon Grant
Property owner, Town of Comox

Summer water restrictions lead to BC Hydro releasing water

I have been trying to show we do not need tough new water restrictions or extra water efficiency measures.  [The BCHydro] article in the July 06, 2010 Echo proves my point

The flow in the river will increase by slightly more than double every Tuesday and Wednesday for the next five weeks.

Those are two of the four watering days permitted by our Water Restriction Bylaw.  So the water that we could have put on our gardens or lawns has been dumped in the ocean instead.

The Comox Lake reservoir, which holds the drinking water for most of the Comox Valley, remains full. Flows may have to increase even more if the hot weather expected materializes and increases water coming from snow melting in the mountains. The dam is currently just 30 centimetres from spilling over the lip of the dam.

BC Hydro says they will spill water for two days each week until mid August if not longer.

This proves that there was no need for a bylaw to impose Stage 2 water restrictions by the calendar rather than on an as needed basis.  There is no need to hire a full time bylaw enforcement contractor to deal with only water matters.

BC Hydro says they are releasing water for the benefit of fish but the primary reason they are doing so is that the lake is full and is expected to keep full for the rest of the summer.

The total licensed water use from Comox Lake and the Puntledge River is 35 m³/s. The major water users include BC Hydro use of water for power generation, which is diverted
into the Penstock at the Puntledge Diversion Dam at 28.34 m³/s, Federal Department of Fisheries & Oceans and BC Hydro for conservation use 5.67 m³/s, and the Regional
District of Comox Strathcona for the Comox Valley Water Supply System uses 0.29 m³/s. They have applied to increase their license to 0.32 m³/s.

As pointed out in [one of my earlier papers], our water use is insignificant in relation to the water available.  Our water licence is for 0.83% of the water licenced.  We are permitted to use, but don't about 5% as much as alloted for DFO conservation (fish), and we only use about 1% of what BC Hyro uses to produce power. 

We only use about 75% of our summer water licence limit but the Regional District thinks we should use 27% less per year with most of the reduction coming in the summer.  That doesn't make sense.

Richard

Water metering in the Electoral Areas

In Debra Oakman's Oct. 5, 2009 Staff Report [link]to the Electoral Areas Service Committee she said there would be substantial savings if water meters were installed. 

To fund the meters project money was taken from

• Bulk water rate increase funds       $318,515
• Capital works reserves                  $654,032
• Community Works funds               $435,753

More than $1,000,000 came from funds that could have been used for other qualifying projects in the EAs, inside or outside of the Local Water Service Areas.

In this email conversation in March 2010, I tried to convince the EA members of the Water Committee that

• Universal water metering would cost more than it is worth
• Meters won't reduce water use unless the rate structure penalizes those who use too much.  
• Even if water use is reduced, the water service needs/wants the same revenue as before, therefore rates will rise.

Oakman's recommendation that this would save money was wrong. 

Last month the Regional District board passed a bylaw (wording of the bylaw) (minutes of the meeting) to 

• let the Water Service keep the funding that was intended for (unnecessary) water metering 
• increase the bulk water rates for 2012 and 2013 due to the loss of revenue due to projected water conservation.   

Voting to give the funds away rather than roll back the home water rates were

• Paul Ives - Comox mayor
• Patti Fletcher - Comox
• Greg Phelps - Courtenay mayor
• Murray Presley - Courtenay
• Bruce Jolliffe- Area A
• Jim Gillis - Area B
• Edwin Grieve - Area C

 only Larry Jangula, Courtenay, voted "No".

The installation of meters will not, in and of themselves, reduce demand

Forwarded conversation

Subject: The installation of meters will not, in and of themselves, reduce demand

------------------------

From: Richard Hallett <richard.hallett@gmail.com>

To:  WaterCommitee

Date: 23 March 2010 10:09

The title of this message is a quote from the Draft Water Efficiency Plan June 2009.  It is no longer part of the final plan found on the website.  This is an extremely important statement that is being ignored.

The Water Efficiency Plan states (page 15)

It is well established that water meters are the most effective measure for reducing water

demand and locally a universal metering program  is expected to result in annual reductions

of 20-25% based on evidence from neighboring communities that have recently become

universally metered  

Staff Reports often include a similar statement.   

Buried near the end of the Koers report that formed part of the Draft Water Efficiency Plan June 2009 with appendix states

The installation of meters will not, in and of themselves, reduce demand. To be a successful demand-side management tool, metering must be accompanied by an appropriate rate structure that rewards water conservation and attaches to excessive users the appropriate cost associated with developing the water infrastructure to meet their demand.

The quote above says that to reduce consumption of water there must be penalties for overuse of water.  In particular that means that Volunteer Water Metering will have little or no impact on the amount of water used. 

The Koers document didn't even say that 20-25% was expected, just that it was a possible target. 

A demand reduction of 20 to 25% does not appear to be an unrealistic target for the

Comox Valley based on a review of the information available and similar

municipalities, such as the cities of Port Alberni and Vernon, and the Town of

Ladysmith where an annual reduction of at  least 25% was achieved; as noted in the

Comox Valley Water System Univeral  Metering Study Update, 2007 (page 22).

Since we are not running out of water as many other places are it is hard to justify massive increases in water rates for the residents.  Without such increases then going to a metered rate only means a reduction in charges for those who get metered (why else would they volunteer?) which forces higher costs on the rest. 

The Comox Valley Water Local Service Area is the one that stands out as using more water per capita that others in our valley.  There are many farms and ranches in this area and that may be why the use more water than other places.  Using water helps the local growers and that supports sustainability. 

Comox has a wide variety of properties - from apartments to acreages with different water demand needs. 

Water use is not necessarily wasteful or evil. 

Taken by itself the statement that Water Meters will reduce consumption by 20-25% is not true.  To get those results would take a substantial increase in water rates. 

In conclusion, I urge you to consider what you are trying to accomplish before running out and buying water meters for all or some of your residents.  If you do decide that meters are a good idea then develop a price structure that supports your strategy. 

With Courtenay rates I am sure that many volunteers would end up paying more for their water.  With LSA rates being so low, the loss of revenue will be a concern. 

Buying a home gym won't make you fit either.  Buying a bathroom scale won't make you lighter. 

Richard

----------

From:  Edwin Grieve

Cc: WaterCommittee

Date: 23 March 2010 18:57


 Richard:
Thanks for your e-mail.
Consider electricity.
Here you are sitting in your home...you have your heat and lights turned off in the rooms your not using and turned low in the rooms you are.
Your neighbour has every light in the place on and the thermostat cranked to 110 degrees. He's never used a clothsline.
Should he be paying the same hydro bill as you?
Water is our most valuable resource and will become even more so.
With government's impending 4 3 2 1 water treatment directives the
Comox valley faces serious upgrades.
Do you not think "user pay" is the only fair way to address the future?
Edwin Grieve

----------

From: Richard Hallett <richard.hallett@gmail.com>

Date: 29 March 2010 11:29
To: Edwin Grieve

Cc: WaterCommittee

Edwin

Thanks for your reply.

I do believe in user pay much of the time.  I'm glad I don't have to pay for each email I send! 

As you may, or perhaps may not, know I got involved in these water matters since I was the treasurer of a Courtenay strata and found that we were paying 50% more per unit than the standard price even though we were using 40% less water.  We bought another house but still own the strata so I don't belong to either camp.

I am a retired Math prof and senior administrator of a college and have both time and intellectual interest that I have turned to water matters.

Frankly I was really annoyed when I found out last week that Courtenay was thinking of offering volunteer water metering so others could pay more for their water even if they use less.  Read that carefully to catch my meaning.  I just went back to bold some words to make my point.

If you read what I say carefully you will find that I am not speaking against metering.  It is a way to allocate the costs of providing a service in proportion the the value received.  I am fully in favour to metering all new homes and setting an appropriate rate structure.  I do question the wisdom of paying about $1000 per home to meter the rest.  The benefits may not warrant the costs.  The city of Vancouver has felt that way for years but their current Mayor would like to see changes.

The main reason that I am so involved in this water issue is that I think that the public and our elected representatives are being mislead, and that includes you.  

Last year I kept hearing that the Comox Valley was using twice the Canadian average use of water. We were told that we used more water than other places that were metered so that proved that if we got metered then we would use less.  That didn't sound correct so I wrote a paper (attached).  I did send my report to the RD but I am not sure that it went to the correct person.   Others also challenged this statement. 

I also challenge the we need to cut use by 27% since it was based on an exaggerated water consumption scenario and an restriction that doesn't exist.  The Ministry would increase our water license but the Regional District delayed providing the information they reequested until after the Regional Water Study is completed.  That being the case, why not hold off on metering until then.

The reason I lobby you is not to convince you to do something but to think for yourselves.  I have yet to see once where you do not do exactly what the Staff Recommendation suggests.  You should realize that the Staff have their own interests that may be different than yours.   They want to keep jobs for those who have been funded by contract or RD split funding.

Each Area should have its own interests.  You may think that water metering is good, but is that the best way to spend the gas tax infrastructure funds.  The Comox Lake water system is the best in the valley.  Shouldn't those funds go where the need is greater.

The Areas as a group will have some common interests, but don't lose sight of your own.

So think for yourselves and for the people you represent, those that live in your own Area.  If you want advice take it from your citizens rather than from the CAO. 

The water committee meetings are too short for you to have a meaningful discussion of the issues, some of which are big. 

There is a Water Advisory Committee, established by Letters Patent, to make sure that the Water Committee gets good advice from the city and town administration as well as the regional district.  It is that committee whose advice you should consider, yet it doesn't even have a chair and all minutes are taken by regional district staff.  There is no one in common at the meetings of these two groups except for the large number of RD staffers. 

If there was $15,000,000 available to spend on water where would it best be spent - water meters, deep water intake, higher dam, improved piping, more reservoirs, leak detection, toilet rebates, rain barrels, advertising, demonstration gardens, school programs, etc.

 I hope I have given you something to think about. 

Richard

How the politicians were tricked in 2009 to support water metering/conservation.

I am posting in the Letters page Wayne White's letter of Mar. 2009 as printed by the Comox Valley Record [here].  It shows how Wayne was arguing well that we were not water wasters, well before the June 11 2009 public forum told us we were.  If you look at the other posts on this site you will find that Don McRae and the other politicians were tricked, since our water use was actually compares well with Vancouver Island and BC places.  Our wonderful water supply and infrastructure development is up to providing all the water we need, sometimes even too much.