Lake Country to sell foreshore

[erinmore3775]

http://www.lakecountrycalendar.com/news/residents-looking-to-save-carrs-landing-beach/

The District of Lake Country Administration and Council is considering selling foreshore property in Carrs Landing to finance it commitment the Kelowna to Vernon trail. The draining of the District's reserves on frivalous projects have meant that to finance the District's trail obligation they must consider selling off foreshore for $1.34 M.

The original deeds to these Carrs Landing properties did not include the beach. Since 1910, various court decisions have sided with the citizens of the province; private ownership begins at the natural high water mark. All beach land below that is free for the public to access. While I understand the desire of these property owners to secure their privacy, it can be done with hedges or fences along the high water mark. Their docks and waterfront structures should be licenced.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/lake-country-beach-shoreline-district-sale-residents-1.4360576

While "... there has been no sale completed to date, just the actual negotiations," said Matt Vader, manager of strategic and support services with the district."It's mayor and council's discretion to make these decisions, listening to the public and balancing what they believe is the community interest."

I believe it is time that Lake Country's citizens need to wake up and tell their Council that the foreshore is not for sale. Currently, Kelowna residents are trying to take back their foreshore. Why should Lake Country and its citizens loose their foreshore?

[WalterWhite]

I’m curious how a municipality can sell foreshore property to private interests when it's “owned” by the province. The municipality is supposed to be stewards of public land - especially a limited commodity like foreshore property on Okanagan Lake. I would also agree, that signing onto the Rail Trail project without sufficient funds is incredibly poor management of municipal finances, especially when this is their planned method of recouping costs. This should turn into one hell of a *bleep* storm for Baker and crew if this is actually the case.

[GordonH]

I’m curious how a municipality can sell foreshore property to private interests when it's “owned” by the province. The municipality is supposed to be stewards of public land - especially a limited commodity like foreshore property on Okanagan Lake. I would also agree, that signing onto the Rail Trail project without sufficient funds is incredibly poor management of municipal finances, especially when this is their planned method of recouping costs. This should turn into one hell of a *bleep* storm for Baker and crew if this is actually the case.

My thoughts as well

[Queen K]

Short sighted if they can. Keep foreshore for the public.

Find another way to finance the trails.

[lightspeed]

I’m curious how a municipality can sell foreshore property to private interests when it's “owned” by the province. The municipality is supposed to be stewards of public land - especially a limited commodity like foreshore property on Okanagan Lake. I would also agree, that signing onto the Rail Trail project without sufficient funds is incredibly poor management of municipal finances, especially when this is their planned method of recouping costs. This should turn into one hell of a *bleep* storm for Baker and crew if this is actually the case.

Baker doesn't care. I don't think he even knows what day it is.