All heck broke loose at council Monday night over a proposed local improvement on 100th Street that has aroused considerable local consternation.
The proposed improvement was for sub grade, storm sewer and pavement on 100th Street from 27th Avenue to 25th Avenue at an estimated cost of $335,527.50. The estimated $204,845.42 is to be paid by the municipality while $130,682.08 is to be paid by the benefiting landowners on that street.
A local improvement construction bylaw was before council Monday that would have given the go-ahead for the work. The ensuing discussion ended up dominating the 90-minute meeting.
While the bylaw made it through two readings, final passage is on hold, as the proposed local improvement has run into trouble with several property owners on the street.
A group of residents was before council Monday to attempt to stop the proposed improvement. A delegation led by Paul Kryzanowski Jr. expressed concern about the cost of the work. They noted property owners received only a month's notice about it.
Kryzanowski and the affected property owners attempted to file a petition with City Hall to stop the proposed improvement.
City Clerk Debbie Wohlberg explained that of the 16 affected owners, only eight were counted in support of the petition. That was one short of the majority needed, so even though they had the required 50 per cent of the assessed value, the petition was invalid.
Of concern to councillors were some of the challenges petitioners faced in filing the petition, particularly in tracking down the owners of the properties on the affected street. One property had three owners, which required a majority of two of them to count in favour of the petition.
The delegation before council noted they were ultimately able to obtain the additional one name needed to achieve the required majority, but it arrived too late for the April 9 deadline.
Even if the petition had been valid, the most that could have achieved was a delay of the local improvement by one year. Council still retained the power to force the local improvement to go ahead after a year, in spite of the petition against it.
Compounding matters was the fact there was also support expressed to go ahead with the proposed work. City Manager Jim Toye told council it was his understanding there were several requests in the past for the local improvement on that particular street. Public works director Stewart Schafer confirmed it as well.
Council was at a standstill in determining how to address the situation.
There was sentiment in favour of moving ahead with the improvement despite the opposition. Councillor Ron Crush took the hardest line in favour of addressing the infrastructure needs, taking the view the work was needed as "part of an infrastructural renewal process."
"I have some difficulty with us not continuing on track with our budget documents," said Crush at one point, noting the work was earmarked to go ahead in the 2012 budget.
But unease was expressed from other councillors about moving ahead given the near-miss petition opposing the work.
Councillor Brad Pattinson was one of those who sympathized with the property owners over the hefty bill they would face. He also noted there was confusion in the process.
"Most of us understand the process," said Pattinson, referring to City Hall, but "residents really don't."
Local improvements could be a completely unexpected added expense, noted Pattinson. He suggested in such a situation where people were taken aback, council did "have the ability to step back" and defer it for a year so everyone could plan for it.
Councillor Grace Lang acknowledged council faced a tough decision. Lang said she was uncomfortable moving forward with the local improvement, noting the petition concerns, but agreed with other councillors who are concerned the cost would ultimately hurt taxpayers if the project is delayed.
Lang quoted a familiar line from fellow councillor Don Buglas by saying "every time we put something off, the price goes up."
"It's a bad place to be sitting right now," she said of council's predicament.
A wide-ranging discussion ensued, much of it procedural in nature. One scenario that appears to be gaining traction with councillors would allow the local improvement to go ahead but push back the start date to allow residents additional time to prepare for the tax hit.
In the end, council made clear they would not rush to an immediate decision that night.
Council did vote on two readings of the local improvement bylaw, both of which highlighted the tough deliberations councillors had on the issue. Second reading for the local improvement bylaw passed, just barely, by a 4-3 vote, with Trent Houk, Pattinson and Lang voting against. As well, a majority of four councillors voted to deny the unanimous consent needed to move to third reading.
Third reading has been held over to the next council meeting May 28 at which time the matter will be discussed again.
