Phase One Residents Seek Fairness

Robert Thomas

In a case of timing, policy changes and politics, a group of residents who had their water and sewer service connections replaced during Phase One of the Cast Iron Water Main Replacements left Executive Committee empty handed and seemingly no closer to a satisfactory resolution to their concerns.

In a lengthy discussion, residents once again returned to asking for reductions in their final billings for service connections from the City. Billings which they believed were up to thousands of more dollars than they initially signed quotes for.

Service connections are the water and sewer lines running from the main lines into individual properties.

City Manager Jim Puffalt had reviewed the contracts and subsequent billings and recommended the bills be sent out.

Initially the service connections were to be part of the Cast Iron Water Main Replacement Local Improvement Program and a portion paid from that program. With the defeat of the LIP program in the referendum Council changed the policy and billing method for service connections.

Puffalt said he “took a look at all information and listened to the citizen’s concerns” before arriving at his recommendation.

He said many residents were “led to believe the only bill they were going to get.”

Despite the City Manager’s review and verbal report property owners in attendance at Executive Committee were not in favour of the amount pointing to the quotes they had received from KMS Construction on behalf of the City.

Property owner Bill Smith stated that he was one of the property owners caught in the policy change following the 2016 Civic Election and Referendum on using the Local Improvement Program (LIP) to replace cast iron water mains.

Smith blamed his high bill on “wrong information from the City and made a decision based on that.”

Smith had been told that he was required to replace his lead water line as required under the City policy in 2016. At that time replacing lead water service connections was mandatory but made optional when a new Council was elected at the end of October 2016.

Initially an attempt was made to pipe burst just the water line but when that failed the water line and sewer line service connections were replaced by pipe bursting through the existing intact sewer line. The sewer line initially wasn’t suppose to be replaced as a camera showed the clay pipe in good condition.

Pipe bursting is a trenchless method of replacing pipe by pulling a bursting head down of a slightly larger diameter of an existing pipe and splitting the existing pipe to pull through the same size or large pipe.

“We had to burst a perfectly good sewer line to replace a lead water line that didn’t need to be replaced,” Smith told the Committee adding he did receive an apology from the City.

“An apology with an $11,000 bill attached isn’t very apologetic,” he said. His initial quote was $3600 plus he had done the work inside the residence himself.

He questioned if people were actually listening to property owner’s concerns.

Resident Bill Graham likewise appeared with a large unexpected bill for the work. He was quoted much less than the $16,000 he said he is now responsible for.

“My sewer line was good and they decided not to replace it...when the contractor came they decided to replace it,” Graham said.

Puffalt said the policy was changed after the election by Council.

“These property owners they had to change lead lines re election and changed after by the new Council,” he said.

Smith said residents wanted a fair and equitable solution.

“We do realize we have better infrastructure on our properties. We aren’t asking for it for nothing. We are willing to pay, we just wanted to be treated fairly,” Smith said.

City Engineer Josh Mickelborough stated that there were “options for additional costs not covered by the LIP on advise by the property owner.”

Mayor Fraser Tolmie thanked the residents for returning but requested more time to make a decision.

“We would ask if you would not give us a little bit more time to work on this. I would rather do that now rather than making an arbitrary decision tonight,” Mayor Tolmie stated.

“There is no cookie cutter approach to this and I think this is part of the answer here,” he said.

Councillor Chris Warren said he was “frustrated there was some form of discrepancy.”

“We do have a Administrative Review officer who could take a look at it and (we could) make a consideration or recommendation on his findings,” Coun Warren stated.

Puffalt said Administration would absolutely and gladly send it to the Administrative Review Officer.

Warren stated that nothing had changed for residents since January.

“Was anything said or anything done? I do realize its a schmozzle and the complexity of this issue. But the bottom line is it’s affecting people's lives in a big way,” he said.

Councillor Scott McMann looked for more details in the report to help make a better decision.

“Can we get a report what they were quoted and billed?” Coun McMann asked.

Property owner Melissa Meacher said the entire picture wasn’t being looked at.

“We have different bits and pieces and they aren’t being seem together,” she stated.

Melissa Meacher stated she had voted against the LIP in the referendum as the “message was we should not be held responsible for so much water and sewer replacements.”

“After the work was done there was no billing process and now I’m being retroactively billed,” she said.

Meacher produced her contract which was for “lateral lines”. Lateral lines are defined as the pipes connecting a property to the main sewer and water lines.

“Nowhere in our contract does it say it’s for work in the home. This was for lateral lines...I just want you to know the time line and how it was billed,” she said, adding “you guys have changed rules for Phase Two and can’t retroactive to Phase One.”

To help erase the confusion and clarify the billing Councillor Crystal Froese said she agreed with asking the Administrative Review Officer to look into it.

The comment was made from the delegation, the contract came from the contractor “on behalf of the City” And also “there was no communication until we got this eleventh hour bill.”

It should be noted during Phase Two of the Cast Iron Water Main Replacement Program there were major communication problems with least one High Street business claiming the City abrogated communication about the project to the contractor.

Councillor Brian Swanson opposed the move to the Administrative Review Officer.

“I’m not too quick to go to the Administrative Review Officer although Administration would like to see that,” Councillor Swanson stated.

Coun McMann restated the need to see what people were quoted.

“I want that what they have to pay and what they were told.. I would like to see that information, I believe it is critical,” McMann stated.

Coun Warren moved the issue be referred to the Administrative Review Officer for a report.

The Administrative Review Officer will make a recommendation that Council can consider when voting on the issue.

Although Executive Committee made the decision MJ Independent has learned at least one effected resident, not part of the delegation, is in the process of filing a complaint with the Provincial Ombudsman's Office on their billing and treatment regarding the entire process.

It’s unknown at present time if the Ombudsman’s Office will hear the complaint and if it falls into their mandate. The office is seen as an office of last resort.

The Provincial Ombudsman's Office was granted jurisdiction over municipalities since November 2015.