Benefitting property owners, or the general tax base?
Joe McWilliams
Lakeside Leader
The owner of an industrial property on the north side of town wants to hook up to the town’s sewer system. This requires an extension, since much of that industrial area in the north is un-served.
What’s proposed is a scheme by which the property owner pays for the construction of the sewer line extension. If and when other properties in the area take advantage of the opportunity and connect to the sewer service, the developer would charge them a fee and by that means recoup his initial outlay. It would be up to the town to inform those landowners of their obligation at the time.
Terms and conditions of the proposal were laid out in a report for council for its Aug. 16 meeting. These include a security deposit, which would cover the town’s liability if things go sideways on the project.
This is the option the proponent is proposing, but it’s not the only one. The town could do and pay for the work, thus eliminating the risk for the developer, but assuming it all. In that scenario, council heard, the general tax base pays for something most taxpayers receive no benefit from.
A third option would be for the town to look after the building of the sewer line, and collect from benefitting landowners by way of a local improvement levy. This was the practice for years, but it has drawbacks, including the possibility of it being voted down. Council decided a few years ago to move away from the local improvement levy method.
Notwithstanding the wishes of the developer in this case, councillor Francesca Ward came out strongly in favour of the town not expecting developers to pay for “basic infrastructure.” She said she’d be in favour of the town taking on the extension of sewer line to un-serviced parts of town as a capital project, rather than expecting developers (and perhaps especially existing businesses) to shoulder the cost.
“I think we need to take a look at it,” she said.
Councillor Kimberly Hughes expressed surprise to learn so much of the town’s industrial areas are not serviced. She asked how many lots are in that situation. About 40 was the answer.
Council ended up making two decisions. One was to approve the proposed ‘endeavour to assist’ agreement with the developer. That’s the scheme whereby he pays to get the sewer extended, provides security and the town later does its bit to inform other benefitting property owners of their obligation to pay a share of the initial extension cost. This clears the way for the developer to get on with it.
A second motion requested a report on the costs to the town of a full extension of sewer service to the properties in the un-serviced zones.
Council was advised if it decides the town should be paying for sewer service extensions (rather than the developer), it can expect a lot more applications. In fact another application for a sewer extension is already in the works, from a business on Caribou Trail.
