DIDSBURY -- Councillors were presented with a couple of scenarios for the final 2019 operating budget at the regular council meeting on Feb. 26.
Council and administration have been working on the operating budget since before Christmas.
Council had asked staff to look at the effects on taxes based on a tax rate increase from zero to four per cent for six different non-residential properties, as well as the effects on eight different residential properties.
The operating budget is expected to be brought back to council on March 12. The tax rate bylaw is a separate requirement from the operating budget and will be brought forward to council in April.
For scenario 1, the one recommended by administration, the tax revenue requirement would be $4,922,275, which is the same amount that was generated in 2018. Under that scenario the estimated tax rate increase would be 3.2 per cent.
The one council favoured was scenario 2, which has a tax revenue requirement of $4,870.000, which is a reduction from 2018 of $52,275. The estimated tax rate would be an increase of two per cent.
"Council has directed administration towards budget scenario 2," said Mayor Rhonda Hunter. "That assures a $226,289 transfer to reserves for the RCMP and $62,067 into general reserves. These reserves are in addition to what the managers are already allocating into their department reserves."
Hunter said council is also looking at a variety of tax rate increases between 0 per cent and four per cent. The 2018 tax rate for residential/farm land for Didsbury residents was 8.30.
"A 1.65 per cent increase was discussed, but not settled on, at the January 31 budget meeting," she said. "The operating budget will be presented again at the March 12 regular council meeting.
If council is satisfied that all of their questions have been answered and that the budget is presented with all of the revisions they are expecting, a motion will be presented for a vote, she said.
The budget report was accepted by council as information.
In other council news, councillors voted to accept as information a letter from the Didsbury and District Historical Society.
The society has decided to publish a history book for Didsbury and area for its 40th anniversary. The society is requesting $95,000 from the town towards the cost of publishing.
At the recent meeting, council approved the Didsbury Municipal Library's safety and use bylaw.
In other news, council granted third and final reading to the rates, fees and fines bylaw after a lengthy discussion.
There was a second motion carried to have council review a number of aspects of the bylaw and return that information to council in September.
Administration has completed a study based on a directive from council to complete a comparative analysis on the flat rates being charged to individual dwellings within a multi-unit residential building to other municipalities.
Council also directed administration to determine the financial impact of changing the rates based on a fee of $25 per building for water and $7.50 per dwelling unit for wastewater.
The report from administration stated that, "Currently, the town's utility fee philosophy is to charge the cost to use the system across all users of the system. These fees are currently set at $14 per unit for water, not including consumption, and $15 per unit for wastewater, not including consumption.
"Under this fee structure the town has determined each dwelling to be a fair unit to distribute cost. This methodology is aiming to charge all users of the system their share of the system."
During discussion at the meeting, Coun. Bill Windsor stated that having a flat rate was unfair.
"I think the whole thing revolves around the idea of a flat rate for the infrastructure," said Windsor. "I don't think there is any question about the variable rate, this all revolves around the flat rate.
"I think part of the problem of looking at a flat rate is whether you look at it from a per unit point of view or a per meter point of view, it's unfair. The reason I don't think it's fair is that it doesn't take into account usage."
Windsor said he realizes that the variable rate is based on usage but he thinks the infrastructure needs to be based that way too.
"If you use a single family dwelling and you charge everyone whatever the number is -- $25 a unit -- you're assuming that both households are using the infrastructure equally," he said. "That's not necessarily so.
"It could be that in the one family they have four teenagers, while in the other house it's just a single resident. So the usage between those two would be completely different. So to charge a flat rate to both is unfair."
Amanda Riley, chief financial officer for Didsbury, replied to council that she strongly recommended a flat rate component because the town has fixed costs to operate the system.
"We need to guarantee to collect," said Riley. "If usage stopped flowing altogether and we had no flat rate -- we still have fixed costs we have to pay for. So that is the idea behind the fixed portion of the fee. I'm not saying the allocation of it is completely fair for everyone, as you pointed out.
"But I strongly suggest there does have to be a flat portion to the fee structure in order to cover our fixed costs and our infrastructure costs in case there is no water flowing. That wouldn't happen but maybe there isn't enough to cover those costs."
Hunter told the Gazette that the discussion started with what council felt were not fair and equitable fees for multi-unit residences.
"The flat rates were the issues that started the discussion," said Hunter. "What it has evolved to is a directive to administration to undergo a full review of the water and wastewater rates and fees for all residences that will include research into a user-pay system based on consumption.
"The review will also go through the entire water and wastewater budget to identify any improvements that can be made to that department."
Hunter said due to the scope of the review, the information will be brought back to council in September.
Council voted 4-3 to send a letter of support for Lotus Agriculture in its quest to obtain a cannabis grow operation permit from Health Canada. Voting against the motion were Bill Windsor, Curt Engel and Dorothy Moore.
The Lotus Agriculture facility is located just outside of Didsbury town limits on Highway 582 east of town.
In the letter to council, Lotus president Lowen Pawliw stated, "We are completing construction of our facility in April of this year and have already started hiring. Our concern is that we have not reached our detailed review yet and that we may not be a priority for Health Canada."
Council approved a motion to provide funding for the municipal development plan (MDP) for $70,000 for 2019.
Adminstration provided council with information regarding the Shantz Crossing development deal.
The cost to develop Shantz Crossing was $6,820,976, the initial loan amount was $2,812,500, and loans outstanding as of Dec. 31, 2018 totalled $1,605,711.
The amount of interest paid on loans to Dec. 31, 2018 was $542,182.
Meanwhile, council has received a presentation from Greg Skotheim, manager of public works, about the Butte pumphouse upgrade and the 20th Avenue sanitary sewer rehabilitation project.
