A disagreement between Town of Sundre council and Mountain View County council on water and wastewater servicing has sparked mediation.
Town officials feel the county owes more than what it offered for Sundre's east side servicing project.
“Based upon independent engineering data and financial statements, the appropriate proportioning of all costs for the project and over sizing, the county share of 26 per cent of the total cost ($8,080,060) is $2,100,816. Net of the BCF grant ($5,170,430) the county share owing to the town is $756,504,” states a letter written by Sundre mayor Annette Clews addressed to county reeve Bruce Beattie, dated Aug. 20. The letter was hand-delivered on the same day it was written.
The county offered to pay $304,000 to the town and stated that the amount was not to be negotiated. It was the decision of county council on Aug. 14 that the town was to accept the amount by Aug. 27 or it was to be withdrawn.
In a letter from Beattie to Clews dated Aug. 23, he refers to a letter written by Al Kemmere when he was reeve, dated July 12, 2010. It indicated that the county no longer intended on participating in the Sundre east side servicing project.
“At that time negotiations between the county and the town had broken down, and therefore, legally there was no binding obligation on the part of the county to contribute to the project,” explains Beattie in the letter.
“This is why the county considered the $304,000 as a goodwill measure which was not negotiable.”
He said the amount was based on a formula that was agreed to by administrative representatives from both the town and the county, for the river crossing portion of the project only.
“The MOA (memorandum of agreement) between the county and town clearly outlines the detail and conditions for utilities. The MOA must be used and the conditions attached to the county contribution are not appropriate,” reads the letter from Clews to Beattie.
“Should the county not accept their responsibility to fund the full contribution for over sizing the town again recommends that mediation services be engaged to resolve this issue.”
During the Sundre council meeting on Oct. 7, council passed a motion to take the next step in mediation with the county, under the MOA. If mediation fails, arbitration will be sought.
Coun. Tony Jordan said the county and the town were in mediation in 2010 regarding the issue. Coun. Myron Thompson expressed concerns about going into mediation with the county because of the damage it might cause to the relationship between the town and the county. Jordan reiterated to Thompson that the county refuses to negotiate. Coun. Paul Isaac opposed the motion.
“I reiterate that our solicitors have advised that there are no legal grounds for mediation as there was no agreement that was broken. The county's participation in the project ended with Reeve Kemmere's letter. I would also refer to section G. 8 of the MOA which states: The town and county recognize that the decision to participate in or not participate in a capital project ultimately lies with the respective municipal councils, who in turn must rely on the support of their electorate to support the project and any capital borrowing that could be required,” said Beattie.
He said county council never considered or passed a motion in support of the east side servicing project.
“I would hope that your council might reconsider their decision to reject what I view as a fair and equitable solution to a long-standing irritant that continues to impair what should be a strong and positive working relationship between our two municipalities.”
