The municipality can, at its discretion, impose mandatory water restrictions during extenuating circumstances such as droughts or emergencies like floods that reduce or otherwise hamper the infrastructure’s capacity.
However, council has decided against introducing a strict schedule that residents would have to abide by throughout the spring and summer between the months of May and September.
The proposed bylaw that was previously discussed during the April 1 meeting did not pass, bringing the matter back for discussion on April 15 with an amended version that removed a section regarding a mandatory watering schedule.
“The discussion was, should we make mandatory the water conservation or should we make it voluntary,” said Mayor Terry Leslie.
Coun. Todd Dalke made a motion for the bylaw’s third reading, initiating further discussion.
Coun. Cheri Funke sought the opinion of the municipality’s operations manager, Jim Hall.
“We only have the two operating wells. We do have four wells, but only two are in operation for our licence,” said Hall.
From an operational perspective on water usage, Hall said there is a noticeable draw on Wednesdays during the Sundre Fire Department’s practices.
“There are some concerns sometimes with aquifer levels,” he said, adding there could potentially be an impact on the municipality’s Well 5, which does get affected by the Red Deer River.
There would still be Well 4, which he called the town’s “worker well" during a followup phone call.
But any unforeseen mechanical issues or problems that are out of the municipality’s ability to control — namely environmental variables — that resulted in the loss of those wells’ ability to pump water would leave the town with a few days' worth of supply from the reservoir’s storage capacity at the treatment plant.
Hall said during an interview that he fully supports a mandatory watering schedule. He added that while his department has made progress towards identifying and repairing leaks, there are issues that still need to be addressed.
Plus, “with looming rumours from the farmers, the almanac and weather programs for the next three years, I think it behooves us to put that in place,” he said about mandatory restrictions.
Hall also told council that he has been watching very closely the public’s opinion on water conservation through conversations with people.
“People are really into water conservation, so I don’t think it’ll be a hard sell,” he said.
While he could not speak on behalf of the municipality’s peace officer, Hall pointed out there are other bylaws in place, and that the priority would be educating residents before pursuing any kind of punitive enforcement such as fines.
Coun. Rob Wolfe was in favour of supporting the amended bylaw. But he expressed reservations about an enforced restricted watering schedule and wondered how bylaw enforcement would happen over weekends in the absence of staff.
“It’s concern-based,” said Hall, using as examples unsightly property complaints or barking dogs, which can be reported over a weekend and then followed up on during the week.
“Over the weekend we do have those infractions happen...I don’t see a problem with that,” he said about enforcement.
Coun. Todd Dalke said he agreed with water conservation in principle. However, Dalke pointed out that not every resident’s schedule would always be able to accommodate even- and odd-day watering.
There are also residents who are willing to pay for their consumption, not necessarily just to water the lawn, but also to perhaps enjoy recreational activities like allowing children to run through a sprinkler, he added.
“I do believe in not making it mandatory off the bat and seeing where we land,” he said, also expressing a reluctance to overburden residents with rules.
Coun. Cheri Funke said she spoke to a councillor from Didsbury, which has an odd- and even-day water conservation schedule in place and inquired how that municipality handles enforcement.
“People are going to follow the rules, or they’re not. That’s not the point,” said Funke.
“Making it mandatory, they felt that more people would follow it than voluntarily,” she said, adding Didsbury’s council was less concerned about enforcement and more preoccupied with finding the best way to get as many people complying as possible.
“The reason I wanted it mandatory was just because we’ll have a better percentage of people actually doing it.”
The mayor expressed support for the amended bylaw and said “government overreach shouldn’t go into our citizens’ lives.”
If council decided to proceed with mandatory restrictions, then the municipality should be in a position where it can actually enforce those rules, said Leslie.
Plus, complaint-based enforcement involves neighbours calling out their neighbours by contacting the municipality, the mayor added.
“I don’t support that,” he said.
“I have a lot more faith in our residents when they are looking at water conservation as a big deal to them. It’s much more respectful to say, ‘we have a voluntary water conservation schedule.’”
If need be depending on the circumstances, he said the municipality may still impose mandatory restrictions.
Additionally, there are deterrents already in place, with rates based on consumption that offer residents the option to lower their bill by reducing the amount of water they draw.
Council approved the amended water conservation bylaw with Funke and Coun. Paul Isaac opposed.
