There are residents who refuse to adhere to proposed changes to the Town of Ponoka’s utility bylaw.
Council was presented with these proposed changes Nov. 14 during a regular meeting in which options for wireless water meter holdouts were included within the town’s bylaw.
Those revisions give those who don’t want a wireless water meter the following options:
• To have a radio transmitter mounted to the outside of a building at a one-time cost of $275 or outside of the property with a one-time cost of $700 for the installation.
• Install what is called a ‘non-standard’ meter with a button reader mounted on the exterior of the home. This would be a one-time fee of $250 plus $20 per month for manual readings and a $10 per month administration fee.
• If the other options aren’t selected by a homeowner then the town would proceed with the installation of a new water meter off-site. The cost for that would fall to the homeowner.
“I think we’ve given our taxpayers and residents numerous options,” said Coun. Carla Prediger of the proposal.
For Coun. Teri Underhill’s part, she wondered about feedback.
Chris McKenna, director of operations and property services, said there is one resident worried about how it would affect the bees, but McKenna said it’s actually less radiation than a hard line meter system.
McKenna added that one resident was okay with the change but didn’t want to pay for it, however, they know they are required to, he added.
CAO Albert Flootman said that one resident has put the town on what he called ‘notice,’ stating that they did not have a contract with the town.
“They’re not accepting the terms of the bylaw as amended,” said Flootman, but confirmed that under the Municipal Government Act the town is within its rights to change the bylaw.
Ponoka News obtained copies of three letters from residents (names redacted due the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act) on the proposed changes. The letters are written in complex legalese. One hand-written letter states they will not allow the town to place them “under contract.”
“Please be advised that in no way will either [redacted] allow the corporation acting in commerce named the Town of Ponoka, incorporated be allowed to place us unto contract under Bylaw 391-17 tacitly or otherwise.”
“We do not consent and waive all benefits.”
Another typed letter requests that council “cease and desist” in any further action against them as they have health issues.
“In no way will I allow The Town of Ponoka Corporation by any means whatsoever to put me under contract or change my existing contract without my permission or be placed in tacit agreement by acquiescence. It is illegal to alter or change a contract without the consent of both parties,” states the letter.
Each letter claims that a contract was entered with the previous utilities bylaw.
Council passed second reading on the bylaw with a decision expected at the Nov. 28 meeting on the proposed changes. Third and final reading was approved at that meeting.
Updated to add that council voted in favour of the bylaw amendments.
