In an effort to bring issues to a close, the Town of Ponoka has offered $56,690 to 38 Street residents. This is the first acknowledgement from the town that residents were overcharged for services in a 2006 local improvement project.
A public meeting was held May 21 to address residents’ questions and to present the town’s proposal. Mayor Larry Henkelman encouraged residents to offer their thoughts and questions on the proposal but asked discussion be in a positive spirit of information exchange.
CAO Brad Watson’s started with the hope to resolve what he calls an “albatross of a file.” Since 2006 the 38 Street file has been subject to Freedom of Information and Privacy Protection Act (FOIPP) requests, RCMP investigations, Municipal Government Board appeals —some of which are still being investigated.
Only three councillors and the mayor sat at the table as councillors Loanna Gulka, Rick Bonnett and Izak van der Westhuizen were unable to vote because they live on 38 Street. There would be a conflict of interest, explained Bonnett in an interview. If their vote was ever challenged there is a potential for legal issues.
To help with technical questions, Terrance Kozmech, owner of Descon Engineering, the company that oversaw the project, was in attendance. There were no representatives available from Nikiforuk Construction, the company that contracted the work.
The refund would be shared among the residents based on the size of their lots, explained Betty Quinlan, director of corporate services. There were errors in how residents were billed and some of that information came from requests from Nick Kohlman, an advocate for the affected residents. “The majority, if not all queries have risen from Mr. Kohlman.”
“The issues that we’re going to identify tonight, in my opinion, resulted from human error,” said Quinlan.
Engineering costs associated with sewer and water were pulled, including for those residents who had had unwanted services installed. Gas line crossings that appear to have been installed in a different location, as well as the cost of moving a fire hydrant on 42 Avenue were removed.
“That was about $31,000. We’ve pulled that out, plus the engineering,” she said.
A detailed summary of costs was presented to residents to show where Quinlan calculated the refund amounts with $37,100 for construction adjustments and $15,372 in engineering adjustments both in favour of the residents. The difference is $4,218 for two properties that were not charged enough for work but the town’s proposal forgives the amount owing, she explained.
Peter Davis owns two properties on the street, 4607 and 4603 38 Street, he feels the engineering costs on property frontage is high and would like council to address those questions before he makes a decision on the proposed refund.
This issue has gone to a regional assessment board hearing and despite saying most of 38 Street issues are outside of their jurisdiction, there was feedback on how properties are charged, explained Quinlan. “I have recalculated it and that’s how it’s sitting now,” she added.
Water and sewer connection charges were extracted and recalculated to meet the suggestion of the assessment board. The changes were made in accordance with the Municipal Government Act (MGA), which was not followed during construction.
A first step in the right direction
Providing an offer to residents is a first positive step by the Town of Ponoka in seeking a resolution to the issue, said Kohlman but he feels they should have the chance to review the details before making a decision.
“…Some of the questions that we asked tonight have not been answered and I think the people should be given an opportunity. What they decide is up to them.”
At one point the decorum of the meeting began to disintegrate and Henkelman attempted to maintain control.
“The main issues we were concerned about tonight was the local improvement in 38th. We want to get this resolved…So this doesn’t carry on another 20 years.”
He feels the town’s proposal is a reasonable option for 38 Street residents but he was disappointed there wasn’t full representation of residents during the meeting.
Bill Kuncio, 4015 39 Street, feels many of the issues with 38 Street could have been dealt with when the first complaint came in March 2009. “Was it not prudent for the town to look over the situation?”
The money and time spent with lawyers and FOIPP requests could have been averted by trying to solve questions immediately. He suggests if the MGA was followed that would also have helped prevent issues.
“We all realize that and so do the taxpayers of Ponoka realize,” replied Henkelman.
Gary Stickney, 4105 38 Street, suggests one of the reasons this issue has cost so much money and four years is because of the restrictions imposed by administration.
“You guys held back the information that’s public information.”
“It took four years and two FOIPP requests to get part of the information. We still don’t have it all,” added Kohlman.
Coun. Doug Gill was pleased to see the amount of people who came to hear the town’s offer and feels their concerns are valid. “But also resolving this is an issue of the health and welfare of this town. So we need to deal with that, get it behind us and move on.”
Kelsey Hycha, who owns property on 4003 39 Street, suggested a fixed date be provided for residents’ decisions as the issue has been going on longer than he hoped.
“Right now we are having trouble selling our lot because this is still open,” said Hycha.
Residents were also given the opportunity to provide some additional questions to administration in writing no later than May 30 with responses by July 9. Council will make a decision July 25.
The town is asking for a majority of votes with each home counting as one.
What do residents think?
Although Gulka, who lives at 4606 38 Street, is unable to vote and had no hand in the town’s offer, she commended this first effort. “Some admission has been made that there was some miscalculations, some errors. I don’t feel that it was done intentionally or that there’s any intention to elude people…Or be evasive.”
She feels the real issue was the road not being brought back to its original state. There are other concerns of overpayment but residents can present their questions in writing.
Stickney had some specific questions over the discrepancies, specifically why engineering costs were 15 per cent of the total construction and not the 11 per cent in the mentioned tender letter; he also feels the job was not handled in a professional manner. He believes crews did not have all the survey information when construction began and as a result errors were made. “We’ve always been short of information.”
Kuncio feels more money should be offered. “It’s not a bad offer but they have not gone far enough,” he said.
“The issue is how they allotted the cost to the landowners,” added Kuncio.
Access to the financial information prior to the meeting would have been helpful as well. Kuncio does not feel making a quick decision is realistic.
Residents have not had a chance to speak with each other and a planned 38 Street block party was cancelled due to inclement weather.
“We do have to have a conversation with the rest of the people that were there. It was nice to see the amount that turned out,” he added.
Although Kohlman is not a resident, he appears to be the most knowledgeable of 38th Street local improvements. He commended the town for trying to come up with a solution.
“I think it’s the most hopeful that the mess has been from the beginning.”
He feels the town acknowledging the error is a positive first step but does not answer some questions he still has.
Despite the offer Kohlman feels the only way to finally come to a resolution is if the town tells the truth.
“I think that the dollars and cents are a secondary issue. I believe what is really at stake here is the integrity of the people who run the town,” he stated.
Although he has not spoken with all the 38th Street residents, some stated they would prefer to see a resolution over the issue.
Kohlman’s name was mentioned several times as one of the main reasons FOIPP requests have cost the town so much but he is quick to point out that if he had received information from the project there would have been fewer FOIPP requests.
“Why don’t they try telling the truth and see if it would end?” he asked. “I was not involved until a year after construction.”