McBride Council: water metering, parks plan, cemetery fencing
By Abigail Popple, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, RMG
McBride Council discussed water meters, a new plan for local parks and cemetery fencing during the August 12th regular meeting. Mayor Gene Runtz called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
After approving the night’s agenda and adopting the minutes from the July 8th meeting, Council heard from two delegations.
Water Metering
Water management expert Kirk Stinchcombe spoke to Council regarding the upcoming installation of water meters. Stinchcombe is a founding partner and managing director of Econics, a company that advises water service providers on how to set rates and manage their infrastructure.
CAO Jeanette McDougall invited Stinchcombe to talk about the provincial water metering pilot project, which puts water meters in rural communities to track water use among homes and businesses. Stinchcombe is part of the pilot project’s management team.
McBride is one of 19 communities across the province selected for the pilot project. The Village will receive nearly $1.3M in funds to purchase and install water meters, according to a press release from the Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs.
Aside from the benefit of having the Province cover up to 100 per cent of the cost for a water metering system, McBride will also be part of a network of communities collaborating on the best way to implement the system.
“McBride is participating in a community of practice… and through that community of practice, getting a whole bunch of technical resources, presentations, webinars, technical content to assist with implementation, [and] getting support from a provincial project team,” Stinchcombe said. “People are exchanging information already – we’re seeing that online and people [are] reaching out and sharing information and resources.”
Additionally, McBride’s participation will benefit other similar communities who start water metering programs in the future, Stinchcombe said.
B.C. has an unusually low rate of water metering, according to Stinchcombe – about 75 per cent of homes across Canada have water meters, and Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario all have water meters in over 90 per cent of homes.
“When you put meters in and charge by volume, the water consumption goes down significantly,” Stinchcombe said. “As a general rule of thumb, it’ll usually go down [about] 20 per cent … but it can be as high as 30 per cent.”
Water metering creates a financial incentive for residents to use less water, Stinchcombe added. Without metering, everybody pays the same rates regardless of how much water they use – meaning residents who use less water subsidize those who pay higher amounts, he said.
“The other benefit is that once you meter, you’re able to dramatically improve your control of leakage because you know where water is being used in the system,” Stinchcombe said.
Small leaks can go unnoticed for years without a water metering system, Stinchcombe said. According to him, finding and repairing small leaks can be the biggest source of water savings.
When the water metering system is installed, some residents may face higher bills while others face lower bills, Stinchcombe said.
“A key thing is that everyone will have the opportunity to control their water costs,” he said. “In a metered system, people can make decisions to conserve, and so they can control their water costs more than they can without meters.”
Stinchcombe added that while residents may be opposed to water meters at first, in his experience people want the water meters to remain once they’ve been installed.
“Typically, there’s a little bit of argy-bargy during the project, but once it’s in place, you don’t see a lot of sustained negativity towards it,” he said, adding that he recommends creating a communications plan to discuss water metering with residents.
Runtz thanked Stinchcombe for his presentation.
DragiT
McBride resident Chuck Rollinson gave a presentation about the community’s first-ever annual Show and Shine day, which took place on June 21st.
“I’m here to thank you, Council, Jeanette [McDougall] and Karen [Dubé] for making it a huge success,” Rollinson said. “You guys went above and beyond. Some of our councillors here were on site, working their butts off and helping out. It’s very appreciated.”
Rollinson added that in his experience, it can be hard to find a sufficient number of volunteers to put on a big event. Having the Village’s support helped make the event possible, he said.
The event raised $700 for the McBride legion, and $200 each for three local food banks, according to Rollinson.
Councillors thanked Rollinson for putting on the event.
“Chuck, I don’t think this would have happened if it wasn’t for your leadership and what you took on. All of us owe you a debt in that regard,” Runtz said.
“It’s the community that made it happen,” Rollinson said. “I think we’re in a great little community here. We should be proud of it.”
Runtz thanked Rollinson for his delegation.
Parks project grant
Council approved an application to the Union of BC Municipalities’ Community-Building Fund under the capacity building stream, which funds projects such as infrastructure planning and asset management. Staff suggested applying for the grant to pay for a Parks and Recreation Plan, which would include a new design for Steve Kolida Park, redesigning the parking lot near the train station, and outlining improvements to the Dominion Creek and Phil and Jennie Gaglardi Park trails, among other work.
Staff consulted engineering firm R. Radloff & Associates, who estimated the project would cost around $280K. The grant covers projects up to a maximum of $7M per community, according to the staff report.
Economic Development Officer Karen Dubé told Council having the plan could improve the Village’s chances of winning grants for future projects.
“This funding opportunity, should we [succeed], would give us the opportunity to have engineer-planned designs, which would get us to the next phase for applying for grant funding for actual construction,” Dubé said. “Right now, we don’t have the ability to apply for funding for any of the projects listed in the report because we don’t have the plans in place.”
Runtz asked if the grant could also pay for consultants to evaluate local trails and see which improvements need to be made. Trail evaluation would be a component of the project, Dubé said.
Councillor Joe Kolida asked if $280K would be sufficient for the project. Dubé said grant applications typically require a contingency amount to be built in, so there’s extra funding to draw on if costs rise higher than expected. She added that the costs were only for planning, not for constructing the proposed projects.
Councillor Tina Bennett asked if Council would be consulted before making new plans for Steve Kolida Park.
“A significant portion of the project would be focused on consultation with community for all components,” Dubé said.
Sewer upgrades grant
Council approved an application to another Community Building Fund grant, this time under the capital infrastructure stream, which covers building large-scale infrastructure projects. Staff recommended applying to the grant for storm and sewer upgrades, which would include repaving alleys between Columbia and Main Street and extending the Queen Street storm sewer – which catches runoff – to the alley behind Main Street.
The cost of the project would be about $6.7M, just under the grant’s $7M maximum, according to the staff report.
Cemetery Fencing survey
McDougall submitted a report suggesting the Village hold an open house or distribute a survey to get input on how to complete the cemetery fencing project. The project has faced multiple delays since the fencing material the Village initially purchased was found to be inadequate upon closer inspection – according to Public Works, the material would not last long, was already damaged and was too light to withstand wind. Councillors have suggested alternatives such as installing benches and hedges around the cemetery. Additionally, councillors have expressed concern that they were not consulted before Public Works decided not to use the material councillors had approved.
McDougall’s report also included different options for the fencing, such as cast iron, a chain-link fence, or a stone wall, among others.
“My suggestion is that the survey ask the public to rate their preferences,” she said. “We’ll have a comments section where they can add additional comments. Council wanted some input on this, so that’s why the report is here.”
Bennett said she doesn’t understand why the project has had so many delays.
“We had a committee of the whole, we purchased the fencing, we put it up for bid… then all of a sudden it changed, but not by Council,” she said.
Bennett added that she did not like all of the materials McDougall included in the report, such as the chain-link fence, and would prefer if some materials were not included in the survey.
“The point I’m trying to get across is that we’ve already purchased [materials], so we’re wasting money,” she said. “Again, Council made a decision, and it’s being changed.”
Runtz said councillors have previously brought up using hedges and benches to surround the cemetery, and the survey would give an opportunity for residents to show their support for those solutions. He asked Bennett to explain why she feels Council’s decisions are being changed again.
“We made the motion to … do the cement base. We made that decision, and now it’s being changed,” Bennett said.
McDougall said when the Village first issued a bidding opportunity for the project in September 2024, the project did not receive any bids.
“During that process, the product was being examined… It was considered too light for the purpose, it would bend easily. There were some scratches, it would mean painting additional parts,” she said. “We went back to the drawing board.”
Kolida said the fence is there for visual appeal and does not need to be strong.
“We don’t need to be holding in buffalo. It’s a cosmetic fence, and if that fence isn’t proper, that’s fine,” he said. “What we’re saying is the changes were made, but not by us. If we made the original decision, it should have come back to us to change the decision.”
Kolida added that rather than presenting fencing options to the public, they should be given a blank slate to submit their own ideas.
Runtz said councillors are meant to represent the community, so residents should be consulted before making a decision on the fence. Bennett said she agrees residents should have input on the project, but added that her issue is that staff changed the project without consulting Council.
Runtz asked Public Works Manager Brian Taphorn to share more information about the fencing material the Village initially purchased.
“We met with contractors… they were all in agreement that the fencing was not all the same, it was not going to be easy to put up, and it was not at any strength for any wind [or] snow,” Taphorn said.
Runtz added that contractors did not bid on the Village’s project because they didn’t want to install a weak, damaged fence.
“It wasn’t because of the fencing that they didn’t put it up, it was because of the contract,” Kolida said. “You guys scared them. You said, ‘If you go through a grave, that’s your responsibility’… They’re not going to drill a hole, go through a grave, and then get sued or get charged or have liability.”
Runtz said staff had made it clear where any construction would take place, so there was a low risk of hitting a grave while installing the fence. Bennett said she still believes contractors did not bid on the project because the contract would have held them liable for any damage to graves.
“Rather than [continuing to] go over this thing and putting blame on staff, we’re back to starting over again,” Runtz said. “The idea was to get a survey out.”
Kolida moved to hold an open house where the public can give their opinions on how the project should move forward. McDougall asked if councillors would like to include the suggested materials she had in her report.
“We’re looking for input from the public, and ideas on the cemetery – whether it includes a fence, or no fence, or a hedge, or a bench or nothing at all,” Kolida said.
Bennett asked Dubé if the UBCM grant council discussed earlier could be used on a cemetery project. Dubé said cemeteries are typically excluded from infrastructure grants because local governments collect funds from people who purchase cemetery lots, and those funds can go towards cemetery improvements. However, she offered to find relevant grants.
Council approved Kolida’s motion for an open house.
Public Works report
Staff submitted a report with updates on all of the Village’s ongoing Public Works projects, including washroom renovations in the train station and the alternate water source feasibility study, among other items.
Bennett asked about the water metering project, which the report said is in its initial planning stages.
“When we discussed the grant … [we said] we would discuss it more if we were [installing] water meters. Is that going to happen?” She asked. “We had asked for a referendum with the public also.”
McDougall said she would have to review Council’s resolution to apply to the grant to see if it included a direction to organize a public referendum. Dubé said now that the grant has been approved, the Village is in its community consultation and education phase.
“I must have had a major misunderstanding when we applied for it,” Kolida said, adding that he believed Council would revisit the topic and get public input if the grant was approved.
Minutes from the meeting showed that Council had approved to apply for the grant, but did not move to hold a public referendum. Because the report was only for information, Council did not make a motion on the water metering discussion.
Gigglin’ Grizzly support
Council approved a request to write a letter of support for the Gigglin’ Grizzly Pub’s proposed patio expansion. In a letter to Council, Chris Fry of Stacks Ventures Inc. said the pub needs to apply for a license with the BC Liquor and Cannabis Regulation Branch which would cover the extended patio. Part of the application process includes consultation with the local government, according to Fry.
“The existing patio is currently licenced [sic.]. To enhance the local pub experience, licencing [sic.] the expansion will reduce confusion and potential conflict as to where liquor can be served and consumed,” Fry wrote.
Zoning for daycare
The McBride Community Forest Corporation recently purchased property at 311 Main Street, hoping to lease the building as a daycare. However, the Village’s zoning bylaw does not allow that lot to be used as a daycare.
Council gave first and second reading to a zoning bylaw amendment which would change the 311 Main Street zoning to allow a daycare or childcare centre. According to the staff report, staff will issue notice of the bylaw amendment and hold a public hearing so residents can give feedback. After the public hearing, Council can consider third reading and adoption of the bylaw.
The Corporation hopes to open the daycare in early October, according to the staff report.
Street closure
Resident Teo Esser submitted an application to close Lonsdale Street on August 13th from 8:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. The closure would allow him to run a kids’ summer camp, according to his application.
Council approved Esser’s application.
Business facade improvement
Council approved granting $5,000 from the Village’s business facade improvement program to Robson Valley Community Services for facade improvements at 942 3rd Avenue. The upgrades would include staining cedar on the building’s beams, repainting the main door, installing new lighting and adding a new sign, among other projects.
Runtz asked Dubé if the business facade improvement program is a provincial or federal grant.
“This program is funded through Northern Development Initiative Trust,” Dubé said. “We’ve applied annually since 2003 [or] 2004 for up to $20,000 a year that we can then in turn provide to local businesses to improve the fronts of their buildings.”
Council unanimously approved the grant.
In-camera
Runtz adjourned the open meeting at 7:57 p.m. Council moved to an in-camera session to discuss matters related to Section 90 (1) of the Community Charter:
(c) labour relations or other employee relations; and
(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality.
