Skip to content

Pool tender award week approaches

Town of Athabasca councillors will not be reviewing pool project tender submissions before the public openings of the figures during the June 5 tender award week. During the May 2 town council meeting, Coun.
During their May 2 town council meeting, Athabasca councillors could not agree on who to appoint to review the pool tenders before the award week, running through seven
During their May 2 town council meeting, Athabasca councillors could not agree on who to appoint to review the pool tenders before the award week, running through seven defeatd motions.

Town of Athabasca councillors will not be reviewing pool project tender submissions before the public openings of the figures during the June 5 tender award week.

During the May 2 town council meeting, Coun. Steve Schafer passed information along from the pool design committee that a new committee should be struck to review the four project bids, which are expected by June 1.

After seven failed motions to elect a member of council to sit on the committee and a 10-minute recess, council came back and passed a motion that chief administrative officer Doug Topinka and financial director Donna Anderson would review the information and bring it back to council.

Topinka was already expected to review the tenders.

Coun. Tanu Evans expressed concern about striking a committee without knowing its purpose and terms of reference.

“I thought this entire council was dealing with the tender process?” he said.

Mayor Roger Morrill said the committee is not for the long term, but just for one meeting to review the tenders.

Earlier in the meeting, council approved administration to set up a special joint meeting with Athabasca County to review and award pool tenders.

“Both the town and the county will have their special meetings together so that it can be discussed, and whatever decision is made can be done right there,” Topinka said.

Public consultation

In a later interview, when asked if people would be given the chance to provide feedback during the public opening of the tenders, Topinka said they would not.

“If the pool goes ahead, yes, then there will be information to the public, how the town is funding its portion and if there will be any effect on taxes,” he said.

He added that taxpayers have already approved the $5-million loan, which he said is taken as approval of the project, unless the town is required to borrow additional funds.

Morrill said at the public opening of the tenders there would be all sorts of opportunity for public feedback.

“I’m not sure what model the town and county councils will take on at that point as far as feedback going forward,” Morrill said. “I think everything’s going to depend on how the bids come out, and discussions the following week.”

When asked if the town and county would make a final decision in their joint meeting, he said it would depend on the bids, but it is not something that will be handled lightly by either council.

In December, town council responded to a request by the Concerned Citizens Committee for more information on the pool project, and passed a motion to compile figures to create various scenarios of the project.

As of yet, Concerned Citizens Committee member Cal Gilbert said the group has not received that information.

He added there are mixed feelings on how well the town and county have provided information to and consulted the public about the pool project.

“Hopefully, when they get the numbers together they’ll have an open house and let people have some input into the project,” he said. “I would hope when you’re spending that kind of money, whatever it may be, they might have the opportunity for the ratepayer to have some input into it.”

He added the committee is not against the project, but they just hoped to have more information on it.

“To date, that’s not forthcoming,” he said.

Evans said the lack of public consultation on this project has been immense, and the 2014 plebiscite to move ahead with the $5-million loan should not be taken as public approval of the project.

“That doesn’t necessarily mean they voted for this current project, which is above and beyond that borrowing bylaw,” he said. He added the town may not have to borrow above $5 million, but the scope of the project has increased since initially budgeted for and ongoing operations are what concern him.

“When I worry about people’s impacted taxes, I’m not necessarily worried about the impact this term. I’m worried about down the line, when we’re left with a multi-million facility that is underutilized and has a growing deficit. Does it sound familiar?” he said.

He added when the project began as the oil boom was happening and town numbers were growing. He said now is a different economic time, and town council needs to slow down, adding that there is no rush to push a project such as this so quickly.

“No, we should not be making this decision,” he said. “I would love for a new town council to sit down, to examine everything with a very, very fresh perspective and none of the bulls--- crap baggage that now sits over our heads, and make an informed decision.”

University Drive extensions

During the May 2 meeting after council came out of camera for two legal items, Coun. Shelly Gurba made two motions to award the University Drive extension to Master Paving in the amount of $426,837.18, and award the University Drive. water and sanitary extension to Laforce Construction in the amount of $93,612.12.

Topinka confirmed these extensions would be sufficient to service a new pool, should the project go ahead.

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks