A Local Improvement Tax (LIT) that was presented by Rocky View County to Cochrane Lake residents is now “dead in the water ”, according to Division 9 councillor Bruce Kendall July 30 - at least in the way it was presented.
A Local Improvement Tax (LIT) that was presented by Rocky View County to Cochrane Lake residents is now “dead in the water ”, according to Division 9 councillor Bruce Kendall July 30 - at least in the way it was presented.
Cochrane Lake hamlet residents received a letter from the county June 25, notifying them of an LIT as a possible long-term solution to the extensive flood issues at the lake.
A number of hamlet residents have written letters and contacted the Eagle, expressing outrage over the possibility of having to cover the expenses they believe should be shared by the province and the county - considering that the former Monterra developer (Medallion) and former water utility holder (Regional Water Services Ltd.) are both now bankrupt.
“We (at the hamlet) didn't create this problem, ” emphasized 15-year Cochrane Lake resident, Darla Gullons.
“Are we willing to take on a tax for the next 30 years to fix a problem we didn't create? ”
The ‘hamlet' refers to Cochrane Lake residents who reside on the west side of the lake, next to Monterra; they do not currently have formal hamlet status, namely due to the absence of commercial infrastructure.
Cochrane Lake levels have been rising and causing flooding onto the properties and into the homes of hamlet residences (and some Monterra residences) over the last four years.
There has been some misconception in the media over referring to Cochrane Lake as artificial, due to the interference of man filling the lake levels in previous drought years.
Residents of Cochrane Lake assert that the lake is indeed natural, with natural underground springs.
To date, 21 of the 54 residences in the hamlet area have been flood-impacted and a number of homes in the Monterra community have also been flood-impacted; between the two communities there are over 350 residences.
Kathy Sheridan is a 19-year hamlet resident who has been involved with the Cochrane Lake Hamlet Plan (adopted by the county in 2011).
She, along with a number of other hamlet residents, has taken it upon herself to collect signatures for a petition opposing the LIT; residents opposed to the LIT had 30 days (until July 25) to collect signatures and present the petition to the county.
“We (the hamlet residents) have the biggest lots, but we're the smallest population and the most significantly impacted, ” said Sheridan, adding that the requirement to collect signatures from two-thirds of area residents was hardly possible - considering that many of the Monterra lots are vacant or owned by banks.
According to Sheridan, two Phase One Monterra residents told her that they had promised Kendall they would not sign a petition.
Sheridan, as well as 30-year hamlet resident Gloria Wilson, expressed concern with the LIT - that it was an estimated cost of $1.5M with no cap; that the build and maintenance of a paved pathway around the lake was included (something that residents have told the Eagle takes away from the natural feel of the area and does not make sense for the residents to pay for when it's a public lake) and building a berm around the lake (a huge cost that could have negative ecological impacts).
“We're left wide open, the way (the LIT) was presented - there's no cap, just estimated costs, ” said Wilson, who has questioned the validity and legality of the LIT itself.
Sheridan and Wilson said they have tried to contact area councillor Kendall, but have not heard from him.
County Division 2 councillor Jerry Arshinoff first received an email from a hamlet resident one month ago, beckoning county council members to view the damages incurred by hamlet residents from the flooding.
He visited a number of flood-impacted residences in the hamlet area and was ‘blown away' by what he saw.
Arshinoff said he is opposed to an LIT and is disappointed by the response from the majority of Rocky View County councillors.
“Not only have they (hamlet residents) incurred property damages…why are they being told they have to pay for it? ” said Arshinoff, remarking that footing these residents with the bill is simply ‘adding insult to injury'.
Kendall did say that in all likelihood, those residents who have incurred property and even household damages from flooding would be responsible to cover those costs themselves; he said that hydrological studies would be required to prove that the damages are a result from the actions (or lack thereof) from the now-insolvent water utility holder and developer, rather than from groundwater and rainfall.
Sheridan and Wilson have both said that the root of the problem goes back to when Cochrane Lake levels were brought back up, during the build of the Monterra community, with no outflow system in place.
“Assessing blame (between the province and the county) - there's no point in that, ” said Arshinoff. “But this is not the fault of the people in the hamlet. ”
Arshinoff also commented that the way the LIT was set up - to assess taxation based on lot size and majority vote would overlook the smaller hamlet area residents, who have largely been the most significantly impacted.
“The hamlet and Monterra should be treated as two separate communities, ” said Arshinoff.
It would appear that many Monterra residents would be in favour of an LIT, whereas hamlet residents are at least 95 per cent opposed, according to Sheridan.
Jamie Hanlon, spokesperson with Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (AESRD), explained that the province is covering the cost of the short-term solution - pumping into Big Hill Creek and Horse Creek - and will be installing a third pump (pumping into Horse Creek) by the weekend.
Hanlon said AESRD “recognizes the urgency of the situation ” and are “going to continue to work with the county and support them in their efforts ”.
He said that the county is to devise a long-term solution to lower the lake levels (down to a water table of 1,281 meters - the current water table is sitting two meters, or six feet, higher and being lowered around one inch per week).
Hanlon said there would be funding (grants) available for the county for a long-term solution, but the requirement is for “the county to submit a viable proposal, for which they are responsible for the design, implementation and operation of a proposed plan ”.
At this point, it looks like a long-term solution may be pumping into Horse Creek with a permanent line, according to Kendall, noting the complications of running a line down to the Bow River (high costs, issues of running across multiple landowners' properties).
Kendall said a proposal would be submitted to AESRD in the ‘coming weeks'.
He said that once the water table is brought down in Cochrane Lake, managing it would not be that difficult - and therefore won't upset the water table at Horse Creek from pumping.
Kendall said that an LIT is still a possibility, but not in the form of how it was originally presented.
In the meantime, the county and AESRD will continue to work on bringing the water levels down to 1,281 meters as a long-term solution is being devised.
