After previously voting on application fees in the $650,000 range for PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), the receiver in charge of Three Sisters Mountain Village, Canmore council reconsidered a previous motion and installed a new fee that ensures protection for both the Town and the taxpayer.
The original cost of fees for PwC to complete an area structure plan, Land Use Bylaw amendment and block subdivision applications was set at $952,500, however, during a council meeting in December the receiver requested fees be reduced to $265,000.
Last week, council set a refundable maximum fee of over $650,000 after administration recommended $360,920. Due to the narrow margin in which the decision passed, the issue was brought back to council on Tuesday (Jan. 23) for reconsideration.
All members of council voted in favour of the motion to reconsider the fees as Mayor John Borrowman pointed out the message sent out last week could be taken as fairly negative.
“Sounds like council was saying we’re going to be hard to get along with,” he said. “I’d like to remain positive. We have an opportunity to see all of Three Sisters lands back in a position that could be marketable.”
Councillor Sean Krausert, whose amendment last week set in place the maximum fee that would be a refundable deposit to secure any additional costs to the Town, also expressed his support for reconsideration.
“I’ve received a lot of feedback. The motion was not an attempt to torpedo the process,” Krausert said, adding his amendment was in no way a lack of confidence towards administration, but rather an expression of concern and an attempt to protect citizens and the environment.
In a new motion that relates back to what administration had previously recommended, Borrowman requested the fees be set at $360,920 based on around 172.4 hectares of land that does not include the area known as Site 9 or the green space not proposed for development.
The mayor’s motion also included an amendment that stated if development of land increases by one hectare, new fees will be calculated based on the revised area or direct control land use bylaw.
It also directs administration to enter into a letter of intent with PwC that protects the Town from unforeseen or unanticipated costs related to the application and creates a process of how the costs will be triggered and paid.
Coun. Hans Helder also commented on last week’s motion regarding the confusion it created amongst members of the community and how he feels it was a positive step that council decided to reconsider.
“This proposed motion takes a balanced approach,” Helder said about the new motion on the floor. “It’s balanced and reasonably fair to the applicant. There’s a risk to the Town and this revised motion addresses that.”
Krausert also indicated he would support the mayor’s revised motion.
“This satisfies all of the concerns that I have,” he said. “It has flexibility. It protects the taxpayers and also embraces administration’s recommendation.”
Krausert also used the opportunity to reiterate his support to employees within the town’s administration whom he described as “professionals who have excellent credentials. They have my confidence.”
Coun. Joanna McCallum indicated Borrowman’s amendments actually make the motion stronger and provides further protection to the ratepayer.
Addressing last week’s motion regarding the refundable fee, Coun. Jim Ridley proposed another amendment to the mayor’s motion to leave $293,000 as refundable in the agreement to make sure there are funds available if enforcement of the letter of intent is needed.
Responding to Ridley’s proposal, the mayor indicated he would not support the amendment as it “flies in the face of the intent of this whole discussion” and that the roughly $360,000 is more than sufficient.
Krausert also vowed not to support the amendment as the motion the previous week was not in the same vein nor is it needed.
Ridley was the only councillor to vote in favour of the amendment. The original motion from Borrowman passed unanimously.
