Prior to the regular meeting, councillors met behind closed doors. Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) Rodney Audette explained to Last Mountain Times (LMT) that the councillors met, not as an in-camera session, but as a committee of the whole. LMT asked if Council is discussing the affairs of the RM during a committee of the whole meeting. The CAO responded that some affairs of the RM were being discussed, but no decisions are being made. The CAO explained that in-camera meetings are held ‘during’ a meeting on a specific item where the item is discussed, no minutes are taken, and no decisions are made.
All Councillors and the Reeve were present. The Reeve, Terry Neugebauer, called the meeting to order, and the CAO moved the meeting through the agenda. Gallery members were required to wear masks and were socially distanced in the room. Council was seated around the boardroom table and was not required to wear masks. After the meeting concluded, the CAO explained that in the spring, meetings were held via Zoom. Then in April, socially distanced meetings were held in chambers. In June and July, as a result of the provincial COVID-19 status, he explained that Council felt comfortable meeting around the table as they would still be able to distance the gallery away from Council. It should be noted that there are other RM and Town Councils who also meet around their council tables, choosing not to socially distance from each other. The CAO went on to say that at the August meeting, they had an unknown number of people in the gallery which they were not prepared for and as a result, Council decided to have all Gallery attendees wear masks.
Under ‘Financial Statement’ – The CAO sent the financial statement for the month ending August 31, 2020, electronically to Council. The RM supplied this financial statement to Last Mountain Times. The RM noted the document is yet unsigned by the Reeve, as it is signed at the following meeting. Total Revenues - $59,732.44; Total Expenditures - $293,499.77; Total cash and Investments $2,518,327.74
Under ‘Accounts Ratified/Approved’ – Council reviewed the statement of accounts for payment, which were sent electronically. They totaled $4,879,281.98.
Under ‘Reports’ - Administrator Report- The CAO reported on general matters; Cameron Wyatt from Northshore Lands provided the RM with a discretionary use development application for their boat launch. The CAO noted that the Water Security Agency and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans had provided approvals to proceed with the work. The RM will send out notifications as per the notification process. The matter will be dealt with at a regular council meeting in October; Last Mountain Railway inspected the crossing at grid 739 west of Bethune. They reported that it does need to be replaced and will be providing a time schedule to the RM in the next couple of weeks. RM Foreman Report – This report was sent electronically for Council’s review. The CAO noted that he had received 2 RM testimonials on a road rock pulverizer, which he will forward to Council; The Foreman made a request to Council that employees with over 20 years of service be given the approval to allow two weeks of summer holiday over the summer months. Currently, employees are allowed to take one week during the summer months. A Councilor asked who has more than 20 years. The CAO said that he and the foreman have more than 20 years.
Under ‘Municipal Tax report’ – The report was sent electronically to the Council. The CAO reported that the RM is currently sitting at a tax collection rate on par with previous years.
Under ‘Dorry Street Road Closure – encroachment matter’ – This item was missed and addressed at the end of the meeting.
Under ‘New Business’ –
A) A motion was made to follow the tax enforcement act for collection of arrears.
B) List of Lands in Arrears – motion made to advertise the tax enforcement list.
C) Northshore lands – Review of Daniel Street Connection to Buffalo Vista. The CAO noted that Community Planning (CP) requires a connection, and two options were presented by CP as a means for CP to receive guidance from the Council on which they prefer. Council decided that they preferred the single road connector.
D) Buffalo Vista – Servicing Agreement Road Development Certificate of Completion – Council made a motion to approve.
E) SAMA AGM – October 22, 2020, Virtual Attendance – Council made a motion to acknowledge the AGM.
F) Lyle Pollock Subdivision of PT SW25-20-24-2 – The CAO noted that one email was received from a property owner who was concerned about the potential that his driveway would be used as a turnaround. Council made a motion with the consent to proceed.
G) Northshore lands subdivision Inclusion of ER (Environmental Reserve) 3-4-5 – CP requested a review of the inclusion of ER 3-4-5 lands within the bare land condominium footprint. The CAO noted that these lands would be protected, they do not alter previously approved lots by community planning, and the land would be titled by either the Crown or the RM. The CAO said that if you overlay the heritage sites that were found on the original heritage impact assessment, this is where all the First Nations cairns areas are. The CAO said he thinks that it is protecting those areas. A Councilor asked what was driving the change - the CAO said it’s being driven by the developer. A motion was carried by Council that they do not have any objection to the proposed inclusion.
H) Request Consideration to Purchase Parcel of MR Highwood Beach – Derek Fuchs – Councilor Brent Smith recused himself due to a conflict of interest. The CAO said that Mr. Fuchs submitted a request to consider a small portion of municipal land adjacent to his land on Lot 7 Block 6 and that Mr. Fuchs submitted an appraisal of $8,500. The CAO noted that public notice was completed as per the public notice bylaw around consideration of the sale of municipal lands. He noted that two communications from local ratepayers were received, which stated concerns that there is a path either directly adjacent or within the proposed parcel of the area of purchase.
During Council’s discussion on the matter, there were a number of gallery attendees who were objecting to the sale of the parcel. Councilor Wesibrod asked why there is such opposition to this purchase. The gallery brought forward concerns of; there is a pathway beside the parcel which has been used for decades for people to access the beach; potential safety issues as a result of increase in traffic; notice was put up only seven days prior; that they had been told that they own right to the water’s edge with their property and if so that they could lose half their public beach with the sale of this piece; noting they had been told that RM property couldn’t be sold, and then they received a letter saying that this land would be sold. Gallery member, John Promhouse, said that part of the problem is that the area is not marked off to show exactly where the parcel is, and as a result, they don’t know how this could potentially impact them, adding that they want transparency.
Council decided to have the parcel marked out so that Council and the ratepayers can have a clear understanding of the parcel in question and then tabled this item. Councilor Brent Smith rejoined the meeting.
Council discussed and approved numerous development permits.
Under ‘Councilor Smith Request Consideration for Legal Counsel Support’ – Councilor Brent Smith recused himself over a conflict of interest. Councilor Smith submitted a request to Council to cover legal costs relating to inflammatory and defamation issues. Council discussed the matter and made a motion to seek advice from the RM’s legal counsel on this matter. Councilor Smith rejoined the meeting.
At 10 am, a Public Meeting regarding Zoning bylaw amendments 04-2020 Country Residential Zone – Animals & 05-2020 Agricultural Zone Discretionary Use began. A letter was sent in by Jennifer and Jason Rankin. Council made a motion to acknowledge the correspondence. There was a motion to acknowledge there was no one to speak on the matter. There was a motion to adjourn the Public Meeting.
Sam Ferris, President and General Manager Operations of K + S Potash Canada (KSPC), presented as a delegation to provide an informal update to Council. Ferris noted that the last update was at the May Council Meeting via a remote call with a presentation. He said that at the last update, they were focused on three topics - Groundwater monitoring focused on the tailings management and how they are progressing - Management program - Subsidence.
On Subsidence- Ferris noted that a Lidar survey was done at the end of 2019 and that there is one done every two years, the next being at the end of 2021. He further noted that it had been just over five years since they began mining and the last Lidar survey showed no subsidence, which was not surprising as it was in the very early days. The Reeve asked Ferris if they could have the result of the survey so that they know where they started from. Ferris explained that there was zero subsidence measured and that the result of the survey isn’t a number but a profile. The Reeve said to Ferris that as the municipality, they should have a copy of the survey so that they can see what’s happening over time. Ferris said that he believes the RM does receive a report when the Lidar is done. The CAO said that they did not have a copy of the survey but did receive a notification that the report had been submitted. Ferris said he understood that the information sent to the RM details that a Lidar survey was completed and that no measurable amount was detected. Ferris further said that the RM wouldn’t receive a detailed report of the actual measurements, noting that the requirements are that the RM would get notified that a survey was done and the results.
Ground Water Monitoring - Ferris said that KSPC has a sampling plan with the Ministry of Environment, which samples certain wells with certain frequencies. He said that they are getting their first results from sampling that was done in May. He said the general feedback they received; specifically around the tailings area, salt storage area and the cooling pond area, which falls in the Tailings Management Area (TMA), is showing that the interceptor trench that they put in at the end of 2018 has done the job of holding everything steady. He noted that there hadn’t been any change in the migration pattern to the south, which was the most critical area as it was closest to the boundary. He noted there was another area on the west side, but they had more space to the boundary that similarly did not have a significant change.
He said that the long term permanent solution has been the cutoff wall, noting that this has always been the plan; it has just been a matter of timing. He stated that the project was initiated in 2019 and that this year they completed two different trials. He noted that based on their findings from 2019, they wanted to try another technique. One trial was done in early July, and a southern second trial using a different technique would be started next week.
Ferris said that the west trial, which was done in July, was very successful. He indicated that this method would likely be the preferred method for the cutoff wall, which will surround the entire tailings management area. He said they had updated the Ministry of Environment of the results. He said that the next year’s program goal is to connect up to what they started in 2019 and get the entire south area, which has been the new trouble spot. He added that the temporary interceptor trench has been doing the job, but they will have the permanent cutoff wall done by the end of the next construction season on the south end.
A Councillor then asked if there was a leak/seepage. Ferris stated that there certainly was seepage, and the fact that there was seepage was never the question. It was always a matter of time. He noted it was a little surprising that it was in this particular area. He explained that what they found from doing drilling in that area was that it was glacial, with a mixture of soils and sand pockets.
Councilor Lorrie Zinn asked Ferris if they were informed of the leak. Ferris noted that he wasn’t sure if that was necessarily required under any regulation. Councilor Zinn asked him how they would find that information out. Ferris noted that it is all permitted through the Ministry of Environment. Ferris offered to help the RM immediately, depending on what they needed or that the RM could get the information independently by contacting the Ministry of the Environment.
Councilor Zinn said to Ferris that they thought the RM should know. Ferris said he believed they had talked about elevated chlorides in the last update but that maybe it wasn’t understood.
The Reeve asked Ferris if they have been keeping up with their development permits on locations that they were working on. Ferris said that the cutoff wall is on their property. Councilor Fishley and the Reeve responded, saying that KSPC still needs a development permit. The CAO said that it wasn’t considered an improvement. Ferris added that it’s not a taxable item as it’s a slurry wall. Ferris noted that they are keeping up on their permits for the pad sites.
A Councilor said that they would like to be informed as they get questions from ratepayers and would like to be able to answer questions when asked. Ferris indicated that the only area is on the south edge. Everything else is per the permit, well within the TMA boundaries, which was part of the design. He added that it is part of the adaptive management plan, which meant they have a lot of monitoring wells around the perimeter that they monitor at least once a year. He noted that some are monitored quarterly, depending on which ones they are. The CAO said that a lot of the questions Ferris was being asked were part of the slide presentation at the last update.
Ferris said that the one location at the south edge where they have an issue is where it actually crossed the TMA boundary because the boundary was very close. He said that they have since acquired that land so it’s now on their property. Noting that it’s in one location outside the TMA boundary, but the plume has been stopped by the interceptor trench they put in two years earlier. He said that the permanent solution is the slurry wall, which he then explained to Council how a slurry wall is built and works. Ferris asked Council if that helped, and a few Councilors said it did. Ferris encouraged discussions with Council.
2) Management Program – Ferris said that their 3-year plan had been approved by the Ministry. He said the next year would be a very busy construction year for the south edge cutoff wall, noting that it will cut off the entire south cooling pond area where the plume hit. He explained the cutoff wall would allow the interceptor trench to function more like a pump back system. He added that the following year they have a lot assigned due to a groundwater model that they have to complete with the engineer of record for the entire TMA area. He explained that this is a major undertaking and that 2023 would be mostly focused on this site.
Weed Management – Ferris said that as part of the environmental permit, there are biological, plant and animal components. He noted that he looked at the site prior to the Council meeting, and he felt that it looked like they made some progress on it. He added that there were some areas where they can do a little more next year but that, in his opinion, it was much improved. He told Council that he is open to feedback and questions.
Ferris asked if there were questions from the Council. There were none. The CAO recommended another update in the spring before things get going for the next year. The delegation was concluded.
Councilor Zinn said to the CAO that she wanted it on the record that if the Ministry receives confirmation of a leak, the RM wants to be informed. Councillors Zinn and Fishley spoke up, saying that two years ago, there was a leak at KSPC, and the only reason they heard was through other people and not through the RM. Fishley noted that as a council, when it’s in their RM, they need to know.
The CAO suggested that they should ask Ferris if there is an incident to inform the RM and that the RM can also contact the Ministry. Councilor Fishley said that they should talk to the Ministry directly. The CAO asked Council what they want to know. Councilor Fishley indicated that they want to know about the cathodic walls, as it could affect the groundwater. She said there are 12 walls around each pad for which KSPC gets a permit from the Water Security Agency but does not pay the RM nor the owner of the land.
She said KSPC leases each well that they have drilled 80 metres deep. Councilor Fishley said when there is a leak, and there is seepage, it is serious. Fishley further posed the question, “how would we be in this RM and we don’t know?”
Councilor Fishley recalled that in May, Ferris said they were working on a new slurry wall, not that they had seepage. Fishley also noted that Ferris said they are going to be updating the development agreement to expand the TMA, which was last done in 2011 and that Council needs to be asking questions around that expansion.
At the conclusion of the discussion Council passed a motion requesting cordial communication from KSPC with regards to any reportable incidences to the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry supply that information to the RM when received.
Continuing with ‘Business Arising from Minutes/Unfinished Business’ – Zoning Bylaw Amendments 04-2020 and 05-2020 - There was no further discussion. As such, the zoning bylaws passed second and third readings.
The meeting had just adjourned when a gallery member, asked the CAO why item 7- e) Dorry Street Road Closure – Encroachment Matter wasn’t addressed. The CAO said that it was inadvertent and asked if Council could reconvene to discuss and then re-adjourn.
The CAO said that the municipality was provided with an appraisal for the Dorry Street proposed closure for review. Upon discussion, the Crown Appraisal determined that the assessment would need to be redone since that land is being subdivided and proposed for annexation. Further, with the laneway being closed to the water pipe, it would not meet suitable sizing requirements under the zoning bylaw for the development. A revised appraisal is going to be required. The CAO stated that Crown has reported that they will do this, and he was hoping that it would be in time for the regular meeting; however, this had not been received by the time of the meeting. There was a motion to table this item.
The meeting was adjourned. The next regular meeting will be held on October 14 at 10 am at Bethune’s RM office.
See financial statements here - LMtimes.ca/rm-duff-finstat-aug-2020-pdf
Jennifer Argue, Civic Reporter, LMT - Local Journalism Initiative reporter
Note: These reports are abridged for content. Council/Reeve would not comment further regarding topics of this council meeting.