District of Squamish staff have been busy identifying funding options for Squamish's below-provincial-standards dike infrastructure and on Tuesday (Feb. 8), engineering manager Brian Barnett brought some options to the council table.
Barnett presented several options - establishing a local service area, establishing dikes as a municipal service, including diking infrastructure under general taxation, using a portion of the federal gas tax or partnering with a third party.
The idea of a local service area - in which those living in affected areas of Squamish would pay for the upgrades - made Coun. Corinne Lonsdale choke on her water and all council members shook their heads.
"I'm not in favour of taxing one area," said Coun. Doug Race. "I don't think it's fair and I live at the top of Garibaldi Highlands - it would take a flood of Biblical proportions to reach me."
Coun. Corinne Lonsdale asked about using DCCs (development cost charges) to fund the infrastructure.
"Let's establish a formula where new development as part of an amenity package puts money towards diking," she said. "We have that for water and sewer and I think dikes are every bit as important."
Coun. Paul Lalli agreed it was practical because most new development would be taking place in the flood plain.
DCCs are a one-time tax charged to new developments for future capital works that will be needed to accommodate the hypothetical influx of population that generally accompanies development.
Barnett said the current Community Charter stipulates that DCCs can only be used for water, roads, sewer, parks and drainage. To apply a diking DCC, provincial legislation would have to change.
Lalli suggested bringing the issue to debate at the 2011 Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) convention.
"Just because it's not under the current Community Charter doesn't mean it can't be changed," said Lalli, adding that he felt the avenue should be pursued.
Coun. Patricia Heintzman agreed.
"I don't know whether it's ever been brought forward before at UBCM but it's never bad to revisit a suggestion," she said.
Barnett said it was a possibility and suggested the district continue to use the general fund for short-term needs and continue to look at the benefits of other funding options in the long term.
Council members referred flood protection funding upgrades to the 2011 budget process and directed staff to continue pursuing alternative funding options for the maintenance and upgrades of flood protection infrastructure, with the aim of ensuring that it's part of a long-term financial strategy.
