By Sebastian Kanally, Times Chronicle

Oliver will support a new plan for water conservation, but uncertainty remains around a proposed tiered rate structure for billing water. 

Oliver town council moved to support the new 2025 Water Conservation Plan, which was developed along with TRUE Consulting, at their June 23 meeting. 

Town council supported the plan and instructed town staff to begin implementing the recommendations and strategies identified in the plan. 

This decision comes after the plan faced heavy criticism from multiple councillors on April 22, specifically around the proposed tiered rate structure for billing. This proposed billing structure seeks to incentivize users to reduce their water usage.

Wayne Anderson, chief administrative officer with the town, explained that “at the April 22 meeting, we did a deep dive into the tiered pricing model. Today, we are just taking a step back and reviewing why a water conservation plan that includes the strategies listed here is important to Oliver’s future.” 

Anderson explained the water conservation plan to council, including the fact that 75 per cent of residential water consumption in Oliver occurs between April 1 to September 30. 

He went on to explain that the main issue is increasing capacity. There are multiple capacity-building water projects that the town could pursue, but none of the projects planned for 2025-2029 will increase capacity. 

The town could, for example, develop a new well. With the current rate of consumption, the town would need to invest in a new well in 10 years. The estimated cost for a well is between $5 million and $6 million. This estimate does not include tie-ins or site work. 

A new well could increase the town’s water capacity by 40 per cent. 

There is also the possibility of twinning the Black Sage distribution system. Anderson explained that this system has all chlorinated domestic water that goes out for irrigation and domestic use. If the town were to twin that system, it would provide more capacity for the treated water within town. 

 This project would increase the town’s capacity by 25 per cent. But the estimated cost for this project is $24.5 million. 

The third major capacity increasing project that could be done is well rehabilitation projects. The town just completed the Rockcliffe Well rehabilitation project, which substantially increased the well’s productivity. 

The well yield had decreased and approached its lowest levels ever recorded of 350 gallons per minute (gpm). Now that the rehabilitation has been conducted, it is back up to approximately 750 gpm. 

The normal suggestion is to perform this rehabilitation every five to eight years. One option Anderson explained was to put $100,000 aside each year to pay for these.  

With these projects in mind, Anderson noted in his presentation that “conservation efforts would result in a 15 per cent reduction and help to defer the investment in a new well by approximately 10 additional years”.

This means that instead of Oliver needing a new well in 10 years, one would not be needed for 20 years. But this would take serious conservation efforts, and one of the main ones would be implementing the tiered rate structure that council was already criticizing previously. 

Capacity issues can also negatively impact development and population growth in Oliver. 

“We have had discussions on a few projects with developers that would add 200 to 500 new residential units in the next few years. We have a Housing Needs Report that suggests we need 340 units. A lack of capacity could negatively affect development opportunities”. 

Anderson ended his presentation with an explanation of Medicine Hat, Alberta and their success story in reducing consumption through tiered pricing implementation. 

Councillor Rick Machial expressed frustration that Anderson’s presentation focused on a tiered billing structure even though council expressed resistance to it in April. 

“The whole presentation was almost geared towards it. We haven’t decided as a council that we are going to go in that direction yet, there is some opposition on this council towards that,” Machial explained. 

Despite council agreeing to support the water conservation plan, the tiered billing structure would still have to go in front of council before it is implemented. 

The goals and strategies that are contained within this plan, that the town will now be pursuing, are as follows:

  • Defer additional water source infrastructure to the greatest extent possible;
  • Extend the lifespan of the town’s existing groundwater production well sources;
  • Provide evidence to grant funders that the town is making concerted efforts to lower water consumption;
  • Provide more capacity within the water system to allow for additional development and population growth. 

Then in 2025/2026 the town will:

  • Conduct high use audits, 
  • Configure billing system to accommodate tiered pricing (by starting with the same rate for all tiers);
  • Design potential large family application process and rebate program;
  • Information and education;
  • Water Conservation Bylaw – Fall 2025. 

By January 1, 2027, Anderson explained that the town would be ready to set tiers and rates for implementation. 

Anderson explained that it is important to keep in the Water Conservation Plan in order for the town to be eligible for grants, even if they ultimately decide on other water conservation efforts instead of tiered billing. 

When asked why the town keeps pushing the idea of tiered water billing, Anderson explained that the “Water Conservation Guidebook of BC, is a guide that outlines the community’s efforts at water conservation, and the best practices. One of the best practices within that guide is to do conservation-oriented geared tier pricing. It’s a capacity issue for a lot of municipalities.

“If they do not conserve water, they are not going to be able to develop.”

Anderson provided the example of the Village of Keremeos, which can’t provide any more building permits because they do not have water. They need to develop a new well. 

 Not all councillors were against the idea, as Councillor Petra Veintimilla commented that “I’m in support of this idea, I’m one of the people that has never paid a water bill that is not metered. 

“I don’t know what a water bill looks like without a meter counting all the water that runs through my house . . . I have no idea where I am in relation to my neighbours. Maybe we are excessive water users, I don’t have a clue that would be handy to know to help bring things down.”