A crucial vote by Keremeos taxpayers over funding for a proposed reservoir for the village was undertaken today, Saturday, April 27 at the village office.
Village residents turned down the proposal by an unofficial count of 156 for versus 174 against, pending a recount Monday.
Keremeos taxpayers were being asked for permission from the village to borrow approximately $950,000 over 30 years to finance the construction of a water storage reservoir for the village. The Regional District Okanagan Similkameen had already agreed to help finance the project with a $300,000 federal gas tax grant, but the proposal had been subject to some controversy over the past three years, and it appears that controversy was enough to sway the vote on Saturday.
The Keremeos Irrigation District put forward an alternative approval request for the funding three years ago, but there were sufficient taxpayers to deny the AAP when 10 per cent of the residents signed a petition.
The K.I.D. then began discussions with the village regarding funding opportunities for the project, and through the municipality they were able to apply for a gas tax grant for the project. The village, armed with funding assistance through the regional district, then went to the taxpayer once more in the Saturday referendum.
Several residents in the community have disagreed with the proposal from the outset, claiming that there were viable, more cost effective options available to the Keremeos Irrigation District.
On Monday, April 29, Keremeos Mayor Manfred Bauer said that village council and the K.I. D. would be discussing next steps and what options might be available.
“It’s unfortunate that we were unable to take advantage of the $300,000 grant,” Bauer said, adding that the village was committed to assuring residents of an available water supply in the future.
Unfortunately, insurance underwriters and Interior Health may ultimately have more to say about the issue in the future. Should the village ultimately be forced to build a reservoir somewhere down the road, residents will be on the hook for the total amount, minus the $300,000 grant and no doubt at a higher cost than what was proposed in Saturday’s vote.