WESTLOCK - “Significant movement” of the Tawatinaw Valley Ski Hill chalet has prompted the municipality to begin reaching out to engineering firms to explain why it continues to shift and what remedies are available.
County councillors received that news as part of the recreation and community services report delivered by community services coordinator Adrienne Finnegan at the Jan. 18 governance and priorities meeting. Her report specifically reads: “Building continues to move. Considering structural engineering report to be completed. Contacting companies to potentially provide quotes. Repairs will have to be completed.”
She also told councillors that a county-hired contractor, who’s not a structural engineer, has done “several” measurements and adjustments to the screw jacks under the chalet, with the two most recent happening Nov. 29 and Dec. 22.
“There was significant movement noticed again in November so throughout the course of late December and early January I have been reaching out to companies and consultants that may wish to provide us with a quote to go out to the ski hill to complete a structural engineering report to review what is happening there, what the possible reasons (are) and the possible implications for fixing those might be,” said Finnegan.
A new chalet for Tawatinaw was first talked about in 2012 before getting the go ahead. With the building all but done in 2014, it had to be physically moved due to flooding after an initial engineering report on a suitable location was ignored. The facility finally opened to the public in 2015.
The chalet had an initial price tag of $2 million, which according to reports in the intervening years ballooned to as much as $3 million, while the $1.5 million debenture on the facility is slated to mature in 2023, leaving roughly $344,000 left to be paid over the next two years — then-CAO Leo Ludwig said in a past interview that as of the end of 2018 there was approximately $860,000 remaining.
Coun. Stuart Fox-Robinson agreed with reeve Christine Wiese who asked administration to tell them who the contractor is because, “if this is going to be something that we might be liable for I think we should have more information on it.”
“Now I’m thinking some of this information may need to come to council sooner. The idea that we are making alterations to what is the foundation and we’re not doing it under specific direction does concern me somewhat,” added Fox-Robinson. “We do have a liability and we obviously have to take care of it and I think Ms. Finnegan is handling it appropriately.”
Council then went on to question Finnegan on a note in her report that the county will be footing the bill for eavestrough replacements this year — county finance director Peggy Hardinge told council there is a specific maintenance fund for the chalet.
Ultimately councillors, who by and large wanted clarity on what the municipality is on the hook for at the hill, voted unanimously to get administration to bring the old and new agreements with the Tawatinaw Valley Ski Club, the business-case study for municipality-run ski hills presented by CAO Kay Spiess in June 2021 and any additional information to the Feb. 15 GPC meeting.
Spiess said she’ll do an update to the business case and “a recap of anything related to the chalet and the building.” She then said if council wants to meet with ski club reps following the February GPC they can aim for March.
Operating agreement
Westlock County is paying $175,000 annually to the Tawatinaw Valley Ski Club to manage the hill for the next six years.
The contract between the two, which was negotiated exclusively during in-camera discussions last summer, was approved following a closed-door session at council’s Aug. 10 meeting — the yearly financial commitment by the county and length of the deal were not made available until council’s Sept. 14 meeting. For comparison, the previous deal, signed in 2018, saw the county pay $250,000 annually ($200,000 in operating and $50,000 in capital) to the group.
“I don’t think council fully understands our commitment here, what we’re responsible for and what we’re not responsible for,” said Fox-Robinson, a sentiment that was echoed by Coun. Sherri Provencal. “Even more specifically, how it’s funded, whether it’s from reserves or operating capital. I think council needs all of that information from administration and we all need to be on the same page.”
