Jointly-Owned Water Treatment Facility - Feasibility Study

There is a confusing item on tomorrow's RDOS board meeting agenda. The 'Sage Mesa Water Study' agenda item is an administrative/housekeeping item and not a new discussion. This is the same recommendation identified by McElhanney (the company that assessed SMWS) as an additional consideration to review as part of the Sage Mesa Water Acquisition process. A feasibility study will help determine if a jointly owned water treatment plant is viable and cost-effective.

• The study does not affect the Bulk Water Agreement for West Bench or ongoing water supply discussions with the City for Sage Mesa.

• The feasibility study is assessing the viability of a jointly owned water treatment facility with PIB, RDOS, and the City as part of the SMWS acquisition process.

• The RDOS/West Bench and City of Penticton Bulk Water Agreement expires in March 2037 and will need to be renegotiated at that time.

• The feasibility study is set to be finished in early 2026, and the results will be made available to the public.

  
  

The Sage Mesa Water System referendum date is also on the agenda tomorrow. See previous post for more information.

To correct the misunderstandings provided in a recent post about the Sage Mesa Water System and tomorrow’s Board discussion, please see the clarifications below.

The black text is copied from the Facebook post. My comments are in red

Regarding our water systems! The agenda for the Thursday (Nov 6th) RDOS Board meeting is putting forth a motion to set an April date for the Sage Mesa water system referendum. RDOS seems to be favouring a standalone water treatment plant, FALSE - No preferences can be made until the assessment of a jointly-owned facility is complete; a standalone water treatment plant is not under consideration.

The RDOS... had advised the former WBID area, now being serviced by the City Bulk Water Agreement, that we needn’t be involved in the meetings this summer as this doesn’t concern us. False - the RDOS did not advise or deliver the message suggested here.

I disagree, and here are some of my questions to RDOS:

• - Is there an expectation that our water would be sourced from the stand alone plant instead of from the CIty? No

  
  

• - What would happen to the Bulk Water Agreement? Nothing Would RDOS cancel it? No

  
  

• - Would we have a choice on whether we stay with City water or be forced into using the standalone system? There is no standalone system to be forced into.

  
  

• - If so, would we be expected to contribute capital costs to a new plant when we’ve already paid to get our water system sorted out? Or does the $33 million assume Sage Mesa ratepayers would unfairly shoulder the costs for a standalone system? This is a severely misinformed question. The $33 million is the anticipated highest cost (worst-case) scenario for upgrading the entire SWMS, including engineering, infrastructure, replacing the reservoirs, a standalone water treatment plant (not a jointly-owned water treatment plant), and includes a 40% contingency.

  
  

• While the information to Sage Mesa has been inadequate, it's been non-existent to the former WBID area. There is no detailed information on a standalone plant at this time, (this is because there are no details to provide) and the Bulk Water Agreement has provisions to allow Sage Mesa to hook on (incorrect) at $18m which is much less than $33million. Please review the assessments, watch the videos. This is a significant conflation of important information (re: $18 and $33 million).

I’ve emailed Riley and requested the referendum be delayed until further information is forthcoming to all of us. If others have concerns, you can email her at: [rgettens@rdos.bc.ca](mailto:rgettens@rdos.bc.ca).

Apparently, the agenda items pertaining to the water systems start around 10 am tomorrow morning if anyone is interested in attending the RDOS Board meeting.

I received no advance communication that this was being discussed at the Board meeting. Not sure if anyone else did? Board meeting agendas are always posted online, and providing advance notice of regular meetings would be redundant.