Part 2: Asset Planning Discussion - 08/28/2025

The August 28, 2025 Council and Staff Working Session included steady back and forth between councillors senior staff and consultants as they worked through the proposed Asset Management Plan levels of service. While no votes were taken during this working session the discussion revealed where councillors focused their attention and what concerns surfaced by asset area.

The session was chaired by Mayor Steve Ferguson, who guided discussion and clarified how the working session fit into the broader approval timeline. Ferguson repeatedly framed the conversation around long term planning and confirmed that annual reviews and future councils would have opportunities to adjust service levels once the plan is approved. He also asked direct questions about how the plan would be revisited over time and how five year updates would align with council terms.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

View the entire PEC Council Meeting; or view our recap.

Roads, bridges, and infrastructure questions

During the discussion on roads bridges and culverts councillors listened closely as consultants explained condition ratings and service targets. While no councillor challenged the need to maintain bridges at a high standard the conversation reinforced that bridges were not being considered for reduced service options due to safety and risk.

Councillor Bill Roberts was present for most of the infrastructure discussion before leaving the meeting later in the morning. Councillor Corey Engelsdorfer and Councillor Chris Braney remained attentive as staff explained why bridges and culverts carry higher consequences if service levels drop.

Facilities divestment and condition concerns

Facilities generated more direct questions. Councillor Phil St.-Jean asked whether buildings that the County is considering divesting should be included in the asset management numbers. His question focused on accuracy and whether future sales would distort funding needs.

Staff and consultants explained that all facilities remain in the plan until they are formally sold and that values would be removed during annual updates once divestment occurs. This exchange highlighted council awareness that facility decisions can quickly change financial projections.

Councillor Janice Maynard, engaged during the facilities discussion and later returned to related issues around accessibility and risk.

Fleet replacement and insurance implications

Fire fleet and corporate fleet prompted some of the most pointed questions. When consultants explained that fire apparatus were not being considered for reduced service levels due to insurance implications, Councillor Maynard directly asked whether those implications affected homeowners or the municipality.

Albert Paschkowiak, Environmental Services and Sustainability Supervisor, added context by noting that council has discussed reduced fleet replacement in past years. He questioned whether reduced service options were truly off the table for fleet assets and acknowledged long standing conversations about extending vehicle life where possible.

Accessibility and community use

Accessibility emerged as a recurring theme later in the session. Councillor Maynard raised concerns about how accessibility audits park access and facility ratings would be integrated into the asset management framework. She referenced parks beaches and community facilities and pointed out that only a portion of assets have been formally assessed for accessibility.

Consultants responded by explaining that accessibility data will continue to be incorporated over time and that the asset management plan is designed to evolve as new studies and audits are completed.

What this means for residents

For residents this discussion signals that future road conditions bridge reliability facility upgrades and fire response readiness are being planned with long term impacts in mind. Decisions about service levels will influence where money is spent how often assets are replaced and whether certain facilities remain open or are sold.

While no votes were taken at this meeting the questions raised by councillors show that cost safety accessibility and fairness across wards will all shape the final Asset Management Plan that comes forward for approval later this year.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 5:21:22. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.