Pool project moves into validation phase
Design team to lock down construction numbers ahead of fall referendum
Council voted to add seven new partners to the multi-party contract to validate the construction cost estimate for Fort St. John’s proposed new aquatic facility and indoor fieldhouse at their June 22 regular meeting.
The multi-party contract and subsequent validation report will firm up both the design and the construction costs of the proposed facility, ahead of the planned referendum in October, when the city’s taxpayers will decide whether to approve borrowing of up to $90 million for the $185 million project.
“Our validation report that we’re creating is going to take us up to just before final design, confirm out $185 million budget, and because we’re using the Integrated Project Delivery model, most of this is done in meetings,” Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Darrell Blades explained to Council. “Starting in July, we’ll have weekly big room meetings; they’ll be virtually and in-person. Those meetings, as we go over the whole aspects of it and define the risk registry, [will] narrow down the costs, any unknowns that all come out.”
This process is a new one for the City, which has so far only used the IPD model to design and construct the new 106th Street Reservoir.
“At the end of the day, it gives us better value and more firm answers, very similar to the best value process that we use for some of our stuff,” Blades added. “A lot of unknows are identified in these meetings.”
Of the seven new partners that are being added, two have local roots – D. Bauer Mechanical Ltd., and Urban Systems Ltd. The other new additions including Read Jones Christofferson Ltd. (structural engineering partner), Apri’s North Inc. (mechanical trade partner), Spartan Steel Ltd. (structural trade partner), AME Consulting Group Ltd. (mechanical engineering partner), and Westcana Electric Inc. (electrical trade partner) are all based in Western Canada, while WSP Canada Inc (electrical engineering partner) is based in Montreal.
These partners are required to get a validated and accurate construction budget and gain momentum into the upcoming 2027 construction season. Delays in starting construction will likely lead to cost escalation.
“The intent of this [process] is that everybody’s in the same room together and finalising the design together, taking on the risk together, understanding profit margins together. So, it’s a very open and transparent process,” Blades said.
During the weekly meetings, each component will be broken down and allow partners to dig into the fine details, in what Blades describes as a “risk registry” rather than a simple contingency plan.
“In a lot of our projects there’s a contingency and there’s change orders and all that. In this process there should be very little stuff that happens after we finalise and start construction, because it was all walked through in tabletops and meetings and design changes.”
The parties will be working towards solutions ahead of time, rather than trying to deal with changes during construction.
Council also voted to transfer $1.2 million from Capital Reserves to finance the cost of the construction estimate validation for the proposed facility.
This money is part of the $185 million budget, Blades said, not in addition to, they’re just spending it earlier.
“There’s a ceiling cap of $185 million, with the intent to get the costs lower through this process,” he said.
Borrowing bylaw gets first three readings
The City is moving forward on another aspect of the project development, preparing a Loan Authorization Bylaw for approval by the Inspector of Municipalities.
To that end, Council gave first three readings to the Aquatic Facility Loan Authorization Bylaw No. 2635, 2026 at the June 22 regular meeting, which authorizes the City to borrow up to $90 million of an estimated $185 million project cost, over a maximum borrowing term of 30 years.
By giving the bylaw first three readings, the City has taken the first step in the statutory process to seek approval for long-term borrowing to support the construction of the proposed Aquatic Facility.
Corporate Officer Bonnie McCue explained this step doesn’t mean the City is authorizing borrowing before going to a referendum:
“This is the first step in a process of potential borrowing, which will go to the elector approval at the October 17, 2026, general election, where voters will be given a yes or no question whether or not to approve borrowing up to this amount.
“The bylaw is read for the first three times by Council at this stage, which is then passed on to the Inspector of Municipalities for their approval, and proceed with the vote in the fall.”
Once the approvals from the Inspector of Municipalities and the voters are received, the City will have the authority to go ahead with the long-term borrowing as part of the project’s financing strategy.
Let’s Talk page now includes property tax calculator
While council members previously maintained that municipal capital projects don’t directly rely on the city’s property tax base, pointing instead to transfers like the Peace River Agreement, the introduction of the new Aquatics Facility tax calculator marks a shift in the conversation. If the Loan Authorization Bylaw is approved by the Inspector of Municipalities, and the project passes referendum in October, local taxpayers will be directly responsible for servicing up to $90 million in long-term debt over the next 30 years.
The potential impact to taxpayers has been presented in the City’s project materials from the March 23, 2026, Committee of the Whole meeting, when staff outlined the potential tax impacts of a loan between $60 million and $90 million on property owners. The new online tax calculator brings the public-facing narrative into alignment with the original technical realities, giving residents a clear look at what a 30-year municipal obligation will mean for their households and businesses.
Accompanying the Property Tax Calculator is a chart detailing the three potential Funding Scenarios as presented to Council on March 23. In it, residential tax increases range from $17.68/month for a $60 million loan, to $26.53/month for $90 million. Similarly, businesses could see tax increases from $137.41/month to $206.10/month.
The work that the design team is undertaking will firm up the cost of the project and the impact to taxpayers through the validation process, which will provide the City and taxpayers with a more concrete Class C or B estimates, before the project goes to referendum on October 17.