MD Council reluctantly approves weed spraying contract

The MD of Pincher Creek No. 9 Council met on the afternoon of April 10, 2012.

The Council discussed at length the proposed Alberta Transportation (AT) Weed Spraying Contract for 2012.  In 2011 AT re-tendered their highway contracts, and  Volker Stevin Contracting Ltd. was accepted as the contractor for the next ten years.  At the MD Council's March 27 meeting they referred the contract request by AT to the Agricultural Services Board (ASB).  At their March 29 meeting the ASB "Moved to recommend to Council that the Municipal District continue to spray the weeds adjacent to Provincial highways, knowing that Volker Stevin Highways is the Prime Contractor with Alberta transportation and therefore the billing agency."


The subcontract is to commence on May 1.

Councillor Helen Cyr, who sits on the ASB, said "The bottom-line concern is weeds.  If we don't sign it this year are the weeds going to get done?"

Reeve Rod Zielinski and Councillor Bjorn Berg expressed reservations about the contract.   Ultimately it seemed no one on Council was completely in favor of it.

"It's a generic contract," said Berg.  It talks about construction, removing construction items... and it may mean opening our books to scrutiny by an outside contractor.  I think it places us in a bad situation.   We're responsible, if not the contractor will take over and we have no recourse, yet we issue weed notices."

"I don't think that's the way this is supposed to work."

Berg mentioned section P and Q of the contract as being of concern.

Section P covers Hazard Assessment, and states in part that " Prior to the commencement of work a Hazard Assessment of the Work shall be completed by the Subcontractor."  It concludes with the statement that "In the event of a dispute regarding the nature of hazards and mitigation measures required for the Work, the Contractor shall have the sole authority to make this decision."

"Section Q is more onerous," Berg said. Section Q in part states that "Prior to the commencement of work an Environmental Risk Assessment of the work shall be completed by the Subcontractor."  It too states in conclusion that the contractor is the sole authority in case of a dispute.

Berg said that many sections of the "generic" contract did not apply to the MD. "
I still have a difficulty with the wording and the generalities of this contract," he said.  "I think there's costs built into this thing that we would actually be subjected to," he added.  "Do we have any legal recourse to this if the contractor  gets into problems?  It looks like they transfer all that responsibility to us."

Berg also questioned whether the MD had flagmen as indicated by the contract, and was told by Director of Operations Leo Reedyk "All of our people are trained as flag people."  Reedyk also said the Risk Assessment would be a compilation of various existing documents.

Reeve Zielinski reminded council that they had previously decided "we would not sign this contract again.  I'm concerned that last year we signed it, we said at that time we wouldn't sign this again, and nothing's changed.""

Councillor Terry Yagos was also concerned, saying "This is not an appropriate contract for us."

"Do we need to push the issue?" asked Councillor Helen Cyr.  "If we don't sign it this year what happens?"

In the end, Councillor Berg moved that the board sign the contract for this year and refer it back to the ASB for due diligence.  Councillor Helen Cyr suggested it be referred to a lawyer as well.  "That's up to the Ag Services Board," said Berg.

Brought to a vote, council approved Berg's motion, with Reeve Zielinski opposed.