Iqaluit council to consider waiving water bills again

Issue slated for Dec. 14 meeting, mayor says, as city extends state of emergency declaration

Iqaluit council is slated to consider issuing a rebate for November water bills at its Dec. 14 meeting, Mayor Kenny Bell said on Tuesday. (File photo)

By Nunatsiaq News

Iqaluit city council will consider forgiving November water bills as residents continue to cope with the city’s water emergency.

Mayor Kenny Bell told council members that the issue will be on the agenda for their Dec. 14 meeting. This would mark the second time council has waived water bills since the government ordered people to not consume Iqaluit’s treated water Oct. 12, due to the discovery of fuel contamination in the water treatment plant.

On Oct. 26, council unanimously decided to provide full rebates on water bills in response to what was then a two-week-old crisis. That decision cost the city approximately $965,000 in lost revenue, city administration estimated at the time. The city hoped to recover that money from a Government of Nunavut fund for assisting municipalities.

Bell provided the update on November water bills during an emergency council meeting on Tuesday where councillors agreed to extend the local state of emergency declaration for another week.

Coun. John Fawcett had brought the issue up, asking whether the city would once again waive water bills now that it’s December.

A local state of emergency declaration is a temporary provision a municipality can enact to give it powers it normally doesn’t have while it deals with a crisis.

Next week it will be two months since the water advisory was enacted.

Share This Story

(10) Comments:

  1. Posted by Void Me on

    Can the government of Iqaluit void the bills it owes, too?
    What about the salaries it owes to its employees?

    2
    5
  2. Posted by Kicking it down the road on

    Wait, so the councillor who resigned (or is resigning?) because he’s moving away is bringing up the issue of waiving the water bill?

    Those of us who are staying here for the long run will have to deal with the consequences of kicking the can down the road. We’re going to pay for this somehow, just like we had to pay for all the blunders with past councils.

    But hopefully he can get a little freebie before he leaves. I’m sure he thinks he’s entitled to it.

    13
    4
    • Posted by Optics on

      not a smart move whether hes right or not.

      probably should have stepped down immediately. this is like breaking up with your spouse and then taking months to move out of the house…and then have the nerve to tell them how to they should redecorate the house on your way out.

      7
      3
  3. Posted by Large landlords on

    The large residential landlords shouldn’t have their water bills waived – they don’t pass the saving on to their tenants, so it’s just money going from the city straight to southern investors.

    8
    1
  4. Posted by Enough Drama!! on

    There’s nothing wrong with the water!!!! You are using the water every day just like you always have, washing your clothes, dishes, having showers & baths. There’s no reason to continue this game or even consider not paying for the water you are using!!! Stop the drama!!! The water in Iqaluit is better than many other places in this country!!!

    8
    5
    • Posted by Northern Guy on

      How do you know? Do you have access to some secret set of water tests that the rest of rest of us don’t? I, for one, will continue to rely on the advice of the experts and refrain from consuming the water and I would strongly suggest you do likewise.

      2
      3
      • Posted by Aputi on

        Dr Patterson has the final say about when can we use the water, it’s in the acts and regulations

  5. Posted by River Rat on

    You think? It’s an absolute given that residents should not be paying for water services until the do not consume order is lifted. Thanks Coun. John Fawcett for bringing it up. While you’re at it, can you check the credentials of engineeers before hiring them to work on our utilidor?

    4
    3
  6. Posted by John W Paul Murphy on

    What is there to”consider”?
    Why should the residents be charged for a service not being provided?
    The residents are not getting drinking water delivered to their homes and the water they do get is still not drinkable.
    Don’t pay for a service that you don’t get. Have the residents been reimbursed for the expense of cleaning the tanks and pipes?

    4
    3
    • Posted by Is that you talkin…? on

      We are still using a lot of water, even if we can’t drink it. I would prefer to pay for what we use instead of seeing the City going into the hole. It will just hurt us later if they do.

      3
      3

Comments are closed.