The ongoing Downtown Revitalization Project in Estevan has raised concerns among residents throughout the construction process. This issue was addressed at the All Candidates Forum, where a community member asked the potential councillors about the transparency and cost of the project.
During the forum, the ten candidates were split into two groups of five. Dave Elliot, Kirsten Walliser, Stephen Daniel, Rhyan Hagel, and Tom Mauss were part of the second group.
Elliot voiced concerns about the project’s financial aspects, admitting that he wasn’t fully aware of all the details. However, he recalled an email from the city manager that provided some insight into the budget challenges. According to the communication, the city had to make cuts to various elements of the project, including traffic lights, benches, and garbage cans, to manage cost overruns. Elliot added that the information was available when requested.
In contrast, Walliser, who was involved with the downtown revitalization project, emphasized the common challenges of working with aging infrastructure. She acknowledged that delays were inevitable due to unforeseen complications but assured the public that the city had worked closely with contractors and local businesses to address these issues. “Just like community members experience inflationary pressure, so does the city. Because of our commitment to not increase the overall cost of the project, some of these easy-to-add items, like garbage cans and benches, were deferred to avoid incurring new spending to cover the cost overruns,” she said.
Daniel explained that he was motivated to run for council in part due to concerns over the project. He expressed his displeasure with what he had read regarding the revitalization efforts. Having retired to Estevan and initially enjoying the town's friendly atmosphere, Daniel became increasingly bothered by what he saw as a lack of transparency from the current council.
Hagel also voiced concerns about the management of the Downtown Revitalization Project. He criticized the perceived lack of transparency and raised a separate concern, stating that he had seen a city engineer photographing Nicholson Road, worrying that another plan might be proposed in that area in the future. Hagel stated that he believed transparency and project management issues would likely continue under the current administration.
Alternatively, Mauss stated that he had no issues with the communication from city officials regarding the revitalization process. He noted that he was provided clear and transparent information from both the city manager and city clerk. Through this communication, he was informed about unexpected issues such as contamination and water main problems discovered during excavation. “They were very open and told me about that, and as a result, they had to defer some of the project to a later date. I had no problem with the transparency at all,” he said.