Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the International Peace Gardens topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee discusses $250,000 study and Manitoba match for International Peace Gardens water and sewer plan
Summary
A legislative conference committee discussed funding a $250,000 sewer, water and irrigation master plan for the International Peace Gardens, to be matched 1-for-1 by Manitoba, and deferred final decisions to a later meeting after questions about prior Manitoba contributions and state priorities.
Get email alerts on the International Peace Gardens topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A legislative conference committee discussed allocating $250,000 to develop a sewer, water and irrigation master plan for the International Peace Gardens, with the province of Manitoba to match the appropriation 1-for-1, committee members said.
Senator Thomas, reporting the results of a call with International Peace Gardens officials, said the engineering proposal they received covers a broader scope than initially expected and would include “hammering the sewer system lines, identifying … where the faults were in the lines” as well as soil samples, inspections of water lines to all buildings, and planning for future growth. Thomas said the firm’s estimate suggests that, if work started in 2025, the review would run through the spring of 2026.
The engineering proposal also flagged what officials believe is a waterline leak beside the conservatory and included a separate cost estimate for repairs; Thomas said “right now would be about a half million dollars is what the project proposal was.”
Representative Sam Sanford said he agreed with Thomas’s recommendation to increase the committee’s prior $100,000 Senate offer to $250,000 for a full master plan and to allow Manitoba to match the state appropriation. “I certainly second what Senator has to report,” Sanford said, describing the proposed $250,000 as a step to produce a clearer scope and cost estimate for any future funding.
Senator Bechtel raised a procedural concern about prior Manitoba funding and matching credit. Citing a letter from Director Tim Chapman, Bechtel asked whether Manitoba’s reported one-time, pre-fiscal-year grant of $1,000,000 has already been credited toward required matches, and whether that amount would count against matching obligations for the projects in the bill. “Are you familiar with the letter?” Bechtel asked; Thomas and other committee members said they had discussed Manitoba’s prior contribution and that the status of that $1,000,000 should be clarified in the bill text so Manitoba is not penalized if it already applied funds toward matching requirements.
Committee staff said section 7 of the House bill currently provides $1,500,000 for projects at the International Peace Gardens to be matched by Manitoba and that the language could be adjusted to reflect a 1-for-1 match and to account for exchange-rate mechanics. Thomas said he expected the conference committee would fold the $250,000 study, the International Music Camp item, and the Cactus Conservatory completion into the matching language.
Not all members supported expanding grants to local park districts. One senator said the Senate side remains focused on state-owned infrastructure and that there was “not a lot of appetite to do grants to parks outside of our state owned facilities.” Another member reviewed past biennia and noted local grant lines had been small or absent, saying the state now needed to “take care of our own house” before expanding local grants.
The committee did not take a final vote on the $250,000 proposal or on amendments to the bill language. Members agreed to clarify matching-credit language with staff and to reconvene at a later date to finalize funding decisions.
The discussion drew technical and fiscal questions about which state budget — parks and recreation, water infrastructure, or federal grant opportunities — would be the appropriate source for parts of the project, and whether prior Manitoba funds would count toward new matching requirements. Committee members identified next steps as clarifying the bill language, verifying the status and intended use of Manitoba’s previously reported $1,000,000 contribution, and returning with a revised draft and further information before final action.
