Summary#

On October 14, 2026, the Infrastructure and Planning Committee carried Councillor Pantazopoulos’s motion, 8 to 0, recommending that Council receive the Water Utility Asset Management Update for the Corporate Record. Council’s decision is still the next step; the committee did not approve a new program or direct new work.

City staff report progress on plans and inspections for Calgary’s drinking water, wastewater and stormwater assets. The Bearspaw South Feeder main Implementation Advisory Group’s stated goal was to provide an update on plans, inspections and remaining gaps.

• Staff report that 6 of 7 drinking-water plans, 2 of 7 wastewater plans and 3 of 5 stormwater plans have been issued and are being used.
• Staff identify high-consequence assets without a current plan, including the Glenmore Reservoir; wastewater trunks, lift stations, treatment plants and control systems; and stormwater treatment and storage assets and lift stations.
• Staff anticipate completing the remaining plans by the end of the first quarter of 2027.
• The report says some infrastructure risks will remain high for an extended period, while assessment, mitigation and renewal work continues.

What it means for you#

• Water utility customers: The decision does not directly change water, wastewater or stormwater services, rates, or customer obligations. It records a committee recommendation about receiving an update.
• Calgarians: Staff report that inspections are underway across all three service areas, but the supplied material does not give a complete list or count of inspections completed.
• Council: The committee recommends receiving the report for the Corporate Record. Council has not yet made that decision in the supplied material.

Money#

The report says there is no anticipated financial impact from its recommendation, but future funding needs are not yet fully known.

• Staff say near-term funding is currently understood to be adequate.
• Staff expect assessment results to identify additional funding needs for future budget processes.
• Staff say continuing infrastructure deterioration may require significant investment starting in 2035 and beyond. The report gives no cost estimate.

What is unclear#

• The supplied material does not give detailed counts or results for inspections completed.
• The report lists remaining plans and anticipates their completion by the end of the first quarter of 2027, but does not set out consequences if that timing is missed.
• The amount and timing of additional funding requests are not stated.
• The supplied material does not explain what specific actions will address each listed high-consequence asset while its plan is incomplete.

Case for#

• The Implementation Advisory Group said the absence of current, actionable plans and incomplete inspections and risk mitigation were among the direct causes of the Bearspaw South Feeder main failure. It asked for a public update on plans, inspections and remaining gaps.
• City staff say risk-based plans help prioritize inspections, mitigation and investment according to asset criticality.
• Staff say asset management is part of weekly Water Leadership discussions, which include risk, performance and financial matters.

Case against#

• The Advisory Group warned that publishing an update would only signal progress; the supplied material does not establish that the listed risks have been resolved.
• City staff say several high or extensive risks will remain for an extended period. They also identify limits on the pace of mitigation, including staff and contractor capacity, project lead times and, for some work, regulatory approvals.
• Staff say future funding needs will become clearer as assessments continue, so the report does not show the full long-term cost of the work.