Councillors will have a few more options on the table as they decide the fate of the 90-year-old grain terminals later this year.

At its July 24 meeting, councillors approved a motion asking staff to report back on options for the terminals, options that include — but aren’t limited to — consideration of a public-private partnership, full divestiture, or integration into the town’s waterfront master plan.

A 2018 engineering report indicated the terminals needed $10 million in repairs; alternatively, it could be torn down for approximately $5 million.

In a report presented to council in December, parks, recreation and culture director Dean Collver noted the lack of services — including inadequate electrical service, no sewers, and a one-inch water pipeline that serves the yacht club — presented a challenge to determining possible uses.

Collver’s recommendation at that time was to compile a base of information on the terminals and the spit property, and develop a strategy for public consultation, in order for council to make a decision on the future of the lands by the end of 2019.

Coun. Steve Berman said his July 24 motion was an effort to ask staff to look at all the options and come back with a recommendation on the next steps.

While he acknowledged the public response to the motion has been general concern the buildings would be demolished, “there is nothing in this motion that asks staff to look at that option.

“As with any process, there will be opportunities for public input before any decisions are made,” he said.

Mayor Brian Saunderson said the motion “adds the flexibility” of the municipality looking at a public-private partnership or divestiture. Both Saunderson and Berman said it would not presuppose any public input on the future — notably if the response from the public is to use some of the revenue from the sale of the airport and the utility to fix the building.

“That will weigh into our decision-making,” Saunderson acknowledged. “Ultimately, council will decide, and they will look at what’s viable, sustainable, and what is a priority as identified in the community strategic plan.”