- ESQUIMALT COUNCIL DISCUSSES SEWAGE PLANT COMMUNITY BENEFITS, 7 FEB
- ESQUIMALT RESIDENTS URGED TO RE-IGNITE FIGHT
- CRD SAYS PRE-DISCHARGE MONITORING DONE - BUT WHERE IS MARINE EIS?
- SAANICH COMMITTEE DISCUSSES SUSTAINABILITY & STORMWATER, 10 FEB
------------------------------
ESQUIMALT COUNCIL DISCUSSES SEWAGE PLANT COMMUNITY BENEFITS, 7 FEB, 7PM
(3) Core Area Wastewater Treatment Project – Community Benefit Framework Reports, Staff Report No. EPW-11-004
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff prepare and submit a letter to the Capital Regional District Core Area Liquid Waste Management Committee outlining Council’s comments and concerns with the Community Benefit Framework Reports. Pg. 133 – 136
- http://www.esquimalt.ca/files/
------------------------------
ESQUIMALT COUNCIL DISCUSSES SEWAGE PLANT COMMUNITY BENEFITS, 7 FEB, 7PM
(3) Core Area Wastewater Treatment Project – Community Benefit Framework Reports, Staff Report No. EPW-11-004
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff prepare and submit a letter to the Capital Regional District Core Area Liquid Waste Management Committee outlining Council’s comments and concerns with the Community Benefit Framework Reports. Pg. 133 – 136
- http://www.esquimalt.ca/files/
------------------------------
ESQUIMALT RESIDENTS URGED TO REIGNITE FIGHT AGAINST CRD'S SEWAGE TREATMENT PLAN FOR MCLOUGHLIN POINT
Tim Morrison
6 February 2011
Esquimalt Council recently hosted an open Council meeting to solicit input from members of the public on the issue of mitigation for our community if we are to become the home for all of the Capital Regional District’s future sewage treatment.
A Capital Regional District (CRD) staff report offers up the possible creation of a community amenity fund – equivalent to one per cent of a portion of the estimated $800 million cost of the sewage treatment system – to help soften the impact of sewage treatment facilities. The fund is to go towards payments for local parks, trails, sidewalks or public art.
A recent media report indicates “the staff report to the CRD’s sewage committee calls for creation of a regional fund to pay for community amenities as compensation to affected municipalities such as Esquimalt, home to the selected treatment plant site of McLoughlin Point. It also said affected municipalities should be able to decide where the money goes.”
Esquimalt residents can interpret the CRD report as a blatant bride to Esquimalt to shut up and go away.
As the CRD's sewage committee is currently gathering municipal input on the report, it is becoming apparently obvious that the report will be shelved rather than adopted. Municipalities are likely going to want to avoid forming financial expectations from other communities negatively affected by future CRD projects.
Case in point, we hear in the news that Oak Bay Council has voted unanimously to reject any suggestion of compensating Esquimalt’s woes for having to house the CRD’s future sewage. Oak Bay referred to the compensation proposal as “irresponsible.” So, let’s talk about the word “irresponsible” while we are on the topic of CRD sewage treatment.
The real irresponsibility occurring is the ramming through a boondoggle project that will be based on a site with no room to expand and thus become a useless facility for the CRD’s future growth beyond a mere two decades. Financing that bonehead decision will be an additional cost to individual taxpayers of at least $400 per year in property taxes. Finally, the project is so shortsighted in vision that it actually hurts the environment more than helps it.
These points were brought up yet again by Esquimalt residents and Council members alike at a recent public meeting. When Mayor Barb Desjardins asked if there was anyone present in the audience from the CRD to address the issues raised at the well-advertised open meeting, the room was silent. That has been the CRD’s response to Esquimalt all through the sewage treatment planning process: silence, disregard, and exclusion. And, that is the most irresponsible aspect of this whole process.
It literally stinks and Esquimalt is not going to tolerate it any longer. Forget talk of mitigation, now is the time for litigation. The CRD have cheated the people of Esquimalt every step of the way and we are organizing to fight back. We are joined by allies from all parts of the Capital Regional District. We’re not going to take it anymore. We are already seeing rays of hope with both the federal and provincial governments delaying the signing of their overdue financial contributions to the project.
Whether you are an Esquimalt resident or a resident elsewhere within the CRD, the time is now to piss or get off the pot. No more apathy. No more whining. No more being treated as if we don’t matter. Our community deserves better, our region deserves better, our tax dollars deserve better, and our environment deserves better.
The CRD sewage treatment plan for McLoughlin Point is clearly the wrong plan. But, it is up to us to fight back and put forward the right plan, one formed from responsible planning and one based on listening to the people rather than ignoring them.
Don’t let yourself be ignored anymore. For more information, go to www.thewrongplan.ca
------------------------------
CRD SAYS PRE-DISCHARGE MONITORING DONE - BUT WHERE IS THE MARINE EIS?
ARESST: CRD Water Manager Jack Hull replies that the terrestrial EIS communication was ok and he implies that the marine EIS is the pre-discharge marine monitoring report that was released 24 Nov. However, the pre-discharge monitoring report is obviously not a marine environmental impact study of proposed McLoughlin Point sewage plant - so where is the real marine EIS? We need to see a marine EIS, because McLoughlin Point's nearshore appears to be a rich habitat. It is apparent that avoiding a real environmental impact study allows the CRD to ignore much of the ecological habitat values near the Point that might be impaired by a land-based sewage plant. McLoughlin Point terrestrial EIS was inadequate, but given that a sewage plant is intended to benefit the marine environment, its even more worrisome that no study on marine environmental impacts of a sewage treatment plant McLoughlin Point appears to be planned.
While the McLoughlin Point Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was not brought forward as a separate agenda item, it is clearly referenced in the June 23 staff report and was attached as Appendix C.
The approved motion specifically references the EIS report (unfortunately, Appendix C was omitted from the CRD web site posting for Reports – this is being corrected).
The schedule indicating a June 30, 2010 was incorrect, work on the EIS started in late 2009, and was completed before the June 23 meeting.
The McLoughlin EIS is one of many EIS reports prepared as part of the CALWMP and are publically available.
The Pre-discharge Marine Monitoring Update report was on the CALWMC agenda on Nov. 24 (Item #8, 14MB pdf) and on the CRD Board agenda on January 12 (item No. 6.1.2) and is available on the CRD web site.
At this time there are no plans to hold public meetings specifically on these issues as the information is already in the public domain.
Thank you for your continued interest in this project.
Jack Hull
------------------------------
ARESST: CRD Water Manager Jack Hull replies that the terrestrial EIS communication was ok and he implies that the marine EIS is the pre-discharge marine monitoring report that was released 24 Nov. However, the pre-discharge monitoring report is obviously not a marine environmental impact study of proposed McLoughlin Point sewage plant - so where is the real marine EIS? We need to see a marine EIS, because McLoughlin Point's nearshore appears to be a rich habitat. It is apparent that avoiding a real environmental impact study allows the CRD to ignore much of the ecological habitat values near the Point that might be impaired by a land-based sewage plant. McLoughlin Point terrestrial EIS was inadequate, but given that a sewage plant is intended to benefit the marine environment, its even more worrisome that no study on marine environmental impacts of a sewage treatment plant McLoughlin Point appears to be planned.
John
Email message from Jack Hull, 4 Feb:
While the McLoughlin Point Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was not brought forward as a separate agenda item, it is clearly referenced in the June 23 staff report and was attached as Appendix C.
The approved motion specifically references the EIS report (unfortunately, Appendix C was omitted from the CRD web site posting for Reports – this is being corrected).
The schedule indicating a June 30, 2010 was incorrect, work on the EIS started in late 2009, and was completed before the June 23 meeting.
The McLoughlin EIS is one of many EIS reports prepared as part of the CALWMP and are publically available.
The Pre-discharge Marine Monitoring Update report was on the CALWMC agenda on Nov. 24 (Item #8, 14MB pdf) and on the CRD Board agenda on January 12 (item No. 6.1.2) and is available on the CRD web site.
At this time there are no plans to hold public meetings specifically on these issues as the information is already in the public domain.
Thank you for your continued interest in this project.
Jack Hull
------------------------------
SAANICH COMMITTEE DISCUSSES SUSTAINABILITY AND STORMWATER, 10 FEB, 4:30PM
2. CRD REGIONAL SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY
Presentation from Marg Misek-Evans, Senior Manager, CRD Planning & Protective
Services
3. 2010 STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: STORMWATER HARMONIZATION PROJECT
Continued discussion with the Environmental Services Manager
-----------------------------
END.
