- GVHA AGAINST SEWAGE TREATMENT AT MCLOUGHLIN POINT
- CRITICISM OF SITE CHOICE FOR SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
- LUCAS ABOUT FORTIN'S SEWAGE SLUDGE MENTION IN PORT ANGELES
- CRITICISM OF SITE CHOICE FOR SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
- LUCAS ABOUT FORTIN'S SEWAGE SLUDGE MENTION IN PORT ANGELES
- VICTORIA COUNCIL FACES FINANCIAL RECKONING
- CUPE: "CRD SHOULD KEEP DOOR SHUT ON PRIVATIZED SEWAGE TREATMENT"
- PROVINCE GUMMING UP NEW VICTORIA SEWAGE PLANT: CRITICS
------------------------------
- CUPE: "CRD SHOULD KEEP DOOR SHUT ON PRIVATIZED SEWAGE TREATMENT"
- PROVINCE GUMMING UP NEW VICTORIA SEWAGE PLANT: CRITICS
------------------------------
GVHA AGAINST SEWAGE TREATMENT AT MCLOUGHLIN POINT
NEWS RELEASE
GVHA against sewage treatment at McLoughlin Point
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Victoria, BC, Tuesday, March 1, 2011… Greater Victoria Harbour Authority (GVHA) does not support locating a sewage treatment plant at McLoughlin Point. Victoria’s working harbour needs land access to the water to support critical marine activities for Vancouver Island into the future. McLoughlin Point is one of few remaining harbour properties that can be used to benefit marine industrial and marine tourism activities.
After weighing all sides of the sewage debate, the Board of Directors has significant concerns about this choice of location. “From the perspective of a sustainable working harbour, a sewage treatment plant at McLoughlin Point is a poor use of this strategically located and unique harbour property,” said Dermot Loughnane, Acting Chair of GVHA. “McLoughlin Point is an important working harbour asset and is also one of the most visible sites for visitors coming into the Victoria harbour.”
GVHA also believes that a treatment plant in that gateway location will put marine tourism activities at risk. Marine tourism is a critical component of GVHA’s business activities and an economic engine for Greater Victoria.
GVHA has provided the Capital Regional District with a list of concerns that must be addressed in order to protect the working harbour and ensure that key stakeholders, including the Esquimalt and Songhees Nations, are consulted.
Greater Victoria Harbour Authority (GVHA), a not-for-profit society, owns and operates deep water, marina and upland holdings throughout Victoria’s harbour including the large vessel Ogden Point port facility, Victoria’s renowned Fisherman’s Wharf, and the inner harbour’s luxury yacht and marine tourism facility at Ship Point. GVHA’s vision is a harbour where people live, learn, work and play; a spectacular gateway into Victoria’s past and into its future, monumental in look and feel, linking communities and all people together. GVHA is governed by a board of directors representing key stakeholders and the community at-large.
- 30 -
Rebecca Penz
Manager of Communications
Greater Victoria Harbour Authority
189 Dallas Road
Victoria, BC V8V 1A1
------------------------------
MORE CRITICISM OF SITE CHOICE FOR SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
CFAX 1070
March 2, 2011
The Greater Victoria Harbour Authority has weighed in on the sewage treatment debate, issuing a statement critical of plans to build a plant at McLoughlin Point.
The Harbour Authority says McLoughlin Point is too valuable as a potential waterfront commercial site. The Authority says "Victoria's working harbour needs land access to the water to support critical marine activities", and "McLoughlin Point is one of the few remaining harbour properties that can be used to benefit marine industrial and marine tourism activities".
It is also "one of the most visible sites for visitors coming onto Victoria Harbour".
That argument had been raised earlier by the Victoria-Esquimalt Harbour Society, when it objected to the Capital Regional District's plan to locate a sewage treatment plant on the point. The Municipality of Esquimalt also objects to the proposed location.
http://www.cfax1070.com/index.
------------------------------
LUCAS' INTERPRETATION OF FORTIN'S SEWAGE SLUDGE MENTION IN PORT ANGELES
from Philippe Lucas <plucas@victoria.ca>
to John Newcomb <newcombjohnhoward@gmail.com>
date Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:44 PM
subject Re: Philippe: Fortin quoted as supporting sewage sludge fertilizer.
I attended the meeting, and believe the mayor was misquoted. However, CRD Chair Geoff Young did suggest that this was
still being considered by the CRD, which actually goes directly against the CRD's current ban on land application of bio-solids.
Best regards,
Philippe
------------------------------
VICTORIA COUNCIL FACES FINANCIAL RECKONING (letter with sewage mention)
Letters
Paul Brown
Times Colonist
March 03, 2011
Victoria council is dreaming. Taxpayers are more than likely to end up paying the bill for whatever funds are expended on a rail bridge, a bridge that might never see commuter rail.
Last November we voted for a road bridge alone, and a rail bridge only if additional funding came from elsewhere.
Now, however, taxpayers are on the hook for another $100,000 while council members hope and dream that other municipalities will come through. This additional $100,000 is going to come from the city's capital budget -a budget already strained by a funding shortfall of more than $10 million this year alone, and by $500 million over the long term.
Our city is approaching a financial reckoning even without the cost of a sewage treatment plan.
For a city councillor to criticize the willingness of other other municipalities to chip in $700,000 and then say they could do a bottle drive and raise the money is insulting.
That is one of the big differences between Victoria council and its neighbouring councils -fiscal prudence.
The region has a dysfunctional governance framework, one incapable of dealing with regional issues effectively. Some form of regionalization is badly required if we are going to deal with regional priorities.
Taxpayers -throughout the entire region -are being victimized by a broken system of governance. And municipal politicians who insist on guarding their own fiefdoms are a major part of the problem.
Paul Brown
Victoria
http://www2.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/comment/story.html?id=168d9b96-0a58-481f-b409-5a7eb6b42f20
-------------------------------------------
CUPE: "CRD SHOULD KEEP DOOR SHUT ON PRIVATIZED SEWAGE TREATMENT"
VICTORIA, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwire - March 1, 2011) - CRD directors got a strong message to stay true to their commitment to public sewage treatment and avoid the slippery slope of 'short-term' private operation of new sewage treatment.
Concerns were raised in response to a report to the Core Area Liquid Waste Management Committee (CALWMC) by Ernst and Young on industry interest in participating in the Capital Regional District (CRD) procurement plan. In a letter to the committee, CUPE National representative Blair Redlin cautioned that the "market sounding" report's recommendations would expand private control of the sewage treatment project.
Redlin questioned why so much of the report appears to fly in the face of previous decisions and clear public opinion in support of public control and operation of new sewage treatment.
On March 31, 2010 CRD directors approved a plan with traditional procurement methods, not a public private partnership. The decision came after detailed reviews of financial, technical and social factors and was resoundingly applauded by CRD residents.
"The Ernst and Young report goes well beyond CRD mandate for private design and building of the facilities. It suggests an operating agreement of between 3 and 5 years, and not just the initial training and maintenance support that the private sector usually provides when it builds public facilities," said Redlin.
Redlin also noted that the market sounding exercise explored the possibility of entering into a 20-year operating contract with private sector participants. "This is clearly beyond the scope of the original CRD decision."
"We knew when the decision was made that there would be more to do, despite the fact that residents had overwhelmingly said they do not want privatized sewage treatment. The elected officials in the CRD really listened and made the right decision. They need to stay the course here and stay public," said CUPE BC president Barry O'Neill.
The CALWMC received the report on February 23. CUPE's letter to the committee is available here: www.cupe.bc.ca/sites/default/
More information is available at www.keepwaterpublic.ca.
For more information, please contact
CUPE
Robin Roff
Privatization Coordinator (B.C. Regional Office)
604.992.9943
www.cupe.ca
------------------------------
PROVINCE GUMMING UP NEW VICTORIA SEWAGE PLANT: CRITICS (CUPE wants it all)
Project said to be delayed by Partnerships BC's private sector agenda.
Andrew MacLeod
thetyee.ca
2 March 2011
Click here to comments:
Even though the Capital Regional District (CRD) has decided that its new $760-million wastewater and sewage treatment system should be mostly public, greater private sector involvement in the project continues to be pushed.
That's the assessment of a public sector union after seeing a market sounding report released last week.
Meanwhile, a CRD board member says the report was only necessary to satisfy the provincial government agency Partnerships BC that the project can be done the way the CRD wants and that PBC is delaying the project.
"It is very surprising to learn that a private operating contract is now under active consideration," CUPE research representative Blair Redlin wrote in a Feb. 25 letter to members of the CRD committee who are working on liquid waste management.
Redlin was referring to a Feb. 23 report Ernst & Young Orenda Corporate Finance Inc. prepared for the CRD, PBC and the provincial ministry of community, sport and cultural development. The report summarized how 11 companies responded to questions about their interest depending on how the project proceeds.
But none of those questions asked specifically whether they would bid on a straight design-build project, like the CRD had approved, Redlin's letter said.
Rejected options raised again
Instead they introduced the possibility of operating the facility, planned for McLoughlin Point in Esquimalt, for as long as 20 years after it's built.
"Would you bid the McLoughlin Plant with a 3 to 5 year
operating contract which may be renewed by the CRD?" asked one question.
Another asked the companies to comment on the "pricing and risk transfer implications" of going with a 20-year fixed price contract where the CRD could get out after five years instead of a five-year contract.
Redlin said asking those questions made little sense, considering the CRD had already rejected including operating the facility in the contract.
"The CRD's decision to use traditional procurement methods was made after detailed review of financial, technical and social factors -- including extensive public input," he wrote. "The value for money analysis specifically determined that public operation combined with a design-build or design-bid-build construction model would be the most cost effective delivery method."
Public prefers public operation
Greater Victoria citizens supported the CRD's decision, Redlin said. "Throughout the public engagement process on procurement, citizens expressed a strong preference for public operation of the wastewater treatment facilities."
CUPE BC has an ongoing campaign aimed at keeping CRD sewage treatment public.
While it would make some sense to have a transition or warranty period once the facility is built, three to five years is a long time, Redlin said. "The private contractor would be responsible for all important operating requirements, including day-to-day operations," he said. "This is a proposal for privatized operation of wastewater treatment."
As for the 20-year operating contract the Ernst & Young report considered, "This is clearly way beyond the scope of the CRD Board decision." It's unclear why the option was even being discussed, he wrote.
He noted, however, that the report hinted at one reason politicians might prefer a short, renewable operating contract: "Having a long term operating contract has the potential to slow the project down, given the politics that go along with 'privatization', not often received favourably by the public. A shorter term project is an easier sell as part of the [design-build] project."
The renewable operating contract "is an obvious foot in the door for long term private operation of the plant," Redlin wrote.
Transition period makes sense: councillor
Judy Brownoff, a Saanich Councillor and former chair of the CRD's Core Area Liquid Waste Management Committee said she's not as nervous as Redlin about including a temporary operating contract, but the details and limits should be tied down before any agreement is signed.
"It's kind of like a warranty period," she said. "We want to ensure all the components we get are viable."
Responses from the companies varied on the need for such a period, by the way, with some saying it was an appropriate length of time and others saying it would be longer than normal in similar situations.
In the long run the facility should be run by CRD staff, Brownoff said. "The CRD has the experience and knowledge to run wastewater and sewage treatment systems."
The Ernst & Young report was done to satisfy Partnerships BC that the CRD's approach will work, she said. "I'm blaming Partnerships BC."
The provincial government set up PBC as a Crown corporation to assess and promote public private partnerships, where companies are given a greater role in delivering public services.
PBC responsible for delays?
"Partnerships BC needs to stop interfering at this stage because they're tying up our funding at the federal government," said Brownoff. The federal government is waiting for a provincial decision, she said.
And with a federal election looking likely, it would be wise to get the federal commitment solidified as soon as possible, she said. There are also municipal elections scheduled for the fall and the new BC Liberal leader Christy Clark has said she will likely call an election before the 2013 fixed date.
The Ernst & Young market sounding repeats similar work done previously and was done to prove to PBC that the CRD's approach will work, said Brownoff. She said it confirmed that "people will bid on it."
A PBC spokesperson took questions Tuesday afternoon, but did not have a response ready by the end of the work day.
Brownoff also noted that the Ernst & Young report validated the CRD's decision to break the project into smaller contracts, despite PBC's push to take bids on the whole system, estimated to cost around $760 million.
"I think this will be the turning point with Partnerships BC trying to say 'one big P3,'" she said. "It's time to stop trying to push local government to a full P3."
http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/
------------------------------
END.
