Esquimalt council needs to put an end to the torment of the sewage debate. On April 7, councillors have another chance to vote on the McLoughlin Point treatment plant. They can approve it or reject it, but whatever they do, they must not find another reason to delay it.
Esquimalt councillors are doing their best to defend the interests of their municipality, but by bending over backward to give plant opponents a say, council is costing taxpayers money and putting off the inevitable.
Councillors have already voted on the treatment plant. Last year, they held public hearings and passed a bylaw to permit a sewage plant with certain conditions, some of which presented problems for the Capital Regional District. Negotiations led to revisions that are now up for public hearing.
In the midst of the hearings, the municipality鈥檚 latest move is a letter to the CRD asking for 10 letters and other pieces of information, including a third-party assessment that must address 15 points. The answers are to be submitted before the next round of public hearings on March 20.
The CRD is asking for permission to extend the plant as much as four per cent into the 7.5-metre shoreline buffer and to increase its allowable height.
The list of questions, however, includes a third-party review of the planned six-metre-high tsunami wall, information on antibiotic-resistant bacteria in secondary treatment plants and a third-party assessment of the impact of Colwood building its own treatment plant.
Mayor Barb Desjardins said the request for information is going to the CRD because people had questions. But most of the questions are about the details of the sewage project that have nothing to do with the setback or height variance. They are issues that should have been dealt with at last year鈥檚 rezoning debate.
Council held two days of hearings on Feb. 18 and 19. More hearings are scheduled for March 20 and, if necessary, March 22. That means council would vote on April 7, which would put the project two months behind schedule and cost regional taxpayers an extra $2 million.
It is satisfying for people to speak in a public forum, but the purpose of the hearings is to give council input in its deliberations, not to provide catharsis for resentful residents. The Esquimalt speakers are turning the hearings into a debate on the entire sewage plant, something on which council has already voted.
No one wants a sewage plant in their backyard, and residents of the other municipalities understand that Esquimalt voters think the CRD is trying to dump the worst parts of the project on them. Perhaps Esquimalt councillors are regretting their approval of the rezoning. If they can鈥檛 stomach the thought of a treatment plant, they should simply reject the application.
A rejection by Esquimalt would leave the CRD with two options: Ask the provincial government to overrule Esquimalt鈥檚 decision, or issue a new request for proposals to build a plant that would stay within the permitted footprint and wouldn鈥檛 encroach on the buffer.
If the CRD chose the second option, it would need no further approvals from Esquimalt. However, it doesn鈥檛 want to go that route because the smaller footprint would be more expensive and leave less room for innovation; it would need pumps instead of being able to use gravity to move the sewage.
Brenda Eaton, chairwoman of the Seaterra commission, wrote to the CRD board last week urging it to consider 鈥渕oving this issue to a forum where a resolution can be reached鈥� 鈥� going straight to the provincial government.
Esquimalt councillors have fought valiantly, but they must not delay a decision any longer.
