Re: “CRD selected best possible sewage-treatment plan,” April 16.
I take great exception to the commentary.
One of the reasons we are now facing a resetting of the sewage plan is due to a consultation deficit from the Capital Regional District on this subject. Although the CRD states it did consult, many parts of this project were originally presented as a fait accompli. True consultation starts at the beginning of a project through engagement with local communities, obtaining feedback before decisions are made and using the information to guide the development of the project and reach agreeable solutions.
I only need mention the Viewfield Road sewage sludge plant debacle as a prime example of consultation done backwards. This proposal literally came out of the blue for local residents. The money was spent on the property, suggesting a done deal, and the attempt was then made to sell it to the community. These are pressure tactics, rather than meaningful consultation towards a common goal. This is just one example of a project gone sour.
Another problem is that many of the prominent CRD board members formulated this project when they worked on this file in the early 1990s. Why advance consultation or look for better solutions if you already know the answer? No meaningful solutions to this current mess will come forward unless fresh faces are sitting at the CRD planning and governance tables.
Filippo Ferri
Esquimalt
