It’s hard to imagine how elected officials can spend a significant amount of time, money and resources on public consultation then reject the results of the process. But that is what has just happened in the City of Powell River’s liquid waste management plan (LWMP) process.
A majority of the LWMP steering committee members voted down a recommendation from the joint local-technical advisory committee that selected a publicly owned and operated consolidated plant as the preferred option for treating the city’s sewage. The other option was joint treatment at Catalyst Paper Corporation’s Powell River division.
The city held two public consultation events, an open house and a world café, to gather input from residents about the two options. The information collected overwhelmingly indicated the public not only opposed joint treatment, but believed the whole process had eroded trust in elected officials, who were seen as having already made up their minds. In other words, the public perception was that joint treatment was a done deal and it didn’t matter what the public had to say.
Elected officials on the steering committee who voted down consolidation have succeeded in reinforcing that perception. Instead of hearing what the public had to say at official public consultation events, they instead indicated the vast majority of people they speak to support joint treatment. This silent majority urges them to continue to push for joint treatment.
This invisible support for an option that has generated considerable public opposition generates a number of questions. Who are these people? Where are they? How many of them are there? Why don’t they publicly disclose their views? Why do elected officials choose to listen to them as opposed to the people who take the time to participate in organized events designed to give a picture of what the public thinks?
Some of the councillors opposed to consolidation implied the people who attended the public consultation events were all part of special interest groups, including Powell River Water Watch, Townsite Ratepayers’ Association and Canadian Union of Public Employees. Because these groups have been vocal in opposing joint treatment, councillors believed they did not have to pay attention to the input gathered at the events.
Some of the councillors who voted down consolidation pointed to the provincial guidelines for preparing an LWMP. One of the sections outlines options that should be investigated, including joint treatment with industry. Councillors failed to point out that the guidelines also state “alternatives worthy of further investigation should be determined after evaluating public concerns.”
The guidelines are also specific about why public consultation is so important in developing an LWMP, another section councillors failed to mention. “Adequate public consultation during the plan’s development is essential as there is no mechanism to appeal a plan once approved by the minister,” the guidelines state. And “public participation should foster acceptance and a feeling of ownership among the residents of the municipality.”
It’s clear that an overwhelming majority of people who turned out to public consultation events neither accepts nor feels ownership for joint treatment. It’s a message elected officials should heed.
