DEMOCRATIC CONCERNS

THE SETTING: a public meeting in a rural coastal municipality

THE ISSUE: Domestic Water Quality and whether to contravene the Official Community Plan and lay a pipeline to deliver water to 22 waterfront homes heretofore self-reliant on wells, which now seem to deliver water carrying corrosive chemicals making their water unpalatable, but, according scientific reports, not a health hazard.

THE PARTICIPANTS: Municipal Engineer, Chief Environmental Health Officer from the region, Consulting Hydrologist, Chairman and a Member of the Local Water Advisory Task Force, Residents from the affected area and the neighbouring area as well as other parts of the municipality.

AUTHOR'S POV: While classrooms are controlled environments with a single purpose and a director called, a teacher, a public meeting is an entirely different beast. A public meeting is a political forum involving conflicting interest groups in a power struggle to achieve their different aims. It is a power struggle with no one leader and, often, no clear winner.

When conflicting interest groups have an advantageous personal objective, they are not in a frame of mind to be educated by their opponents. Although there are often valiant attempts to educate authorities and the public, a political forum is a dubious place to start, particularly when the issue touches or threatens people's homes and daily lives - issues which tend to cause emotions to run high.

In this particular public meeting on southern Vancouver Island, what became very clear through the words of the various participanting groups, was the utter lack of a common basis of of concern. There emerged through the dialogue four major causes for concern: 1) long-term environmental concern for water conservation and the aquifer; 2) the short-term cost involved in solving the problem; 3) the level of services available to local residents; and, 4) the reliability of the science used to gauge the problem.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

Environmental concerns about water were brought forward by four different people: the chair of the Water Advisory Task Force and three other residents.

The first to mention water conservation was the Chair of the Water Advisory Task Force who

advises that the smart way to go into the future is to consider environmentally viable

alternatives to a conventional waterline.

• Chair: "...There is a sweeping movement in North America to what is called 'Smart Growth' and there's lots of municipalities that are taking the lead. We suggest that it ... is a classic case where you consider the alternatives and there really has been very little discussion on alternatives...and I should point out that the infrastructure grant... .will be preferred where...projects that encourage the adoption of water conservation practices and the management of on-site water management systems..."

 

The first resident to raise the issue is concerned that people are paying more attention to

global water needs than local water needs.

DEMOCRATIC CONCERNS - Gail Bradshaw 2001 2

• Resident 1: "... water is one of the greatest issues facing the world today and...we're contributing heavily to 3rd world countries today to improve their water supplies. Well, let's do it right here."

The second resident to speak to the environmental aspect of the issue is concerned about the

treatment of the aquifer.

• Resident 2: "...what we've done within the aquifer. We've paved it and we've turned it into a fast track for storm drainage so water never gets a chance to get back into the aquifer...I would like to see...we take a hard look at protecting the aquifer."

The third resident uses the environmental concern for the aquifer to support the argument

for laying a conventional waterline.

• Resident 3: " It's my understanding that the Hagen Creek water is supplied from, a great deal of it is supplied from the aquifer and that during the summer 50% of the water that flows into Hagen Creek comes from the aquifer. If we take people off the aquifer and put them on a water main we will be supporting more water in that creek."

COST CONCERNS

Another important concern at the forefront of the discussions was the cost of the proposed

solutions. Various residents repeated their concern that council would apply for available

grants to assist them in paying for the solution to the water problem.

Resident 4 is concerned as to whether the municipality would support an application for an

infrastructure grant.

• Resident 4: "...The question is that in the event, likely, I hope, that there is an application

made for an infrastructure grant to seniour levels of government...would the Capital

Region Health people and yourself support that application?"

Resident 5 wants the opportunity to apply to the powers that be in the various governments for financial assistance.

• Resident 5: "We're just asking for the opportunity to apply to the powers that be in the various governments for assistance."

Resident 6 is worried about the increasing cost of this problem.

• Resident 6: "We've lost opportunities for federal and provincial grants and the costs...have...increased..."

MUNICIPAL SERVICES CONCERNS

Further to environment and costs, both municipal staff and residents had concerns about

fire, taxes, and agricultural needs in the municipality.

For the municipal engineer (ME), the consideration is whether or not a conventional water line would provide enough water to control fire. He points out that a conventional water line would also supply enough water for the population of Senanus Road to double. This would mean that the number of homes would double, the amount of surface cover would double, which means that the amount of rainwater entering the aquifer from that source would halve.

DEMOCRATIC CONCERNS - Gail Bradshaw 2001 3

• ME: "...at least probably twice the amount of people that are there now could easily be supported...from the residential point and still have fire flow capability. Fire flow capability is always the governing thing in a water main system design."

Resident 7 is concerned as to how tax dollars are being spent if they are not being spent on something as essential as drinking water.

• Resident 7: "We have been supporting Central Saanich with our ever-increasing taxes all these years but we have no more services now than we had when we first came [1969] and those services are almost nil."

Resident 8 is concerned with an adequate water supply for agriculture.

• Resident 8: "I look at this issue...as two issues...it is time to create a more even playing field for some of the residences...[and] agriculture's need for water...I would hope that Council would take a long hard look at creating a policy whereby when that hole is open and there's a pipe being put in the ground, that the water supply system be sized sufficient so that agriculture will have a supply of water."

SCIENCE CONCERNS

Finally, residents voice their concerns about the scientific methods used to collect the data

influencing Council's decisionwhether or not to supply water to the homes in question.

Resident 9 is concerned that the water testing was inadequate.

• Resident 9: "..was that water thoroughly tested at its source?...and yet you state that you hadn't looked into the sources on the corner of Mount Newton Crossroad and the West Saanich Road. That is the area where this clears, or shall we say is="

Resident 2 is concerned about the scientific data on the aquifer being used by authorities.

• Resident 2: "...the statement that measuring for a third time would not necessarily give good answers is contradictory to the fundamental law in geosciences that you never use two points to define a time series."

DEMOCRATIC CONCLUSION

It would appear that the concerns of the 'experts' are at odds with the concerns of the

residents. The municipal 'experts' are offering scientific data in which the residents have little

or no confidence. The Water Advisory Task Force, a volunteer intermediary group, made up of

municipal residents, is concerned with the bigger long-term environmental picture of the municipality and what is happening to the local aquifer which affects everyone's water quality and supply. The residents of the municipality are most concerned with the immediate services or lack thereof furnished by the municipality and the escalating costs of solving their problem the longer everyone has to wait for a solution to this problem of unacceptable water quality on Senanus Drive.

There is, from my point of view, a need for a clear and concise list of long-term pros and cons for the municipality as a whole to the laying of a conventional water pipeline. There seems to be lack of clarity of vision of the big picture by focusing attention so narrowly on the small picture. Should the tiny minority of the population represented by the 22 homes on Senanus Drive residents receive satisfaction at the long-term cost to the municipality as a whole whose fragile eco-systems, agricultural lands, and many more than the 22 homes, all depend on the local aquifer? In a democracy minorities do not rule. In a democracy, the greater good for the greater number is the guiding principle.