To: Linda White, Clerk, Town of Saugeen Shores Feb. 29, 2012 Dear Ms. White: I would like to be placed on the Committee of the Whole agenda for the March 12th, 2012 Council meeting to address council with the comments below. I enclose copies for the Mayor and each council member as well as one for you to include in the minutes. Thanks, Cheryl Grace Dear Mayor Smith and Members of the Corporation of the Town of Saugeen Shores Council, Deputy- Mayor Charbonneau, Vice-Deputy Mayor Gowanlock, Councillors Brown, Frosst, Huber, Legault, Seaman and Schildroth: My name is Cheryl Grace - I was born in Southampton. My ancestors ( the Gowans, Strongs, Colemans, Walkers and McDougals ) moved to Arran and Amabel Townships here in Bruce County in the 1850s . Although I lived here mostly in the summers until this past fall when I retired here as a full-time resident, I have a deep and abiding love for Saugeen Shores. I speak tonight for a group of concerned Saugeen Shores residents and property owners. We present you with the following concerns about the NWMO's (Nuclear Waste Management Organization) site selection process for the national DGR for high-level radioactive waste and some of our main concerns with placing the site in our community. We are very co ncerned about the Saugeen Shores Council’s actions on this issue: During the January 9th, 2012 Committee of the Whole Council meeting several councillors and the mayor spoke about their desire for an open public education process. Here are some of your statements as recorded by those who attended that meeting: - Councillor Schildroth - “members of the public engaged in an ad hoc committee” - Councillor Huber - “Interested in forums - loud, rowdy, opportunities for dialogue. I would like to see us do that with this” - Councillor Seaman - “I want more information - public meetings, not kiosks.” - Deputy-Mayor Charbonneau - “The buck stops with us to do a better job of informing the public. ...I move we defer this until there is comprehensive education - and have five or six meetings for public consultation.... - If the council feels the timeline is too truncated - if we want to go longer - I can do that.” That night I e-mailed all members of the council asking for public education to be extended through the summer to allow for all residents to participate in this process. I also volunteered to be a member of the committee being formed to advise council on the public education process. I was encouraged when Mayor Smith responded in a Jan.11th e- mail: “ “...I will ask Council to decide on the composition of Committee at the next scheduled meeting, I do agree the May 14 date does not allow enough time to do good job (sic) and believe Council will likely agree to extend the time.” 1 Despite further e-mail correspondence addressed to Clerk White and the Mayor in January, I did not receive the information I requested about this committee. On Feb. 1st, Mayor Smith responded by e- mailing only “We should have something for the next meeting of Saugeen Shores Council.” 2 1 see attached e-mail correspondence
B ut by that Feb. 13th council meeting, the “committee” was a done deal. Mr. Allison reported that a committee of unnamed council and staff had met with the NWMO on an unnamed date to “map out the education program.” This program included and I quote: “a d irect mailing, ...kiosks, at least one open house in both Port Elgin and Southampton staffed by NWMO officials, a potential display staffed by NWMO at the home show in early May, an informational presentation to councillors at a special meeting and online links ...through the Town’s and NWMO’s websites.” There is no mention of the public meetings or loud, rowdy forums asked for during the Jan. 9th meeting. Mr. Allison’s report goes on to indicate that and I quote: “direct feedback regarding the merits of the project itself would not be sought at this time as there are multiple opportunities for those opinions to be expressed if decisions are made to proceed to subsequent steps.” 3 This is unacceptable to us. We Call for Council to take the following actions: 1. Defer Your Decision until after Labor Day We formally ask you to defer your decision from May 14th until the fall of 2012 to allow all property owners and residents of Saugeen Shores to participate in the public education process. The NWMO professes a desire to require a willing host community - how can we do that without allowing maximum public participation? 2. Expand the public education process beyond what the NWMO has suggested. The NWMO has a job - their job is to sell this project to a community and find a place to dump all of Canada’s highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel. YOUR JOB as our elected Council is to act in the best interest of our community and to respect the democratic process. ALL of your constituents need a process with experts outside the NWMO to be part of the discussion; we must have public forums where citizens can ask questions and receive balanced answers. This must occur during the spring and summer allowing the non-resident 30% of our population to participate. 4 The “open houses” suggested by the NWMO are not public meetings, but merely propaganda displays designed to sell their message. Don’t let the NWMO manipulate this community by controlling the message. Ask yourselves why the NWMO didn’t suggest this type of open meeting as part of their plan for Saugeen Shores. 3. Guarantee that “community consultation” will be truly democratic: The NWMO site selection process states that the host community must be WILLING. This willingness cannot be measured accurately with out a genuine Community Consultation. For Kincardine’s proposed nuclear waste DGR, the NWMO polled residents in the dead of winter - January and February 2005 - by telephone or mail survey, depending on residency status. They were asked “Do you support th e establishment of a facility for the long-term management of low and intermediate level waste at the Western Waste Management Facility?” The words NUCLEAR and DEEP GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORY were not used in this question. With a 71% response rate and a 60% positive vote, only 42% of the Kincardine population gave their approval for this project. Is that a willing community? 5 And with such a benign and general question, did they even know what they were voting for? The most democratic type of community consultation should be a ballot referendum on an accurate question. 2 see attached e-mail correspondence 3 The Corporation of the Town of Saugeen Shores - Information Report, Prepared by Larry Allison, CAO, Feb. 13, 2012, “Next Ste ps, NWMO - DGR Site Selection Public Education Measures”, https://saugeenshores.civicweb.net/FileStorage/356BC55F19FA44389D4BE7A27E81A032- WorkspaceInformation%20Report%20-%20Next%20Steps%20NWMO%20-%20DG.pdf 4 Growth Management Discussion Paper, Town of Saugeen Shores, Official Plan Review, October 6, 2011, Meridian Planning Consultants, Inc. http://www.saugeenshores.ca/downloads/municipal/Growth_Management_Report_October_6.pdf 5 Chapter 2 of Vol. 1 of the OPG-NWMO environmental impact statement. You can access the PDF through http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/document-eng.cfm?document=49818.
Recommend
More recommend
