Council motion will ask for new public comment period on changes to Ajax plan
By MEL ROTHENBURGER
NEWS/ AJAX — Kamloops City council will be asked by one of its own Tuesday to seek a new public comment period before KGHM submits its application for an environmental permit early next year.
Coun. Donovan Cavers said Sunday he might not make the motion himself but acknowledged he’s working on its wording and is discussing it with other members of council.
Coun. Donovan Cavers.
Cavers said the recent announcement by KGHM International of a new footprint shifting several components of the mine plan south of Jacko Lake makes it “critical” that the public be given a new formal opportunity to comment and to ask questions.
He said Tuesday’s proposal to ask the B.C. Environmental Assessment office for the new formal comment period won’t be presented as a notice of motion, a common practice with the current council when members raise new issues. This one is different, he said.
“This needs to be dealt with as soon as possible,” said Cavers.
One of the main questions, he said, is the environmental impact of switching from a dry tailings stack located west of Jacko Lake between the Lac le Jeune Road and Coquihalla Highway to ranchland between Jacko and Goose Lakes to the south.
He also said the new plan shifts much of the infrastructure into the Peterson Creek watershed. “It’s pretty significant.”
Another question is the economic significance to the City of moving all infrastructure beyond City limits, the councilor said.
Cavers said the exact wording of the motion hasn’t been finalized and he won’t make it public before Tuesday’s council meeting. He also wouldn’t reveal which other councilor might make the motion but said, “if they don’t, I will.”
The upcoming motion follows a similar call by Kamloops Area Preservation Association spokesman John Schleiermacher last week but Cavers said he’s been thinking about a council motion for awhile.
A group of Ajax opponents is expected to attend Tuesday’s meeting to hear the discussion.
At that meeting, council will also receive a letter from Scott Bailey, the project lead for the B.C. Environmental Assessment office on Ajax, in response to a June 4 letter from Mayor Peter Milobar asking about the implications to the environmental assessment process of KGHM’s proposed changes to the mine’s site plan.
Bailey suggests in the letter that council hold off on a public-input until KGHM is ready to submit its application and is “therefore aligned with the official public comment period” on the application. KGHM has said it will have its application ready by next March.
“I think this will help to ensure that the public is well-informed of the EA process, including the timing and purpose of the public comment period, and that they are able to submit meaningful comments that will be considered in the EA,” Bailey writes.
However, Bailey said he “would be happy” to attend a council meeting and offer a “broad-based public information session” in early fall to clarify the EA process if that’s what council wants.
Bailey’s letter says he expects parts of the Application Information Requirements and Environmental Impact Statement guidelines — known as AIR and EIS — will need to be amended.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
We should hold off on our comments until after KGHM submits it application?? You can take any date KGHM gives you and add a year, probably more. At this point, if none of their studies are complete (taking their word here), then March is way too optimistic.
What constitutes “meaningful comments”? If one says that they don’t want to see all this beautiful land destroyed, or you say that you don’t want to live beside a giant hole, is that meaningful? I suppose the EAO would simply file this under “aesthetics”. If my neighbour planned to import a large Bengalese tiger and I complained that I don’t want to live beside a house with a large predatory animal, would that be a meaningful complaint? Or in order for it to be meaningful, would I have to talk about e.g. the need for appropriate fencing and sound control?. You know, the fence needs to be a minimum 5m high and uses high-quality steel with barbed wire. Noise barriers need to be erected to mitigate noise from growling at night. It would probably be meaningful to talk about the need to anchor the fence well into the ground, a minimum of at least 50cm, to prevent the animal from tunneling out. Then there’s the issue of tiger droppings which produce an awful smell, especially in the summer heat. These issues of course need to be dealt with. There are also needs to be an emergency plan in place if the tiger escapes. Probably best to set up toll-free hotline. What about property values, neighbourhood image? Need to do some socio-economic studies here.
This is how we deal with an insane plan. We give it to a bunch of bureaucrats sitting over there in Victoria who slice and dice it into neat little categories and subcategories so that it seems entirely plausible.
LikeLike
Dude, I spat out coffee reading this. Just brilliant. I appreciate well crafted sarcasm! Let’s stop the idiotic mine plans.
LikeLike
Great, Donovan! If the mine has made significant chnages to the proposal, of course people should have the chance to ask different questions. The company made the changes and the company keeps saying how it is “early in the process” so why would a public comment period be a big deal?
I totally agree that the timing is unfortunate for the government employees working on the file. Everyone knows that nothing gets done quickly in the summer. This review is very important to our city, so of course our city should be advocating for us! The government employees should have as much time as they need, not just 4 weeks in July and August to do research on the new proposal and determine what changes need to be made to the AIR.
LikeLike
It really doesn’t matter what time of year it is Kerriann, nothing ever gets done fast unless the Lieberals want it to happen. Then the bureaucracy moves with light speed.
LikeLike
So how public comments do we wish to have and for many years down the road, do we wish to have comments, is it five, ten or fifteen years? Is the mine going to be within city limits. If it is not within city limits, why not try to get TNRD to pass a motion seeking a new period for public comments?
LikeLike