City investigates Site-C impact study

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Photo: Mayor Bruce Lantz addresses his item of new business at Monday's Committee of the Whole Meeting - Christine Rumleskie/Energeticcity.ca

By Christine Rumleskie

Fort St. John City Council will soon be looking for money to conduct its own study on the impacts of the Site-C Dam proposal.

At Monday's Committee of the Whole meeting, Mayor Bruce Lantz suggested that City Staff contract a consultant. That individual would then acquire the funds necessary to conduct a socio-economic impact study of the Site-C project. He also said that consultant can look into the future of the fair share program and explore how it's going to unfold beyond the expiry of the agreement in 2012.

Lantz says that he wants the study to be conducted before Site-C gets the green light. Councilor Trevor Bolin agreed.

Audio placeholder

Lantz says he has written to BC Hydro, and requested funding for the socio economic impact study. But, he says the letter hasn't generated any discussion.

Mayor Lantz says the Peace River Regional District is pursuing a similar impact study, but to no avail. So, he suggested teaming with the PRRD, along with the North and South Peace Economic Development Commissions, to get the ball rolling.

So now, the first step is to get the consultant on board to acquire proper funding.

Audio placeholder

If and when the study is complete, the potential impacts will be reviewed, and funding will be pursued to mitigate the anticipated effects.

The Site-C proposal is in the second phase of its development, and is currently being reviewed by the provincial government. BC Hydro submitted the consultation summary in December 2009, along with its recommendation. The report has yet to be made public.

If the province moves into the regulatory environmental assessment phase of Site-C, it will take around two years to complete. The fourth phase is detailed design and engineering, and has a one-year timeline. The final stage is construction, and should take around seven years.

news

WASTE OF MONEY

Submitted by FSJ BOY on Tue, 2010/02/02 - 18:33.

Who cares what the city thinks. The province sure doesn't. If the province wants the dam, the province gets the dam. The city should save it's money to help pay for the CRAZY costs to run the 40 MILLION dollar Enerplex.

Socio Economic Study:

Submitted by downtoearth on Wed, 2010/02/03 - 00:04.

Definition: "socio-economics is the study of the relationship between economic activity and social life. Socioeconomists focus on the social impact of some sort of economic change. The goal of socioeconomic study is generally to bring about socioeconomic development, usually in terms of improvements in metrics such as GDP, life expectancy, literacy, levels of employment, etc." So does this mean Mr. Lantz is now for the Site C dam and he is looking for some way to justify his change of position? You don't need to spend money on this Mr. Lantz. Everyone, even those of us without a University degree, knows that the dam will bring in jobs and money to the area, providing an increased revenue to local businesses as well as construction jobs for 7 years. So there is your report, in writing, and it didn't cost you a dime!

Charge them a consultant fee.

Submitted by FSJ BOY on Wed, 2010/02/03 - 09:00.

Downtoearth should be able to charge the city oh somewhere around 50,000 dollar mark for a Site C consultaion.

Whats in it for Lance

Submitted by Jays4ever on Wed, 2010/02/03 - 09:50.

Lance is a smart man to a degree and likely knows that this Dam will bring jobs and pump money into the city which is good for everyone. My question is, what’s in it for him? He must be planning on giving this to a consultant he knows and getting a kick back in return or something. Otherwise, why bother. As for these councillors who have zero credibility after allowing this $40million Enerplex to go forward on a referendum of 13% of the voting public, PLEASE start contributing and challenging this mayor and each other. It's called democracy, not fallow the leader.

Jobs and Money!

Submitted by Mary Sehn on Wed, 2010/02/03 - 10:13.

Yikes! (An honest job and income) Sounds like a good thing. Perhaps the City would grow and there would be more tax dollars. Maybe the 40 Million Dollar Enerplex should have been built 6km north off Highway 97 where there is quite a bit more area and larger parking. No doubt I'll catch h-ll for that, eh, cool.

unmitigated greed and folly

Submitted by carolyn robe on Wed, 2010/02/03 - 12:37.

Nothing can mitigate the loss of the best farmland in the North, the loss of the ability of the North to feed itself locally in this rich valley, which is type of land that is rare and precious in the North, This is a loss which would be forever. However the 7 to 9 billion dollar dam will silt up in 70 to 100 years, and could very well go down in history as a monument to short sighted greed--why? all for the export of power outside of BC.? Also there is the huge cost of upgrade and expansion of transmission lines. It doesn't take another study to show that this monument is wrong headed. Wind, solar, and geothermal are the way to go in the North. Does our generation really want to go down in history as one that pillaged the land for a short term, possible gain?? Dams aren't even being built in the States anymore, but I suppose they can use our power. This dam could go down infamy: The Peace Valley being sold away for the greediness of the South is a sad proposition. This dam will make another wonderful boom for the North.??I doubt it. I heard it takes very few people to run this automated type dam on a long term basis. To see this dam as bringing prosperity is myopic at best. How can we afford to be apathetic and just let it happen?

Portions of Land on either side..

Submitted by Mary Sehn on Thu, 2010/02/04 - 06:00.

Portions of land on either side of the Peace River are not owned by farmers and therefore are not used to produce crops. Seven years of jobs outside of oil and gas, farming, and forestry would generate jobs and income in a recession. If, there is also financial income from a dam to the area it would be added benefit to the area. Why is a dam unsightly? Small amounts of people actually use the Peace Valley for camping and boating and I doubt the dam will harm the area. The issue should be examined for both positives and negative outcomes. Not all people are employed in oil and gas, forestry or farming.

total waste of money

Submitted by born and raised here on Thu, 2010/02/04 - 11:35.

this will not affect the city of fort st. john as a corporation. unless the city is going to bid on a part of the construction. if not dont worry about it. the goverment should make it mandatory to exclude out of province bids on the construction. there will be of course some company who actually manufactures the generater itself. but by in large the province can handle this scope of work quite easily. as for the city , well there might be some revenue in the hospitality sector, which again is nothing to do with the city. if local contractors get some of the work, awsome!! that again has nothing to do with the city. this is a provicial issue, let the province handle it. lance could use that cosultant to oversee the cleanup of the old fort hotel. deal with the problems at hand! maybe the city planner could plan on that.

Site C

Submitted by Eddie M on Fri, 2010/02/05 - 10:34.

If people are concerned still about site C, perhaps we should have a referendum on the issue, I'm sure if site C is shot down, Alberta's Bruce Power would be glad to start planning a nuclear facility at the location of site C. Take your pick, my choice is a dam

Site C ignorance of the issues

Submitted by Lynda Peterson on Sat, 2010/02/06 - 18:30.

James l. Peterson< I am continually amazed at the ignorance of the residents of the Peace Country about the huge negative impact that Site C would have. The net impacts have been studied to death for over 35 years. Overwhelming evidence exists that Site C should not be built. The "corporate socialists" that currently run the B.C. government and their "flunkies in the B.C. cabinet along with an impotent federal senator are pushing a disgraceful agenda that is extremely detrimental to the people of the Peace and the people of B.C. You "dogs" (that sit under the table to wait for "crumbs"), that support Site C will someday find out you cannot survive on it and will wake up "slaves" in the land our forefathers sacrificed so much for. Lantz is the only mayor that has had any ability to think independently on an issue such as this. Hats off to him.

site c impat study is already completed

Submitted by born and raised here on Tue, 2010/02/09 - 10:26.

lions gate consulting of vancouver has done mega work on this. JK solutions of fort st. john was also assossiated in this study. lynda p. is correct when she says it has been studied too death, because it has! what sense is there to do a study when the last study is ignored. our mayor should maybe be more informed of past work done on these studys before councill decides too jump into this endeaver at this time. there is going too be lots of consultation with the towns, the public, more than likely first nations and the gov. that will be in the next phase of construction. I would hope that our mayor at that time will be there and represent fort st. john.