Candidates were asked to keep their responses to each question to a limit of 150 words, but their responses have not been edited in any way. The responses to the questions will be published in the order they were received. The fifth and final question, and the responses to it, is as follows:
How much of a priority should this next council place on reducing carbon emissions within the corporation and the community, and how would you propose to approach funding those projects and initiatives?
Raymond Fromme: Environmental awareness, green projects, environmentally sound programs are important. We all have to learn (or have learned) our lessons to save energy, to keep our air and water clean, to reduce, reuse and recycle. This awareness starts at home, schools and workplaces. We have to be serious about our environment, meaning: We recycle (great), but still idle our trucks for hours to keep it at the desired 21.5 C (not so great).
Most founding for green project should come from the BC’s Carbon Credit Program. However, we need to remember, that not all “Green Projects” are viable and the City should not “overkill“ this issues.
Trina Commandeur: A sustainable building contributes to the protection of human health, social and cultural values. The building sector has the greatest potential to reduce CO2 emissions. Currently, @ 30% of global CO2 emissions and 40% of global resource consumption is a result of constructing buildings. Green building methods is an approach to building environmentally sound and resource-efficient. A great partnership for affordable housing to meet the people’s needs and the environment; by partnering with stakeholders and interest groups it should not cost the taxpayers much at all. Industrial composters installed on-site at restaurants can manage food waste. The food waste, once processed in as little as 24 hours, can be incorporated into the farms and cityscapes, helping reclaim valuable nutrients that would have otherwise been sent to the landfill. This will reduce CO2 emissions also, a great opportunity Dawson Creek to meet three of your target goals at the same time.
Trevor Allaby: I truly believe that the community should take a step back from all of our green initiatives. We are held up as a model to the rest of Canada but maybe there is a reason that more communities are not placing as large an emphasis on green projects. We have to re-evaluate the cost of such projects. We should look at doing those projects that would generate grant money and leave the other projects alone, at this time.
Doug Ragan: Our City and community should still continue to strive to reduce their carbon emissions as much as possible. However, funding new projects and initiatives should be postponed until the City’s necessary expenditures are addressed and the debt load is reduced. New corporations into our area should be encouraged to adopt our vision of ‘reducing their carbon emissions’ and implementing practices to attain sustainability.
Shaely Wilbur (Shaely): The next council should continue to be enviromentally responsible and promote that responsibility to existing and future industry. As well avoid taking on any new projects until our debt is better under control. We should not sacrafise the maintenance and improvement of our core services and infrastructure to have a "Green City hall" we must promote enviromental responsibility to our community as a whole. Change starts at home and such promotion can be done with hardly any expence more of the councils time.
David MacDonald: I think we should look at reducing emissions but we should work at educating people on best practices for this and get business involved more. We should hold business accountable to the same standards we are as a City; they should also have to contribute to the carbon fund setup by the past council if they cannot reduce emissions at the set pace. This would help provide more funding as well as an incentive for business to get on board with the city vision. We could also work with residents to help them take advantage of government grants to make homes more efficient. Funding should not be borrowed for these projects.
Cheryl Shuman: Reducing emissions within the corporation and community should be a priority for future City Councils. Having signed onto the Climate Action Charter prior to the 2008 City Council, the City has committed to reduce and offset 100% of the corporation’s emissions by 2012. This will cost $90,000/year to accomplish if we do nothing past what we’ve already done. Focusing on four or five identified energy efficiency upgrades in the next year could save us about $10,000 in carbon offsets, $43,000 in payments to the Carbon Fund and anywhere from $79,000 to $330,000 in energy costs. These actions not only show our environmental leadership but also our fiscal responsibility The City must show leadership on this issue by developing policies that increase the opportunity for community wide emissions reductions. Leveraging funds collected from the Carbon Tax Refund and our City Carbon Fund will fund these initiatives.
Sue Kenny: Reducing carbon emissions within the corporation and the community is not a choice it is a mandate. The City needs to continue to work with the province and the federal government to succeed in meeting our country’s goal to reduce carbon emissions. We need to continue to lead our city into the future by example and educating others. Alternative energy methods save dollars in the long run. All investments in conservation will pay dividends in the future.
Terry McFadyen: not sure …. funding options are still being explored.
Mile O City wishes to thank all of the candidates who participated for their time and consideration in answering these questions, and encourges all eligible voters in Dawson Creek to make their voices heard on Saturday in the general election if they haven't already participated in advanced voting.