Re: 2007 Audit of Carp River Watershed Study and Related Projects

Mr. Chairman, Members of Committee,

The Carp River Coalition is supported by four environmental organizations in the city: the Greenspace Alliance of Canada’s Capital, Friends of the Carp River, Ottawa Riverkeeper, and the Ottawa Group of the Sierra Club of Canada.

Some of our comments on the AG report are:

1. The report clearly shows that the problem is not just a matter of one error in the analysis for this development. The report documents a string of serious errors and omissions. It is truly worrisome that staff and the landowners group keep insisting that there is just one error that is being corrected. It is amazing that management and KWOG keep thinking they can fool the public by insisting there is just one error. (This morning we heard about several corrections allegedly made – these by no means exhaust the list.)

Most fundamental of all is the fact that the data necessary to properly calibrate these models are not now available. They will not be available until there are sufficient and working gauges in the River and there are number of significant rainfalls. No data, no reliable output – it’s that simple.

(We read the comments provided by KWOG. On the all-important issue of calibration, KWOG’s response is that calibration does not need to be undertaken to move the project forward. “All of the necessary modeling work has been undertaken and ongoing monitoring will be carried out as the project is developed over the next 20 years.” We submit that this is the height of callousness but it is of course their right to try to pursue profit at the expense of anything else.)

Our Part II Order Request of July 2006 was in large part based on the observation that sufficient data for calibration were not available and that therefore the 100-year flood line under existing conditions, let alone the flood line post-development, was unknown.

2. The AG report also confirms what we said now almost two years ago: Restoration of the River cannot end at Richardson Sideroad. The report did not go into the matter of the status of a portion of the River as a Municipal Drain. We were convinced by the evidence then and we remain convinced now that the River IS a Drain from Maple Grove Road to just past the Village of Carp. On this issue, at least, the blinds are beginning to come off. The City’s own web site now shows part of this watercourse as a Drain. This status has both legal and practical implications which, once recognized, will help towards finding a way out of the current fiasco.

3. In light of the indictments contained in the AG’s report and of senior management’s response – heavy spin would be the better word – as far as the public is concerned staff has no credibility left on this file. We ask you:

– Why is staff, in its response to the AG’s Recommendation #1, referencing a policy from the Toronto Region Conservation Authority substantially out of context?
– Why were the KW reports forwarded for Council approval even though significant comments on earlier drafts were not heeded? (Please refer to pages 17 & 18 of the audit report.)
– Why did the City (and MVC) not insist that gauges be put in the River so that the data necessary for calibration of the models could be gathered?
– Were the recommendations of the Carp River Watershed/Subwatershed Study tainted by the fact that the same consultant had also begun working on the Kanata West Concept Plan, and if so, was this with the knowledge and concurrence of City staff?

In light of the Audit report we offer you the following pieces of advice:

1. Don’t expect the so-called correction of errors to provide the answers we need. The essential data are not available today.
2. Recognize once and for all that the Carp River to just past the Village of Carp is a Municipal Drain. The sooner this is done, the sooner a rational approach to restoration of the River can proceed, with a fair distribution of the cost.
3. Ensure that the 3rd-party review is done and acted upon in a transparent and credible manner. Staff untainted by previous missteps and omissions must visibly be involved – luckily, you have a few water resource engineers left who can do the job. We urge you to use them, whether KWOG likes it or not. The decision to subject the draft Terms of Reference to public review and Council approval is a good start.
4. Request that the AG extend the audit of this file, this time with emphasis on project management. Too many strange things have been going on here, light needs to be shed on them.
5. Finally, reference was made this morning to a memo from John Moser about KW development applications. We haven’t seen that memo [a copy was given to me later in the meeting]. Our advice is that, until this situation is cleared up, this Committee must refuse to hear further development approvals and instruct staff to freeze all applications and stop holding public meetings about specific KW development proposals under the Planning Act.

Thank you.

For the Carp River Coalition
Erwin Dreessen