When it comes to source water protection, the costs and responsibilities remain in the forefront for Puslinch council.
Those concerns are tied in with source water protection policies drafted by Guelph which directly affect properties in Puslinch, where some city wells are located.
On Feb. 1, Puslinch councillors reviewed correspondence from Wellington County director of planning Gary Cousins, regarding the county?s comments on Guelph?s draft source protection policies.
In addition to noting that Guelph?s proposed policies will be considered by the Lake Erie source protection committee, Cousins stated the current position of the county on appropriate source protection policies is the draft set of policies approved by county council and sent to the city late last year.
Jurisdiction of policies
Cousins said that throughout the draft policies, there is reference to Wellington having to amend its official plan or the township?s, to implement certain measures.
As part of the Lake Erie source protection process, Cousins explained Wellington is responsible for developing and implementing policies for wellhead protection areas and other protection areas in the county.
?As such, reference in the city?s policies to other municipalities should be removed,? he said.
Policy consistency
Cousins also believes all municipalities are striving for consistency for source protection policies and approaches.
He added the county has five source protection areas so it is making efforts to encourage consistency where possible.
Cross boundary costs
Cousins said that in addition to the city?s protection areas, which also cross into the county, there are protection areas originating in Hamilton (Freelton) and the Regions of Waterloo and Halton that fall within Wellington boundaries.
?Accordingly, our rural municipalities will be required to enforce new policies and measures to protect source water for neighbouring communities. While we are willing to protect neighbouring municipal wells, it seems unreasonable that the costs associated with such protection should be borne by the municipality that does not own, operate or benefit from the water system being protected.?
Other discussion
Councillor Susan Fielding said Hamilton and Halton had extensive discussions with the Lake Erie source water protection group. ?They have come up with a consistency strategy – which I think is really good News.?
She believes Cousins and other Wellington representatives were involved in those discussions, and said the move by Hamilton and Halton seems to be in the right direction.
Fielding added the group she is involved with had asked for a deadline extension. At the time of its most recent meeting, the Ministry of Environment had neither responded to, nor even acknowledged the letter.
?It?s getting so close that we may be out of compliance and there was a lot of talk around the table as to what might happens if we are out of compliance.?
Fielding said the work still needs to be endorsed by the Hamilton and Halton Conservation Authorities because those representative feel there may be fines for being out of compliance.
?I?m really disappointed with the MOE, that they haven?t even responded.?
She added there was also a letter sent directly to the Minister of the Environment.?
Fielding said Halton Region is adamant it is not prepared to continue with the changed deadlines. ?They feel they still need two more months.?
Fielding said, ?This is an extremely important document and I would rather see quality – than go back later if there is a predicament. We?re kind of hanging, and don?t know what is going to happen.?
That is what is happening with the Hamilton-Halton source water protection group, Fielding said.
She said there are at least four other such groups that requested deadline extensions.
?But nobody has heard back yet.?
Mayor Dennis Lever said in Cousin?s correspondence, ?he echoes our feelings about protecting the wells that Guelph uses within our boundaries, but not us being burdened with the associated costs.?
Lever said the county policies were included in the county agenda package in November. The policies were within a 24-page document.
