There appears to be some confusion over who is picking up the tab for consulting services tied to a recent government inspection of dredging efforts at Puslinch Lake.
Last week, councillor Matthew Bulmer wondered aloud if the municipality was expected to pay Harden Environmental Services Ltd. for consulting fees for an Aug. 24 letter to the Ministry of the Environment.
Bulmer said the letter, penned in response to a May 25 MOE inspection report, is intended to address “deficiencies” and thus should not be included as part of the township’s accounts for payment.
The MOE report found the dredging operation has not complied with limits set out in its certificate of approval, and has also not met certain reporting and sampling requirements.
Bulmer used the analogy of a teenager driving his parents’ car and said while the parents may cover car payments, the teen should be on the hook for violations like parking tickets.
Councillor Dick Visser said dredging efforts at the lake never would have occurred without the efforts of the Puslinch Lake Conservation Association (PLCA).
Between 2007 and 2009 the project removed over 21,000 cubic metres of solids, but Visser said for years prior to that, it was “mired in red tape.”
“It’s sort of [in a] catch-up phase now,” he said, noting any “deficiencies” are tied to events from many years ago, and not the fault of the PLCA.
Bulmer stressed the township needs to make a clear distinction between fees tied to the PLCA’s new certificate of approval process – for which the township has agreed to help cover costs – and those incurred as a result of the MOE inspection report.
Councillor Don McKay agreed, saying the latter should be covered by the PLCA.
Clerk Brenda Law said she would consult with Stan Denhoed, of Harden Environmental, to see who should pay for the work and get back to council.
* * *
In his letter to the MOE, Denhoed stressed that groundwater and wetland monitors installed in 2006 show contamination from the dredgate impoundment:
– is not contaminating local wells;
– is not discharging contaminants to nearby wetlands; and
– is sufficiently reduced in concentration prior to crossing the property boundary.
