Recently, Mitchell Simpson, Candidate for Mayor, posted some comments in response to a thread on water rates on the Community Voice for Emerald Park & White City Facebook Group.
Hi Residents of White City,
Please see below for my thoughts in regard to the wastewater management plant.
Wastewater Management - A Call for Change
I know that water and wastewater management has been a major concern for White City. Currently, the Wastewater Management Board is made up of six directors—three from the Town of White City and three from the RM. While this structure might seem balanced, I believe it has created significant challenges that need to be addressed:
1. Deadlock in Decision-Making: With a six-person board, we often face deadlock when it comes to voting. This means that someone from either White City or the RM has to break the tie, which might result in decisions that aren't always in the best interest of White City. A board structured this way can limit progress, rather than enable it.
2. Lack of Professional Expertise: The board, made up of representatives from both White City and the RM, is tasked with building and managing the wastewater management plant. However, it lacks industry professionals, such as engineers, who are crucial for guiding large-scale infrastructure projects like this. This absence of technical expertise has contributed to costly building errors.
My Proposal: I believe that we need to appoint a professional board with expertise in the industry to guide this massive project. Having knowledgeable professionals with a background in engineering and wastewater management will ensure that the project is executed effectively, within budget, and built to last.
This shift will allow us to make more informed decisions, avoid unnecessary debt, and ensure that due diligence is done—such as conducting feasibility studies and testing systems in conditions similar to our climate.
The main reason we’ve seen massive debt in White City is due to the wrong company being chosen for the job and a lack of due process. For example, I was told that wasn’t performed to determine how this system would work in North America or if it could handle our climate. We need professionals at the helm of our large infrastructure projects—those with the expertise to make smart, cost-effective decisions for our community. Let’s build a system that works for White City, not against it.
My response:
“I believe that we need to appoint a professional board with expertise in the industry to guide this massive project.”
Great idea - why didn't I think of that?
Oh, wait, I did!
In early 2022, I drove the initiative to engage a management consulting firm to provide governance structure services for the WCRM158 Wastewater Management Authority (WMA). They assessed the current state, what worked, what didn't, and made recommendations to improve governance of WMA.
The recommendation was to restructure the Board from one comprised of equal representatives from the RM and White City into a skills-based board with minimal Council representation as shown here:
This restructuring was supported by the Board members appointed by the Town of White City, but the RM chose not to support the recommendation. As the Constitution forming the WMA provides for no ‘tie-breaking’ formula or process, the proposal to change the structure was unable to proceed.
While it’s true the WMA has no engineers on staff or part of its Board, it engages external expertise – including engineers – as and when necessary. Further, an ‘Owner’s Engineer’ has been contracted, starting in 2021, providing appropriate expertise when needed by the WMA.
“Having knowledgeable professionals with a background in engineering and wastewater management will ensure that the project is executed effectively, within budget, and built to last.”
“This absence of technical expertise has contributed to costly building errors.”
From the WMA Constitution: “The purpose of the Board is to manage, control, operate and carry out the day-to-day business of the Authority and ensure the proper operation of the Wastewater management system.”
The WMA Board didn’t make uninformed, irrational, or unprofessional decisions when deciding upon the treatment system which ultimately was deemed unable to meet the needs of WMA or its contracted specifications. Given the structure of the Board, the decision to select the treatment system which ultimately failed was based upon the recommendation of a qualified engineering firm. There’s no way of knowing whether an ‘in-house’ engineer would have made a different recommendation. In fact, a single ‘in house’ engineer is unlikely to have the broad base of skills, experience, and knowledge that a reputable engineering firm would have.
Notwithstanding the above, it’s important to note the lawsuit launched by the WMA alleges fault on the part of the companies chosen to provide the wastewater treatment system, and the engineering firm which made the recommendation has subsequently been added as a defendant, as has the project management firm.
“The main reason we’ve seen massive debt in White City is due to the wrong company being chosen for the job and a lack of due process.”
While there’s no doubt that a portion of the Town’s debt relates to the failed treatment system – and which is the subject of the lawsuit – most of the debt relates to the current Wastewater Expansion Program (WEP). That program is necessary for the continued growth and expansion of White City, and the Town would have the debt related to WEP with or without the failed treatment system.
WCRM158 Annual Report
The 2023 Annual Report can be seen here: Annual Report 2023 Draft -3.2 & Audit 2022 (Cleaned for Public).pdf
Opmerkingen