|
Comments? |
|
Prince Rupert Regional Information
Site |
||||
NATURESea, land, river PEOPLESCommunity
|
Meeting was practicllay
over in little over than an hour --- no serious discussions other than the
presentations --- and oh yah, mandated public budget discussions will be held
(legal formality from Council perspective) |
|
Enbridge comes
to ‘calm the waters’ Port there too – but (almost) everyone left City continues
to do all its serious discussions in-camera (illegally?) Update
on ‘donations’ tax receipts And Spring
comes |
|
About 30+ people
come to hear Enbridge |
|
|
Lots
of people showed up – but no cheering, booing etc – only a few banners |
|
|
I did not
get the youngest person’s name ---just before picture taken, he was the one
with the ‘No Tankers’ banner |
|
|
|
|
Power Point
presentation was ‘predictable’ --- seen/ heard this before |
|
I
will see how much of this is online later |
|
|
Main message
was about pipeline-- Marine aspects emphasized in Councillors questions |
|
Again
predictable --- things have changed --- pipeline spills safety etc --- and
even Canadian rules (via international shipping regs – have been updated post
Exxon Valdez spill |
|
|
Trust us |
|
Here
is their slide how things have changed since 19189 Exxon Valdez spill --- (in
passing it was human error that caused latter)
Comparing
previous tanker traffic with projected Enbridge related traffic --- note the
presentation began about 4 minutes into the meeting – and the questions from
Council about 13 minutes into the meeting and lasted almost 30 minutes (to
7:44 by my watch --- in case anyone wants to review it using City Audio or
Video |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If anyone believes
Joint Review Panel – ‘meaningful’ the material is online |
|
Councillors good questions |
|
|
·
Is there going to be any kind of public process in PR?
Terrace, yes – but not so far in PR ·
Ashley probed the Tanker liability aspects: there is a
generic fund for maritime accidents but once tanker filled ‘liability’ moves
to carrier ·
If there is a spill—is there a dedicated ‘pocket’ of $$ to
deal with it? --- Again the
generic maritime fund etc ·
Good questions –probably best to review sing City recorded
audio/ Video |
·
Thorkelson on comparisons with Exxon Valdez spill ·
Garon: Pipeline passing through some of wildest country in
the world --- leading to how detect
respond to seeps / breaks/ spills etc ·
Garon – there are 733 water crossings – but pipeline
underground except in 2 broad river crossings --- more on detections and response time
|
|
And
predictable --- once the presentations/ questions were over—almost everyone
left –t hogu some like MLA Gary Coons did stik it out throught the next
presentation etc |
And everyone
leaves |
|
|
|
|
Port
presentation on MOU with City |
|
Emphasis
perhaps on ‘Section D’ where City responsibilities outlined --- Gordon-Payne
wondered about the implicit funding --- Port claims to have put 50T$ into the
present Task Force etc --- more later |
|
See my previous |
Update on Flow
Through tax donations |
|
I
spoke with Tax people help line --- their position (as I understood their
spokesperson) that as a ‘qualified donee’ the municipality could give tax
receipts to donors --- and ‘spend’ the $$ as they saw fit --- in this case
transferring it to selected charities --- Example given was someone could
donate a valuable painting to the City – get a tax receipt – and the City
could use $$ after its sale for anything they wished --- thus presumably the
key becomes ‘budgeting’ --- how tracked in audits etc |
|
|
And the spring is approaching
crescendo locally
|
|
Here the
Skunk Cabbage sending up its yellow flag to greet the spring sunshine – more
later |
Created by LG on 13/4/2011
Last updated on Wednesday, April 13, 2011