OUR LAC STE ANNE COMMUNITY IS AT RISK !

Please see Calendar for more information

Sequence of Events:

August 25th, 2008:

YA submits Application to LSAC Covering letter with application states that the FFA (noise) and HCL( water) reports may be shared with public.
LSAC refuses to discuss application until matter is on an MPC agenda.

Sept 12, 2008:

LSACG picks up application from AENV. Is is void of FFA an HCL reports. It inadvertantly had within it deemed proprietary (private) information including TEST HOLE RESULTS from 1998. the application was posted on LSACG website.

Sept 23, 2008

Patricia Fish receives a Cease and Desist Order to remove and return all proprietary information in order to avoid legal action.

Sept 2008

YA advised Karen Kormos that (they changed their mind?) the HCL and FFA report may NOT be released to the public.

Oct 1st, 2008

MPC Meeting:
Prior to hearing any presentations or reviewing submissions from the affected parties, Karen Kormos- MPDO declares YA application complete and refer it to Council with a recommendation for approval. County Council returns FFA and HCL reports to YA stating that they can not accept them as proprietary. All submissions for LSAC-MPC to consider must be available to the public. Council does not accept KK recommendation, they declare the application is incomplete and they defer the matter to December 10th, 2008 with conditions for water, noise, traffic and on-site dust control plan reports to be provided by YA by October 31, 2008.

Oct. 2008

Karen Kormos resigns from her job with LSAC.

October 31, 2008

Yellowhead Aggregates files an Appeal. YA lawyer presents that because their application was "complete" as per Karen Kormos, they assign a "deemed denial" decision because LSAC failed to respond otherwise in the required 40 days. They appeal to SDAB to overrule the decisions of the Oct 1 MPC meeting and request an approval of the gravel pit applications. It seems relevant that YA resorts to legal bullying to avoid providing impact asessment reports.

November 6, 2008

LSACG obtains the HCL report from AENV which concludes that " the gravel extraction is not expected to have a negative impact on the local groundwater resources". It seems relevant that this HCL report is obviously missing extremely relevant information. 26% of the test holes are missing from the HCL illustration and study. 35% of those missing test hole results reported water. The "Test Hole Location" drawing 3/9 in the application in comparison to the illustration provided with HCL report clearly Identifies the discrepancies, It seems relevant that included in the 20 missing test holes. are seven (7) test holes reporting water within the extraction area It seems relevant that in the HCL report, two test holes within the extraction area are presented as containing water, and that these two test holes were reported not to be containing water in the 1998 test hole results data. All of this information can be confirmed from the 1998 Test Hole results document that was forced out of our hands with a threat of legal action by YA lawyer. If seems relevant that YA resorts to legal bullying to ensure that the County and the affected parties are denied the facts about the ground water at the extraction site. It seems relevant that YA did not notice the obvious discrepancies within their own application. It seems relevant that HCL did not comment on the obvious omission of test hole data for the west section of the extraction site.

November 26th, 2008:

SDAB Appeal Hearing was initiated by Yellowhead Aggregates as a way to circumvent the municipal process and have their application approved without providing impact assessments reports. Over 150 people attended the hearing which was dismissed -thrown out” on the grounds that a complete application was not provided to LSAC- MPC, therefore there was no “deemed denial”.

We were informed that the moratorium on gravel pit applications was repealed (taken off), and so more gravel pit applications would again be considered. We were informed that Yellowhead Aggregates had previously approached the County regarding Pit 31 and they were advised to wait a year to apply. (County Elections were coming) Therefore, the County was well aware that the gravel pit application was imminent when they approved the adjacent land owners’ subdivision application!

We learned that our County lawyer is advising them on the amount of input and involvement that will be considered coming from local residents and community group. They have refused to let LSACG speak at subsequent Council or MPC meetings.

We were advised that Lac Ste Anne County will accept a re-application from Yellowhead Aggregates (YA). Yellowhead Aggregates intends to re-apply for Pit 31 Spring 2009. Alberta Environment approves of the quality of the registration application provided to them, and will approve the registration if YA obtains the municipal approval. YA came to the SDAB Appeal Hearing with a revised water report to include the 20 missing drill holes on their diagram; however, still no hydrogeological testing was done on the site.

 

"Your chances of success in any undertaking can always be measured by your belief in yourself" Robert Collier