I write in response to a letter published in the Shoreline newspaper titled “OCI should put their listening ears on,” the week of Nov. 9. We fully respect opposing views to our development; all we ask is that people consider the facts.
Certain individuals on the Advocates for the Responsible Development of Long Pond Facebook Group continue to post skewed misinformation relating to Ocean Choice’s development. They continue to state that we are “project-splitting” the development to move through the regulatory process. The plan submitted to all regulatory bodies, and ultimately what is included in our Land Use Impact Assessment Report (LUIAR), is our plan. There is no alternative plan. To suggest this is misleading.
When we post information to the Facebook Group, or when we respond to misinformation posted, we are accused of spreading “corporate propaganda” and “shoving the development down people’s throats.”
We have been engaged in rigorous federal, provincial and municipal approvals. We have worked with the responsible regulatory authorities to ensure compliance, and we are adhering to the processes deemed necessary by these authorities. In addition, significant independent analysis has been conducted by experts, ranging from specialized engineers to industrial hygienists. These are knowledgeable and well-respected experts in their fields. But yet, the regulatory authorizations and the expert reports are not accepted by the group.
When we post information to the Facebook Group, or when we respond to misinformation posted, we are accused of spreading “corporate propaganda” and “shoving the development down people’s throats.” Our posts have been fact-based and respectful, yet we have been blocked from seeing, and therefore being able to respond to, all of the posts. The group has asked for transparency. How is this supporting transparency?
To be viewed as “listening,” the development will not go ahead. The advocates have taken a “not in my backyard” stance to the development. While we might not be giving into this narrative, we are listening and taking feedback. For example, due to ongoing conversations with residents, we commissioned an expert engineering firm to complete a study of the development and any potential impacts on flooding, ice jams, currents, etc. This was a direct result from concerns raised by property owners. In addition, due to feedback relating to navigation, we adjusted our plan to add a wider channel for the safe passage of small boats.
Listening is a two-way street and some of the active individuals on the group should take their own advice.
The group continues to state that Long Pond is an estuary which would trigger an environmental assessment (EA). The Department of Environment, Climate Change and Municipalities, the provincial regulatory authority responsible for the EA process, has repeatedly stated that it has never been considered an estuary. A letter from the minister of the department was shared on the group stating just that. Despite this, certain members of this group keep advocating that it is an estuary. If it is an estuary, should past developments in the harbour, as well as the other developments currently undergoing permitting, also be subject to an EA?
We acknowledge that there were some issues with how information was originally shared with area residents. Since August, we have held several meetings with individuals, businesses and property owners in the area.
We have been sharing our plans and fielding questions every step of the way. In light of COVID-19, we have not been able to hold the traditional town hall public consultation. In an effort to ensure there is a forum for the public to review factual information and to pose questions, we set up a website dedicated to the development. Since September, close to 60 questions have been submitted, all of which are posted to our site for anyone who is interested.
The group continues to state that we have not been responsive. This is simply not the case. While some questions may take us a bit longer to answer because we had several expert reports being carried out for the development, we have been responding.
It is also important to note that we are working with the Town of Conception Bay South to host a public consultation about the LUIAR. We have been informed that the terms of reference and our LUIAR is one of the most extensive that the town has ever seen.
Blaine Sullivan, president
Ocean Choice
