Smoky Lake Water?

Smoky Lake Signal Article No. 227 (June 27, 2012) Whispering in the Wind Having sustainable, reasonably priced WATER for Smoky Lake’s communities are two great objectives that few would argue with. But circumstances in the area have actually degenerated with a lot of confusion regarding the facts and differing opinions as to what measures are going to be required to fix what appears to be a politically mismanaged set of circumstances – a situation that for the moment, appears to be out of control. Here are a few facts that are not in dispute: the waterline from Redwater to Waskatenau was completed a couple years back; the waterline from Waskatenau to Smoky Lake was just recently completed; but surprise, surprise there is no water available to fill the waterlines. Alberta’s “Water for Life” Strategy The Government of Alberta enacted a “Water for Life” strategy in 2003 and by that strategy, introduced a new, innovative “watershed planning approach” to deal with water and land use management issues. Critics have applauded this new approach to protect Alberta’s watersheds but have reservations related to how this new approach was being implemented, monitored and governed. From my perspective, recent revelations and actions by two relatively new governing bodies (the so called water commissions of northeast Alberta) are clear examples on how governance of a reasonably well thought out policy initiative, the “Water for Life” strategy, can get screwed up when it comes to the implementation and governance. The Water Commissions To implement the “Water for Life” strategy and to administer the water flows from EPCOR’s water treatment facilities in Edmonton going into north east Alberta, two water commissions have been established to manage the distribution system. First is the Capital Region Northeast Water Services Commission (which includes the various counties and municipalities south of Redwater and includes major centers like Fort Saskatchewan and Gibbons). The newer, second water commission has been labeled the Highway 28 / 63 Regional Water Commission (includes the County of Thorhild and the County of Smoky Lake and the various municipalities within those two counties). From my perspective, having a single water authority that oversees a safe, sustainable, reasonably priced water distribution system is not only necessary, it is critical. To have two independent water commissions overseeing a single distribution network is a recipe for sub-region price discrimination and unfair distribution practices – a true recipe for disaster. The Issue As I already pointed out the establishment of two (independent) water commissions puts the Thorhild and Smoky Lake regions at a major disadvantage when it comes to discussing the fair, reasonably priced distribution of water into the more northern area communities. From what I understand, the waterline capacity that’s presently going into the Capital Region Northeast Water Services Commission was, in part to be directed to the Highway 28 / 63 Regional Water Commission for residential use participants. Since the waterline capacity that was to be directed to the Highway 28 / 63 is being used by the Capital Region’s commercial participants – if I understand the conditions for the dedicated waterline, commercial use is a no – no? So the conclusion has got to be, build another waterline, but at whose expense and is there additional capacity available through EPCOR? In the meantime things are getting a little tense between the two water commissions – Gibbons councillor Doug Horner expressed his sentiments with a rather curt comment, “All our member communities would suffer so someone in Smoky Lake could wash their car.”