Letter to the editor: City must be more transparent and informative about GRO facility proposal site

To the editor:

With regard to the new Green Recycling and Organics (GRO) facility proposed by the City of Burnaby, there are two issues that need to be addressed.

Firstly, is the concern, rightly raised by Councillor Gu, about the distribution of and access to information regarding the GRO proposal to Burnaby residents.

This is a time when many residents may not be up-to-date with local news and not expecting the need to vote so soon after the fall 2022 municipal election.

The onus is on the City to ensure the majority of the electorate is aware of and understands the Alternative Approval Process (AAP) set to gauge the will of Burnaby residents to remove the Park designation from the project area—the very first AAP Burnaby will have experienced.

Councillor Dhaliwal's glib statement claiming that just two notices planned for the Burnaby Now will be enough to prepare the electorate is somewhat of a head-scratcher. Unless Councillor Dhaliwal can confidently say that the majority of the electorate regularly read the Burnaby Now, then it's difficult to see how the city's current efforts to inform Burnaby residents and local stakeholders about the pros and cons of the proposal is sufficient.

Secondly, and arguably the most important issue is the proposed destruction of 21 acres of valuable riparian forests and wetlands along the Fraser river foreshore. In an age when habitat destruction is one of the leading causes of biodiversity loss, the question is why was this particular site chosen? Where industry-hardened shores dominate much of the downstream areas of the Fraser River, what is the logic of destroying what precious ecological habitats still remain, overturning existing protections for a GRO facility that is supposed to be self-contained.

Wetlands are an especially vital habitat type, not only for their inherent worth to native plants and wildlife, but also for their ability to stabilize shorelines and prevent erosion, buffering floods and droughts by retaining and slowly releasing water over time, and water filtration. Even though the proposed area only consists of 12% of the entire Fraser Foreshore Park, it is well-known that disconnection and fragmentation of habitat significantly reduce ecological value. Wetlands are powerful carbon sinks and act as natural infrastructure to protect against the effects of climate change. The value gained from the proposed project would be hard-pressed to measure up to the value of the ecosystem services the site currently provides.

The ultimate fate of the GRO facility proposal benefits from an uninformed electorate. The proponents of this project and City of Burnaby officials need to be more transparent and informative as to the reasons why this particular protected park site was chosen for the proposed GRO facility.

Additionally, any negative environmental impacts the project would have should be clearly stated in full in order for Burnaby residents to make an informed decision. If no further effort is expended by the City to increase the reach of this voting issue among the electorate, then I question the validity of the process and the City's commitment to environmental protections and climate action.

Marisa Bischoff
Burnaby resident