A new proposal to spend $300,000 to remediate an area off Campobello Island to move forward with the Market Square and Market Wharf project in Saint Andrews has the council divided.
The project was delayed until October 2025 amid concerns over a lack of mitigation around the area, something the municipal council has suggested was the fault of engineers hired by the town.
“In order to do our wharf project the way that we presented when we did all the consultation, and what council selected, what the community selected … at the last hour, unfortunately, our wharf project was not approved by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans,” said Mayor Brad Henderson. “If we wanted to do that project, it would take away from fish habitat.”
The wharf project is expected to cost the town a bit more than $2 million.
The wharf refurbishment project is facing challenges as council decides what to do about mitigation efforts. (Town of Saint Andrews)
Henderson explained the town needs to acquire credits to do the project that is already designed.
It will need to pay for a mitigation project somewhere else to move ahead with wharf refurbishment. The original cost to mitigate the area by the wharf would cost the town an additional $1 million.
The project, which would involve dredging an area off Campobello Island, would provide the town enough “credit” to move forward on the wharf without any local mitigation.
“If we cancel the project altogether, we lose all of our government funding, it’s still going to cost the town a significant amount of money,” he said during the meeting. “There is no good option for this council to select.”
The wharf was originally built in the 1950s, but burned down in 1994, and was rebuilt by the town, who took ownership of it.
Henderson described the situation as environmental “blackmail,” a term also used by another councillor.
Coun. Steve Neil, who is a biologist, said during the meeting he would vote against the Ducks Unlimited project.
“The idea of mitigating or remediating marine habitat somewhere else in order to continue this project, it’s not an approach I really agree with, from my almost 30 years of being a biologist,” he said during the meeting.
“If the project was in our own community, I’d probably swallow it a little better.”
Neil said if the project was what he believed to be viable, he would also be able to support the option.
“But in my opinion, this project is doomed to fail right from the start,” he said.
The wharf is under a weight restriction currently. (Patrick Watt/CHCO-TV)
He described the idea – of doing a project somewhere else to help marine life to take it from someplace else – as unethical.
“We have no good option,” he said. “No good option is not how I want to proceed with $2 million worth of taxpayers’ money.”
Coun. Darrell Weare also spoke about the concerns he had when speaking with the engineers.
“In April of last year, myself, Coun. Neil, Coun. Blanchard all spoke to the engineers … told them that this needed an EIA (environmental impact assessment) … and we were basically ignored and everything went ahead,” Weare said during the meeting.
He said that was frustrating.
Henderson said the council didn’t push back more on the engineers because it trusted their expertise.
“It’s delayed our project by a year,” he said. “CBCL is our engineers … the reality of the situation is you trust your professional opinion to give you the right opinion.”
“If you’re professional services that you’ve paid are telling you you’re good to go, especially one that has a long history in this community, you assume that they’ve done their homework and what we’ve actually found out is that they didn’t do their homework and that’s why we’re in the situation we’re in.”
He said this drew concern from both staff and council, which is why a policy to help some customers was created.
The Courier reached out to CBCL for comment on the allegations but did not receive a response by deadline.
The question, Henderson explained, is whether the town wants a wharf or not.
During the meeting, Coun. Jamie Hirtle said he has concerns too, but there is one that is clear – the desire from the community to keep the wharf.
“I feel like we’ve been falling forward through this project and hoping we’re going to land on our feet, so I have some significant concerns,” he said. “When we consulted the public on this and we had envisioned exercises … no one from the public could imagine a town that didn’t have a wharf in it.”
The bridge has visual damage and council fears further restrictions if things are not repaired. (Patrick Watt/CHCO-TV)
“So I need to keep that at the core of how I’m thinking about this.”
He said this desire and attachment to the wharf needs to be part of the decision-making process.
Coun. Lee Heenan said the council has to start somewhere.
“At some point, the municipality has to start somewhere,” he said. “If we’ve decided that the wharf is going to be fixed, which we have, we’ve had public awareness, we’ve had everything. We have to start somewhere.”
But time is running out.
Henderson said that a federal election is looming and a new government that may not share the priorities of the previous government could mean the funding sources dry up.
“We know there is a change in government, this is an environmental fund, you might lose all your funding for the entire wharf,” he said.
There is no flexibility in the timeline, the money must be spent this year, he explained.
The wharf refurbishment is planned for October 2025 after being delayed last year.
Council voted on Jan. 20 on the motion to bring a formal contract on the Ducks Unlimited project back to council for it to be reviewed before it moves forward with the project. The motion was passed in a vote of seven to two.
