Is it the same Conestoga-Rovers that ...???

This is the Conestoga-Rovers & Associates (CRA) that allowed the “independent” Public Liaison Committee be heavily swayed and manipulated by the conflict of interest / influence of (then) Goulbourn Mayor Janet Stavinga and Regional Staff Engineer Stephen Forstell (since removed from the project) …both of whom should have been no more than silent observers  …if present at all.

This is the same CRA that was the only  “independent” engineering firm out of a total of four hired consultant firms, that strangely selected the more costly, and trouble-prone pipeline, as the preferred option. 

This is the firm that was to "independently" follow the evaluation criteria of the Regional Council order ---to help select a technology that could meet the MOE- "compliance schedule"--- but deliberately* left the crucially-relevant evaluation criterion of "time to implement", out of the evaluation matrix. *(Even when asked repeatedly why a "time to implement" component was not being put into the matrix, CRA's project engineer denied that there was any "time urgency".)

This is the only consulting engineering firm (out of the four) whose "independent" evaluation work was found to be "imperfect" by the Ontario Municipal Board ...and was ordered to be "re-evaluated": a re-evaluation which found evidence against the pipeline option.

This is the only engineering firm that Councillor Janet Stavinga so glowingly touts as “independent, open, and transparent” in choosing the pipeline option. Ms. Stavinga does not seem to refer to RV Anderson  (RVA) with the same glowing attributes, when describing RVA’s December 16, 2003, rejection of the pipeline option.

This is the same CRA, which, after selecting the pipeline option, was quickly re-hired by the Region ---without tender--- to “independently” select the pipeline route. This is the same firm that assembled a “Pipeline Route Selection – Public Liaison Committee”, and stacked it with known pipeline supporters from Munster, rather than the potentially affected downstream residents who have a bigger stake in the issue, some of which had special environmental credentials, and were known to have applied, but were denied.

This is the same CRA that was hired by the Region, (Chair, Bob Chiralli presiding), to do an “independent” audit of the Ottawa South Collector fiasco ---in which RV Anderson Associates was named as a defendant –for alleged “negligence”, in a $200M lawsuit by the Region, the results of which have never seemed to have reached the tax-paying public.

This is the same CRA that was hired by the Region of York to independently evaluate (and which ultimately re-confirmed) the Environmental Assessment work done by  ---none other than--- RV Anderson Associates, which had supported a big pipeline solution for King City, over the less expensive on-site treatment solution. 

This RV Anderson Associates is, of course, the same firm that the City of Ottawa chose (and RVA accepted), to do the Ontario Municipal Board-ordered “independent” re-evaluation of the “independent” work done by CRA.

You will recall that the Board ordered the city to choose a re-evaluator who was “disinterested”, (as presumably, in past, present or future business interest with the City).

And finally, Councillor Janet Stavinga is referring to the same CRA that sued, with malicious intent, a member of the Munster, Public Liaison Committee in the amount of $4,200,000, to suppress his evidence of a pipeline fix by the Region/City, under the watch of, none other than, Regional Chair, Bob Chiarelli.

Sorry, Ms. Stavinga, to interrupt your commercial moment ...but your bias is showing!

The best thing you could do, Councillor, is to heed the honest concerns of two of your more insightful colleagues: Councillor Rainer Bloess, (QUOTE), and Councillor Wendy Stewart, (QUOTE).