OSHAWA — On July 16, officials announced details of a landmark agreement between the City, the federal government and the Oshawa Harbour Commission on the future of Oshawa’s waterfront.

The full wording still hasn’t been released, but stakeholders are already forming strong opinions.

This Week gathered feedback from some of the people who have been heavily involved in this issue over the years.

Larry Ladd, Oshawa Marina Users Committee

Larry Ladd has spent the past eight years fighting to have federally owned, environmentally contaminated waterfront lands cleaned up and returned to the City and to stave off efforts to further industrialize the port area.

The chairman of the Oshawa Marina Users Committee has also been waiting patiently for a new marina to open, after Oshawa’s was abruptly shut down in 2002.

His vision for the waterfront was reflected in recommendations made by David Crombie, who was appointed by the federal government as a mediator in 2007.

“They threw his report out with the bath water, they didn’t listen to him,” Mr. Ladd says, calling the July 16 event “a dog and pony show.”

While clean-up funding was announced, Mr. Ladd said no one has explained how the contaminated lands will be remediated. He wants to make sure hazardous material is completely dug out and moved to another location.

He is also concerned the agreement is silent on a proposed ethanol plant and criticizes officials for a lack of transparency.

“If the City is going to be working on its waterfront master plan this fall, the public needs to be involved. Going forward there has to be more consultation,” he said.

Bob Malcolmson, Greater Oshawa Chamber of Commerce

Bob Malcolmson says the Greater Oshawa Chamber of Commerce has been advocating for a mixed-use waterfront since 1998 and he’s thrilled with the July 16 announcement.

“We think this is a win-win for all parties, everyone got a bit of something in the negotiations,” said the CEO of the chamber. â?¨ Mr. Malcolmson said Oshawa’s port is a valuable asset that needs to be used to its full potential. He compares it to the Oshawa airport, which was struggling before a recent economic impact study pushed its potential to the forefront.

“Oshawa has one of 18 deep water ports in Canada and it’s so close to 401 and rail service,” Mr. Malcolmson said. “The (water) highway is going to become more important to movement of goods because of concern about greenhouse gases.”â?¨ He said the agreement will allow the port to attract new business, while also creating space for residential and recreational uses to flourish.

Frank Reher, Oshawa Yacht Club

When Frank Reher learned there would be a federal government announcement at the Oshawa Port in advance of the July 16 meeting at the Jubilee, he called Transport Canada and the Oshawa Harbour Commission to ask for an invitation.

The longtime waterfront advocate and commodore of the Oshawa Yacht Club was turned down.

“It was really disappointing to be standing outside the gate, it shows you why there is so much mistrust between all the groups involved in this,” he said.

Mr. Reher is concerned the funding announced isn’t enough to properly clean up contaminated waterfront lands, and questions why the ethanol plant proposal isn’t mentioned in the deal.

“There’s something going on there that we aren’t being told,” he said.

Mr. Reher also isn’t happy with the prospect of a public-private partnership for a marina, saying it should be owned entirely by the City.

“With a P3, businesses make money and the City doesn’t see the benefits,” he noted.

John Carrick, Oshawa Port Users Group

Years of gridlocked debate between the City and the federal government have created uncertainty at the Oshawa port, says John Carrick.

As chairman of the Oshawa Port Users Group — which represents industry such as Miller Paving, McAsphalt Industries and CCC Steel Canada — Mr. Carrick has watched as existing port businesses have held back from expansion and new businesses have hesitated to invest.

“People don’t want to spend their money if there is uncertainty about the future of the port,” he said. “People hear the mayor talking about wanting all the land down there and building condos and they don’t know what to think.”

Mr. Carrick said he still needs more information about the deal between the City and the feds, but overall he’s pleased that the situation has been resolved.

“The port users have been caught in the middle for so long, so we’re just happy that we can move on now,” he said.

Mr. Carrick said he is confident that a successful port can co-exist with people-friendly uses such as a marina and boardwalk, pointing to major ports across the country that are succeeding with that model.

Mark Mattson, Lake Ontario Waterkeeper

Officials with Lake Ontario Waterkeeper are frustrated an official copy of the agreement has yet to be released to the public.

“This goes towards a bigger issue of transparency and accountability when it comes to making important decisions about the future of our lake,” said LOW president Mark Mattson.

He said lack of transparency is also evident in the fact no one has seen environmental reports or independent research on the type of cleanup that will happen at the waterfront.

LOW is also concerned about putting so much land in the hands of a Canadian Port Authority.

“The new governance structure means that a small group of interests will control most of the land around one of Lake Ontario’s most prized urban harbours,” Mr. Mattson said. “A port authority has no accountability to the public and envisions harbours only as transportation hubs, primarily for shipping and railways.”

Concern about a proposed ethanol plant on Gifford Hill is also front of mind. Mr. Mattson said harbour commission representatives refused to answer the public’s questions about the project at the July 16 meeting.

Brian Brasier, Friends of the Second Marsh

A proposed ethanol plant on Gifford Hill lands is the major concern for Brian Brasier, executive director of Friends of the Second Marsh,

He says there is “no defensible reason” to leave those lands out of the agreement and questions why the deal didn’t at least include a policy to limit land uses on that property.

“The federal government’s insistence on controlling the Gifford farm lands and establishing a Canada Port Authority creates a perfect storm that leaves the Second Marsh in perpetual danger,” he said.

While FarmTech has withdrawn its application to the Ministry of the Environment, Mr. Brasier said applications for re-zoning and federal funding are still in play, which is why his group remains concerned.

“We’re really disappointed by the lack of protection for the Gifford land,” he said. “Despite the announcement of a new spirit of cooperation, we feel that Second Marsh has been left out in the cold.”