Emotions run wild in Summerland solar debate

There were tears, technical problems and take-downs Monday as Summerland councillors again debated a controversial solar project — and that was just in the first 10 minutes.

The stage was set by Coun. Richard Barkwill, who planned to introduce a notion of motion calling on district staff to remove what he believes is misleading information on the Solar+Storage website.

But after receiving new information just hours the meeting, which was conducted via videoconference, Barkwill pulled his motion from the agenda.

In its place, Coun. Erin Carlson introduced a fresh motion to “reaffirm that council will complete the integrated solar and battery storage project in its chosen location.”

The motion eventually passed by a 4-3 margin with Barkwill, Doug Patan and Marty Van Alphen opposed. Council passed a similar motion by an identical vote in July 2020.

Carlson introduced her motion with a 10-minute speech that was halted numerous times by a frozen video feed and ended with her in tears and her camera switched off.

Her concerns centred on an essay published in the Penticton Herald last week in which Barkwill presented detailed arguments against the $7-million project, which would be funded by a $6-million federal grant and the balance by local taxpayers.

“By writing his side of the debate in the media and receiving vacuum silence from the rest of council, he’s succeeded in making some wonderful and very smart Summerlanders believe that the project is contributing to climate change, that it’s over budget and that it’s going to cost them money, and I can’t believe that he has been allowed to do this,” she said.

“I believe that this is an ethical problem,” said Carlson.

She accused Barkwill of attempting to “undermine” council and senior governments, and potentially making Summerland a laughingstock.

“I care about this town and I care about the people who have written in their opposition because they have been misled. Council debate happens at the council table, not in the media. Don’t do it again!”

In his equally fiery response, Barkwill said he felt obligated to bring new information forward.

“The whole project has been presented as a cool project — and that’s not how I make a decision, and that’s why I want all the facts on the table, and that’s what I felt I was doing,” said Barkwill.

He went on to note Mayor Toni Boot — who said at the outset of the debate she would speak on “ethics and integrity” — also writes regular newspaper columns.

“I’d do it again,” said Barkwill, “and I am certainly not going to take any lectures from Mayor Boot about integrity.”

Boot — who never actually delivered the promised remarks on ethics and integrity, but described her newspaper columns as a mayoral responsibility — appeared frustrated as the debate neared the one-hour mark and interrupted councillors multiple times when she felt they strayed too far off-subject.

In explaining their opposition to the motion, Van Alphen expressed concerns about the location, while Patan noted local taxpayers are still contributing $1 million to the project’s capital costs.

The project, which will use solar panels and batteries to generate and store electricity, should provide enough power to run 100 homes. It’s slated for a five-acre municipally owned lot that formerly served as a public works yard.

Construction must conclude by September 2023.