Former mayor Spearman waiting to see where current council stands on coal issue

By Al Beeber - Lethbridge Herald on February 21, 2025.

LETHBRIDGE HERALDabeeber@lethbridgeherald.com

When he served as mayor of Lethbridge, Chris Spearman made clear to the provincial government the stand city council had on coal mining in the Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains and the potential for harm to the Oldman watershed and communities relying on that river for its water supply.
That potential harm was selenium contamination, a matter present mayor Blaine Hyggen also addressed on behalf of council in a letter of his own to the UCP government in 2023.
Spearman, who now lives in Pincher Creek, will be watching on Tuesday as council addresses an official business motion being brought forward by Belinda Crowson calling on the City of Lethbridge to reconfirm it is opposed to any coal developments – including the Grassy Mountain project – that risk damaging the Oldman watershed.
In a phone interview with the Herald on Thursday, Spearman said a safe potable water supply for Lethbridge, as well as surrounding areas and businesses which rely on city water, is the most important issue council will face during its current mandate.
“This is a huge issue for the City of Lethbridge. If we lose the ability to access treatable water and create potable water for our citizens and for our region, I can’t imagine a more important issue and it is definitely within the realm of responsibility of the City of Lethbridge. It’s definitely a municipal issue,” said Spearman.
Spearman, who is spokesperson for the Water for Food group which is opposed to coal mining on the Eastern Slopes, said the issue isn’t one of right versus left but rather right versus wrong.
Spearman will be in council chambers Tuesday when Crowson presents her motion and says council’s involvement is “overdue but I’m glad to see them moving forward. I did write a letter to them today, I expressed a lot of concerns. They have no information posted on which they’re going to make their decision. I wrote to them in January and offered to make a presentation. I never heard back from them until yesterday — they sent me a copy of the resolution and said it would not be appropriate to have a presentation at this time.”
In his Thursday email to city council, Spearman asked for them to reconsider the decision of the agenda review committee.
“While I respect the agenda review committee’s authority to make this decision, I do wonder how the Lethbridge public will perceive a decision made in the absence of any supporting information,” wrote Spearman.
“Will councillors decide the issue solely on the basis of personal opinions? While that is certainly an option for council, would it not be better and more transparent to receive a brief presentation with supporting document available as a submission that could be used as a reference? Councillors could then agree or disagree with the information,” his email added.
Spearman has a 20-point PowerPoint presentation that he says would cover key points in about five minutes and supply council will all supporting documentation on his position. And council would have an opportunity to make a decision based on information, he says.
(Public presentations to members of council are reserved for Standing Policy Committee meetings.)
Spearman says Water for Food tries to represent the interests of everybody in the region who depend on clean drinking water as well as everyone involved in the region’s integrated agriculture industry “and try to advocate for their interest because the provincial government has basically been tone deaf. They have not responded to anything,” says Spearman, whose group on Thursday was going to call for the resignation of Alberta’s Minister of Energy and Minerals Brian Jean.
“Albertans value transparency. I think that’s the same across Alberta and I think that’s the same in the city of Lethbridge. And if council’s going to make a decision, they should publicize what information they’re making the decision on, says Spearman.
He says he doesn’t know how council can debate a resolution such as Crowson’s without information being presented publicly to them.
“I think Belinda will provide information that she’s found verbally. I commend Belinda for bringing forward the resolution, I really do. Normally there is some basis for the resolution so if I only see the resolution and no information behind it, are we going to surprise everybody at the meeting and provide information or are we just going to debate the resolution as it stands with no information,” he asks.
Spearman says if he was on the pro-mining side, he might say mining is a provincial responsibility and in the jurisdiction of the ministry of energy.
He would respond to that by saying mining is a municipal issue “because the City is responsible for providing safe, potable water to its residents, its businesses, its food processors, for cooking and drinking. So if that’s the City’s responsibility, they have a genuine concern and should be speaking out against any threats to providing that.”
In an open letter to Jean earlier this year, Spearman addressed issues including Alberta government science reports which say contamination will definitely happen in the Oldman watershed based on what has occurred elsewhere in Alberta and neighbouring B.C.
“Once the river is contaminated with excess selenium, it’ll be too late. You won’t be able to fix it and based on the experience elsewhere in Alberta, once it’s contaminated, it could take 20 or 30 years to fix,” he says.
“So based on the science why are we moving forward? And if the City of Lethbridge does not have access to safe, treatable water from the river, what is your solution? What is your backup plan? That’s what I wrote in my letter,” says Spearman who asked Jean how treatable water could be accessed by residents and all communities that Lethbridge supplies with potable water if selenium contaminates the Oldman.
He says three weeks later, he got form letters in response.
“The Minister has not provided any answers in three weeks.”
Spearman started asking questions of Northback Holdings eight months and says he’s never received an answer about his concerns. Those questions were the same ones that council on June 22, 2021 asked Atrum Coal.
“The most important question is ‘can you name a municipality anywhere in the world that has been able to remove excess selenium from the water successfully?’ And the answer is, no they can’t provide it,” he says.
Selenium contamination “travels 500 kilometres downstream. That’s why there’s lawsuits in the U.S. against Teck and the province of British Columbia for selenium contamination. We’re not 500 kilometres downstream, we’re 150 kilometres downstream in Lethbridge,” he adds.
Spearman feels, though, that the Grassy Mountain mine is a given. He also says the 200,000 Albertans downstream of the Municipality of the Crowsnest Pass didn’t get a voice in last fall’s non-binding CNP plebiscite on mining despite the potential negative impacts.
A petition after that plebiscite was started to give other residents a voice. That petition now has more than 5,000 signatures which is substantially higher than the CNP 1,957 votes in support of mining. Those signatures will be collected until the end of the month and then an MLA will present it to the government. That petition’s two operative clauses include that Grassy Mountain mining is harmful and Northback hasn’t responded to concerns, he says.

3
-2