While gearing up to contend assertions city hall is solely to blame for coal tar contamination in Foster Ward, city officials contend they’re not turning their backs on the issue despite also appealing an order to take action.

“We’re appealing the responsibility outline in the order,” said Richard Reinert, the city’s manager of environmental services. “The city is not turning its back on this project. We’re not disputing that something needs to be done down there, but if we go ahead and comply then everybody comply.”

There is one sticking point, said Reinert, who suggests the city has been leading the charge the entire time.

The city is currently embroiled in a disagreement with several other parties over who is responsible for rectifying potential pollutants in sections of the lands identified in a ministry order.

“The city is named in all four parts of the order as it relates to the different areas in that part of the city, the other parties are not. They’re only named in the areas they own. We’re saying they should be named in all the areas,” Reinert said.

Sources have said part of the ministry’s objective is to apportion blame to each party based on what they are deemed responsible for.

The ongoing wrangling over who is to blame has triggered a January Environmental Review Tribunal appeal hearing of the environment ministry’s order, with the other parties filing a claim laying blame squarely on the city’s shoulders.

The City of Belleville, alone, should be ordered to address contaminants that it, alone, caused and has failed to address, an appeal filed by the parties reads. The city is in the best position to carry out those parts of the order that deal with the contaminants on the site, it further claims.

The city isn’t online with those claims, saying when property is purchased the new owners assume responsibilty for the good and bad.

“They have owned the property for many years as well and they have done nothing to prevent the material from leaving the property,” Reinert said. “That’s why we feel they’ve got some responsibility. If the city was to go in and clean it up then they stand to benefit from that. That’s why we don’t agree with their approach.”

The other parties’ position is a far cry from the city’s stance.

“The city is responsible for the coal tar because it placed the coal tar within the ground,” states the document obtained by The Intelligencer. “The city has taken no steps in over 65 years to attempt to abate the migration of coal tar or to remove the coal tar.”

The appeal, filed on the behalf of 105 Pinnacle Inc. Kent D. Hawkins, Darlene Hawkins and Tony McGarvey, states the parties find “it unjust, unreasonable and inequitable to name the Pinnacle appellants, 835867 Ontario Inc., Sidney Spiegel and Naomi Spiegel in part of the order related to the site.

Ministry of the Environment officials confirmed the ministry is pressing ahead with its demands aimed at expediting the start of clean up, despite the appeal.

“Just because the order is being appealed doesn’t mean that anything stops, so we’ve been working to meet the order.” Reinert said Monday. “We have to submit a work plan, which we have done. We’re waiting for comments from the ministry.”

The order being appealed was released in September and is addressed to several parties including 105 Pinnacle Limited, the holding company for one of the companies operating in the area, the city, Kent D. Hawkins, Darlene Hawkins, Naomi Spiegel and Sidney Spiegel, a past owner of the former gas plant site.

jason.miller@sunmedia.ca