After repeated procedural challenges and two different legal opinions, Sechelt councillors gave second and third reading to the zoning amendment bylaw needed for Target Marine Hatcheries to process sturgeon on their property.
Councillors also adopted the official community plan bylaw to allow Target's caviar production during their May 11 committee of the whole meeting. These readings will now go to a regular council meeting for formal adoption.
Both motions were made after much debate on Wednesday afternoon, with councillors Fred Taylor, Alice Janisch and Warren Allan voting against them. Councillors Ann Kershaw, Keith Thirkell, Alice Lutes and Mayor Darren Inkster voted in favour of the motions.
Inkster called the process to date "exhausting" referring to the lengthy process Target has been in with the District in an attempt to have the bylaws passed. Council refused to accept a staff report on the subject, tabled it, deferred it, asked for more staff reports, mandated mediation between Target and those opposed to their application, amended various motions, and defeated and rescinded motions on the subject in a process that has been going on since January.
The confusing and lengthy process had some councillors asking for a detailed staff report outlining those changes at Wednesday's meeting.
Inkster said the task might be too complex.
"I would say, though, that in watching the public at the last meeting and continuing meetings on this issue - the continuing saga, I'll now call it - I think it would be very difficult to follow what amendments are being introduced, what changes are being introduced," he said.
"I think even the minutes' taker would have trouble with the defeated motions, with amendments to amendments, looking for first and second and approval in the minutes," Inkster said. "So I think it's very difficult and it's going to take a lot of work, but I know what's being asked for."
The confusion didn't stop there. Councillors had some questions around whether they were procedurally able to deal with the Target bylaw amendments, saying the former rescinding of a defeated motion was not allowable and therefore the issue could not be brought up again for "reconsideration."
Director of corporate services Jo-Anne Frank said she had spoken with a registered parliamentarian and the District's senior legal advisor on the subject.
"Basically, at the last council meeting, a resolution was passed rescinding a defeated motion. That was a technical inaccuracy. You can not rescind a defeated motion," Frank said. "Subsequent to that, council passed a resolution basically directing staff to bring forward a report today. That motion was passed by council appropriately. We are in committee today and committee's normal process is to consider anything that is referred from council to you, so that's where you are at today."
The answer didn't appease everyone, with Taylor saying he did not accept Frank's response.
"I do not believe the ruling with respect to reconsideration is accurate," Taylor said. "I believe this is a reconsideration of the bylaw and that it has not followed our procedural policy. And for the interest of others, I don't think people are aware that within the course of a week I've had three different interpretations. The one originally, one yesterday and one today, so the procedural clarity is murky at best."
Thirkell called for a written summation of the legal opinions for council to see and it is expected that written documentation will be reviewed before the zoning amendment bylaw comes to council for fourth reading and final adoption.
Allan tried to table the issue until that written legal opinion could be provided, but the motion to give second and third reading to the zoning amendment bylaw was already on the table. It was passed by a four to three majority vote at the committee of the whole meeting.
The zoning amendment bylaw calls for a cap of 325 square metres on the processing plant and a limited building height of five metres, as was recommended by Thirkell at a previous meeting.
Councillors also passed a motion that the adoption of the zoning amendment bylaw be conditional on a development permit for the proposed building.
