Faced with growing opposition stemming from a public hearing Monday night, Sechelt council voted to defer the official community plan (OCP) amendment bylaw and zoning bylaw for Lot L to the new council at its final regular council meeting Wednesday night.
Discussion started with Coun. Alice Lutes putting forward a motion to table the matter. That motion was defeated by a vote of 4-3 with Mayor John Henderson, councillors Tom Lamb, Chris Moore and Doug Hockley, who joined the meeting by conference call, voting against the motion, and councillors Lutes, Mike Shanks and Darnelda Siegers voting in favour.
Siegers then put forward a motion to defer the discussion to the new council.
She then read a three-and-a-half page prepared statement that outlined the history of Lot L, the agreements in place with previous councils and land owners, the reasons why the decisions were being made by council and the concerns raised by the public.
“The first issue is the fact that the public has lost trust in this council, which was evidenced at the polls this past weekend,” she said. “Also at the public hearing, what was reiterated over and over again by those presenting was the request to defer the decision of subdividing Lot L and selling off part of it to the new council to be sworn in shortly.
“While I do recognize the contribution it would make to our community and the vision this council has for employment opportunities and an increased tax base, I am putting forward a motion to defer this OCP amendment until after the new council takes office, fully aware that the opportunity for the sale of the second lot will probably not go through. The jobs will go elsewhere, along with the property taxes, and the purchase of the land in Davis Bay along Chapman Creek will fall through.”
Coun. Chris Moore thanked Siegers, saying it was a “great summary that hit the nail on the head.”
“I hope people read this and digest this because all the misinformation and innuendo surrounding this issue has been terrible,” he said. “I will be supporting this motion because I want to see what this new council can do. Medical marijuana is a discussion that has to happen, people. The jobs and the tax base that can be created with this industry cannot be disputed. This is such a brilliant land swap and it breaks my heart to do this, but I look forward to seeing what the new council can do and I will support the motion to defer.”
Hockley said he would vote against, saying it was sad to miss such a great opportunity, while Henderson also said he would vote against the motion.
“I give full marks and recognition to our staff for putting this together,” Henderson said. “This is a deal we should be doing. Medical marijuana is a red herring on this. It may happen, it may not. I will not be supporting the motion to defer.”
When the final vote was called, the motion was passed by a 5-2 vote with Henderson and Hockley voting against.
