Sechelt Mayor Bruce Milne has offered a response to residents of the Seawatch subdivision, where sinkholes have closed roads and forced a family out of its home, and promised a formal staff report as soon as early November.
Milne, speaking on behalf of the district as a whole, read a lengthy prepared statement during the Oct. 4 council meeting, after council approved the minutes of a September committee session where Seawatch residents aired their concerns.
“Our approach to this issue since February 2015 has been measured and considered,” Milne said.
He went on to say that “the District of Sechelt remains committed to open and transparent decision making” and encourages Seawatch residents “to work together to reach a collective ‘omnibus’ solution that is agreeable and fair to all,” while acknowledging that approach seems to be stalled.
“We understand now that the interests and preferred outcomes of the residents are currently too diverse to support a shared approach to resolving this situation. It is also clear from continuing consideration of this situation that the factual foundation informing the perspectives of residents may vary considerably. Nevertheless, it remains the opinion of council that a collective, agreed upon outcome provides the best options for residents,” he said.
“In my view, only if we have all those with claims and grievances in the same ‘room’ as all of those whom are said to be responsible in some way – including Concordia, its geotechnical engineers and others who are named in the ongoing litigation – is there any chance a fair and balanced resolution will be reached.”
Milne’s statement also disputed claims made at the September meeting that the district did not release technical reports and other information in a timely manner, specifically reports by Thurber Engineering, prepared in 2012 and 2013.
“Claims that these reports were withheld or unavailable to residents appear to be inaccurate in respect of both reports... Of course, we do not know who used the availability of this report or those reports released prior to or subsequent to August 2012 to inform themselves of the geotechnical realities of this development. However, we do know that this report was provided directly to residents at the time and to the developer.
“We do not know if anyone purchasing Concordia properties after August 7, 2012 were made aware of this report by realtors or through their personal due diligence. We can be confident in knowing that if anyone purchased directly from the developer – Concordia Seawatch knew exactly what they were selling.”
In his statement, Milne described the tone of the recent interaction between the district and residents as “not bad,” but urged frustrated homeowners to help foster improved dialogue.
“First, by way of analogy, consider the recent engagement between the president of the United States of America and the president of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” Milne said at one point.
“No one thinks for a moment that the mutual bluster, threats and insults the world has witnessed will lead to a better mutual understanding or reduce the risk of war… Similarly, some of the language used in recent weeks – the language of accusation – crosses the line of what should be acceptable in a mature, civil discussion… They appear to be a strategy meant to produce a ‘gotcha’ moment.”
There were only a couple of Seawatch homeowners in the pubic gallery, and in the post-meeting Q&A they criticized Milne for not giving advance notice of his statement so more people could have been there to hear it.
Mike Paddison, one of the property owners with an active suit against the district, pointed out he was also in the council chamber in December 2015, when Milne delivered a similar statement.
“Unfortunately, two years have gone by and it would seem you’re not going to get a class action suit,” Paddison said. “Let’s end this. Let’s get everybody together and talk about it.”
Milne denied the district has ever pushed for residents to file a class action. “I don’t think we have ever used the word ‘class action,’ we have always used omnibus,” Milne said.
A class action suit was mentioned in that 2015 statement, when lawyers representing homeowners Ross and Erin Storey were considering that approach. “If the Storeys’ solicitors are successful in engaging the other owners in the subdivision in a class action then the prospect of reaching a mutually satisfactory omnibus solution will be greatly enhanced,” it said.
Milne said legal action has gotten in the way of “frank talks,” but that a solution is still possible. “If we could get everyone in the room, there will be enough weight to clearly move towards a solution… That’s all I can say. We’re going in circles. We have been for two years, and I don’t know how we can resolve it. I’ve tried to set out what the district is doing – we’re going to continue to do that.”
He also called the Seawatch situation “the most complex file in B.C. right now” and said, from his perspective, even those who aren’t openly in litigation are, in some ways, still in litigation.
“There are some who claim they’re not in litigation, but their entire set of questions are clearly, and only, serving litigation. We know that, we“re not naïve. We can’t pretend one thing and act another way. We need to simply protect the interests of the District of Sechelt and the community and at the same time try and find what would be right for the residents… If there was a balance here, this council would find it.”
The full text of Milne’s statement was posted to the district website, sechelt.ca, earlier this week.
