A recent ad from the anonymous group Sechelt Deserves Better has been criticized for inaccurate claims.
The ad, which ran in Coast Reporter on Aug. 17, said, "Over the past four years, more than 600 new seniors care units have been proposed for our community. The current mayor and council have rejected every single one of them."
The ad goes on to list Spani Developments’ Ocean Stories, Wesbrooke by the Sea on the Clayton Family Lands, Trellis Seniors Services’ Silverstone, and SSC Properties as the projects in question.
However, as outlined in past Coast Reporter stories and confirmed this week by District of Sechelt staff, only one of those five projects can accurately be described as having been rejected by council.
Spani’s Ocean Stories project on Cowrie Street has passed third reading and is awaiting finalization of servicing agreements and other conditions before adoption.
Wesbrooke by the Sea was at the same stage in the process, but was withdrawn by the developer and its partner in January.
The Trellis application remains open, and could move forward for consideration if the company decides to pursue it.
SSC Properties promoted an “age-in-place” component that could have included assisted living and even residential care and were requesting zoning that would have allowed for that, but the company did not put forward any specific details.
“That application was not accepted for a number of reasons, primarily servicing issues,” said Tracy Corbett, Sechelt’s director of planning. “The site has existing zoning which was put in place to support the previous Silverback development. It is still valid and allows for up to 1,600 units, which includes areas for multi-unit housing and a mixed-use development at the water’s edge. These areas could incorporate a range of independent and assisted living opportunities.”
Mayor Bruce Milne is unequivocal in his interpretation of council’s actions on the five projects.
“Council has not rejected any proposed seniors care units,” Milne said. “This advertisement is one more illustration of a small group of people intent on serving their own self-interest at the expense of Sechelt’s reputation. They have lied, misconstrued decisions, contorted facts and have unleashed a barrage of negativity on our community. One simply has to ask what motivates this kind of behaviour in a community?”
Sechelt Deserves Better, which has refused Coast Reporter’s requests to name its key members or to an interview to discuss its goals, acknowledged in an email that rejection “may have been too strong a word.” The unattributed email statement goes on to argue the fact that none of the projects listed in the ad have gone forward amounts to “rejection by attrition.”
“We will endeavour to be clearer in our wording in the future,” the group added.
Meanwhile, another group has started an advertising campaign focusing on the Sechelt election, including one attacking “anonymous political ads” that ran in the same edition of Coast Reporter as the Sechelt Deserves Better ad.
“The political climate in Sechelt has become far too divisive. We hope to buck that trend,” say Tom Clelland and Uwe Mummenhoff in a statement on the recently established Sechelt Votes Facebook group.
The two men were also involved in the third-party effort Vote for Change during the 2014 election. Elections BC disclosure statements say the group spent more than $10,500 during that campaign.
