The District of Sechelt (DOS) wants its citizens to know they chose to save them money rather than tackle a legal challenge they felt had little merit.
The DOS released a press release on July 31 that refuted some of the contents in a letter to the editor published in the July 11 edition of Coast Reporter.
The letter, submitted by residents Alice and Hudson Janisch, said they initiated a judicial review petition with the B.C. Supreme Court in 2007 regarding council's handling of the Pacific Spirit development bylaw amendments.
The Janischs said in their letter that their petition was in direct relation to "citizens' fundamental right to fair and open government" and "a number of failures to comply with the provincial legislation, including Local Government Act requirements " They also contend the District "capitulated" and said the judge must have sided with them because they were awarded costs of the petition.
In the District's press release, there were two points made. They agree that a "typographical error" occurred in the notice that omitted the full purpose of the zoning amendment bylaw being put forward, and secondly, they decided it was not worth using taxpayer dollars to fight the petition.
Both Coun. Keith Thirkell and corporate officer Jo-Anne Frank said there were about four words missing from the notice and they maintain this was an unintentional mistake made without malice.
Thirkell and Frank also said District lawyers told them it was the only point in the judicial petition that had any merit, and while it was a small issue, it was definitely one that might have caused them to lose the petition.
On that advice, and considering the more than $30,000 cost to taxpayers to challenge the petition in court, the District took responsibility for not having their "i's dotted and their t's crossed" as Coun. Warren Allen said and chose to consent to the bylaws being quashed and restarted the process.
The release said, " rather than engaging in a costly court battle, [this] was the prudent and financially responsible course of action to take."
In response to the District's press release, Alice Janisch said the bigger issue being sidestepped by the District is that Pacific Spirit is just one example of the District's miswording of public notices regarding bylaw amendments. She contends the District habitually omits words that would ultimately inform citizens of Sechelt exactly what it is they plan to do. Instead, she said they publish notices using jargon that is understood only by a few, which is in conflict with the Local Government Act, which Janisch said requires notices to use every-day language to describe potential changes to a bylaw.
Thirkell said the silver lining is that through even further consultation with the public, the District was able to go back to the drawing board with the developer, which resulted in an even better design for the Pacific Spirit development proposed for the Teredo Street site.
