photo from Bear Mountain: Pete Rockwell
For immediate release - February 24 2009
Contact: Zoe Blunt 250-885-8219 or zoeblunt@gmail.com.
(Email usually works if I don't answer the phone, and please don't be offended if I don't call back right away because I am too damn busy this week. I've already weighed in anyway. Maybe some local politicians would like to comment?)
Raw audio/video of the public hearing will be available on disc sometime February 24 with any luck.
----------------------------------------
Langford Bailout?
Langford mayor Stew Young told a public hearing on Monday that the city is jockeying for federal and provincial infrastructure money for the new South Skirt Mountain development, along with the Bear Mountain Interchange, the Bear Mountain Parkway and a pedestrian overpass at Spencer Road and Highway 1.
"Yes, Langford is applying for all available federal and provincial grant money," Young said in response to a question about infrastructure funds asked by Zoe Blunt, a local environmentalist. The government has earmarked $110 million for Vancouver Island, and the list of projects that will receive funds will be drawn up in the coming weeks.
Young's remarks surprised several observers. Meanwhile Blunt chastised Young for seeking a "bailout."
"This project is a huge waste of resources," she told Langford council and staff and attendees. "There are a hundred projects more deserving of infrastructure spending than this one – projects that will deliver lasting value to a greater number of residents than a short-term construction project to serve a nearly-defunct resort."
The nearly-complete Bear Mountain Interchange and the roughed-in Bear Mountain Parkway will give Bear Mountain Resort direct access to the TransCanada Highway. The resort is rumoured to be heading for bankruptcy if a buyer doesn't step forward soon.
Blunt went on, "My concern is that accepting bailout money for these projects – now or in the future - would amount to admitting that Langford has failed at financial planning and broken its promises to the taxpayers that we won't be the ones on the hook for the cost of this project."
"Langford is like a Ponzi scheme," she concluded. "As long as there's people buying in, everything is liquid and it looks fine. As soon as the cash flow stops, it crashes."
Mayor Young, who was chairing the public hearing, interrupted Blunt five times during her six minutes at the microphone. Others in the audience jeered and heckled her as the mayor sniped from the council table.
Young also lectured several other residents opposed to the development on what he called their "hypocrisy" in opposing the South Skirt Mountain plan. He complained repeatedly about hearing the same "negative comments" raised “time after time.”
Young had no comment for Joni Olsen, a member of the Tsartlip First Nation who is opposed to the development. She told him the graves of her ancestors are on Skirt Mountain and that repeatedly damaging ecosystems would destroy the mountain.
“That’s 8,000 years of history that you guys are going to build on. That’s appalling,” Olsen said.
On closing the public hearing, Langford council gave second and third reading to the Skirt Mountain rezoning bylaw without further discussion. Young told CHEK News before the hearing on Monday that the bylaw would be adopted in March, and construction would start
immediately after that.
-----------------------------------
Below is the text of my statement to Council. Highlights: Skirt Mountain is on an earthquake fault line; Ingmar Lee's mineral claim on the land is now being operated by Ben Isitt of Victoria; and we should use stimulus money for the E & N Rail instead of this mega-project.
South Skirt Mountain Public Hearing – Monday Feb 23.
I want to thank you for scheduling this public meeting. I'm a big fan of public consultation - especially for mega-development projects, and most especially during this economic crisis.
Let me start by saying I welcome more consultation about this project, and I'm open to meeting with the mayor, councillors or staff to discuss the concerns I'm raising, anytime, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.*
As you know, I oppose this project in general and I have a lot of problems with the specifics too. The steep hillsides and rare ecosystems next to Goldstream Provincial Park make this absolutely the wrong place for a huge development. Your engineers may or may not be aware of the fault lines that run underneath Skirt Mountain. The mountain exists because of the action of the tectonic plate to the west pushing into the plate that most of the island sits on and forcing the Wrangellia rock up hundreds of meters over millions of years. This is a fairly active earthquake zone so I would urge council to take another look at this proposed development with this in mind. Emergency plans for this area may need to be revised substantially.
There are more deficiencies in the Environmental Assessment but I will leave that analysis to others. The assessments as they stand are inadequate and rushed. They raise more questions than they answer.
For one thing, I would like to remind the landowners here that the mineral rights to South Skirt Mountain are held by Ben Isitt, who was designated the official agent for that claim earlier this year. It could be that he's already notified the landowners to discuss his rights as a free miner on the property.
More questions have been raised about this project: Why is it being proposed now? And how do the landowners intend to pay for this sprawling development? Especially the road access. Bear Mountain Parkway is planned to be a four-lane arterial. That will cost more than 17 million dollars. I realize the owners are committed to a total of $26 million for the interchange and the parkway. How will the developers pay for it all? They have to sell condos in order to build the road, but don't they have to build the road before they can sell the condos?
It seems to me that financing for the parkway is crucial for the project. And it could be that the landowners have that all sewed up. Maybe they have a $ 26 million loan. But what I keep hearing about is the $110 million in federal infrastructure spending that's earmarked
for Vancouver Island. That money is being divided up this month and I'm not the only person who's reached the obvious conclusion that Langford is pushing for federal money not only for the interchange, but also for the parkway. If people are wrong about that, I'd like to know.
My concern is that accepting bailout money for these projects – now or in the future - would amount to admitting that Langford has failed at financial planning and broken its promises to the taxpayers that we won't be the ones on the hook for the cost of this project.
The Bear Mountain Interchange is already being called the Bridge to Nowhere. The question is, are we also going to have a Parkway to Nowhere? Bear Mountain Resort looks more like a ghost town every day.
This project is a huge waste of resources. There are a hundred projects more deserving of infrastructure spending than this one – projects that will deliver lasting value to a greater number of residents than a short-term construction project to serve a nearly-defunct resort. Like routine sewer maintenance, for example. Deferring maintenance work could mean paying double down the road. Or use the stimulus money for the E & N Rail instead – that would
potentially serve tens of thousands of people and give Langford a huge and sustainable boost.
Langford is like a Ponzi scheme. As long as there's people buying in, everything is liquid and it looks fine. As soon as the cash flow stops, it crashes.
I'm am opposed to this project on every level. We've said before that development far out on the fringes of the urban area – development that destroys wild lands - is not sustainable. That means it will come to an end. That's what unsustainable means – the boom comes before the
crash. What will happen to Langford when it reaches the cliff?
Thank you again for providing this public hearing space, and I would urge you to take a step back from the cliff and look for a better way. Consultation is a good first step. Meaningful consultation and accomodation of people's concerns is a necessary second step. Like I said, I am available for discussion anytime, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.* Thank you.
--------------------------
*Mayor Young last year threatened to sue me for the cost of sending police to protests at the Bear Mountain Interchange, and his staff delivered letters to me "with prejudice" – that is, to be used in litigation. No lawsuit ever materialized, of course – the whole premise was ridiculous and I've never done anything illegal in Langford.
Thank you for reading all this!
Zoe
