According to the Community Charter:
“Council may seek community opinion
83 (1) A council may seek community opinion on a question that the council believes affects the municipality, by voting or any other process the council considers appropriate.
(2) The results of a process under this section are not binding on the council.”
Notwithstanding the results of the referendum and the subsequent decision by Council, the final decision regarding the change of use request rests with the Agricultural Land Commission which has stated that:
“Given the very high agricultural capability of these lands, and their current agricultural use, the Commission would likely not support the conversion of an additional 40 ha to non farm uses.” (See Friday, August 17, 2007 article of this Blog: The Land Commission's position.)
Is the expenditure of many thousands of dollars of taxpayers money justified on a project that:
1. Divides the community into opposing factions and
2. Has little chance of succeeding in light of the obvious obstacles?
Our Council was given appropriate directions by the community through the Official Community Plan, which Council acknowledged and reconfirmed (see previous article “Where is the logic?). Council members must be consistent and stand up for their policies. Some members of our Council must be reminded that they have taken an oath to uphold the law of the land.
“Council may seek community opinion
83 (1) A council may seek community opinion on a question that the council believes affects the municipality, by voting or any other process the council considers appropriate.
(2) The results of a process under this section are not binding on the council.”
Notwithstanding the results of the referendum and the subsequent decision by Council, the final decision regarding the change of use request rests with the Agricultural Land Commission which has stated that:
“Given the very high agricultural capability of these lands, and their current agricultural use, the Commission would likely not support the conversion of an additional 40 ha to non farm uses.” (See Friday, August 17, 2007 article of this Blog: The Land Commission's position.)
Is the expenditure of many thousands of dollars of taxpayers money justified on a project that:
1. Divides the community into opposing factions and
2. Has little chance of succeeding in light of the obvious obstacles?
Our Council was given appropriate directions by the community through the Official Community Plan, which Council acknowledged and reconfirmed (see previous article “Where is the logic?). Council members must be consistent and stand up for their policies. Some members of our Council must be reminded that they have taken an oath to uphold the law of the land.
************************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment