County reconsiders past vote

Sharon McLeay
Times Contributor

 

In a rare vote on Sept. 6, Wheatland County council reconsidered their vote denying Douglas Homes six development permits.
Such a vote is rarely made and needed consultation from the County lawyer, and reference to Robert’s Rules of Order, to make sure the procedure undertaken was correct.
“I gave my word. I can see no reason why we can’t rescind,” said Coun. Alice Booth.
Booth and Coun. Brenda Knight were outvoted at the Aug. 16 meeting, by a vote of four to two, denying Douglas Homes the right to permits.
The four councillors who voted against the applications gave their rationale for their vote. Some thought it might be an end play by the company to slide permits through before the Oct. 18 wastewater pipeline review date. They said some Muirfield residents had complained about the trucking costs to dispose of their effluent. They did not want to see the new homeowners suffer, if costs escalated or negotiations fell through. There were also concerns that it would reflect on upcoming permit requests for the area.
“I would hate to see six more people have to pay those costs,” said Coun. Ben Armstrong.
In order to reconsider the vote, one of the four councillors who denied the permits had to ask for reconsideration on the lost votes. After much deliberation, both Coun. Don Vander Velde and Coun. Rex Harwood provided a reconsideration motion; all six permits were individually reviewed again and were accepted with only Coun. Armstrong opposed.
Their decision did not come lightly. An eloquent appeal by resident businessman Doug Whitney started a process in which council had to roll up their sleeves and work through a perplexing political catch 22.
“I am here today, really as a ratepayer, standing shoulder to shoulder with the other citizens of the Lakes of Muirfield,” said Whitney. “I am here to speak to you about the hardships placed on us, from what we believe is political posturing going on between the County and the developer.”
He said as a builder in the County, he had some of the same goals as the County for growth and prosperity of the community.
Whitney said the initial decision meant he had to lay off tradesmen who were supporting wives and children. It affected businesses in the community. Credibility, good faith and business reputations were being jeopardized. He had one buyer waiting for her new home, whose current home had sold and she was living with relatives. If no reconsideration was made, she would have to wait another six months to a year while appeal processes were made.
“I am not burning bridges, I am starting to nuke them and those are bridges that can’t be built again,” he said.
Whitney said property values were dropping due to delays in resolving these issues, with evidence of more for-sale signs on homes going up every day.
“The sacred equity of those people that trusted in and invested in the community is being driven down and diminished,” said Whitney.
He appealed to council to reconsider the vote, so the situation did not escalate to where reimbursement for personal damages within the community would be considered.
The terms credibility, accountability and trust were looked at from both sides of the issue.
Whitney reminded council of the comments made in the April meeting to builders, and stated it was not fair to use punitive measures against the residents and businesses, yet having little effect on the situation with the developer. Council replied they were caught in a difficult corner. They needed to ensure accountability and protect County residents.
“Nothing has been done and we have seen it before,” said Coun. Harwood. “The problem is the County didn’t hold anyone accountable for those services. I want to see something signed and I want to see some goodwill from their side. With that, I am willing to rescind it.”
Whitney stated the effluent is being trucked to Strathmore waste treatment. Cost comparisons were done and the price was cheaper than what Chestermere residents were paying for treatment. New buyers were being told the waste management costs may rise, prior to signage of sales agreements. He said his company always sent request for permits as a batch. It was business model regularity.
Coun. Brenda Knight agreed with Whitney. She reminded her fellow councillors that when the lots were sold to the builders, it was under the condition the effluent be shipped. She said with the Strathmore trucking agreement, that contract obligation continues.
Jim Souza, project manager for the development, verified he had been making weekly progress reports to the County, as requested, and the delay in having a signed contract lay in the laps of lawyers and summer vacations. However, he agreed council should keep pressure applied to have the contract signed.
“The problem is lawyers. Everyone is on vacation during the summer and it is hard to get things done, but summer is over,” said Souza. “It is just not fair to penalize these people.”
Souza said lawyers gave assurances the contract will be finalized before 2017. Souza made a promise not to come back in front of council unless he had a signed paper to give councillors.
Whitney suggested if the council wanted to add teeth to the agreement with the developer, they could apply pressure to hold decisions on the existing unsold lots and phases owned by the developer in the Lakes of Muirfield.
There are currently 24 unsold lots in Phase I. The developer had planned for a Phase 2 and 3 in the future.
“We need to take away the mudslinging and start at ground zero,” said Coun. Harwood, who changed his vote after hearing from Whitney and Souza.