Skip to content

Waiting on seven more to have say

Last week's Southlands public hearing reinforced much of what we already knew about the issue, including the fact that regardless of who purports to speak on their behalf, the silent majority continues to be, well, silent.

Last week's Southlands public hearing reinforced much of what we already knew about the issue, including the fact that regardless of who purports to speak on their behalf, the silent majority continues to be, well, silent.

When Mayor Lois Jackson pulled the plug on the proceedings (at least the oral portion) last Saturday afternoon, civic politicians had heard from almost 400 speakers, the last 390 of which didn't offer a whole lot in the way of original material.

OK, so maybe that's stretching the truth a bit, but as the hearing dragged on it was clear that new information or new arguments were in short supply, turning the proceedings into little more than the expected numbers game.

And what did we learn from that exercise? First off, it's readily apparent there's a significant segment of the community that wants to see the Southlands retained as agricultural land in its entirety. The opposition camp is nowhere near as big as it was back in 1989, but, based on an unofficial count of speakers last week, it's still larger than those who came out to support the Century Group's development application.

So, if Delta council is simply doing a head count, and presuming the letters and petitions came in at a similar rate, then the opponents would rule the day. It would be a logical and completely justifiable outcome, but given this is the Southlands we're talking about, could it possibly be that simple? I know opponents are screaming that it should be, and that may well turn out to be the case, but given the twists and turns that have gone on with this incarnation of the plan, nothing would surprise me at this point.

This proposal has received the most support of any pitched for the property over the years, so I get the sense there's not an appetite to just throw it all away. The ideas of public ownership of 80 per cent of the site and resolving the issue once and for all have definite allure, so it could be that civic leaders try to find a compromise.

The obvious one would be to move the proposed housing off Boundary Bay's doorstep and toward 56th Street, but that could bring out a new batch of opponents and would also torpedo the notion of only building on the lowest quality soil.

I don't have any better handle on what's to come now than I did last Monday when the hearing began at the rec centre. All I can be sure of is the public has had its say and now we're anxiously waiting for our elected leaders to do the same.