Skip to content

Locke, Annis want review done of Surrey council’s contentious Oct. 3 land use meeting

Elford warns a reversal of decisions ‘could potentially open up the city to litigation’
30739811_web1_221027-SUL-SurreyLayOfLand-cityhall_1

Surrey Mayor-elect Brenda Locke wants a review done of city council’s final meeting Oct. 3 in which a 4,800-page package was put before council on the land use agenda, with dozens of applications, just 12 days before the civic election.

“There are some projects that went through on Oct. 3 that I want reviewed, absolutely I want them reviewed,” Locke told the Now-Leader. “I don’t think we should have put them through, I think they were conflicted and I want that to be looked at.”

During the election campaign, mayoral candidate Gordon Hogg of Surrey First said if he and his slate were elected a public inquiry would be held into “Doug McCallum’s four-year approach to approving development applications in the city.”

READ ALSO: Surrey council’s final land-use meeting draws vows of public inquiry

“Last night’s stampede to approve more than 50 land use applications showed that Doug McCallum does not care what the public thinks when it comes to developing Surrey,” Hogg charged in a press release before the election, in which Hogg placed third. “At the same time, there was a complete disregard for any sort of fair or ethical process around approving development applications. Last night was the last straw and it’s time to shine a light on the last four years.”

In response to this, McCallum told the Now-Leader on Oct. 4 that it’s “strictly” city staff that puts the agendas together and the meeting on Oct. 3 was a “large one but that was because we had to cancel one because of the passing of the Queen and so what staff did is take all the items in that week anyways and moved it forward to this week, which made this week very large, but that’s the reason why it was large.”

Coun. Linda Annis, who topped the chart in her re-election as a Surrey First councillor, said she “absolutely” wants to see an inquiry into the “processes and some of the land applications that have been approved. What happened on Oct. 3 was just a prime example of a lot of applications getting rushed through and I think we need to have a better understanding as to why and how this came to be.”

Locke echoed that.

“Oh yeah, oh yeah, oh yeah,” Locke said. “There are some that I absolutely know that I’ve kept track of over the years that I’m going, uh, we’re looking at this, we’re revisiting that. Oh yeah, I know where we’re going on those for sure.”

Coun. Doug Elford, elected again as a Safe Surrey Coalition councillor, said it would have to come before council in the form of a motion to council, “so I can’t speak on behalf of the new council.

“It’s kind of a wait and see on that. If a motion comes forward then I’d be better prepared to comment,” Elford said Tuesday.

“It’s really hard to comment, this is the previous council now. I’m assuming that they would have to raise a motion when we’re inaugurated, so we’re just speculating right now,” Elford added. “Certainly many of them (applications) were from what I understand final adoptions, so that could potentially open up the city to litigation if there’s sort of a reverse of this, because it was decided by democratic process.”

Many of the applications passed by council were sent to public hearing, he noted, “so the public still has an opportunity to speak to these in front of the new council.”

Meantime, Safe Surrey Coalition issued a statement Friday that “upon further review” by its legal advisors the slate has decided not to pursue a judicial recount of the election results, under Section 148 of the Local Elections Act, which saw Locke defeat McCallum for the mayor’s seat by 973 votes.



tom.zytaruk@surreynowleader.com

Like us on Facebook Follow us on Instagram  and follow Tom on Twitter



About the Author: Tom Zytaruk

I write unvarnished opinion columns and unbiased news reports for the Surrey Now-Leader.
Read more