Perhaps it’s simply the cost of allowing one slate to control city hall, but constructive debate coming from Surrey’s civic leaders in the current term of office has been sadly lacking so far.
Nowhere is this more apparent than the issue of a commercial truck-parking proposal – put forth last year by Coun. Tom Gill – on South Surrey land previously considered only for agricultural use.
In the months since, hundreds of residents from Surrey and neighbouring Langley have been critical of not only the plan but a ‘fast-track’ process that removed the land in question from a special study portion of the neighbourhood’s Local Area Plan.
Had this issue arisen in years past, no doubt there would have been at least one council member to have questioned it publicly and called for public updates.
Instead, the silence of council has been all too deafening.
It was pretty clear from the outset where Gill stands on the issue (though he is reluctant to take the lead, as was evident in his defensive interview with Peace Arch News last month over a private meeting someone set up with proponents and opponents).
Yet the other members of council – Mayor Linda Hepner and Couns. Bruce Hayne, Vera LeFranc, Mary Martin, Mike Starchuk, Barbara Steele, Judy Villeneuve and Dave Woods – certainly can’t be counted any less responsible, for all that they have put forth publicly.
Proponents of the scheme and some council members offer assurances that all environmental concerns – the proposed truck park is adjacent to a sensitive fish spawning area of the Little Campbell River – will be addressed and answered conclusively before a single shovel breaks ground.
But residents are wondering, quite naturally, how do such assurances jibe with the apparent haste that council’s ‘fast-tracking’ the proposal suggests?
Again, leadership has to be about more than photo opportunities.
If a truck park in South Surrey is crucial to Surrey’s future, and the risks manageable, residents deserve to hear how and why – and they deserve to hear it from their own elected representatives.
Anything less suggests tacit approval, which begs a whole set of different questions.