Members of Squamish's new municipal council honed their debating skills in a heated discussion that turned out to be moot when a senior staff member later discovered that a key piece of information that sparked the discussion was in error.
The longest discussion during Tuesday's (Jan. 10) special council meeting centered on the urgency of the planned Hunter Trail that's intended as a link between Valleycliffe and Squamish's downtown core.
Brian Barnett, the district's manager of engineering, presented a staff report that recommended delaying construction on the long-envisioned trail project because portions of the proposed route were on private land.
Councillors Patricia Heintzman and Bryan Raiser both expressed frustration with the recommended delay on trail construction. Eventually, council adopted a Heintzman motion that staff kick-start construction on the portions of the trail that didn't cross private property. Councillors Doug Race and Ron Sander voted against the first motion.
After much debate, a further Heintzman motion to commence construction on the remaining portions of the trail as soon as the private-property issues are resolved was tabled and set for a future in-camera council discussion.
Barnett, though, contacted The Chief just two hours before press time on Thursday (Jan. 12) to say that some information in his report had been in error. The land is actually all owned by the District of Squamish, Barnett said.
Barnett said he informed members of council about the error in a group email. He expressed optimism that unless further issues arise, construction on the trail might proceed in short order, perhaps as soon as this spring.
In about eight weeks I should have some cost estimates for the completion of the trail, he said.
The Chief's attempts to reach Mayor Rob Kirkham for comment by press time were unsuccessful.
Tuesday's discussion appeared to expose a sharp division on the new council in only its second full meeting.
In response to the staff report, Heintzman voiced concern about what she perceived as the slow pace of progress to secure and build the trail.
We have directed staff to do this for a while now, she said. How many times do we have to say this is a priority? We need to make it clear that this is a priority. We don't want this to stagnate for another year.
According to the staff report, between 20 and 50 per cent of the trail route was on private property, a fact that led both Race and Sander to oppose a Heintzman motion to start work on the Maple Drive-to-Vista Crescent portion of the trail as soon as those issues are resolved.
The reason why staff didn't go ahead with this already is because of the additional costs associated with going through private property, Race said. I'm not keen on starting a contract for a trail that goes nowhere.
Raiser echoed Heintzman's statements and said staff should at least get as much of the trail done as possible and work proactively to secure access through the private land.
This is frustrating because it's been going on for decades, Raiser said. We've been saying this is an unofficial trail forever. Let's do something immediately. I don't think if you do a little here and a little there that it will cost us more.
Heintzman's motion to start work on the Maple Drive-to-Vista Crescent portion of the trail did pass, with Sander and Race opposed.
Heintzman's second motion that staff begin work on the remaining portions of the trail link as soon as all the private property issues were resolved sparked a heated discussion.
We have to recognize the landowners' interests, Barnett said. These owners have rights and directing people to this trail is something we need to be careful about. I caution council to not make decisions before getting all of the information.
Coun. Susan Chapelle said it all comes down to giving residents a safe way to get downtown.
It's distressing to me that a safety issue of this magnitude hasn't been addressed yet, she said.
Race also expressed his reluctance to support Heintzman's second motion.
This is the wrong way to go about this, he said. We can't ignore that a significant amount of this trail is on private property. This is flying by the seat of our pants decision making and is frankly dumb.
Heintzman emphasized that the project should go forward as soon as possible.
It's frustrating how long this has taken, she said, pointing out that a similar motion was adopted on Dec. 14, 2010. I want to emphasize that this is something I want staff to get done. It doesn't seem to be imperative how important this is.
Raiser seconded the motion from Heintzman, while Sander echoed Race's sentiments for the second time. Kirkham asked staff for further direction but said he understood Heintzman's dissatisfaction.
I think we're all anxious for a safe route in this case and I understand the frustration, he said. I'd like us to get on with it.
Chief Administrative Officer Kevin Ramsay weighed in after Kirkham asked for advice. I strongly advise that this motion be done in camera, he said.
Following Ramsay's advice, Heintzman took her second motion off the table and agreed to wait until after the next in-camera session to consider the next step.
With files from Ben Lypka, The Chief
