Dear editor,Recently, the regional district approved a building permit for the Gas N Go to proceed, which has caused a number of comments and letters to the editor.Since this has been four years in the making, it seems appropriate to provide an accurate review.The property where the Gas N Go intends to build was zoned for a gas station. Mr. Wayne Procter did his due diligence and based on the zoning, purchased the property to build a gas station.The public, including me and the other local regional district directors were surprised and then outraged that another gas station would be built on the estuary. Barbara Price, the director of Area B at the time, did all possible to try and prevent the project from going forward.However, the property was zoned for a gas station and when legal advice was sought by the directors it was made clear that if they did not honour the bylaw they could be successfully sued by the owner. The CVRD would lose, it would be out the legal fees, the court would award costs to the plaintiff, and the gas station would still proceed.Based on that information, Barbara Price and the directors of the day approved a development permit with a series of stringent conditions. Time has passed and Mr. Procter has met all of the conditions.MOTI has given approval to the components of the project under its jurisdiction, and added a turning lane, all at Mr. Procter’s expense. The building permit has now been issued and Mr. Procter can proceed under strict environmental conditions.  Mr. (Mike) Bell (Sierra Club Comox Valley) in his comments to the local papers has characterized the present directors as “timid by allowing the project to go forward rather than backtracking on earlier decisions.” Our area A, B and C directors have always shown strong support of the estuary by requesting an update to the Courtenay River estuary management plan, providing heritage funds, encouraging all municipalities to support the fish trap project and working hand in glove with community organizations such as Project Watershed’s estuary working group and the Land Trust.In fact, in September of last year, Project Watershed came to the CVRD board to recognize the leadership role the directors played with respect to protection of the Courtenay River estuary. We are working with other municipalities and citizen groups in a positive way to improve our estuary.Mr. Bell has been aware for at least three years that the zoning was legal and should be supported by the courts. In a published fall 2008 election brochure produced by candidate Barbara Price, he is quoted “When I’m asked about the Regional District’s role in the Gas ‘N’ Go project I always point out that Barbara Price is doing everything that she possibly can within her legal powers and financial responsibilities to prevent a gas station being built on our estuary.”That is a true statement. Barbara Price had been informed it would cost the taxpayers of the regional district thousands of dollars in legal costs to not support its own bylaw with the end result still being a Gas and Go station in that location.Yet Mr. Bell and the Sierra Club proceeded to sue the regional district and Mr. Procter. When Mr. Bell lost in the lower court, he argued in a higher court and lost there.He and the Sierra Club are paying $18,500 in costs, $6,000 up front and $500 a month plus interest for 25 months to Gas and Go. They are paying the regional district $18,500 in costs with payments at $100 a month beginning Jan. 1, 2011 with the payments to increase to $500 a month on March 1, 2013 plus interest until paid in full.The taxpayers of the CVRD have spent $74,896 in legal costs to uphold their legal bylaws and Mr. Procter has spent thousands protecting his right to build on a piece of property that was zoned for a gas station.What have the courts said in a clear and concise statement?  Honour your bylaws. It is the only vehicle society has to protect the land owner. That includes all of us. Mr. Bell criticized the regional district directors for what he called “a serious mistake” in allowing the project to go forward rather than backtracking on earlier decisions. The courts say otherwise.Now Mr. Bell has chosen to pour cold water on his fellow community members and municipalities by suggesting that “this building permit decision could negatively impact the coming campaign to secure the designation of the Courtenay River estuary as a national or even international heritage site.”There are gas stations, oil change centres and car dealerships that are closer to the estuary than they likely should be. They shouldn’t be there, but we have evolved over time and we have to work with what we have and where we are at this moment in time.We have improved the gas station bylaw. We want to improve on what happens in the estuary by supporting CREMP. We want to have a walking path and trail along Dyke Road. All of this will happen in good time with community support and money.Mr. Bell and the Sierra Club did not win their court case. They are paying for it, as we all are.However, he would be far better off to walk away from this loss and to put his prodigious energy and money into all of the positive things that are happening with regard to the estuary.We can all agree that the zoning was not the best, but it is time to stop badmouthing government and people, and revisiting the past. Let’s move on and all work together to make our estuary the “crown jewel” that it could be in our community.Jim Gillis,Area BEditor’s note: Jim Gillis is the Comox Valley Regional District’s Area B director.

Comox Valley Record