Lots of breaking stories on the swirl of lawsuits being delivered to 12th and Cambie:
From the Vancouver Courier: Casa Mia opponents unleash the lawyers. Not to mention: Mayoral candidate launches second legal action alleging link between Vision, website and Oakridge development
In Business in Vancouver: Mayor files stern response to lawsuit over HootSuite lease.
And, in one handy place, from City Hall Watch: A list of community-based lawsuits, injunctions
against @CityofVancouver, politicians.
Some of these suits are from aggrieved citizens who feel City Hall has acted inappropriately if not illegally. Some are tactical moves to delay. Others are simply devices for political grandstanding. But they all have one thing in common: lawyers will be involved.
This is not a good thing (and even some lawyers would agree, since this is not a diatribe about them): doing planning and politics in courtrooms is, in the long run, not a good thing – even if you win in the short term.
Vancouver has not been a particularly litigious community when it comes to local government. It’s been generally felt that the tough decisions about change should be made in City Hall chambers, not a judge’s. If that changes, I can think of several unfortunate outcomes.
First, the elected representatives will stop making tough decisions, especially if they feel the decision will end up being contested as a matter of course. Indeed, as in Ontario with its municipal board, council decisions will just be the set-up for the lawyers who appeal to the body that makes the real decisions – without any community involvement or accountability at all.
Even worse, as in America, zoning and development will turn into a legal process of entitlements, without the give-and-take of negotiated responses and benefits. Forget urban-design guidelines and generalized policies of good intentions; everything will have to be written in legalese with a minimum of subjective interpretation.
Thirdly, for those citizens who feel there is no other way to get justice when their concerns are ignored other than to sue: be very careful what you wish for. You will not have the money, staying power and strategic ability over time to outgun the lawyers who will be hired to fight City Hall when others see that such a strategy works. And they are not likely to have your benevolent motives for the greater good.
Finally, if you use the law for the intimidation of elected officials, expect to see it used against you.
The latest “aggrieved” group is patrons of a Main St. restaurant called the “Rumpus Room” which is closing due to termination of its lease and redevelopment of the site.
Part of the problem could be the public (those commencing lawsuits) overextending their own sense of “entitlement”.
What ever happened to the meaning of the democratic process? We elected the officials in office to make decisions for us, right or wrong. We hold them accountable at the ballot box. Suing them for the mandate we gave them undermines democracy and wastes considerable tax dollars; the only ones who benefit from this reversal of procedure are the lawyers.