Jump to content

      



























Photo

Bear Mountain insolvency


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
324 replies to this topic

#81 mysage

mysage
  • Member
  • 515 posts

Posted 18 August 2010 - 03:31 AM

Sure. The leaked agreement in principle is here (pdf).

This document appears to be signed by chiefs of the Songhees, Esquimalt, and Tsartlip First Nations. The Tsartlip membership, however, voted to reject the agreement because it doesn't promise to protect the cave. (That was a verbal promise made by Len Barrie in the longhouse.) I can post the text of their press statements if anyone wants.

The province denies that this document is an agreement in principle and won't confirm there was ever a final agreement.


This is all after the fact stuff. Regardless of the so called Tsarslip membership voting to reject any agreement, their leadership, in 2002, signed away their heriditary claims to Bear Mountain for cash and other considerations. They can reject and complain all they want, the deal was done. I would suggest that they sue thier own leaderships if they are un happy with the deal they cut.

Speaking of the lands that they got I am told by a golf employee at Bear Mountain that several months ago they were visited by members of the Tsarslip band who had in tow some golf developers (from the US)and were showing them the lands that they got in the Bear Mountain swap with the thought of putting in their own gold course. Hmmm - they seem quite content with their original deal. It would appear Tracy that you are battling Bear Mountain while the first nations groups are getting ready to cash in (again).

#82 Chris J

Chris J
  • Member
  • 215 posts

Posted 18 August 2010 - 10:40 AM

This is all after the fact stuff. Regardless of the so called Tsarslip membership voting to reject any agreement, their leadership, in 2002, signed away their heriditary claims to Bear Mountain for cash and other considerations.


previously I had only seen the agreement that Zoe references. I would be interested to see proof of what mysage claims.
B the Media @ B Channel News
Local Comprehensive Coverage

http://bchannelnews.tv

#83 Chris J

Chris J
  • Member
  • 215 posts

Posted 18 August 2010 - 10:56 AM

And if the sacredness of the cave were the only reason to block the development, it would be worth debating here for the 5th year running, in yet another thread. But it isn't the sole reason that people are/were opposed to this development .
Nor is this a 'why Bear Mountain shouldn't exist/why Zoe is wrong' thread.
I liked this thread better when it was actually about the BM financials.
B the Media @ B Channel News
Local Comprehensive Coverage

http://bchannelnews.tv

#84 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 18 August 2010 - 02:09 PM

You mean the Tsartlip First Nation, right? There is no "Tsarslip" band. They LOST $6 million because they would not sign off on the deal with Bear Mountain. (See below.)

About the previous land transfer: we interviewed members of the Tsartlip First Nation about that parcel. The problem is, it seems to be illegal. The lot has no road or water access. The transfer was conducted in secret and details are murky. However, it's quite clear that the Tsartlip did not "sign away their hereditary claims." Nice of you to recognize those claims, though! And we applaud your diligent research in referencing questionable statements by a random Bear Mountain employee.

For what it's worth, we didn't include the land transfer in our report on Bear Mountain because it was not connected to that property.

I wouldn't mind reading the press statements....this is giving me, and probably some others..... an education.



Sure! Some of the stories are still posted online.

Truce reached on native cave
'The cave will be protected,' Bear Mountain CEO pledges

Bear Mountain developers and B.C. aboriginal leaders have stepped back from the brink of conflict, agreeing to a two-week truce and an attempt to reconcile their differences.

At a meeting in the Tsartlip longhouse yesterday, Bear Mountain Resort CEO Len Barrie promised local chiefs and Aboriginal Relations Minister Mike de Jong that construction will be stopped for the next two weeks within 100 metres
of a cave sacred to local First Nations.

"The cave will be protected," said Barrie, a former NHL player, as smoke rose from a massive log fire in the centre of the room.

Natives' sacred cave destroyed
Bryce and Tsartlip Chief Chris Tom complained that First Nations were not consulted about archeological assessments of the site by companies hired by the City of Langford and by Bear Mountain Resort.

They said they were shocked to discover last week that the province approved removing the roof of the cave and draining the lake to complete the assessment.


Aboriginal leaders call resort talks flawed
Band negotiators couldn't consult members, chief says

B.C. aboriginal leaders are calling negotiations to end a dispute at Bear Mountain Resort "completely flawed and dysfunctional."

"The Tsartlip leadership did not have the opportunity to report, consult and seek instruction from their members on a consistent and ongoing basis," Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, charged yesterday.

"In short, the band's negotiators were muzzled. Tsartlip was never really allowed to advance their concerns around total preservation of the sacred cave or raising the fundamental issues of spiritual rights."

The cave considered sacred to First Nations has been at the centre of a dispute which flared last month at Bear Mountain Resort on Skirt Mountain. First Nations rallied to protest damage to the cave.

On Wednesday, the province, the Songhees and Esquimalt First Nations, Bear Mountain Development and the City of Langford announced they had arrived an agreement in principle to address archeological interests at the resort.

The Tsartlip were not named in the agreement. They discussed the agreement Thursday at a meeting in the longhouse.

However, on Nov. 24, Tsartlip Chief Chris Tom and other local chiefs signed an agreement in principle which stated once a healing ceremony took place, the area would be developed



Tsartlip issue stern warning on destruction of sacred sites


"This cave has not yet served its purpose," said Tsartlip councillor Don Tom yesterday at a press conference at the Brentwood Bay administration office.

"Never, never will developers destroy another sacred site, as all parties involved in destruction of any sacred site will be fully held accountable."

The Tsartlip have concerns that mediator RCMP Sgt. John Brewer has not been fair and they want someone else given the job.

"John Brewer seemed to be pro-development from the people who were attending the meetings," said Tom.

"When we brought up the issues of the sacred cave and its spiritual significance to us, [Brewer] was short and curt with us, telling us this was not the issue here, (but) that was the whole point of protesting, the spiritual significance of this cave."

The Bear Mountain developer "brushed off time and time again" the aboriginal partners, said Tom.

"We just want to make sure that all developers hear us, and on our sacred territory no development should ever happen without consulting the Saanich people or Tsartlip First Nations."


Tsartlip veto Skirt Mtn. cave deal
Goldstream News Gazette, Dec 20 2006

The Tsartlip First Nation has rejected an agreement with Bear Mountain over a disputed cave, calling the negotiations "ill-fated from the beginning."

"The Tsartlip leadership will exhaust all possibilities in regards to protection of the sacred cave," Tsartlip Chief Chris Tom said in a release. "I am confident we can find a solution to this conflict through diplomatic means, but our communities must be prepared to take a stand if necessary."

Tom took the agreement to his people for ratification, but that was rejected in favour of saving the cave.

The Tsartlip were offered $6 million in infrastructure for 23 acres of its land near Bear Mountain's golf course.* That is off the table since the Tsartlip didn't sign the final deal.
The Tsartlip and the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs have attacked the negotiations as "completely flawed and dysfunctional."


*Infrastructure in this case means building a road to make it a legally-conforming lot.

#85 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,056 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 18 August 2010 - 02:25 PM

The point is that this land was owned by Western Forest Products and then sold to the Bear Mountain group. At the time of the sale the hereditary First Nations band (Tsarslip I believe) signed away (for a major cash payout and title to other lands around the base of Mt.Finlayson, plus other benefits) any hereditary claims to the land and were happy to do so. Then once Bear Mountains seemed to be making money the Songhees band claimed that they had a sacred cave on the mountain.


I know of no First Nation that would sign of an an extinguisment of their title and rights to any land in BC. I have never heard of Tsatlip doing anything like that and would stunned to hear that they had done so.

Also, the province would not allow such an agreement because of the precedence that it would set.

You also have to keep in mind the First Nations in this region have a different set of rights and legal situation than elsewhere in BC because of the Treaties they signed in the 1850s. The Douglas Treaties extinguished most aboriginal title in the CRD area.

#86 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,056 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 18 August 2010 - 02:34 PM

Sure. The leaked agreement in principle is here (pdf).

This document appears to be signed by chiefs of the Songhees, Esquimalt, and Tsartlip First Nations. The Tsartlip membership, however, voted to reject the agreement because it doesn't promise to protect the cave. (That was a verbal promise made by Len Barrie in the longhouse.) I can post the text of their press statements if anyone wants.

The province denies that this document is an agreement in principle and won't confirm there was ever a final agreement.


In reading the document, it is not of a style of type that would be coming from the provincial government or First Nations. I suspect it was written by Bear Mountain as something they were proposing.

First Nations would have expected language in their protecting their title and rights.

The province would not agree to a casino in a document like this and in general it is missing various pro forma butt covering text from the province.

The second half looks more like what I would expect, but there are parts missing from it as well that should normally be there.

#87 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 24 August 2010 - 12:30 PM

Spanky123 posted this on the Bear Mountain thread:

Bjola to receive $250 for the $25M that he claimed he was owed by BM. Judge dismisses his claim.

http://www.pwc.com/e..._081710.pdf.pdf


Yup.

Meanwhile, HSBC launched a separate action July 29 against Len Barrie and Kristy Barrie, Len's (ex?) wife. The bank is demanding payment for mortgages and interest on properties in Highland District, Esquimalt District, Cowichan Lake District, and Yale District (Kelowna). Looks like they're asking for foreclosure if they don't pay in 30 days. This case is not yet proven and I haven't seen the Barries' response. Here's an excerpt:



#88 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 24 August 2010 - 01:12 PM

^ This claim is separate from the CCAA action that Price Waterhouse Cooper is overseeing. The petition was downloaded from BC Court Search Online.

#89 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 21,003 posts

Posted 24 August 2010 - 03:23 PM

A little confusing following all of the documents. I noted that a recent filing from HSBC as part of the bankruptcy process made mention of $350M in loans made by HSBC and BMO to BM (not the $250M outlined in the bankruptcy itself).

I don't know if this action is part of the extra $100M or simply HSBC trying to foreclose on Barrie's assets in expectation that they will not fully recover their debt from the bankruptcy process.

#90 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 24 August 2010 - 07:12 PM

Meanwhile, HSBC launched a separate action July 29 against Len Barrie and Kristy Barrie, Len's (ex?) wife.


Why did you posit that?
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#91 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 24 August 2010 - 07:26 PM

I heard they were separated. Just rumours, maybe.

#92 mysage

mysage
  • Member
  • 515 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:25 AM

I heard they were separated. Just rumours, maybe.

Tracy,

You post enough rumours and innuendos on this site. How about showing a little class for a change and stay away from peoples personal lives.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones - I happen to know a fair amount about your background.

#93 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:59 AM

Hey Mysage - why don't you post your real name? We're all curious about your connection to Bear Mountain. Maybe you could give us the inside info.

#94 mysage

mysage
  • Member
  • 515 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 06:01 PM

Hey Mysage - why don't you post your real name? We're all curious about your connection to Bear Mountain. Maybe you could give us the inside info.


Hey Tracy - Don't know why my name would be important. Am a little suprised that that request would be coming from someone who has never posted here under her real name and in fact is quite vocal with the press, politicians, etc etc all under her alias (why is that?).

Nothing to be curious about as far as my having any connection to Bear Mountain. Any "inside info" that I may have passed on comes from just asking questions of people involved (on both sides). Nothing that anyone else couldn't do quite easily with a little time and effort.

I quickly tired of the politcal rhetoric,private agendas and personal attacks that so often have clouded the truth.

Anyone can pick up the phone and gain the same information - feel free.

#95 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 08:58 PM



#96 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 13,141 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:14 PM

^ is that the "troll" ? :)

#97 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 09:44 PM

If it had a soundtrack, it would go "duh-duh-DUUUUUUUUUUM!" :eek:

But never mind these silly digressions - let's make a game out of predicting the future! Everyone can play.

Will Bear Mountain turn a profit by the end of 2011?
Will Len Barrie face charges? Embezzling, tax evasion, or other?
Will the First Nations get any compensation, cash, or a casino?
Will the Bridge to Nowhere ever go anywhere?
What does the Magic 8-ball say?

#98 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 13,141 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 10:05 PM

^ Maybe there will a bright side?

I caught you with the troll thing though.....eh? :)

#99 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 10:54 PM

^ Maybe there will a bright side?


There already is. The province already has a new rule to protect limestone caves across the South Island Forest District, and new legislation would specifically protect caves all over BC, whether they are listed as heritage sites or not.

The failure of the bridge funding has some interesting consequences. The South Skirt Mountain Village project can't start until that interchange is complete (city bylaw) and the remaining heritage sites on the mountain are still undamaged. Also, developers in other municipalities were trying to convince city councils to do similar "non-traditional" financing, and they might have gone down that same road to nowhere, except they had this big failure as a salutory lesson in what not to do. Plus, I'll bet there's going to be some changes in old Langford around the issue of fiscal responsibility, real soon.

I caught you with the troll thing though.....eh?


Sorry - I'm dense, or my funny lobe is broken, or both...

#100 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 13,141 posts

Posted 25 August 2010 - 11:08 PM

^ nice save

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users