Jump to content

      













Photo
- - - - -

Ultimate NIMBY


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 sebberry

sebberry

    Resident Housekeeper

  • Moderator
  • 18,363 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 15 April 2011 - 10:14 AM

Me thinks they went a bit too far.

Residents and members of a neighbourhood association used identity fraud, forgery, mischief, conspiracy, lying and trespassing to interfere with the Peninsula Co-op's plans to build a food market in Central Saanich, according to a lawsuit filed in B.C. Supreme Court.

Read more: http://www.timescolo...l#ixzz1JcJ8mvzF


Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network

Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams

 


#2 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,936 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 11:06 AM

Unbelievable.

#3 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 12:26 PM

I'm not involved in any of this, but I've been working on an article about the co-op for the past two weeks. There are two sides to this story for sure. The complaint is available on Court Search Online, and it reads like a SLAPP suit.

#4 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,241 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 15 April 2011 - 12:36 PM

If this what is asserted in the article really is true, then the opponents have shot themselves in the foot.

#5 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 01:00 PM

If it's not, the incumbents may have sabotaged themselves.

#6 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,241 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 15 April 2011 - 01:52 PM

Zoe, I am familiar with SLAPP suits, there is nothing about this that says SLAPP unless Peninsula Coop made everything up and I can not think of a lawyer who would knowingly take that sort of case.

#7 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 04:30 PM

Peninusla Co-op has filed a notice of motion. That doesn't necessarily mean they are going to court. If you read the complaint, they allege a huge conspiracy between a few known and many unknown individuals. They allege criminal actions, but the case they bring is a civil case. To me, that says they don't have enough evidence to refer it to the Crown, and they wouldn't be able to match the burden of proof required for a criminal trial.

#8 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 04:39 PM

Does anyone else find it bizarre that they are trying to make a federal case out of a Yes Men-type prank? I mean, the language makes it sound like the James Gang is on the loose.

#9 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 10,574 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 04:40 PM

^ In all fairness, I think they are pissed off. The criminal justice system is a farce, no sense even going there.

Litigation however will bite you in your bank account. If they can prove that they have been intentionally wronged by a particular party and have suffered some sort of damages, then that party will pay.

#10 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 06:16 PM

I can see that these directors don't like to be laughed at. Especially when three (or four? Better check my notes) are chiefs of police.

#11 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 10,574 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 06:43 PM

^ Exactly Zoe. You poke the bull......be prepared for the horn.

#12 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 9,122 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 06:52 PM

Does anyone else find it bizarre that they are trying to make a federal case out of a Yes Men-type prank? I mean, the language makes it sound like the James Gang is on the loose.


Carole James? That is scary!:rolleyes:
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#13 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 08:19 PM

You poke the bull......be prepared for the horn


Oh man, that's all I ever hear from you guys. Look out for the horn, get ready for the horn, you're going to get the horn, horn horn horn. Well, where is it? When do I get the horn? I'm still poking the bull - and what? All talk, you guys are. :D

#14 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 10,574 posts

Posted 15 April 2011 - 08:33 PM

^ Perhaps it's just a small (read medium sized) whistle. :)

Good one Zoe.....I deserved that........

#15 mysage

mysage
  • Member
  • 515 posts

Posted 16 April 2011 - 06:46 AM

off topic

#16 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 10,574 posts

Posted 16 April 2011 - 06:46 AM

The Co-op topic will be interesting to watch in the next few weeks. Six out of the nine board of directors positions will be up for election in May. There is a new active group of members that will be running for these positions in hopes of forming a majority of like minds.

This group will want to change the direction of the Co-op expansion plans.

Normally there are only 3 director positions up for grabs annually, but an arbitrator has declared that the last election was held in "bad faith" and has declared that the directors positions elected last year be available again.

The status quo is at stake this year.

This is an opportunity for an organized group to affect change.

The ballot box is the appropriate venue for change in my mind, not the cell phone store.

The Co-op has 50,000 members and makes a large profit every year mostly from gas and oil sales.

#17 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member
  • 282 posts

Posted 16 April 2011 - 07:12 AM

Yeah, there's a lot going on here. I had to rewrite the whole thing yesterday and the way it's going, I'll have to do it all again next week.

 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users