Public Frustrated at the CVRD Board Meeting

I attended the Board meeting today (February 27, 2019) in the hope of providing public input re the rezoning application along the Estuary. I and many others were prepared to speak both for and against the approval of this application. After only a few speakers we were cut off at the end of the allotted 15 minutes.  Perhaps setting aside a total of 15 minutes for public input at such a meeting is standard practice. But it could easily have been extended in advance as this is clearly a hot topic issue, and the Board could have anticipated, and even welcomed, more broad public input.   Instead, a vote to extend for an additional 15 minutes out of respect for the long line standing behind the podium was defeated by just one board member!  If this is the process, it should be revised!  The manner in which this transpired risks giving the impression that public input can be stifled, even if a majority of the Board is open to it.  This leaves suspicious minds to wonder how seriously the Board takes public input, and how valuable this input is seen to be.  I hope it is clear to the Board of Directors that there are many members of the public who wish to be heard prior to the Board voting on this request for rezoning.  It's not too much to ask that we give democracy a chance in our precious community, and that each of us is given sufficient opportunity and time to be heard.Joe Solanto, PhDCowichan Bay Response to the second reading of the re-zoning issue from other CERCA membersThis morning I received several  mails from other attendants of yesterday's meeting reflecting the same frustrations expressed in Joe Solanto's Letter to the Editor of the local "Citizen" newspaper. Two widely recognized major shortcomings for CVRD meetings such as this are: (a) lack of space: the Boardroom proved to be much too small to accommodate  the constituents wanting to take part and listen to what is being said; more than 60 persons crowded the corridor outside the Boardroom unable to follow what was happening inside; and (b) insufficient time for public input. A total of 15 minutes allowed for public input doesn't do justice to people's concerns to be heard.The public hearing to follow this second reading of the re-zoning application  is again to take place in the CVRD Boardroom. In the light of possibly several hundred concerned citizens wanting to attend the public hearing which allows any person to speak, the CVRD will have to choose a different venue.Another important lesson learned: it appears highly un-democratic for one of nine Area Directors to be allowed to veto the voice of the other eight directors as happened last night.  It is the flawed CVRD rule that consensus of all nine directors is needed to successfully pass a motion. This also has to change!Dr. Goetz SchuerholzChair CERCA