Tribes files court papers against Paldi project
Chief Lydia Hwitsum says the rights of the Cowichan people have not been taken into account adequately in the Paldi development proposal.
Updated: July 20, 2009 10:20 AM
The massive Village At Paldi project could soon be challenged in the Supreme Court of B.C. by Cowichan Tribes.
Chief Lydia Hwitsum filed papers July 13 in Duncan court registry, posting Tribes’ intent to seek a judicial review of the multi-million-dollar development.
But first, Tribes aims to meet with government and Paldi project developers in the next 90 days, she said Friday.
The review application will be “preserved” until the meetings end, she said.
Those huddles will explore elders’ worries about how the approved 500-home project would impact Cowichan River flows, aquifers and fish stocks, Hwitsum said.
“There’s been a fundamental failure to adequately consult Cowichan (Tribes),” she said.
Tribes’ concerns surround protecting rights to fishing, hunting, and water supplies, approval of sewage treatment, plus potential treaty lands in and around the development.
“Crown continues giving access to Crown land in the Paldi area,” Hwitsum said.
Tribes, through lawyers Woodward and Company, would seek an interim injunction restraining the Paldi development from advancing, plus legal costs, under the judicial review.
Tribes’ submission questions the actions of the ministers of agriculture and lands, and community and rural development, the Cowichan Valley Regional District board.
Respondents also include developers The Village At Paldi Enterprises Ltd., and Cherokee Land Investment Ltd.
The developer’s Victoria lawyer, Vince Reilly, could not be reached for comment.
CVRD chairwoman Gerry Gilles declined to comment about how the judicial review may affect the Paldi project.
“The CVRD gave four readings to the bylaw authorizing Paldi that’s the subject of the challenge.
“It was a 5-4 vote in favour of the bylaws. We’ll just have to see what transpires with the challenge.
“All bylaws the CVRD passes are subject to challenge.”
v2





