APPENDIX B: STEPS TAKEN TO PREPARE THE NON-BINDING DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS
History of the recruitment and selection process for the RGS mediator.
APPENDIX B
STEPS TAKEN TO PREPARE THE NON-BINDING DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS
Background
The Local Government Act does not prescribe requirements for developing a non-binding dispute resolution process. Capital Regional District (CRD) staff have worked with municipal directors of planning through the Development Planning Advisory Committee (DPAC) to provide information about non-binding dispute resolution and to develop a mediation process in coordination with rejecting municipalities.
The desired outcome was to reach agreement — at a staff level — on a mediator and a process that could be brought to rejecting municipal councils and the CRD Board for approval by June 14, 2017. To facilitate agreement, CRD staff coordinated a competitive process to identify a qualified mediator who could develop and deliver a dispute resolution process to which DPAC representatives from the CRD and rejecting municipalities could agree.
Key Decisions Leading to Selection of the Mediation Team and the Proposed Process
The following summarizes key decisions leading to the identification of a mediator and a process.
- In anticipation of Ministry direction, on March 23, 2017, CRD staff issued a request for qualifications (RFQ) to two locally-based mediators with previous experience resolving RGS disputes. The mediators were on a provincial list of qualified service providers.
- On April 3, 2017, DPAC representatives from the CRD and the rejecting municipalities met to review the RFQ submissions. A mediator was not identified based on the RFQ submissions, and the group requested that the CRD broaden the search through a request for proposal (RFP) process. The group provided input on the RFP and the RFP evaluation criteria.
- On April 7, 2017 the CRD issued an RFP for Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) dispute resolution services, with a closing date of April 19, 2017. One Proponent, different from the proponents who submitted on the RFQ, submitted a proposal in response to the RFP.
- On April 25, 2017, DPAC representatives from the CRD and the rejecting municipalities met to review the proposal. The group agreed that the proposal could be brought forward for council / Board approval subject to clarification / refinement of certain items. CRD staff invited the Proponent to revise the proposal.
- On April 29, 2017, the Proponent submitted a revised proposal. DPAC representatives from the CRD and rejecting municipalities were satisfied with the refinements and agreed to bring forward the proposed mediation process for council / Board approval.
Considerations
RGS dispute resolution is a niche field as a limited number of mediators have experience resolving RGS disputes. Staff from the Province confirmed that seven RGS disputes have been subject to a non-binding dispute resolution process:
- RDN – Qualicum (in progress)
- CRD – Central Saanich
- Metro Vancouver – Langley
- Comox Valley
- Metro Vancouver – Coquitlam
- Squamish Lillooet
- CRD – Highlands
Three mediators have provided dispute resolution services to these disputes. The RFQ process identified that of those three mediators, one has retired and one may not be perceived as neutral for the present case. The third mediator decided not to submit a proposal in response to the RFP.
Next Steps
As directed by the Minister, the dispute resolution process must begin by June 14, 2017. If the rejecting municipalities and the CRD Board cannot agree to a process, the Minister will direct a process. The table below summarizes next steps.
| Tasks | Timing | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rejecting municipalities indicate whether they agree to the mediator and the proposed process. | June 5, 2017 |
| 2 | Accepting municipalities indicate if they wish to participate in dispute resolution. | June 5, 2017 |
| 3 | The CRD Board indicates whether they agree to the mediator and the proposed process. | June 14, 2017 |