No forever covenants

Writer explains Carver's statements made at meeting

In last week’s letters column (Carver on Convenants, Oct. 26) the claim was made that if Alanda Carver is elected she would require third-party covenants on properties as a condition of simple subdivision.

Yet at no time during the Oct. 19 all-candidates meeting in East Sooke did Alanda talk about subdivision. As I recall it as one of 40 or so people in the audience that night, she spoke about convenants just the once in answer to a question about the controversial removal of a covenant on property bordering on East Sooke Park. She stated that there is an issue with covenants on properties, and whether pre-existing covenants are being fully explored before zoning issues are dealt with. The terms of that covenant and why it was placed on the property must be available, understood and fully discussed with all parties prior to any zoning changes to the lands they cover.

Only after all due consideration should the covenants be lifted. Alanda tells me (full disclosure: I’m one of her volunteers) that she does believe that in cases where covenants are protecting community interests and environmental features, third parties should be included in the covenant so that the covenant cannot be easily forgotten in the rezoning process.

How the writer came to the conclusion that Alanda has a blanket policy of supporting “forever” convenants on all simple subdivisions is a mystery.

Jeff Bateman

Sooke