Page 2 of 8
Or perhaps a solution could be: whatever the full market value of the lots could've been in 1997... demand that cash (minus the 78K) from the current owners (except the ones that aren't suing) up front right now. Not at the time of selling. Then B.C. Assessment can re-assess with full market value in mind and then demand all the years of higher taxes that the muni didn't collect up front right now. Then finally the GST/PST and property purchase taxes that could've been remitted based on the higher values paid up front right now. And whatever other benefits of lower values these people got at the time. Plus interest on all of the above.
Either that or expropriate the properties and pay the current owners the current price restricted value and then resell the properties at the same price to grateful and patient Whistlerites on the WHA list who would like to have a nice house in Whistler to live in (if they can afford it).
On receipt of those monies then you can get your covenant removed. You just might still make some money on the deal but at least it would be fair.
That way the property would be on a level playing field with other open market property owners in Whistler.
It's simply completely unfair that those owners that bought open market property find that these properties, that started out at a much lower than market value starting point, are suddenly worth market value.
It seems when it comes to greed, fairness and justice don't exist.
I hope Mr. MacIntosh and his firm charge you a fortune so that when you lose you can lose that fortune, and I think you should pay the muni's legal costs as well.
For a change I would like to applaud the RMOW for their forward thinking with regard to their non-cost initiatives for infill housing. Finally a simple idea that creates extra housing without additional infrastructure. This could be a win-win. I just hope the NIMBYS don't ruin any proposals.
I also hope the muni puts up a good fight against the Barnfield residents price restriction covenants court case. The residents chose to buy and build under those restrictions; changing the rules now sets a dangerous precedent and defeats the whole purpose of trying to create and maintain affordable housing.