Objectives of Springbank Community Planning Association

2. The objects of the society are:(a) To provide a forum for the current residents of Springbank to come together to

discuss issues to improve the community of Springbank(b) To respond to plans submitted to and by the MD (now Rocky View County) to make

sure they encompass the hopes, dreams and goals that the community holds for itself which describes how, and at what pace the community desires to develop physically, economically, and socially

(c) To consider the future development of the community and in turn, the well-being of citizens, taking into account the past and present demographics, natural environment, economic base, transportation systems, community facilities and land use patterns

(d) To establish and maintain effective communication among interested citizens, Springbank groups or organizations, and government authorities or appointees concerned with community living

(e) To solicit and receive funds by way of contributions, subscriptions, legacies, grants, or by other lawful means, all for attaining the preceding objectives, and

(f) To administer and maintain as a non-profit, non-sectarian organization its property, assets and rights in support of the objects of the society.

Agenda

• Official portion is to address the Special Meeting objective regarding Article 17 of SCPA bylaws. Vote to be taken.

• Unofficial portion to address fund raising initiatives and all other general questions from the membership eg Public safety

This meeting is for the members of SPCA, residents of Springbank Community and Rocky View County

Chronology of Events• Bingham Crossing (BC) Hearing in 2010 was unsuccessful for the Applicant• Open Houses by Bingham Crossing Phase 1 and added a Seniors Residence component • BC Concept Hearing #1 Notification on Aug 23, 2012• BC Concept Hearing takes place on Sep 11, 2012 and approval granted with 5-4 decision • Some residents sought legal advice from Docken & Co due to a perception of bias, misapplication of procedures

and inadequate notice under MGA and RVC policy. Legal review was not about merits, opinions or failings of the BC project itself.

• SCPA joined in the legal review as the only recourse for natural justice • Filing for Judicial Review of BC Concept Hearing in front of Judge Sissons was successful, but Injunction to

postpone BC Re-designation Hearing of Oct 30 and “delay construction” were not • BC Hearing #2 takes place on Oct 30/Nov 2 permitting the land re-designation from Agricultural to Direct Control

by RV • Bulked up for Judicial Reviews (JR) of #1 and #2 with clout of BLG for landmark case.• Bingham Crossing (Rencor/United et al) was given standing as an affected party and Bennet Jones (BJ)/Rocky

View County lawyers joined forces and resources.• JR 1 of RV County and Council decision by Judge Stevens took place on April 26, 2013. • JR 1 verdict and surprising costs decision issued on August 29/30• JR 2 of RV County and Council takes place by Judge Wilson on Sept 19, 2013• JR 2 verdict unknown (perhaps October or November, 2013• Notice of Appeal on Judge Stevens JR 1 verdict and costs awarded was filed on Oct 2, 2013• Date for JR 1 Appeal is unknown (perhaps Feb/Mar 2014?)

>>>> Nothing legally preventing Bingham Crossing, but we remain hopeful natural justice will be served – i.e. BC Hearings done over using fair and equitable processes

Focus of the Judicial ReviewsJudicial Review #1 of BC Conceptual Plan

That Council violated tenants of procedural fairness:1. Nature of the decision and the process(es) followed in making it2. The nature of the statutory scheme3. The importance of the decision to the individual(s) affected or impact

on individual(s)’ rights4. The legitimate expectations of the person(s) challenging the decision 5. The choice of procedure(s) made by the tribunal itself.

Judicial Review #2 of BC Land Re-designation

1. Inadequacy of notification of affected individual(s)

Judicial Review 1 – Costs awarded by Judge Stevens

$69,600 to Bingham Crossing, plus $33,000 (pending adjustments) to Rocky View County

Cost award consider punitive per the opinion of our lawyers Borden Ladner Gervais LLP (BLG) & other legal advisors range from, “outrageous to unprecedented”.

Under appeal – For the decision and cost – court date approximately February/March. On the basis of natural justice of Rocky County and Council Processes.

Judicial Review 2

Decision not rendered yet.

Awaiting Judge Wilson’s ruling (anticipated around the end of October).

We don’t know what costs might be if we lose this case.

Area of notification as required by county planning practices is the basis of our case.

Bingham Crossing Conceptual Plan Hearing – Sept 11, 2012

Land redesignation Hearing – Oct 30 & Nov 1

Cautiously Budgeting for Worst Case Outcome

- Balance of money owed to Judicial Review 1- Possible loss and awards for Judicial Review 2

- Possible loss of the Appeal for Judicial Review 1- Possible Appeal of Judicial Review 2

Costs = court awarded payments plus legal fees

Target goal is to raise $200,000

• Donations (80 community donators + group donations eg. Crocus Ridge Home Owners Association / Artist View Home Owners Association) *

• After Bingham we want to have available operating funds to address future issues per our SCPA stated mandate.

• Promissory notes – bridge funding per Article 17 of Bylaws• Fund raising– Auction– Golf Tournament– Casinos / Bingos (Longer term fund raising/operating funds)

• We are most interested in other suggestions from the membership

Article 17 of SCPA Bylaw

"Bylaw 17. For the purpose of carrying out its objects, the Society may borrow or raise or secure the payment of money in such manner as it thinks fit, and in particular by the issue of debentures, but this power shall be exercised only under the authority of the Society, and in no case shall debentures be issued without the sanction of a special resolution of the Society."

Whereas the SCPA requires funding to continue to fulfill its Objects 2(a), (b), (c) and (e), as set forth in its Societies Act Application filed with the Government of Alberta;

Now therefore, pursuant to Bylaw 17, the Society is hereby authorized to borrow or raise or secure the payment of money in such a manner as it thinks fit and, in particular and including by the issuance of debentures; which funds may be used to pay for the legal action involving the Society, specifically Alberta Court of Appeal No. 1301-0272AC and Court of Queen's Bench Action No. 1201-16317, and for such other uses as the Society may determine in accordance with the Objects of the Society.

MOTION to address Article 17

Springbank Community Planning Association

AuctionOur Right to be Heard - Rocky View Residents Fund

Monday October 21, 2013 – December 15, 2013http://www.elevateauctions.com/planspringbank

To donate items or services please contact plan.springbank@gmail.com Please use “auction donation” in the subject line

Sneak Peek downstairsThanks for supporting your Community!!

We will ALWAYS be Stronger Working as a Community!