April 19, 2002
Mr. C. Edward Hanman
Cox, Taylor
Barristers and Solicitors
3rd Floor, 26 Bastion Square
Victoria, British Columbia
V8W 1H9
Dear Ted:
Re: Dispute Resolution Initiative
Further to our recent telephone conversation, I am writing to you in your capacity as President of the British Columbia Expropriation Association to seek the Association's participation in the design of a process that will diversify the Board's current adjudicative role in the resolution of expropriation compensation disputes.
As I explained, the Board wishes to incorporate into its mandate in the near future some mechanisms and procedures to facilitate earlier resolution of such disputes. This initiative is also a directed outcome of the government's recent core services review.
The overall objectives are to reduce delay, expense and inconvenience in the pre-hearing and hearing processes before the Board, and to encourage the parties to attempt to achieve a fair and final settlement. I should perhaps emphasize at this point that the Board in no way contemplates changes to its process that would have the effect of diminishing the rights of the parties to have their compensation dispute determined by the Board following a full hearing. Rather, the intended effect would be to enhance those rights through a more efficient administrative process and by offering a wider range of possibilities for dispute resolution.
Among the more obvious options which might be considered for inclusion in the Board's procedures are more regular and directive caseflow management conferences, the institution of settlement conferences, and the provision of interest-based mediation.
. . . . . . . . /2
Mr. C. Edward Hanman
April 19, 2002
Page 2
Several months ago the Board struck an ad hoc committee of its members to consider possible issues around the design and implementation of this initiative, including any legislative or regulatory amendments that might be necessary or desirable. Members of the committee have also had exploratory discussions with the dispute resolution office and secretariat and with the policy, planning and legislation division, both within the Ministry of Attorney General.
The Board feels strongly that it would be highly desirable to involve "stakeholders" in the area of expropriation throughout the design stage. While we have looked at some models and initiatives used in other venues and jurisdictions, we appreciate that any design for this Board must take into consideration the interests of the parties who appear before us. We would place high value upon hearing the perspectives and suggestions of those experienced in expropriation compensation matters that come before the Board. Since the membership of your Association comprises lawyers, real estate appraisers, business valuators, land agents, and other professionals who work in the field, and who are retained by either expropriated owners or expropriating authorities, it has seemed logical and appropriate to us to reach out to the Association in the first instance to obtain stakeholder input. We may also wish to consider broader public consultation in due course.
The Board would be most appreciative if, through some convenient means, you could canvass your membership as to their views on the Association's participation with the Board on this initiative. Assuming that the Association is prepared to participate in some way, we are of course interested in hearing the views of as diversified a cross-section as possible. We also recognize that not everyone actively involved in the expropriation field participates in the activities of the Association, and would welcome any thoughts you may have as to how the views of such individuals might be brought forward. Please feel free to circulate this letter to your membership. If it would facilitate matters, the Board is also prepared to have the letter, or a similar outline of our initiative, placed on its website.
You may recall that a few years ago the Association took the lead in creating a liaison committee comprising several of its executive members together with the chair and vice chair of the Board. The principal object was to consider ways of improving the processes of, and practice before, the Board. Unfortunately, the liaison committee ceased to function before it could effect any substantive results. We suggest that a liaison committee, comprising both members of the Association and members of the Board's ad hoc committee, may be a convenient vehicle for carrying this project forward. There are currently six members on the Board's ad hoc committee, and to this might be added a similar number of representatives from the Association to maintain balance and keep the overall size within manageable bounds.
. . . . . . . . ./3
Mr. C. Edward Hanman
April 19, 2002
Page 3
If practically possible, the Board would like to be able to launch the consultative process on this initiative during May, 2002. If there is to be something like a liaison committee formed, we would propose trying to schedule an initial discussion and planning meeting sometime during that month, preferably in person, and either in Vancouver or Victoria.
On behalf of the Board, I wish to thank you and the other members of the Association in advance for giving this matter your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you at an early opportunity.
Yours truly,
Robert W. Shorthouse
Chair
RWS/sa
