The Mack Laing Trust: BC Supreme Court hears arguments in 40-year case

The Mack Laing Trust: BC Supreme Court hears arguments in 40-year case

Hamilton Mack Laing tends trees in his Nut Farm above Comox Bay in the early to mid 1900s

The Mack Laing Trust: BC Supreme Court hears arguments in 40-year case

By

The 40-year saga of an internationally famous naturalist and Comox Valley pioneer who left his waterfront property, possessions and money to the Town of Comox finally made it to the BC Supreme Court recently, where lawyers argued the legal technicalities of his Trust Agreement and his Last Will and Testament.

The the three-day proceedings in Courtroom 200 at the Courtenay Courthouse with Justice Jennifer A. Power presiding provided a stark contrast to the rich history and universal respect for the man, Hamilton Mack Laing, and his passion for the natural world and the biodiversity he found in the early 1920s along Comox Bay.

Instead, a lawyer for the Town of Comox and another for the BC Attorney General speculated on a broader meaning of certain words used in the Trust Agreement and other documents. They cited statues in municipal governance and jurisprudence that didn’t exist in 1973 when Mack Laing started making his gifts to the town or even in 1981 when he wrote his last wishes before he died in early 1982.

The lawyers hoped to convince Justice Power that despite misappropriating Laing’s money and misleading past council members, the Town of Comox should be allowed to demolish the man’s heritage home, Shakesides, and use his money for purposes that Laing had not explicitly envisioned.

They also spent a large portion of their time before Justice Power arguing that she should ignore most of the hundreds of pages of evidence and documentation submitted by the Mack Laing Heritage Society (The Society), an intervenor in this case, because they are “not relevant” to section 184 of the 2003 BC Community Charter.

They dismissed the numerous affidavits provided by The Society as “opinion and hearsay” that purport to describe Laing’s importance to the town’s history and the field of natural history generally and to prove that the terms of his gifts were crystal clear.

But something was missing in this cold, binary courtroom summarization of the legal fine points, which the lawyers so aptly boiled down to what was documented or not and which words were precise or vague and whether agreements made between 1973 and 1981 do or do not comport with a 2003 law. Absent from the discussion, except when The Society’s lawyer took the podium, was the context of the social-political-bureaucratic environment during which this 40-year travesty took place.

The Society’s lawyer did his best to paint that bigger picture. The Society believes that Justice Power, and anyone else masochistic enough to read through the mountain of public filings in this case, will discover the struggles of a lone female advocate for Laing’s wishes, the pursuit of personal agendas, the political strategies that were afoot and the unsavory means used to achieve them.

The Society believes Justice Power will learn that Laing was a good-hearted man, albeit naive about fickle town councils, who wanted his life’s achievements to live on and educate those who came after him and that the intention for his gifts to the people of Comox were clear and indisputable.

The Society’s lawyer said the Town of Comox had made its own mess and was now in a rush to clean it up. But, he argued, there is no good reason why, after 40 years, the town can’t wait for a thorough accounting of how much money should be in the Trust Fund and for an independent assessment of Shakesides’ viability by heritage building professionals.

After hearing from the town, the Attorney General and The Society, Justice Power gave no immediate ruling. Her decisions in this case could take weeks.

The Mack Laing saga is ultimately a story of how clever people can obfuscate the big picture using the detachment of legal proceedings and try to rewrite history to serve a modern agenda. It’s a cautionary tale about how municipal staff can lead a town council down an ethically wrong path and how a majority of them willingly follow it.

The case puts an exclamation point on the importance of electing mayors and council members who believe in playing by the rules. In other words, serious public servants who are determined to fully understand the issues before them and who refuse to take the lazy route of blindly accepting staff recommendations.

But that’s just our opinion.

What follows now is a brief summary of the arguments heard by Justice Power.

 

WHAT THE TOWN AND ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID

The BC Attorney General, represented by Sointula Kirkpatrick, and the Town represented by Mike Moll, argued that Laing had made two separate trusts. In the first one in 1973, the Park Trust, Laing gifted his property including the Shakesides house. In the second in 1981 via his Last Will and Testament, the Trust, Laing left the residue of his estate – money and possessions – to the town.

The lawyers said only the 1981 trust was before the court. That argument, if accepted by Justice Power, means that the Shakesides house was given to the town without conditions in the earlier Parks Trust and was the town’s property to do with as it pleased. The only issue before the court was whether the later Trust funds could be spent to construct a viewing platform.

“It has been 40 years since he made his bequest. Shakesides was never suitable to be a museum and the Trust Funds were and are not sufficient to make it one,” Kirkpatrick told the court.

She said further that “most of The Society’s evidence is not relevant to this court’s determination under Section 184 of the Community Charter.” And she went on to argue details of general trust law principles.

At that point, Justice Power stopped the proceedings to address the gallery, comprising only members of The Society. Justice Power said that despite the AG lawyer’s opinion of The Society’s evidence, only she would determine its relevance.

In regards to the comprehensive plan prepared by The Society and two dozen community volunteers to restore Shakesides and convert it to a natural history museum, Kirkpatrick said their proposal was “beyond the scope of this proceeding and has no basis in law.”

She concluded that the town’s proposal to construct a “Nature Park Platform can accommodate the K‘omoks First Nations’ concern about disturbance to the Great Comox Midden on which Shakesides is located, without further delay or unnecessary litigation.”

She said Mack Laing’s charitable intentions should be carried out through the building of the platform and she asked the court to “grant the variation sought on the conditions proposed by the Attorney General and to which the Town agrees.”

The town’s lawyer, Mike Moll said, “The Town is applying to vary the Trust because the Town’s Council now considers the terms of the Trust to no longer be in the best interests of the Town. The Town says that the Nature Park Platform containing natural history education panels will better further both the intention of the will-maker and the best interests of the Town.’

 

WHAT THE SOCIETY SAID

The Mack Laing Heritage Society, represented by Kevin Simonett of Campbell River, argued that “In breaching its obligations as trustee and allowing waste and neglect of the culturally valuable and irreplaceable trust object (Shakesides), Comox has manufactured the very crisis it now claims as justification to vary the trust.

“Comox does not come before the court with clean hands and is the author of a delay of several decades.”

Simonett went to say that after 40 years of the town’s financial mismanagement and dereliction of trustee obligations and fiduciary duty – “to which Comox has essentially admitted” – a forensic accounting of the trust funds and an independent assessment is required to ascertain the true financial health and structural integrity of Shakesides.

“Comox offers no explanation as to why they cannot wait for such forensic auditing
and physical inspection to be completed. Instead, they insist on immediate
demolition of a culturally valuable and historic home to be replaced with little more than a concrete slab,” he told the court.

Simonett argued that the town’s conclusion that Shakesides is unsuitable for use as a museum was “a foregone conclusion.” Since the town received Laing’s gifts, “the town has selectively sought out informal information tending to confirm that conclusion, rather than carrying out proper due diligence and obtaining expert opinions.”

He detailed how a town executive ignored the misspending of Laing’s money, stacked an advisory committee to get the result he wanted and then misled council members to make decisions based on a non-existent Park Plan and a flawed process designed to achieve personal and political purposes.

He argued that there was only one trust, not two, which Laing continued to amend through the period from 1973 to 1981.

“By way of gift in his last will and testament, the (Laing) carried out the Settlement upon the Park Trust; his intent was to add the residue of his estate to the trust corpus established under the Park Trust, on the terms set out in the instrument of gift. The Town in its capacity as Trustee had notice of these terms, and indeed had a hand in negotiating them, and accepted these terms when it accepted the funds forming the Settlement upon the Park Trust,” Simonett said.

Simonett told Justice Power that the town and the AG have provided evidence, “only on the putative cost-effectiveness of varying the Park Trust to remove Shakesides, and none as to the superiority per se of the viewing platform. It is the Intervenor’s position that the relative cost-effectiveness of the competing visions for Mack Laing Park has not been determined, due to the protracted intransigence of the town.”

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Comox failed to consult with KFN over Mack Laing Park

Now that Chief Nicole Rempel has made it clear the Town of Comox failed to properly consult the K’omoks First Nations about plans to demolish Mack Laing’s heritage home, a serious question arises: With whom did town staff and council members consult?

Council vote sends Mack Laing Trust issue back to court

Comox Town Council voted 5-2 this week to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property, as it prepares to head back to the BC Supreme Court.

The Week: Comox Council again cancels court dates to resolve Mack Laing obligation

The Week: Comox Council again cancels court dates to resolve Mack Laing obligation

 What was once meant to grow straight and true can, over time, become rather twisted |  George Le Masurier photo

The Week: Comox Council again cancels court dates to resolve Mack Laing obligation

By

Today should have been the first day of the week that finally brought resolution to the Town of Comox’s shameful abdication of its moral covenant to the late Hamilton Mack Laing.

But if you hoped that the BC Supreme Court hearing scheduled for this week (Nov. 15-18) would bring an end to the 39-year-old saga over Laing’s Trust and the future use of his heritage home, Shakesides, you will be disappointed. Again.

This is the Town of Comox, after all, where things often get messy.

It’s head-shaking, but not surprising, that the town has backed out of the latest trial dates it had scheduled to petition the BC Supreme Court for approval to alter the Mack Laing Trust Agreement. The town wants to tear down Laing’s historic homestead and use the considerable funds he left to the town for other purposes.

Five years ago, the town was in a mad rush to get to the BC Supreme Court and plead its case. But since then, the town has scheduled and canceled court dates multiple times.

Read all of our stories about the Mack Laing Trust Agreement

And now, despite the feverish pitch reached in 2019 — and the estimated $200,000 plus that it has spent on legal fees — the town still seems confused about whether to go to court or not.

The town spent most of the time from February 2017 to May 2019 trying unsuccessfully to convince two different Supreme Court Justices not to allow the Mack Laing Heritage Society to present opposing evidence at trial.

But when the town finally set a trial date for June of 2019, they canceled it at the last minute (in May). And then the town went dark for the next 31 months.

This year the town decided to revive its application to alter Laing’s Trust and asked the court to set aside four days for a trial that would have started today.

But, like a skipping record, the town council once again canceled these dates at the last minute and then hinted it might revisit its application in the new year.

 

WHY CAN’T THE TOWN MAKE UP ITS MIND?

So, what is going on with this Town Council? Why do they schedule court dates and then cancel them? Why does the town continue to incur high-priced fees charged by a Vancouver lawyer when the council is apparently undecided about what to do?

Comox voters and taxpayers have no way to get answers to these questions because the council only discusses the matter behind closed doors. Ever since the town took its three-year hiatus on this issue, all Mack Laing discussions have been held in-camera.

That means if you ask a Comox council member what’s going on with the Mack Laing court petition, they will tell you they can’t talk about matters discussed in-camera.

That’s an odd position for the town to take.

When the mayor and council were in a rush to get a court hearing prior to May 2019, the council discussed the matter openly in regular council meetings. Motions were debated and votes were taken.

The council even held a special open public meeting at the Comox Rec Centre on the topic just a month (April 2019) before putting it all on ice for nearly three years.

So now, the council refuses to talk in public about even the simplest details related to the case, such as why they schedule court dates and then cancel them or whether the town even has a plan to resolve the matter?

The council’s lack of transparency is disconcerting. Its indecision is stunning.

With every misstep, the town worsens its culpability over 39 years for not living up to the agreement it signed with Hamilton Mack Laing. The town took his money and his property but failed to live up to their end of the bargain.

It’s a shameful way to treat one of the town’s most notable and generous citizens. And their actions certainly won’t encourage any future citizen to leave anything in trust to this town.

The issue has also divided people in the community, another of the regrettable results of this debacle.

 

SO WHAT’S THE SOLUTION?

It’s simple. Go to court. Get a decision and move on. If the town fears the court will reject its application to alter the Laing Trust, then initiate some form of arbitration.

Or maybe both parties could find a way to compromise. For example, the Comox Valley Regional District provides a good model with Brian and Sarah McLoughlin Park. The McLoughlin’s former house is open for artists-in-residence from May through September.

Restoring and opening Shakesides for a similar program — perhaps with priority given to natural scientists — would avoid the problems of parking that concern the park’s neighbors. And it would come closer to Laing’s vision for his historic home on Comox Bay than another unused and unnecessary ‘viewing platform’

Whatever it decides, the Town of Comox should quit stalling and start being honest and open with the public.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHO WAS HAMILTON MACK LAING?

Hamilton Mack Laing was an important Canadian naturalist, photographer and writer. His research has appeared in a variety of publications around the world. Laing moved to Comox in 1922, cleared his land and built his home from a “Stanhope” Aladdin Ready-Cut kit. In 1927, he married Ethel Hart of Portland and they established a successful and commercial orchard which included walnut, pecan, filbert, hazelnut, apple and plum trees. They also grew mushrooms and vegetables.

After his wife died in 1944, Laing sold his original home, Baybrook, and built a new home, Shakesides, on the adjoining lot. On his death in 1982, Laing bequeathed the waterfront property, a sizable amount of money, artwork and other personal property to the Town of Comox according to a Trust Agreement between the parties.

In 2016, the Comox Council, led by then-mayor Paul Ives, attempted to demolish Shakesides but was stopped by the BC Attorney General. Instead, the town demolished Laing’s former home, Baybrook, and began the process to alter the LaingTrust Agreement to permit the demolition of Shakesides and to use Laing’s money for other purposes.

Over the past five years, the town, led by current Mayor Russ Arnott, has appeared in several BC Supreme Court hearings to argue unsuccessfully that the Mack Laing Heritage Society should not be allowed to present any evidence that opposes the town’s application to alter the Laing Trust. Since then the town has scheduled and canceled multiple trial dates.

The Mack Laing Heritage Society believes the town has mishandled Laing’s Trust and misappropriated funds attached to the trust.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Comox failed to consult with KFN over Mack Laing Park

Now that Chief Nicole Rempel has made it clear the Town of Comox failed to properly consult the K’omoks First Nations about plans to demolish Mack Laing’s heritage home, a serious question arises: With whom did town staff and council members consult?

Council vote sends Mack Laing Trust issue back to court

Comox Town Council voted 5-2 this week to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property, as it prepares to head back to the BC Supreme Court.

Wildwood: A community model for creating jobs and revenue within ecological parameters

Wildwood: A community model for creating jobs and revenue within ecological parameters

Photos of the homestead at Wildwood are courtesy of the EcoForestry Institute Society

Wildwood: A community model for creating jobs and revenue within ecological parameters

By

In February of 2017, the former Comox Town Council voted to petition the BC Supreme Court to modify the Hamilton Mack Laing Trust established 39 years ago. The town’s intention was to demolish Laing’s heritage home, called Shakesides, and use the money he had bequeathed the Town of Comox for other purposes.

Although the town had done nothing to live up to the Trust Agreement for over four decades, the town now seemed anxious to get to court and proceed with its plan to replace Shakesides with a “viewing platform.”

But the Supreme Court disrupted those plans when it granted the Mack Laing Heritage Society intervenor status in the case, which would allow the society to present evidence opposed to the town’s petition.

Now, after spending more than $200,000 with a Vancouver law firm, the town appears to have abandoned its petition for unexplained reasons and has not announced any new approach to fulfilling its Trust Agreement.

But among the evidence the Mack Laing Heritage Society (MLHS) would have presented in court was a complete business plan for the restoration of Shakesides as a community project. The plan identified dozens of local businesses, tradespeople and volunteer citizens committed to providing labour, materials and donations.

The plan was “totally plausible” according to its chief architect Gord Olson, a member of the society, in part because other communities have successfully used similar plans to restore landmarks and heritage sites.

In fact, the Victoria Times-Colonist newspaper featured such a project in a three-page spread in its Saturday, Jan. 23, 2021 edition. Although larger in scale, the Wildwood forest and homestead located between Nanaimo and Ladysmith shows how a community project can create a self-sustaining job-creation destination.

 

RESTORATION OF WILDWOOD

Merv Wilkinson originally intended to farm the property he bought on Quennell Lake in 1938 and enrolled in farming classes at the University of British Columbia. But one of his professors urged Wilkinson to instead create a sustainable forest like the ones in the teacher’s Scandinavia homeland.

Over the next seven decades, Wilkinson managed a sustainable forest that today still includes old-growth trees. He selectively logged the property every five years for density, light and marketable species.

He also built a log house with stock from his property that burned down from a chimney fire. He rebuilt it again in 1965.

Wilkinson, who died in 2011 at age 97, eventually moved off the property. The Land Conservancy of BC took its management, but when the TLC proposed selling the property to a private interest, a registered charitable society went to court to keep Wilkinson’s legacy in the public domain.

The Ecoforestry Institute Society (EIS), founded in 1994 by several University of Victoria academics, eventually won a 2016 court battle to acquire the property and hold it in trust for the people of B.C.

Kathleen Code, the EIS vice-chair and communication director, told Decafnation that the society was aided by an Eco forestry Management Plan and a trust deed written by Dr. Donavon Waters, a well-known Canadian trust lawyer. The property now can never be sold to a private interest and must always be owned by a like-minded society.

But, she said, by then the homestead had fallen into serious disrepair. Wildlife and vegetation started to reclaim it back to nature, including a resident bat colony that was relocated to bat boxes.

So Code said the society created a plan to restore the homestead with the help of volunteers, community donations and financial support from the local government.

The result has been a total success, she says.

 

SELF-SUSTAINING AND POPULAR

“Wildwood is a job and revenue creator, all the while operating with its ecological parameters of the forest,” Code told Decafnation in a telephone conversation.

People come from all over the world to visit Wildwood. Some come for tours, some to see the fully-functioning forest and ecosystem, including old growth. There have been groups of Korean foresters, government ministers from Germany, delegations from Europe and more.

But some people come simply for a respite in nature. A top Holland travel agency for the well-heeled has added Wildwood to its list of recommended destinations.

“Some people come to see the famous pear tree in the orchard planted by Dr. Jane Goodall, one of Merv’s many famous friends from around the world,” she said.

Visitors can stay overnight in the log cabin homestead, which has a two-night minimum. Some guests have stayed for a week. The house sleeps 6 with 2.5 baths.

But Wildwood also rents the house for corporate retreats, weddings — one event involved more than 100 people — workshops and other functions.

Code told Decafnation that the facility is already fully-booked through mid-September of 2021.

“What a great job creator; it’s one of the new ways to develop revenue streams while keeping nature intact,” she said. “People today want an experience in their vacation, not just a destination. Vancouver Island can offer experiences in spades. We have nature at its best.”

 

JOB CREATOR

Kathleen Code’s own economic development background has helped make Wildwood a self-sustaining enterprise.

In its second full year, the property generated about $30,000 in revenue that along with continuing public donations and grants pays the society’s $450,000 mortgage, compensates the paid part-time education programmers and tour guides.

It also creates other jobs for cleaners, caterers, maintenance people, naturalists who design courses for school children and workshop facilitators for programs on bats, mushrooms, edible plant identification and health and wellness.

Code says that future building plans will require architects, engineers, construction workers and tradespeople. They also hope to add value-added products, employing artisans and woodworkers. She anticipates that these events will also help support musicians, photographers and artists.

“What a great job creator,” she said. “It’s one of the new ways to develop revenue streams while keeping nature intact.”

 

HOW THEY FINANCED IT

The Land Conservancy originally raised $1.1 million to own and steward Wildwood. Part of the funds came from Grace Wilkinson, the second wife of Merv Wilkinson, who owned three-quarters of the property at the time.

After the court victory in 2016, the Ecoforestry Institute Society paid $800,000 to acquire the property from the TLC. They relied on community donations, but the majority of the money was raised through a $450,000 mortgage provided by Vancity.

The Regional District of Nanaimo donated $150,000 and the society received a $65,000 grant from the BC Capital Gaming agency specifically for the homestead renovation.

The 14-month renovation to the building cost about $250,000. The society did its own general contracting and hired local tradespeople and purchased goods and services from local suppliers.

And volunteers donated extensive labour and materials.

The project managers scoured the island for vintage appropriate furnishings and helped repurpose and refit donations. Volunteers and EIS Board members did the interior design, dug trenches, stained woodwork, painted the bathtub and milled lumber for the bed platforms and decks.

The Homestead restoration required gutting the structure, then installing new electrical, water, heat, solar and septic systems, as well as new floors, plastered walls and new fixtures throughout.

 

WHO IS THE EIS?

Code says the EIS is a tiny society with a cohesive board that has diverse skills, including two registered foresters, economic development analyst, commercial and graphic designer, ethnobotanist, former city planner and an Indigenous liaison.

The EIS headquarters is at Wildwood although volunteer board members come from all over Vancouver Island, including current co-chair Peter Jungwirth, forester, who resides in the Comox Valley.

Wildwood Vice-Chair Peter Jungwirth of the Comox Valley

Jungwirth emigrated from Austria in 1998 with his wife, Heidi, who was originally from the Comox Valley. They met in Austria while she was teaching at an international school.

Jungwirth met Wilkinson in 1997 when he and Heidi visited the area prior to moving here permanently and was “hooked” on Wilkinson’s ideas.

“Foresters are always looking for a better way to manage forests,” he told Decafnation. “And the concept of ecoforestry hooked me in.”

Jungwirth said, “Merv’s legacy is a beautiful forest which he managed for more than 60 years that still has plenty of old-growth trees and thus is a prime teaching and demonstration forest.”

He called Wildwood the biggest hope for change in forestry in BC and the world.

“There is so much more to a forest than timber. There is food, medicine, wildlife, all kinds of vegetation, clean water & air, climate moderation, carbon storage, recreation potential and more, but above all it is an intricate ecosystem that we ought to steward and not destroy, ” he said. “For Ecoforestry, a healthy forest with a functioning ecology is the bottom line, everything else you manage for needs to submit to that goal. That is quite a contrast to industrial clearcut logging.”

Jungwirth said that the forests in Austria are 80 percent privately owned, but forest legislation does not permit anything bigger than patch cuts. With so much publicly-owned forests in BC, you would think public interests like biodiversity conservation or carbon storage against climate warming would be reflected more in the management,” he said.

He visited the Carmannah Valley after it was mostly logged and wondered “why did they have to fight so hard to keep at least some of the magnificent Old Growth forest with the tallest Sitka spruce in the world?”

“Europe made these mistakes, they took it (old-growth) all, and now there’s so little left in the world,” he said. “BC is well on its way there, too.”

Take Decafnation's short Local Government survey

 

 

A SIMILAR PLAN FOR MACK LAING’S HERITAGE HOME, SHAKESIDES

The Mack Laing Heritage Society has proposed a plan to restore the home famous Comox ornithologist Hamilton Mack Laing. You can read the plan here.

 

 

HOW THE ECOFORESTRY INSTITUTE SOCIETY FORMED

EIS grew out of a movement in the mid-1990s as a number of academics from the University of Victoria and local environmentalists sought a better way to manage our rapidly depleting ecosystems. Founders include well-known luminaries:

Dr. Alan Drengson (contributor to the deep ecology movement and UVic Emeritus Professor of Philosophy);

Dr. Duncan Taylor (contributor to the deep ecology movement and UVic Professor of Environmental Studies);

Dr. Nancy Turner (ethnobotanist and UVic Emeritus Professor); and

Sharon Chow (Sierra Club Director for 20 years).

Merv Wilkinson himself was to become a member and was later awarded for his pioneering work in ecoforestry with the Order of Canada and the Order of British Columbia. Learn more about Merv here.

 

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Comox failed to consult with KFN over Mack Laing Park

Now that Chief Nicole Rempel has made it clear the Town of Comox failed to properly consult the K’omoks First Nations about plans to demolish Mack Laing’s heritage home, a serious question arises: With whom did town staff and council members consult?

Council vote sends Mack Laing Trust issue back to court

Comox Town Council voted 5-2 this week to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property, as it prepares to head back to the BC Supreme Court.

Heritage BC joins fight to save Shakesides, warns AG of dangerous precedent

Heritage BC joins fight to save Shakesides, warns AG of dangerous precedent

Is this the future of Shakesides? Photo shows the site of Mack Laing’s original home, Baybrook  /  George Le Masurier photo

Heritage BC joins fight to save Shakesides, warns AG of dangerous precedent

By

Demolition of the famous naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home could have reverberations throughout British Columbia for heritage conservation.

That’s the message from the province’s leading heritage conservation organization, which has thrown its weight behind the Mack Laing Heritage Society’s effort to stop the Town of Comox from demolishing the house, known as Shakesides.

Paul Gravett, executive director of Heritage BC, has urged BC Attorney General David Eby not to condone the “demolition by neglect” practice being used by the Town of Comox.

“If the court allows the terms of Mr. Laing’s trust to be altered, a precedent could be established that would discourage future donors, who fear their wishes could be altered or ignored, from making important gifts of real property. This poses a threat to the conservation of B.C.’s heritage,” Gravett wrote in a letter to the attorney general.

“The current state of Shakesides is a form of ‘demolition by neglect.’ this is a wholly unacceptable and irresponsible practice that results in the slow degradation of our historic environment. It should not be condoned,” he wrote.

Gravett has also filed an affidavit in the BC Supreme Court case that will decide Shakesides’ fate. The Town of Comox has petitioned the court to alter the terms of their trust agreement with Mack Laing, which would allow them to demolish the house and spend the sizable monetary trust Laing left the town in other ways.

The Mack Laing Heritage Society has opposed the town’s petition and will be a party to the case when it is heard. No court date has been set, but the case will likely go to trial this fall.

Gravett said the building, which still stands on its original site, is restorable.

“The proposal (by Comox) to demolish the structure is antithetical to heritage conservation and environmental conservation,” he wrote to AG Eby. “Shakesides should not be allowed to become landfill.”

In his affidavit, Gravett notes that he urged the town two years ago to reconsider its pursuit of court permission to demolish Shakesides. At the same time, he offered the town his organization’s “advice, capacity building training and assistance with conservation planning” to save the building.

Gravett also offered financial assistance through grants from the Heritage Legacy Fund program.

The Town of Comox rejected both offers.

“The replacement of Shakesides with the proposed viewing platform is inappropriate,” Gravett wrote to AG Eby. “The viewing platform would not stand as a memorial to Mr. Laing or the values of a community, but as the neglect of our history and heritage and the disregard of a philanthropist’s wishes.”

The BC Association of Heritage Professionals has also written to the attorney general in opposition to the Town of Comox petition.

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Comox failed to consult with KFN over Mack Laing Park

Now that Chief Nicole Rempel has made it clear the Town of Comox failed to properly consult the K’omoks First Nations about plans to demolish Mack Laing’s heritage home, a serious question arises: With whom did town staff and council members consult?

Council vote sends Mack Laing Trust issue back to court

Comox Town Council voted 5-2 this week to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property, as it prepares to head back to the BC Supreme Court.

BC heritage professionals lobby cabinet ministers to conserve Shakesides

BC heritage professionals lobby cabinet ministers to conserve Shakesides

Hamilton Mack Laing at home in Shakesides during his last years  /  Archive photo

BC heritage professionals lobby cabinet ministers to conserve Shakesides

By

The president of the BC Association of Heritage Professionals has lobbied the provincial Attorney-General and the minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations to oppose the Town of Comox’s application to vary the charitable purpose trust of Hamilton Mack Laing.

Elana Zysblt, a Vancouver-based heritage consultant, says in letters sent Tuesday to AG David Eby and FLNROD Minister Doug Donaldson that the conservation of Laing’s home, known as Shakesides, “represents heritage values that extend much further than the boundaries of the Town of Comox.”

Heritage issues in British Columbia fall under the FLNROD portfolio and are managed by Roger Tinney.

Writing on behalf of the province’s heritage professionals, Zysblat expresses concern that municipalities such as Comox might be allowed to use a section (184) of the Community Charter to ignore and alter substantial gifts of money and property donated to the public in good faith.

FURTHER READING: Attorney general takes West Vancouver to court for breach of trust

The Community Charter sets out municipalities’ core areas of authority, such as municipal services, public health regulation and entering into agreements. Under section 184 if, in the opinion of a council, the terms or trusts imposed by a donor or will-maker are no longer in the best interests of the municipality, the council may apply to the Supreme Court to vary the terms of the trust.

This is the crux of the town’s application to vary the Laing trust and demolish Shakesides.

Gordon Olsen, a member of the Mack Laing Heritage Society, says the significance of Zysblat’s letters is a warning to the minister about the serious precedent the Shakesides case could set.

“If municipalities are allowed to ignore terms of agreements that` they have freely entered into that will have a chilling effect on future donators across the province,” Olsen told Decafnation.

But that isn’t the only point Zysblat makes in her letters. The Association of Heritage Professionals also believe Shakesides has significant heritage values and remains, despite the town’s neglect, in good condition for rehabilitation.

“In 2017, a Statement of Significance was completed to describe the heritage values of the place,” Zysblat wrote. “A condition assessment of the historic structure was also conducted in the same year by an independent heritage professional and structural engineer. The assessment concluded that the building is in good condition to be rehabilitated for adaptive re-use as envisioned by Hamilton Mack Laing.”

The Town of Comox has not requested any professional assessment of the building. But Comox Parks Manager Al Fraser told a public meeting in April that only a “cursory report” has been done, which he admitted was “not comprehensive.” Fraser called it a “soft pass.”

“Let’s say there’s still considerable work to be done in that regard,” Fraser told the public meeting.

As of July, the town still has not done that work and has yet to acknowledge the professional assessment by a structural engineer completed in 2017, according to Zysblat.

She also informs the two provincial government cabinet ministers that the town seems uninterested in other perspectives on Shakesides.

“Gord Macdonald, Heritage BC chair, shares our belief that the state heritage value of Shakesides demands that (Laing’s) former home be conserved for future generations,” Zysblat wrote. “And that Heritage BC has committed to providing their assistance, at no charge, to the Town of Comox, for the duration of the process to repurpose Shakesides, and guarantees the town a provincial grant through the Heritage Legacy Fund Heritage Conservation Program.

“To this date, the Town of Comox has ignored this offer by Heritage BC.”

For more stories about Mack Laing, the Town of Comox and the legal proceedings, go here

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Comox failed to consult with KFN over Mack Laing Park

Now that Chief Nicole Rempel has made it clear the Town of Comox failed to properly consult the K’omoks First Nations about plans to demolish Mack Laing’s heritage home, a serious question arises: With whom did town staff and council members consult?

Council vote sends Mack Laing Trust issue back to court

Comox Town Council voted 5-2 this week to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property, as it prepares to head back to the BC Supreme Court.

BC attorney general appears to argue both sides of cases similar to Mack Laing battle

BC attorney general appears to argue both sides of cases similar to Mack Laing battle

BC Archive photo

BC attorney general appears to argue both sides of cases similar to Mack Laing battle

By

What should Comox Valley residents think about the BC Attorney General’s office arguing two different sides of similar cases?

The attorney general of BC announced last week that it would take the district of West Vancouver to court because the municipality allegedly broke an agreement with two residents who had bequeathed their property to the district.

But in the Comox Valley, the Attorney General’s office is defending the Town of Comox for breaking its agreement with Hamilton Mack Laing.

And it gets more interesting. The lead counsel for the AG’s office in both cases is Sointula Kirkpatrick.

FURTHER READING: More on Mack Laing 

According to a report from Glacier Media, which publishes several BC newspapers including the North Shore News, the AG’s lawsuit asks the BC Supreme Court to rule that West Vancouver is in breach of the trust.

Pearley and Noreen Berissenden gave their property to the district of West Vancouver in the late 1980s. The couple specified that the property was “to be used and maintained by it (the district) for public park purposes.”

When Mack Laing died in 1982, he left the town his waterfront property, his home named Shakesides, and the residue cash from his estate “for the improvement and development of my home as a natural history museum.”

The district of West Vancouver never followed through on their agreement with the Berissendens, and instead rented out the couple’s home on the property from 2001 to 2018. And in 2017, the district applied to vary the trust to subdivide about half of the property into building lots.

The Town of Comox likewise never followed through on the terms of its trust agreement with Laing, and also rented out Laing’s home for almost 30 years. In 2017, the town applied to vary the trust in order to demolish Shakesides.

AG lawyer Kirkpatrick alleges West Vancouver is in breach of the Berissenden’s trust for failing to make their property a park and for profiting from the rent, according to the Glacier Media report. Kirkpatrick has asked for an accounting of all all rent money received and that it be put back into the trust.

As well, Kirkpatrick, on behalf of the AG’s office, wants the court to order West Vancouver to make the property a park.

But Kirkpatrick has taken the exact opposite view when it comes to the Town of Comox versus Mack Laing.

In the Comox Valley case, Kirkpatrick has defended the town’s failure to make Laing’s home a natural history museum for public enjoyment and for profiting from renting out Shakesides, even though there hasn’t been an independent accounting of those funds and not all of the rent money has been returned to the trust, according to the Mack Laing Heritage Society.

Kirkpatrick has not responded to an email request asking her to explain the differences in the two cases.

She did, however, request a nearly five-month delay for the Supreme Court trial that will determine the fate of Shakesides. Kirkpatrick requested the delay in early May, well before filing the lawsuit against West Vancouver.

At the time, members of the Mack Laing society said they hoped the delay meant the Attorney General’s office was less certain about the merits of the town’s application to alter the trust and that it had new concerns about how Comox councils and staff have mishandled Laing’s gifts to the community.

Now they hope the West Vancouver lawsuit signals a change in direction at the AG’s office over municipal applications to vary citizen trusts. It is part of the Attorney General’s mandate to provide oversight of charitable purpose trusts.

No court date to hear the Shakesides case has been scheduled.

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Comox failed to consult with KFN over Mack Laing Park

Now that Chief Nicole Rempel has made it clear the Town of Comox failed to properly consult the K’omoks First Nations about plans to demolish Mack Laing’s heritage home, a serious question arises: With whom did town staff and council members consult?

Council vote sends Mack Laing Trust issue back to court

Comox Town Council voted 5-2 this week to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property, as it prepares to head back to the BC Supreme Court.