A Parable for Woodwynn Therapeutic Community

Starfish on the Beach - A Parable for Woodwynn Farm

Once upon a time there was a wise man who used to go to the ocean to do his writing. He had a habit of walking on the beach before he began his work.

One day he was walking along the shore. As he looked down the beach, he saw a human figure moving like a dancer. He smiled to himself to think of someone who would dance to the day. So he began to walk faster to catch up.

As he got closer, he saw that it was a young man and the young man wasn't dancing, but instead he was reaching down to the shore, picking up something and very gently throwing it into the ocean. As he got closer he called out,"Good morning! What are you doing?" The young man paused, looked up and replied, "Throwing starfish in the ocean." "I guess I should have asked, why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out. And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that there are miles and miles of beach and starfish all along it. You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely. Then bent down, picked another starfish and threw it into the sea, past the breaking waves and said, "It made a difference for that one."

I saw this story on the Rockridge Institute website. We can make a difference, we can save lives.

Councillor King's statement on the Woodwynn vote

Attached is a statement by Councillor King regarding the recent Council motion to confirm Woodwynn farm as agricultural land and to prohibit any institutional zoning:



"1st. I wish to make it clear that the vote on this motion authored by Councillor Graham is NOT a rejection of Mr. Leblanc’s idea. Nowhere in the motion does it mention Mr. Leblanc’s idea – which has not been received as an application.

2nd By voting in favor of the motion I am not indicating that I am opposed to Mr. Leblanc’s idea as I have not seen details or yet received an application.

I ask that the media and the public NOT characterize this motion as a rejection, but rather it should be seen as a re-affirmation of the existing zoning given limited information.

Voting opposed to Councillor Graham’s motion does not indicate support for Mr. Leblanc’s idea just as a vote in support does not indicate rejection. It is important to follow what the motion says and not attach extra-meaning to it.

If Council wishes to clearly reject a proposal it should wait for an application and then make a clear motion to deny the request. Council must maintain Mr. Leblanc’s “right to an unbiased decision maker” and must keep an “open mind”, which means that it must accept evidence before making final decisions – such as an application.

I believe that Councillor Graham’s motion is premature but is valid given the limited information before council. This means that I can vote in support of the obvious nature of the motion given the lack of an application or information to the contrary. In order to not have a “closed mind” I ask that it be recorded that I recognize that this motion does not bind my hands or the hands of council if presented with information in the future.

1) This motion is therefore unnecessary… AND I move to postpone the motion until an application is received for deliberation.

2) I move that Council indicate it has not made a decision on the idea presented by Mr. Leblanc AND that Council remains “open minded and unbiased” if Mr. Leblanc wishes to proceed with an application… "

Note that the link attached to this article will take you to the minutes for the Feb 11 Planning and Development Committee meeting where you can look at the motion that was passed, Richard Leblanc's presentation and Councillors King's 12 questions with Mr. Leblanc's answers.

http://www.centralsaanich.ca/__shared/assets/08Feb11_Planning___Development_Minutes1623.pdf