Stew Young’s
Record as Mayor
Public participation · 1999–2021

Development advanced despite residents’ objections.

Young defended his public-input process, but too often his administration pushed development ahead despite residents’ objections. The South Langford forest proposal, the Speedway rezoning, and complaints stretching back to 1999 show a recurring failure to give public concerns enough weight.

Updated September 30, 2026

The complaints were already there in 1999

A 1999 Times Colonist report by Susan Danard, preserved in a newspaper clipping shared in Langford Voters, records residents challenging the pace of development approvals. Coalition of Langford Residents president Susan Maloney accused council of railroading development without listening. Former mayor Jim London criticized the removal of committee-of-the-whole meetings and the lack of discussion in short council meetings.

Young defended the change, saying six departmental committees including residents had replaced the mayor-administered committee of the whole. He called the system more responsive: “My process is possibly streamlined, but it is not undemocratic.” The dispute over speed and public scrutiny was already established more than two decades before the Speedway hearing.

200 residents objected. The forest development moved ahead.

On July 8, 2019, about 200 residents packed a planning committee meeting to oppose Ridley Bros. Development Ltd.’s proposal for roughly 450 homes on forested land at 804 Latoria Road and 950 Worrall Drive. The Times Colonist reported1 that the committee advanced the proposal to council despite those objections. It requested further consultation and 30% green space, while the Official Community Plan called for 40% open space.

Residents were challenging the direction of development, not just asking for minor adjustments. The proposal sought a new R5 zone to replace rural-residential zoning. Resident Frank Lyne, who had a background in planning, described the process as favouring the developer.

The November 25, 2019 special council agenda2 identifies Ridley Bros. as the owner of the approximately 73-acre site. It includes letters addressed to Young asking the City to delay rezoning, protect contiguous forest, and address traffic and habitat concerns. A response sent from the mayor’s office on July 24 acknowledges a letter and forwards it to planning. The November agenda then places the rezoning before council for a public hearing and second and third readings.

The proposal did change. The November 25 signed minutes7 record a revised plan with 40% green space, speakers supporting it and speakers still opposing the development. Council gave the rezoning second and third readings. The revised plan met the 40% green-space target, but council proceeded despite residents who still opposed developing the forested site.

Residents asked the City to protect the forest and reconsider the rezoning. The process kept moving toward development.

The Western Speedway rezoning

Capital Daily reported in April 20214 that residents gathered more than 500 petition signatures calling for access to a proposed development through Millstream Road. The transportation impact assessment was not publicly available.

Resident Michelle van den Broek told the paper roughly 90 people phoned into the March 15 meeting but only 25 were called upon, blaming a confusing phone system. The report says council advanced the rezoning without deliberating on the subdivision.

Access to the process came late

The same report records complaints about meeting access and financial disclosures. March 15, 2021 was the first meeting jointly livestreamed and audio archived since the pandemic began. Council’s financial disclosures required an in-person appointment, with handwritten notes permitted but photographs prohibited.

A public hearing should let residents see their concerns being weighed. A fast vote without visible deliberation leaves that work hidden.

A smaller proposal still left residents’ concerns unresolved

At Goldstream and Fairway, The Discourse reported5 a proposal reduced from a maximum of 12 storeys to two six-storey buildings after neighbourhood objections. Residents still disputed its size and vehicle access through Fairway Avenue.

The proposal changed, but the underlying concerns about density and street access remained. Accepting some adjustments did not resolve the dispute.

Sixteen motions in five minutes

The October 20, 2014 council minutes6 list Young present, a 7:00 p.m. call to order, and a 7:05 p.m. adjournment. Across five pages, they record 16 motions, including development variances, bylaw decisions, procedural business, and a closed-session resolution. No public participation is recorded.

Five minutes is a strikingly short public record for that volume of business. Residents deserve more than a sequence of motions to understand how council reached its decisions.

The failure was in accountability

In South Langford, residents opposed the loss of forest and asked for a pause. The proposal kept moving. At the Speedway, residents lacked the traffic assessment, struggled to speak, and could not see their concerns debated. Young’s administration repeatedly put development momentum ahead of meaningful public accountability.

Sources

  1. Richard Watts, Times Colonist: Langford councillors advance development plan for forest, despite residents’ dismayJuly 8, 2019. Meeting attendance, Ridley Bros. proposal, residents’ objections, committee advancement, and proposed green-space requirements.
  2. City of Langford, special council agenda, November 25, 2019Pages 21–22: owner and site area. Pages 45–46: letter to Young and mayor’s-office response. Pages 1 and 316 onward: public hearing and rezoning readings on the agenda. An agenda establishes proposed business; it does not establish the outcome of that meeting’s votes.
  3. Susan Danard, Times Colonist: Development issues take spotlightFull clipping reviewed in a September 20, 2026 resident post. The uploader identifies its date as November 12, 1999; the visible article discusses the November 20, 1999 election. Includes residents’ criticism and Young’s response.
  4. Aaron Guillen, Capital Daily: Langford is nearly 30 years old and has only elected one mayorApril 6, 2021: Speedway hearing, petition, information access, and meeting broadcasts.
  5. Katarina Szulc, The Discourse: Controversial development proposal heads to Langford city councilJanuary 20, 2021: proposal changes and unresolved neighbourhood concerns.
  6. City of Langford, council minutes, October 20, 2014Community-hosted copy reviewed in full: start and adjournment times, 16 motions, and no public participation.
  7. November 25, 2019 signed special council minutesPages 2–8: revised 40% green-space proposal and public hearing, with support and opposition. Item 7(a), pages 8–9: second and third readings carried; this is not itself final bylaw adoption.