As the Southlands saga adds another chapter to its colourful history, two things are becoming abundantly clear.
The first, which is hardly a revelation, is the notion there will never be a consensus when it comes to this controversial piece of land. And that brings us to the second point: After years of remaining silent on the issue, civic politicians are going to have to make one heck of a difficult decision.
Once Century Group's development plans make their way through municipal hall, and ultimately out into the community, they will end up back in Delta council's lap in search of direction.
After years of doing their best to ignore what was often referred to at public meetings as the elephant in the room, councillors will finally have to pass judgment. Granted, this initial decision will be preliminary in nature, and might even be something as benign as seeking more information, but at some point in the not so distant future an honest to goodness determination on Century's plans must be rendered.
Last spring's Mayor's Summit is being hailed in some circles for producing a compromise for the Southlands. Given the number of housing units has been cut in half and the amount of land deeded to Delta has increased to 80 per cent, many point to it as a form of common ground.
It would definitely be advantageous for local politicians if the summit got everyone on the same page, but it didn't. There are many that aren't satisfied with its outcome, and might well never be content until every last acre of the Southlands is preserved as farmland in perpetuity.
These two camps, which have waged battle over this line-in-the-sand piece of real estate for years, will undoubtedly do so again whenever civic officials open up the proceedings to the masses.
Faced with this inevitable split, it will then be up to council members to reconcile the disparate opinions to come up with an answer they believe is in the best interests of the community. It's not an easy task, but it's why we pay them the big bucks!
It's hard to say how this one will turn out. Saying no - after careful consideration, of course - is the safer approach as it will leave Tsawwassen status quo, but given the effort at the summit to craft an acceptable vision, as well as the time and money that's currently being expended to scrutinize it, would suggest there's a certain level of support.
I guess we'll find out once local politicians are finally forced to make that difficult decision.
