Richmond is sticking to a conciliatory approach over controversial Chinese language-only signs after lawyers advised them a bylaw mandating English on signs violates the Charter.

Richmond city council voted unanimously at a committee hearing Monday to send staff to talk to owners of businesses displaying Chinese-only signs and “encourage” them to include English, said Mayor Malcolm Brodie.

It’s a tactic the city has already pursued in the past after public outcry over the proliferation of Chinese-only signs, acknowledged Brodie, but “not as extensively as what council is now suggesting. We’ll be far more proactive than in the past.”

The city had sought a legal opinion about whether it can pass a bylaw banning Chinese-only signs, but was told such a bylaw infringes on the freedom of expression and would be subject to a challenge under the Charter of Rights and Freedom. Because of this, council is not currently considering a bylaw, said Brodie.

“It’s basically, can you do this? The answer is no, unless you can show overriding concerns and those are very difficult ... and expensive to show. You have to have very solid evidence.”

Even if a bylaw is passed, existing Chinese-only signs likely couldn’t be outlawed if they were set up legally.

Richmond has the largest percentage of residents with Asian heritage — whether native-born Canadians or immigrants — of any large B.C. community, with many businesses, shopping and strip malls targeting that growing Asian market. Almost 50 per cent of the population identify as Chinese.

Tensions over language in signs and advertising has been building in the municipality over the last decade, with some residents saying Chinese-only signs are exclusionary and damages community.

Last year, council asked owners to include English in their signage “as a public courtesy,” but has shied away from being the language police.

When presented with a 1,000-signature petition collected by two residents calling for a bylaw requiring English on signs, all councillors except Coun. Chak Au dismissed the plea.

“We didn’t take action at that time,” said Brodie. “The situation hasn’t got better, and there’s more evidence of Chinese-only signs.”

This latest attempt to deal with the hot-button issue was initiated by outgoing Coun. Evelina Halsey-Brandt last week, following a pledge earlier this month by prospective city councillors Carol Day and Michael Wolfe, who said they would address the issue if elected.

Kerry Starchuk, a Richmond resident behind the 2013 petition, is skeptical the city’s “encouragement” alone would work.

“They have tried to use this tactic for 20 years,” said Starchuk. “If you go back to the records of 2004, they called this issue ‘silly.’ You would think it should’ve been resolved by this time.”

Fellow petitioner Ann Merdinyan said she was told by other lawyers the municipal government can enact a signage bylaw, and stressed the need is greater now that it has ever been.

“It’s necessary for Richmond to feel inclusive,” said Merdinyan, who has lived in Richmond since 1977. It’s important for people to maintain their own culture and language but “I don’t see why we’re given the cold shoulder.”

Brodie said he is hopeful the issue can be resolved in the coming months, but noted he isn’t closing the door to a bylaw in the future.

“At the end of this process, we may end up ... (saying) we have no other option but to bring in a bylaw,” he said. “But we are far from that point right now.”

A report to council found that of the 874 sign permits issued by the city from 2012 to 2014, 80.7 per cent were English-only signs, 15.9 per cent were mixed-language, and 3.5 per cent were Chinese-only.

The report also said a visual survey of 1,200 businesses on the No. 3 Road between city hall and Cambie Road found “less than one per cent were in Chinese only.”

Municipal lawyer Jonathan Baker, a former Vancouver city councillor, said he thinks it’s reasonable to require English on new signs — and wait and see if someone launches a legal challenge.

“You don’t want to pass a law that’s plainly illegal, but it doesn’t sound like one of those cases,” said Baker. “It seems reasonable to require at least some English to identify a business. People are driving around looking for it.”

As far as bringing in a law that might later be challenged, Baker would take the risk: “There are always two sides. If people want to challenge the law, they’ll challenge.”

Councillors also voted Monday to organize broad public consultation on the signage issue and consult with various community groups. The proposed resolutions are expected to be ratified at next Monday’s council meeting.

chchan@theprovince.com

twitter.com/cherylchan

iaustin@theprovince.com

twitter.com/ianaustin007