The Yukon government's (YTG's) consultation process on the Porter Creek land debacle lacks openness and transparency.

Furthermore, the citizens of Whitehorse have not been adequately consulted in the decision-making process.

That's the opinion of city councillor Doug Graham. He believes the YTG is shirking its responsibilities to keep the issue in the public eye and consult stakeholders in a meaningful way before Premier Dennis Fentie's cabinet makes the final decision on how the land will be used.

During an interview Thursday, Graham criticized the government's open house concept of public consultation for the area. When the city was consulting citizens on its development plans, he said, a series of public meetings were held.

'Our process was completely open and transparent. We kept going back to the public.

'Any decision by council is open to the public; we don't sit in a cabinet room behind closed doors,' he said.

The greenbelt is bordered by Rabbit's Foot Canyon on the west, Mountainview Drive on the east and McIntyre Creek to the south. It has been the subject of controversy since late last year, when Porter Creek MLA Pat Duncan pointed out the government was entertaining three plans for the same area.

Duncan expressed concern that at the same time the city had undergone public meetings on its plans to develop 280 lots in the area, Education Minister John Edzerza had promised the greenbelt to Yukon College as endowment lands and Community Services Minister Glenn Hart was in discussions to have the area protected.

The controversy also sparked a petition drive by the Porter Creek Community Association. That has resulted in the city having to come up with new greenbelt legislation which will go to a citywide referendum.

Last week, the Yukon Electrical Company Ltd. (YECL) waded into the debate when it sent an employee to a YTG open house to inform the government the company has a water licence in the area which would permit it to build a .75-megawatt power-generating project.

YECL officials maintain they have no immediate plans to build the project. They say the licence simply represents a power-generating option for them.

Graham said he still hasn't heard how the government could have had so many plans for the same piece of real estate.

'That just blows me away,' he said.

The city should have been consulted in the government's land disposition process because, while the government is the land owner, any land use decisions made in the area would have to be approved by the city in its zoning process, he added.

Contacted Thursday, Doug Caldwell, a spokesman for the Department of Community Services, said while the government respects Graham's right to his opinion, it will not publicly react to his concerns.

'That's his opinion. We won't be responding to Mr. Graham's comments,' Caldwell said.