City residents were given incorrect information in the weeks leading up to Whitehorse's first referendum in June, council members learned Monday night.

'We did put out erroneous information during the campaign,' Rob Fendrick, the city's director of administrative services, told council during Monday's meeting.

Of the 2,175 people who voted in the city's first referendum on June 22, 1,118 were in favour of the bylaw, which was to require all developers to come up with a planning study and green space map for subdivisions.

Area residents would then vote on whether they were in favour of the development in a plebiscite, which would serve as an opinion poll for the city.

At last night's meeting, Fendrick said in seeking the legal opinion of the Vancouver firm Lidstone, Young and Anderson, city officials learned the bylaw would not apply to developments which don't require an area development scheme under the Official Community Plan (OCP).

The OCP serves as a guiding document for the city, while area development schemes deal more with the long-term plans of specific neighbourhoods.

Area development schemes are identified in the OCP for places like the potential developments of lower Porter Creek, beyond Copper Ridge, the former White Pass tank farm, Takhini/Range Road, Porter Creek extension and the Long Lake areas.

As Mayor Ernie Bourassa pointed out last night, the bylaw doesn't meet the intention of the petitioners who brought it forward to referendum.

The city put out numerous news releases on the impact of the vote, which many councillors spoke out against.

'It would've been nice to have this legal opinion prior to the referendum,' said Bourassa.

Both the mayor and Carole Bookless, the president of the Porter Creek Community Association and a leader in the campaign for the referendum, want to review the legal opinion from Vancouver.

'It's very frustrating,' Bookless told the Star this morning, though she acknowledged about 51 per cent of the voters knew it was erroneous information and tried to advise the city on that reality.

Leading up to the vote, Bookless said, she and others tried to point to potential problems. Since the referendum passed, they have been telling city staff they're willing to work on making sure the bylaw is interpreted in the way it was intended.

The legal situation has left her with one question, she said.

'Who's held accountable?' she asked.

She went on to wonder whether the answer might be city staff for not seeking a second legal opinion prior to the vote, or city council for not asking the right questions.

Prior to the vote, Bookless said, she and others suggested a second legal opinion be sought by the city.

Bourassa said the city obtained the opinion of its local lawyers prior to the vote but staff didn't seek the advice of the Vancouver firm until recently.

He wasn't sure why they went to the Vancouver firm for advice and said he had a lot of questions about the matter.

Not only has the group involved in the referendum asked to be involved in how the bylaw is interpreted, but also pointed out that with Porter Creek's lower bench area up for development, soon the city should be starting its consultations on area green space.

Bookless and others have been told greenspace consultation will be done as part of the design of the area.

'We want to see the green space plan before the design charet,' said Bookless.

City staff said they will now work on guidelines for the bylaw to be applied, which will then come back to council.