Sure HabFan410, if you quote another constitutional lawyer of the calibre of Julius Grey, I'd certainly listen.  As long as he doesn't try convincing us that zoning by-laws aren't subject to the Charter. ;-)

Nobody said "the No voters conspired together to reject the zoning application on the basis of religion."  Setting up imaginary strawmen doesn't help your argument.

Of course there was "no unassailable right from the outset for the vote to be passed."  That's a major legal impact of discrimination - it can turn an otherwise legal decision into an illegal one.

And given the involvement of the Wolf Pack in the referendum, perhaps ending your comment with the metaphor 'crying wolf' was an unfortunate choice.  Their involvement isn't uncorroborated - its leaders admit it.