Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee special meeting, June 17, 2024

[0:00:03] Voice 1: recording live streaming on audio okay thank you

[0:00:07] well thanks everybody

[0:00:08] Voice 3: i'd like to call this uh special meeting of the sultan island local

[0:00:13] trust committee in order and we're meeting here today with uh folks from the capital region

[0:00:19] commission thank you everyone for coming

[0:00:22] Voice 3: um i want to acknowledge our meeting in the territory

[0:00:27] Voice 3: territory of Coast Salish peoples who've been here since time immemorial and certainly Islands Trust

[0:00:35] Voice 3: and I think most local governments are putting work in reconciliation and to honour and respect

[0:00:45] Voice 3: the folks that have been here since long before our ancestors came and their rights and our

[0:00:52] Voice 3: our responsibility to be respectful uh so we have an agenda before us um and uh just before we

[0:01:02] Voice 3: proceed i want to just acknowledge that some of the issues we're going to be talking about today

[0:01:07] Voice 3: are challenging and potentially hopefully not due but potentially divisive and i just really want

[0:01:15] Voice 3: everyone to uh focus on making our discussions as productive as possible and so to that end i

[0:01:22] Voice 3: propose that we start a discussion by understanding the principles and spirit of cooperation of the

[0:01:27] Voice 3: existing protocol and we get into the issues later on um and we have a section in section

[0:01:35] Voice 3: seven to identify and prioritize issues so uh you can help by focusing your comments on the

[0:01:43] Voice 3: issues that we're talking about um we don't we need to be respectful and civilized and

[0:01:49] Voice 3: no attacking and none of that stuff we need to make it safe for people to express their views

[0:01:55] Voice 3: regardless of whether we agree with them or not um so just please uh wait to be recognized to speak

[0:02:04] Voice 3: no side conversations no interrupting um keeping comments brief and focused and uh finally i think

[0:02:15] Voice 3: we can all work best together if we all make a genuine effort to listen and learn from each

[0:02:20] Voice 3: other here around the table and focus on the common purpose here um i think if we can all

[0:02:26] Voice 3: do that we'll have a productive meeting and uh i'd rather not have to interrupt people and remind

[0:02:33] Voice 3: them to uh to stay on track and uh that sounds good to everyone um i'm honored to be going toward

[0:02:43] Voice 3: the first joint meeting of the salt spring island local trust committee capital regional district

[0:02:47] Voice 3: local community commission crd salt spring electoral area and crd southern gulf island

[0:02:53] Voice 3: electoral area and i also want to thank uh chair uh rook for assisting with developing the agenda

[0:02:59] Voice 3: so we do have an agenda before us i'll just look for approval of the agenda by general

[0:03:07] Voice 3: consent and adopt the agenda as presented all right then so uh next i want to i'll introduce

[0:03:19] Voice 3: introduce the trust participants and then i'll turn the floor over to uh lcc chair brooke to uh

[0:03:26] Voice 3: introduce the crd so my name is tim peterson i'm elected on the ski island i'm the chair of the

[0:03:31] Voice 3: salt spring island global trust committee um with me today are local salt spring trustees laura

[0:03:37] Voice 3: patrick jamie harris and uh with us today for staff we have chris hutton the regional planning

[0:03:43] Voice 3: manager uh rob pinkel our legislative clerk uh stefan surmack director of planning services

[0:03:51] Voice 3: um online uh our minute taker joining us virtually lisa millard and uh thank you all of you for

[0:03:59] Voice 3: coming and i'll pass it over to the rest of the introductions thank you jim i also like to note

[0:04:06] Voice 3: this is an official meeting of the salisbury island local community commission as well

[0:04:11] Voice 3: all i'd like to introduce our participants so we have our senior managers stephen henderson

[0:04:17] um commissioner brian

[0:04:19] Voice 3: webster commissioner ben carter and commissioner gail baker

[0:04:26] Voice 3: and we're happy to have the opportunity to sit down with the trust and start talking about some

[0:04:33] Voice 3: things of mutual interest where we can work together to benefit the community thank you

[0:04:39] Voice 3: and also we have the CRD Director Gary Holman and CRD Southern Gulf Island Director Paul Brandt.

[0:04:46] Voice 3: Thanks everybody for being here. So first up is the protocol agreements.

[0:04:57] Voice 3: So I think the first sort of functional thing is coordinating the numbering system on our

[0:05:04] Voice 3: changes that would be helpful. So the protocol agreement forged back in 1999 between the

[0:05:12] Voice 3: six local trust committees in the southern Gulf Islands and the CRD board. In this agreement

[0:05:19] Voice 3: the parties agreed to schedule regular meetings of the regional directors, the local trust

[0:05:23] Voice 3: committees and appropriate staff to review the implementation of the protocols and letters

[0:05:27] Voice 3: of understanding. One change of course that's fairly obvious is the addition of the community

[0:05:33] Voice 3: community commission uh to recognize that it's understood that uh both our elected officials

[0:05:40] Voice 3: and our respective staff haven't continued to work together for the common good of the area

[0:05:46] Voice 3: protocol agreements are implements to guide our relationships and it's best practice for

[0:05:51] Voice 3: to review and update them from time to time the separation of service delivery from land

[0:05:57] Voice 3: use regulation was intentional but the island's trust was also mandated to cooperate with regional

[0:06:02] Voice 3: districts. So let's face it, you can't plan service delivery and we can't regulate the

[0:06:07] Voice 3: development and use of land without cooperating with each other. So we have a protocol agreement

[0:06:14] Voice 3: which we call Trust Council Bylaw 63, the CRD-LTC protocol agreement. We also have a letter of

[0:06:22] Voice 3: administrative understanding for withholding of building permits and there's a protocol agreement

[0:06:28] Voice 3: regarding the provision of parkland between the Salt Spring Local Trust Committee and the Salt

[0:06:32] Voice 3: Spring Parks and Recreation Commission which is now the LCC uh so focus today is on the protocol

[0:06:39] Voice 3: agreement and we'll just I think we just maybe we can go through the the sections and uh see what's

[0:06:50] what's relevant what

[0:06:51] Voice 3: might need changes or additions so to start with um uh to start with

[0:06:58] Voice 3: the principles yes

[0:07:01] Voice 2: just um i know something about contracts and memorandums understanding but i

[0:07:06] Voice 2: don't know where the protocol agreements um fall in terms of um power if you want to put it that

[0:07:12] Voice 2: way are they more than a memorandum of understanding less than a contract or i'm just

[0:07:17] Voice 2: not familiar with them i

[0:07:20] Voice 3: i would say that they're they're more than a letter of agreement but i i

[0:07:24] Voice 3: couldn't give you the legal standing i don't know if there's anyone in the room who can but

[0:07:29] Voice 3: I think that's the letters of

[0:07:31] Voice 3: agreement are usually subsidiary to the protocol agreement.

[0:07:34] Voice 3: Right.

[0:07:34] Voice 2: I know, but memorandums of understanding are somehow maybe a little less powerful than protocols.

[0:07:42] Voice 2: And we don't have to get stuck. I just thought I was on the deep end.

[0:07:46] Voice 2: Okay.

[0:07:47] Voice 3: Anyone want to offer anything on that?

[0:07:50] Voice 3: Sure. I'll read to you the definition we have on the website because I do find it a little confusing in terms.

[0:07:56] Voice 3: terms i will start with the preface that some are agreements between administrations and some

[0:08:02] Voice 3: are political right and some are agreements between the administration which are agreed

[0:08:08] Voice 3: politically so it's a bit of a web uh the first one protocol agreements are the highest order i

[0:08:13] Voice 3: think this is it's a fair thing to say the agreements that trust counter lpc enters into

[0:08:19] Voice 3: with first nations and other government agencies as organizations that are critical and so it's

[0:08:26] Voice 3: usually just that's usually quite high level we agreed to meet on a regular basis these are the

[0:08:30] Voice 3: things we'll talk about letters of understanding agreements that the cao enters into with other

[0:08:36] Voice 3: agencies at an administrative level that's what i was talking about there so that's again a little

[0:08:41] Voice 3: bit more prescriptive what staff are going to do and we have a few examples of those and a

[0:08:45] Voice 3: memorandum of agreement is kind of the weakest one and that is agreements that are agreed politically

[0:08:50] Voice 3: quickly that the LTC enters into with another corporate entity at a political level so they're

[0:08:56] Voice 3: kind of all the same thing really it's just who agrees to it and who signs it in the details

[0:09:00] Voice 3: thank you

[0:09:01] Voice 3: yeah and none of them are legally binding from my understanding that is correct

[0:09:09] so yes and further to that not only legally

[0:09:13] Voice 3: not legally binding between the agencies but

[0:09:16] Voice 3: they don't affect the actual authority and jurisdiction of the agencies yeah yeah and

[0:09:21] Voice 3: of course if you read through the this this protocol that's that's laid out very clearly

[0:09:28] Voice 3: um so there's in the existing document here which i hope you all have in front of you or have read

[0:09:35] Voice 3: uh there's there's five principles listed so um see if uh where everyone's at on these five

[0:09:42] Voice 3: principles are they are they relevant they need to be changed or added to um yes my

[0:09:54] comment actually comes before the principles because the parties to the agreement

[0:10:03] list the local trust committees and the capital regional district board

[0:10:09] does not acknowledge the assistance of the

[0:10:12] Voice 3: local community commission which has the administrative

[0:10:15] Voice 3: authority over 11 services advisory over another three.

[0:10:19] Voice 3: So exactly how, I mean, this is an issue

[0:10:27] that will occur again and again,

[0:10:29] because of course there being six LTCs listed

[0:10:35] and one of the six

[0:10:38] Voice 3: LCC only of course

[0:10:46] is relevant to Salt Spring Island.

[0:10:50] So exactly how that's accommodated in the wording, I'm not sure, but I think it's important to recognize in the protocol agreement that the LCC doesn't have the same status of the advisory commissions that it replaced.

[0:11:08] It has administrative services.

[0:11:12] Voice 3: Sure, yes.

[0:11:13] Voice 3: And of course, this document is approximately 25 years old.

[0:11:18] Voice 3: That's definitely something that needs to be updated.

[0:11:20] Voice 3: Laura?

[0:11:20] Voice 3: I don't know if we we identified some changes that we'd like to see the protocol agreement

[0:11:26] Voice 3: that was side spring I think we could argue our own instead of having six local trust committees

[0:11:32] Voice 3: here that it's a salt spring local trust committee and the CRD board recognizing the unique elements

[0:11:38] Voice 3: and the geographic uh complexities of this one yeah that's that certainly seems reasonable to

[0:11:47] Voice 3: me and that's i think there's fair arguments to be made for that um so anything else preparatory to

[0:11:54] Voice 3: the principal spark i know it's um i i appreciate adam also i think it's been uh hovering a little

[0:12:03] Voice 3: higher than all of us and observing and one one comment he has is that we don't have that ability

[0:12:08] Voice 3: to work together on setting priorities sometimes i mean we do have different services and things

[0:12:15] Voice 3: that we do but there's an opportunity where we could enter into conversations at the beginning

[0:12:20] Voice 3: of the term to see if there's a some opportunity to agree on priorities value that's a principle

[0:12:30] Voice 3: that we try to do that is uh to establish some priorities thoughts on that so are we talking

[0:12:41] Voice 3: about revising what's clearly an outdated document um is there a process that's already in mind for

[0:12:48] Voice 3: doing this or are we making it up as we go um is this primarily a trust document um to which the

[0:12:57] Voice 3: crd is an agreement or is it more balanced so uh i'm gonna look to staff for for some

[0:13:07] information on that but i would just say is

[0:13:09] Voice 3: my understanding is that um notwithstanding the fact

[0:13:15] Voice 3: that that salt spring um should be setting up its own protocol really especially in terms of the lcc

[0:13:25] but the trust council approves protocol agreements trust council would approve the

[0:13:30] protocol agreement um ultimately yes and and also i would have an um effort to create a new

[0:13:38] um protocol agreement from the perspective

[0:13:41] Voice 3: of the ielts trust would likely go to an rf like a

[0:13:46] Voice 3: request for decision um or some type of request up to by the trust council or um the executive

[0:13:53] committee that's probably information we can get back also profitably saying i mean

[0:13:58] Voice 3: um i'm sure

[0:14:00] Voice 3: it's the same with crd um we're we're fairly allocated at the moment when it comes to projects

[0:14:06] Voice 3: in terms of our staffing and I think the same goes for the trust area services department as well

[0:14:13] so you know if there's something coming up I think what we can

[0:14:18] Voice 3: come away with hoping there's

[0:14:19] Voice 3: a lot more questions and we hope to come back to you with clarity around what next steps you could

[0:14:24] Voice 3: be taking under the island stress act though the local trust committee is given the power to enter

[0:14:32] Voice 3: into agreements with regional districts yeah so we don't and i know that's

[0:14:40] Voice 3: not i'm just pointing

[0:14:41] Voice 3: that protocol part out it's certainly not a international issue i don't think at all

[0:14:46] Voice 3: so it's conceivable we could enter into a new agreements strictly between the salt

[0:14:56] spring island electoral area and the question

[0:15:00] Voice 3: that i believe so yeah it's

[0:15:05] Voice 3: Stephen seems to be going in the wrong direction to me though because we're also trying to

[0:15:12] Voice 3: coordinate together i think so what we would end up with there is a protocol agreement with southern

[0:15:18] Voice 3: gulf islands a protocol agreement with salt spring island i don't quite understand why we want that

[0:15:24] necessarily want that division i think where possible we want to work together

[0:15:30] Voice 3: and that's

[0:15:31] Voice 3: the principle of um why i'm here yeah no i appreciate that that's a good point and i think

[0:15:37] Voice 3: there's actually ways to um to recognize the existence of the lcc uh without necessarily

[0:15:44] Voice 3: having to change the whole ballgame yes sir whether it's a separate agreement if the same

[0:15:49] Voice 3: agreement doesn't or a single agreement covering multiple um ltcs doesn't concern me as much as the

[0:16:01] Voice 3: importance of whatever agreement recognizing and acknowledging the role of dlcc because we have

[0:16:09] Voice 3: a different arrangement on the crd side on salt spring from what exists in the southern gulf

[0:16:16] Voice 3: islands now they're better than the worst just different and uh and it's really important that

[0:16:21] Voice 3: that be acknowledged i don't i can't speak for my colleagues but i would not be comfortable

[0:16:28] Voice 3: in renewing an agreement that doesn't recognize the existence of an agency

[0:16:35] Voice 3: that has administrative authority over all the locally delivered island-wide services

[0:16:46] that the CRD provides here on Salt Lake.

[0:16:50] So it needs to be both.

[0:16:52] It may be

[0:16:53] Voice 3: the wording might be a bit more cumbersome to do it in a single one,

[0:16:56] Voice 3: that but i totally agree that if we can do it elegantly so that it covers off the unique

[0:17:05] Voice 3: aspects of the lcc while retaining a single agreement then i'm personally i'm i'm okay

[0:17:13] Voice 3: with that as long as yes and i would

[0:17:17] Voice 3: just i'll just remind us there is a protocol agreement

[0:17:19] Voice 3: that's around the parkland between the salt spring and and the parks and recreation commission

[0:17:26] Voice 3: So there's no reason we couldn't rewrite that one.

[0:17:30] Voice 3: That's between Salt Spring LTC and the LCC.

[0:17:35] Voice 3: I don't think.

[0:17:36] Voice 3: Yeah, I think I don't think we need to get hung up.

[0:17:40] Voice 3: That's where the lawyers come in handy.

[0:17:42] Voice 3: I'll figure out that.

[0:17:44] Voice 3: I think we can work on the principles that we want to behave together as groups.

[0:17:52] Voice 3: so that's a good segue because i was going to try and get back on the discussion of these five

[0:17:57] Voice 3: principles that are made up in the protocol agreement and see um just i'll ask the question

[0:18:03] Voice 3: once again are they still relevant uh changes or additions um or is this basically pretty

[0:18:11] Voice 3: pretty good footing to move ahead on suggested about the principle of somehow beginning each

[0:18:19] Voice 3: term we're trying to establish i've made a note of that and and i'm not uh i'm not thinking we're

[0:18:28] Voice 3: necessarily going to come to a full decision on what changes we might do with this sort of

[0:18:37] Voice 3: talk about them a little bit and ultimately i think the the most important next step coming

[0:18:44] Voice 3: out of today is is agreeing that we're going to have some more meetings and schedule it because

[0:18:51] Voice 1: there's

[0:18:51] Voice 3: an awful lot to talk about there's no way we're getting through it in two hours a day right

[0:18:55] Voice 3: and it's more important that we actually schedule meetings and work together and noodle through a

[0:19:01] Voice 3: protocol agreement where the principles have a lot of really good things we just have to

[0:19:07] Voice 3: basically uh follow them yeah with some measure of let's let's do it rather than oh another

[0:19:13] Voice 3: protocol we have stamped and updated and then nothing ever gets done yeah um so i'm not hearing

[0:19:20] Voice 3: a lot other than laura's point uh which i've made a note of i'm not hearing a lot else around the

[0:19:25] Voice 3: principles part uh so let's move on to oh yes i

[0:19:29] Voice 2: just um under communications it does say that

[0:19:33] Voice 2: they agree that we agreed to schedule regular meetings so i'm not sure yeah and

[0:19:38] Voice 3: i was going

[0:19:38] Voice 3: to just move through each of these sections

[0:19:40] Voice 2: one at a time in terms of meeting at every term it's

[0:19:43] Voice 2: just an iteration of that i

[0:19:46] Voice 3: mean scheduling regular meetings could be few or many and that's

[0:19:53] Voice 3: that's certainly up for us to discuss and decide but let's let's get there when we get there uh if

[0:19:58] Voice 3: we're done with principles let's move on to the cooperation session yes um chair just one issue

[0:20:06] Voice 3: The issue I'm wondering about is whether the CRD, what's the CRD kind of policy perspective position with respect to trust policy and our official community plan.

[0:20:23] Voice 3: So our official community plan does include specific provisions around things like parks and rec and stuff.

[0:20:31] Voice 3: probably will be more familiar with that than me, but definitely there are references in

[0:20:37] Voice 3: our local community plan around sewer view related servicing. But for example, I think

[0:20:49] Voice 3: is there a provision of trust policy about water pipelines from Vancouver Island to the

[0:20:56] Voice 3: confines i i forget but an issue like that where i mean if it's a land use issue there's no question

[0:21:04] Voice 3: that trust policy ocp land use bylaws and the decision of the local trust committee prevails

[0:21:11] Voice 3: right like if we're providing if we're coming to the local trust committee with a rezoning proposal

[0:21:17] Voice 3: for a particular piece of land that you know who makes the ultimate decision on that is clear

[0:21:24] Voice 3: But there may be other issues where it's not necessarily a strictly land use issue.

[0:21:32] Voice 3: And like myself personally, I think the CRD should, you know, in general, adhere to trust policy and our official community plan, even provisions that don't necessarily directly affect us.

[0:21:49] Voice 3: that i think i will speak for myself here but i just i wonder if in terms of principles it

[0:21:56] Voice 3: was mentioned in one of the other agreements i'm trying to remember where trust policy was

[0:22:00] Voice 3: an ocp was mentioned in one of the other agreements but i can't remember which one

[0:22:07] Voice 3: in any case that that's a question i have with not necessarily expecting an answer today okay

[0:22:13] Voice 3: so you can know that and uh i'm sorry mr chair what was the question there exactly

[0:22:21] Voice 3: well bottom line i guess is the does the crd consider itself uh subject to or trying to be

[0:22:30] Voice 3: consistent with trust policy and the official community plan in general did you give an example

[0:22:38] Voice 3: where that might not i mean generally speaking the preserve and protect mandate is all through

[0:22:47] Voice 3: of BC in many, many respects. So I'm not, you know, I do know that the trust and the CRD work together

[0:22:57] Voice 3: on a lot of things, like housing for instance. So Justine and Narissa have been working together

[0:23:04] moving forward on stuff that I think meets both the mandate or the object of the trust and

[0:23:12] and what

[0:23:13] Voice 3: we see as a priority of the CRE.

[0:23:16] Voice 3: They're aligned in many cases.

[0:23:17] Voice 3: I don't know many cases where they're misaligned

[0:23:20] Voice 3: other than the occasional, whoops, the CRE dumps some gravel

[0:23:24] Voice 3: in a place they shouldn't have,

[0:23:25] Voice 3: and we apologize and get temporary lease permits.

[0:23:27] Voice 3: We want to avoid that obviously in advance, right?

[0:23:32] Voice 3: So I did give one specific example of water.

[0:23:37] Voice 3: I think there's a provision,

[0:23:38] Voice 3: it's either the OCP or trust policy around desalination,

[0:23:41] Voice 3: which I know Searing Water Districts have considered from time to time.

[0:23:46] Voice 3: So my purpose is to raise the question, not to necessarily get into the detail.

[0:23:53] Voice 3: Fair enough. Actually, yeah, we don't.

[0:23:55] The salinization was talked about and it was off the table.

[0:24:02] Former trustee. Right.

[0:24:05] Voice 3: that notion there is an example where uh it's not a land use by law but by the kind of legal

[0:24:14] Voice 3: definition the crd would be subject to that by law right so but do we do we respect or are we bounded

[0:24:23] by in any way or guided by trust policy

[0:24:26] Voice 3: so it's just a question not an answer at this point

[0:24:32] Voice 3: Well, I think as we look at our cooperation, we've talked about it when Jason came and

[0:24:38] Voice 3: talked to you at the LCC, is the official community plan has one logo on the front,

[0:24:43] Voice 3: Islands Trust, which has always made me scratch my head.

[0:24:47] Voice 3: I don't know why, but when we create and update our OCPs, of course, CRD has to be actively

[0:24:55] Voice 3: involved with the servicing that you provide.

[0:24:58] Voice 3: So I think down the road, I'd love to see multiple logos on that, that it does represent

[0:25:04] Voice 3: your servicing levels just as much as the land use, because the two are connected.

[0:25:12] Voice 3: One of the challenges I think we have is, and Gary, you might speak more knowledgeably

[0:25:19] Voice 3: about this, but the CRD has a regional growth strategy, and we are removed from that regional

[0:25:26] Voice 3: because apparently we don't like the word growth.

[0:25:29] Voice 3: Now, I don't understand why we can't have slow growth

[0:25:34] or no growth as part of the regional strategy, right?

[0:25:38] But anyway, that's, do you know why?

[0:25:41] My

[0:25:41] Voice 3: understanding is we don't,

[0:25:42] Voice 3: we're not part of the security regional growth strategy

[0:25:45] Voice 3: in the two electoral areas.

[0:25:47] Voice 3: Not if you can subject.

[0:25:49] Voice 3: Yeah, because we have, yeah, it's trust.

[0:25:51] Voice 3: That's what I need to support.

[0:25:56] Voice 3: Oh, well, certainly the Act is very explicit, but we're not going to leave it, as you know.

[0:26:01] Voice 3: And I think the reason is because the Regional Growth Strategy was placed by the all systems.

[0:26:07] Voice 3: So that's meant to be the regional guide and document as opposed to the other regional

[0:26:11] Voice 3: guide and document.

[0:26:12] Is that okay?

[0:26:14] Yes, sir.

[0:26:15] I think in terms of the principles, whoever wrote them back in

[0:26:20] Voice 3: the day, they were careful

[0:26:22] Voice 3: to clearly respect the authority of each and in no way implying that one takes precedence over the other, except in its individual area of authority.

[0:26:40] And I think that is appropriate.

[0:26:43] Voice 3: Clearly, both parties are limited to some extent by decisions the others make.

[0:26:52] Voice 3: whether it's a land use decision directly or indirectly affecting the LCC here on Salisbury or whether it's a decision we make about service provision that has an impact on potential land use, which is definitely the case as well.

[0:27:09] well, I'm comfortable with retaining wording

[0:27:13] that clearly avoids, at least to me it's clear,

[0:27:18] avoids indicating either part of somehow

[0:27:22] being a second priority to the other,

[0:27:26] Voice 3: except LCC has its areas of decision-making,

[0:27:31] Voice 3: the LCC has its, and both respect the other,

[0:27:36] which this wording, I think, covers off pretty well.

[0:27:38] I agree with Laura's

[0:27:44] Voice 3: comment it's partly covered off by principle one that talks about the spirit

[0:27:49] Voice 3: of partnership etc but it could perhaps be more explicit. Okay so anything more on the

[0:28:00] Voice 3: principle section or can we move on to the cooperation section there's lots there I think

[0:28:05] Voice 3: that could be agreed on but uh if we've got four and then item two has a number of subsets

[0:28:14] mutual growth management

[0:28:16] Voice 3: um so again are these all still relevant um changes or additions

[0:28:28] Voice 2: yes kind of curious about the servicing arrangements you know we see services kind

[0:28:33] Voice 2: of in our little corner and so i'm just kind of wondering whether there must have been some

[0:28:37] Voice 2: examples um in the minds of those who wrote this but i'm wondering now what's the agreements are

[0:28:44] Voice 2: talking about and use and water and you know things like that or how how would this one come

[0:28:51] Voice 2: forward

[0:28:55] Voice 3: it's a good question i don't think any of us were in the room when this was written

[0:28:59] we're here now i see staff has a thought

[0:29:03] Voice 3: there uh well i can give you an example of things we've

[0:29:06] Voice 3: recently spoken about and that is uh violent is that we you know could have islands just

[0:29:12] Voice 3: violent enforcement to go to the relevant islands and force security violence that has to be done

[0:29:17] Voice 3: based on an agreement and then there's financial compensation and so on and so forth but that's

[0:29:22] Voice 3: one example uh basically i think one point you guys were talking about more parts planning but

[0:29:27] Voice 3: that's not here to talk to um and we could have done part planning on behalf of you we had an

[0:29:31] Voice 3: agreements and land up for big stuff and so on and so forth so yeah various types of agreements

[0:29:36] Voice 3: we could take on okay uh maybe there are two circuits that covered although i don't see them

[0:29:48] in the list but uh climate action uh certainly something that we have worked

[0:29:58] Voice 3: together on formally

[0:30:00] Voice 3: in renewing our climate action plan 2.0 but also more informally waterers i'm thinking of

[0:30:08] Voice 3: swipa or swipa like organization affordable housing um okay and i'm just going to stop

[0:30:17] Voice 3: here for a moment because we do have in section seven we have a community planning service

[0:30:22] arrangements administrative and identifying prioritized issues

[0:30:27] Voice 3: so that's actually the

[0:30:28] Voice 3: better spot to sort of list out and capture that uh what i'm hoping that we're doing in this section

[0:30:35] Voice 3: is really looking at the not delving into these a to f but the the one two three and four more and

[0:30:45] Voice 3: see if there's something in terms of that broader and then we'll get into that individual issues

[0:30:50] Voice 3: down in section seven well sorry so chair it's it's no more uh less broad than parkland acquisition

[0:30:59] Voice 3: um yeah so i mean this part could could be amended but i think just just because i wanted to separate

[0:31:08] out the the issues uh

[0:31:12] Voice 3: although there are listed here but i'd still like to do that as a as a

[0:31:15] Voice 3: later part of the discussion and just sort of kind of the mechanics here so chair i don't have a

[0:31:21] Voice 3: section seven right here oh on on the agenda community planning on the agenda yes so some

[0:31:29] Voice 3: of those are already covered yeah sure so the first question i would have looking at this is

[0:31:34] Voice 3: if this is deemed to be somehow exclusive and that these are the only areas i guess that would

[0:31:39] Voice 3: be my concern because i think we can delve into each one of them determine what its scope really

[0:31:45] Voice 3: could be but i just want to be sure that by adopting this or renewing this it doesn't

[0:31:51] Voice 3: somehow limit cooperation in areas where we could and perhaps should be cooperating simply because

[0:31:56] of the language and so staff

[0:32:01] Voice 3: might have some insight on that but it might be wise to say

[0:32:07] Voice 3: cooperating we agree to cooperate where appropriate including including not limited to

[0:32:14] Voice 3: we have the option amongst ourselves by mutual agreement yeah i think to answer your question

[0:32:20] Voice 3: is this exclusive while it may not explicitly state that these are the only things we will

[0:32:27] Voice 3: agree on that just as much as we tend to enforce what we can objectively measure we tend to

[0:32:34] to put forward

[0:32:35] Voice 3: notions that we objectively resource and reference so in this case we have

[0:32:39] Voice 3: a list of clear issues so we're looking for do we need to the crd and the island drugs need to

[0:32:45] Voice 3: work together on this issue well it is a matter of community planning so we need a lot of this

[0:32:49] Voice 3: protocol um if it's got to do with something that's not on this list it is harder for staff

[0:32:55] Voice 3: and it's even just as difficult for everybody else to to say we need to work together on this

[0:33:01] and accurately so this is this is i mean

[0:33:04] Voice 3: we talked about the hammer form of authority that

[0:33:09] Voice 3: these have a limited scope but the willingness and the fact that we all accepted to work with

[0:33:14] Voice 3: disagreement um does make it easier to work when the list is adequate or at least in a state that

[0:33:20] Voice 3: you know other topics as identified might be adequate so those may be some opportunities for

[0:33:28] Voice 3: change yeah and i don't think there's anything particularly prescriptive about it we can

[0:33:36] Voice 3: certainly agree to discuss anything and some of them are quite broad yes yes sir um yeah some of

[0:33:46] Voice 3: Some of them are to your very own.

[0:33:54] Voice 3: I actually agree with Gary's point

[0:33:57] Voice 3: that it's a little incongruous to specify park plan

[0:34:03] Voice 3: and not specify some of the other stuff.

[0:34:06] Voice 3: But I think that's just the message of the 1990s

[0:34:08] where that was a high priority.

[0:34:11] Voice 1: In any event, in C,

[0:34:12] where it talks about parks and recreation commissions,

[0:34:15] this is

[0:34:15] Voice 3: one and we'll see it throughout the document,

[0:34:17] Voice 3: the one of the places where the LCC is to be explicitly mentioned because there is no

[0:34:22] part-time creation commission whatsoever yeah absolutely that's the part that becomes because

[0:34:28] parkland is the

[0:34:29] Voice 3: subject of subdivision so that's why the two up there yeah I mean I think we can

[0:34:35] Voice 3: either solve it by adding a new g and other other issues as mutually agreed to or you know

[0:34:41] Voice 3: loose up the language so that you do have another point that you know sometimes we have a mutual

[0:34:45] agreement that we want to work on something. I don't think we can figure out what the something

[0:34:49] is today. No. The

[0:34:50] Voice 3: only other change I'd look at in this section is on number three it talks about

[0:34:56] Voice 3: we haven't used these as much or cooperation but for letters much so if we did agree to work on

[0:35:01] Voice 3: something might be

[0:35:03] Voice 3: valuable either the first thing we agree to work on that we create a bit of a

[0:35:06] Voice 3: template so that it's not a big job for staff you know that we can agree on a template that deals

[0:35:12] Voice 3: with sort of what does that look like what does the letter refer to what are we kind of agreeing

[0:35:16] Voice 3: to so we can easily use them as we go forward rather than not use them because we think it's

[0:35:22] Voice 3: a scary thing jerry so chair if you're saying more specific discussion of issues we need to

[0:35:35] Voice 3: talk about we should save that for later the agenda yeah i'm fine with that but as long as

[0:35:43] Voice 3: look i don't agree that i believe that these specific examples need to be added to

[0:35:51] Voice 3: the trust council and the crd board have declared climate emergencies surely that is something that

[0:35:58] Voice 3: we should be working on together we all i think acknowledge here that we have a housing crisis

[0:36:04] Voice 3: on salzburg at least as important as parkland acquisition and related to both is our water

[0:36:11] Voice 3: situation so uh if if you want to talk in more detail later on the agenda that's fine

[0:36:18] Voice 3: as well as long as i'm recording my disagreement if we're saying well this list of specific issues

[0:36:25] Voice 3: it's okay so i i don't agree with that uh for whatever that's worth and i i i take your point

[0:36:33] Voice 3: and i think that i i'm hearing around the table that we can either amend the language

[0:36:38] Voice 3: which proceeding to list, or we can add to this,

[0:36:41] Voice 3: but I just want to get into what those issues are

[0:36:44] Voice 3: until we get into that section.

[0:36:46] Voice 3: Just cause I'd like to see if we can make it all the way

[0:36:49] Voice 3: through these protocol agreements in a more general sense,

[0:36:51] Voice 3: then that makes sense.

[0:36:55] Voice 3: Mr. Chair.

[0:36:57] Voice 3: Yes, sir.

[0:36:57] Voice 3: On the topic of items of subjects,

[0:37:01] I don't know if that's just another subject,

[0:37:03] but as far as how they become raised,

[0:37:05] it might be helpful if we're able to come to an agreement

[0:37:08] on regular meeting schedules um undergo the process of talking about the next meeting

[0:37:14] whether that needs to be you know two months six months whatever you decide um

[0:37:19] Voice 3: that may be just

[0:37:20] Voice 3: maybe just possibly an agenda structure you may be able to better identify issues

[0:37:25] Voice 3: that said if you created a parkland acquisition uh agreement then that's a topic that you've

[0:37:33] Voice 3: agreed to discuss you don't need it in the master protocol necessarily you've got an

[0:37:38] agree with that right so um

[0:37:40] Voice 3: and more operationalize those things um just to just to yeah back to back

[0:37:48] Voice 3: to laura's point yeah yeah yeah um okay so so anything from anyone else on the cooperation

[0:37:56] Voice 3: section yes sorry just need to make one other comment because i agree with what gary's saying

[0:38:01] Voice 3: this specifies school site acquisition which is a pretty specific thing which was probably

[0:38:08] Voice 3: a big issue in the 1990s but not the same magnitude of issue now whereas climate change housing etc

[0:38:16] Voice 3: watershed protection etc are i would completely okay with deferring the definition of that this

[0:38:23] Voice 3: list to another meeting especially since we only have two hours i agree completely with director

[0:38:28] Voice 3: that we should do so just bring it up to page yes and i agree too but let's face it this is a 20

[0:38:41] Voice 3: 25 year old agreement okay and so maybe one of those things we need to do is say let's revisit

[0:38:48] Voice 3: the protocol agreement as required and list what's important at the time because it's going to be

[0:38:54] Voice 3: fluid and if we have a list that includes everything including reconciliation and every

[0:38:59] Voice 3: other thing that comes up roosters who knows you know really seriously um this is more around

[0:39:07] Voice 3: sort of doing our best to formalize that we're going to get together and work together as much

[0:39:13] Voice 3: as possible because we haven't in the past and we can do it all do a better job right so yeah

[0:39:19] yeah well said that's that's really the point of where we want to get to

[0:39:23] Voice 3: while we're meeting today

[0:39:25] Voice 3: day um so before i move us on to the next section anything further on the cooperation section from

[0:39:32] Voice 3: anyone okay so part three is communication so there's three points here um first being of course

[0:39:43] Voice 3: parties agree to schedule regular meetings um is there anything there that's no longer relevant or

[0:39:53] Voice 3: need to be changed or added to it hasn't worked i i agree and i don't know

[0:40:02] Voice 3: other than agreeing to schedule regular meetings unless we you don't want to specify how many

[0:40:07] Voice 3: how many a year we might say a minimum yeah annually okay or we might say that the

[0:40:15] Voice 3: parties will be publicly shamed if they don't i like that one

[0:40:24] Voice 3: and there should be reference for you all soon yes and

[0:40:30] Voice 2: if we're being aspirational um i would

[0:40:32] Voice 2: say quarterly um meeting once a year is great and looks good to the community but in terms of

[0:40:38] Voice 2: actually working together well

[0:40:41] Voice 3: and i agree i mean if we're if we're having one two hour meeting a

[0:40:46] Voice 3: year we're going to find out in about an hour and 20 minutes how how little can we can do it

[0:40:53] Voice 3: in two hours once a year um so i haven't certainly opened it up yes i had another

[0:41:00] Voice 2: communication thing but it may be more detailed okay so

[0:41:08] Voice 3: as far as these these principles here

[0:41:11] Voice 3: around communication i feel they're still relevant and nothing major nothing insane

[0:41:19] okay mr chair do you feel that this is adequate

[0:41:22] Voice 3: or that there is faceless agreement for how you

[0:41:25] Voice 3: communicate out on these things and distract you. We kind of

[0:41:30] Voice 3: made the decision to address these through the regulations of

[0:41:34] Voice 3: quorum. There are other ways to structure this meeting, and the

[0:41:39] Voice 3: way that we report out to the community, whether that is an

[0:41:42] Voice 3: individual body reports its own way, or that might be a future

[0:41:51] Voice 3: to consideration right individually or jointly how would we establish a quorum and we have the lcc on

[0:42:06] scottsboro

[0:42:06] Voice 3: right we have the uh local trust members to suddenly go violence we have

[0:42:15] Voice 3: a whole bunch of local trust committee people and i'm not sure

[0:42:19] Voice 3: we would get that many all the time it's just a thought right we'd end up with a

[0:42:27] Voice 3: if quorum is going to be an issue do you want to add anything there chris

[0:42:32] Voice 3: i just don't know what constitutes a quorum if we're going to be working together between

[0:42:40] Voice 3: southern gulf islands so and salt spring well it's pretty much done with the electric body right so

[0:42:46] Voice 3: right um the lpc are presently in the forum um so there's a they're already meeting right now

[0:42:52] Voice 3: of the lcc is also according to their review and we have 10 local trust committee members

[0:43:00] Voice 3: actually if you include the chairs we have even more so yeah as far as this agreement spanning

[0:43:07] Voice 3: the six ltcs is what you're getting at correct right this is the agreement we're discussing

[0:43:12] Voice 3: today so yeah you just have to be mindful of that yes well so that's a whole lot of meetings

[0:43:21] If you're meeting with each individual LTC in the southern violence and Salisbury events,

[0:43:26] and you're having them quarterly, I obviously have no objection to meeting more regularly,

[0:43:36] and if it's in a public meeting, we

[0:43:38] Voice 3: shouldn't have to worry about the core issue, right?

[0:43:41] Voice 3: It's scheduled, it's public, it's notified, just like today.

[0:43:46] Voice 3: But I would hope that meetings don't become a substitute for getting down to brass tacks on issues of mutual concern, that we can meet ourselves to death and live up to a protocol agreement that admittedly we have not lived up to in terms of that issue anyway.

[0:44:10] way uh

[0:44:11] Voice 3: but we do in a whole number of respects and i sent a late email to everyone indicating

[0:44:17] Voice 3: all of the areas where we actually do work together now and that's a matter of course

[0:44:22] Voice 3: from bylaw enforcement uh to swift to housing council to etc etc i just hope that meetings

[0:44:34] Voice 3: don't take the place of getting down to discussing substantive issues where we need to work

[0:44:40] Voice 3: together yeah fair enough and i would note that actually one way around but what the director

[0:44:46] Voice 3: brent was saying is that we could put together an ltc to crd letter agreement that covers the

[0:44:53] Voice 3: frequency of the meeting and we're not making a change in the protocol to interact all the

[0:44:57] Voice 3: other offices yeah laura so one suggestion i mean this is how often we need to discuss

[0:45:02] Voice 3: the implementation of the protocol agreement so let's not do

[0:45:06] Voice 3: that that often um but if we

[0:45:09] Voice 3: I think what we can either add a statement on the communications that if we have, if we agree to work together on something, that something would have its meeting schedule determined based on what it is, how frequent or how we wish to proceed.

[0:45:27] Voice 3: see so we either say we'll address communications you know through agreements or we don't have to

[0:45:34] Voice 3: say that but i don't i think we're mixing up the type of meetings that we agree to work on roosters

[0:45:40] Voice 3: that would be our example today um you know we would agree what that

[0:45:45] Voice 3: would look like

[0:45:48] Voice 2: it's a safe semi-safe well

[0:45:51] Voice 3: we've talked about it actually quite a bit so

[0:45:56] Voice 3: Okay. Anything further on the communication section?

[0:46:02] Voice 2: And I know I'm looking very small world, like Salt Spring, but it doesn't say anything about

[0:46:08] Voice 2: our local trust committee and the LCC getting together regularly. And I'm not sure whether

[0:46:14] Voice 2: this protocol agreement is supposed to do that, or we just wait until something comes up

[0:46:19] Voice 2: together but i think regularly sitting down and talking about issues not protocol is important

[0:46:26] Voice 3: yeah and again i would say that that we can if we want to formalize how we do it

[0:46:31] Voice 3: at least we could you have the ability to have to make a letter of understanding between the

[0:46:36] Voice 3: ltc and the lcc to do exactly that that's doesn't have to be in the protocol no because the protocol

[0:46:44] Voice 3: call involves multiple parties beyond um south spring lcc and um the electoral area um galiano

[0:46:53] maine etc and so it doesn't need to be something that affects all parties is something we can work

[0:47:00] out together amongst ourselves and we can formalize that as appropriate yeah yeah well

[0:47:09] Well,

[0:47:09] Voice 3: it kind of goes back to do we need separate agreements with the LCC and the CRD or not?

[0:47:15] Voice 3: And I think ideally, we wouldn't have separate agreements.

[0:47:18] Voice 3: So I do agree with Laura, and that would be the way to handle it, is that we get together

[0:47:24] Voice 3: not just to review the protocol, but to review specific issues, and that could be identified

[0:47:31] Voice 3: in the protocol.

[0:47:32] Voice 3: But I see a reason in this number one here, regular meetings of the director of the local

[0:47:37] Voice 3: community commission and the local trust committee like it wouldn't make sense for the director to

[0:47:42] Voice 3: meet separately with the LCC because the the on regional issues for example and there's a couple

[0:47:49] Voice 3: of local issues as well the LCC does not have delegated authority that's still a matter of

[0:47:54] Voice 3: ongoing discussion and will change over time but the clearly the regional and sub-regional issues

[0:48:01] Voice 3: issues. That's the purview. What authority the director has is a more complicated issue,

[0:48:08] Voice 3: but it's the purview more directly of the CRE for. For us to meet separately, director

[0:48:15] and

[0:48:15] Voice 3: LCC, and then separate meeting with the LCC doesn't make any sense. So that's why

[0:48:21] Voice 3: I think it would be better to change the protocol agreement to include specific mention of the

[0:48:28] Voice 3: the LCC where appropriate and not you know kind of divide things up and in terms of other parties

[0:48:34] Voice 3: I'm not sure what are the other parties here mentioned there's there's the board there's

[0:48:39] Voice 3: the trust council local community commission LTC and LCC but they're they're either trust

[0:48:47] Voice 3: entities or CRD entities there's no other parties at least this is an agreement between those two

[0:48:54] Voice 3: entities anyway that's that's my my preference to try and include it in here versus separate things

[0:49:02] out okay if we can and and i think it's this this will be something that we can certainly get some

[0:49:10] advice on uh in terms of

[0:49:13] Voice 3: including the salt spring lcc into the protocol agreement that council

[0:49:18] Voice 3: will cover some others because this

[0:49:21] Voice 1: is an agreement

[0:49:21] Voice 3: between the four of this this is the

[0:49:24] Voice 3: board and uh and six local trusts well it's actually this agreement it's between islands

[0:49:31] Voice 3: trust trust council this is trust

[0:49:34] Voice 1: me what

[0:49:35] Voice 3: is it i thought it was a trust come on right at the start

[0:49:40] oh okay so the trust council adopted this

[0:49:43] Voice 3: file put it into the agreement between the cru board

[0:49:46] Voice 3: Oh, and the individual website. Yeah, it doesn't mention records necessarily. It doesn't mention, it's just, it's not deep.

[0:49:57] Yeah.

[0:49:57] Yeah.

[0:49:58] Okay, so that's really good, but regional director, LCC, the local trustee.

[0:50:04] Yeah, I mean, if there's no, if

[0:50:06] Voice 3: there's no reason, I mean, if adding LCC in there doesn't create any issues, nobody, right?

[0:50:16] Voice 3: I'm just going to make a recommendation I think for what's first we can have another

[0:50:20] Voice 3: conversation I'm sure um you have a protocol agreement from our perspective our our policies

[0:50:26] are that protocol agreement because it's before hierarchy or

[0:50:29] Voice 3: whatever the top of the list that's

[0:50:32] Voice 3: if that's a trust council delegated and signing on behalf of the LTCs where you guys would fit

[0:50:38] Voice 3: an LCC to LTC, I just said that, would be at the letter of understanding. You agree with that,

[0:50:45] Voice 3: which you will, but the protocol agreement is for us, we would take it to a trust counsel for them

[0:50:50] Voice 3: to say, sure, go ahead, we'll sign it. Does that make sense? So there's a bit of a hierarchy here.

[0:50:55] Voice 3: Yeah. So get a letter of understanding. But you don't want to skip that, just have a minute.

[0:51:07] Voice 3: Okay, and then I think the conditions section is pretty straightforward, it goes differently.

[0:51:22] Voice 3: Yes, that's completely out of date, it's not the Local Government Act.

[0:51:29] Voice 3: That part of these agreements is 24 years out of date at least.

[0:51:37] Voice 3: yeah yeah

[0:51:38] Voice 3: yeah so that that language definitely needs to be updated um so uh in terms of steps

[0:51:48] Voice 3: on updating the language and and and looking at um some of the items that were raised here

[0:51:57] but turn over

[0:51:58] Voice 3: to staff there for a moment and i i did hear that there's some capacity issues

[0:52:05] Voice 3: issues. But from your perspective, notwithstanding capacity issues, the actual mechanics, you

[0:52:17] just give us a brief overview of what it takes to update this. Once we've identified these

[0:52:25] items.

[0:52:51] I don't think it's going to be very strong, but it's pretty much like any policy helping

[0:52:55] development process, except it ultimately amounts to the

[0:53:01] Voice 3: development of a bylaw.

[0:53:03] Voice 3: The one caveat being that there is a ministerial approval for this business, so they can do

[0:53:08] Voice 3: a ministerial approval for protocol, yeah, for protocol.

[0:53:13] A letter of understanding those is pretty much going to fall under, it's essentially,

[0:53:20] It's

[0:53:20] Voice 3: practically an operation if you're a CAO, you've got a trust that essentially entered that agreement to say, we'll continue this collaboration.

[0:53:31] Voice 3: So in that way, it's operationalized with the staff, with the advisor support, and beyond that, it's really a one-on-one relationship if you want to.

[0:53:42] Those are pretty straightforward processes that often

[0:53:46] Voice 3: see the CAO.

[0:53:47] Voice 3: So

[0:53:50] Voice 2: we can't have orders of agreement without a protocol agreement?

[0:53:54] I mean, is there a reason we have to go through this process?

[0:53:59] For clarity,

[0:54:01] Voice 3: if you have a protocol agreement and you would like to update it, we go to Trust Council.

[0:54:06] Voice 3: So we probably get that from the September Trust Council for them to say, sure, go for it.

[0:54:10] Voice 3: And it would probably take us time to negotiate to come back in December or more.

[0:54:16] Voice 3: I think we would agree Sam was theory, and I was just the most important regional government to government that we have. So we'll prioritize some as much as we can do a lot of understanding that's going to be up to your local resources and it's up to you to go as quickly as you sort of want something you want to do it out that you already have.

[0:54:39] Voice 3: and remember understanding agreement oh my gosh your memo that said you can go ahead and do that

[0:54:45] Voice 3: now so you don't need any further direction other than to just talk it out and get your

[0:54:49] Voice 3: your next steps so it just depends on what level you want to go you want to make the big protocol

[0:54:56] Voice 3: agreement then there's a big process you want to be a local process then it's less expensive

[0:55:02] Voice 3: yeah they're not they're not being treated so we

[0:55:04] Voice 3: can we can update the protocol agreement and

[0:55:07] Voice 3: and still do less yes um obviously it's a to be unstressed to figure out its decision making but

[0:55:14] Voice 3: under condition section 4.3 says that amendments to the agreement can be can be written by the

[0:55:23] Voice 3: regional district board and the specific local press committee so uh that's for uh 43 so that

[0:55:32] That seems a little

[0:55:33] Voice 3: different from what was just described.

[0:55:35] Voice 3: More importantly to me that just like this agreement

[0:55:41] Voice 3: specifies that the local trust committee can amend it,

[0:55:45] Voice 3: when it comes to the services where the CRD board

[0:55:48] Voice 3: has delegated administrative authority

[0:55:50] Voice 3: to the local committee commission,

[0:55:52] Voice 3: it is not appropriate for there to be an agreement

[0:55:55] Voice 3: saying that the CRD board enters into such agreement

[0:55:59] Voice 3: on our behalf.

[0:56:00] Voice 3: That's not okay.

[0:56:01] Voice 3: Okay, that's been delegated to us.

[0:56:03] Voice 3: So under the old world, this was completely fine.

[0:56:06] There was no LCC, but now that needs to change

[0:56:09] because when it comes to the areas

[0:56:11] under the authority of the LCC,

[0:56:13] we have full administrative authority

[0:56:15] Voice 3: unless it's the passage of a bylaw by the CRD board.

[0:56:19] Voice 3: It doesn't go to the CRD board, it need not.

[0:56:23] We have the authority to enter into agreements

[0:56:26] relating to our services.

[0:56:27] And I, at least, chose

[0:56:30] Voice 3: to ignore that.

[0:56:34] Voice 3: So, on the Southern Gulf Islands, for better or for worse,

[0:56:39] Voice 3: I'm sure you would view it as for worse,

[0:56:41] I'm equivalent to the LCC, right?

[0:56:44] But I sure as hell are not gonna be able to amend

[0:56:47] this agreement from the Southern Gulf Islands' perspective.

[0:56:51] It's gotta go to the board.

[0:56:52] So you'll make a recommendation,

[0:56:55] and the board will presumably endorse it.

[0:56:57] They're unlikely to, right?

[0:56:58] Right? No.

[0:57:00] Voice 3: Okay, that's my understanding. No, sorry.

[0:57:06] Voice 3: The CRD board has our directorial area director doesn't. So you

[0:57:13] aren't the equivalent of the LCC because the regional district

[0:57:19] board delegated to the LCC

[0:57:22] Voice 3: administrative authority over a

[0:57:23] Voice 3: set of services. Similarly, there were some services were

[0:57:27] Voice 3: were on Salt Spring were not delegated to the LCC.

[0:57:31] Voice 3: While in practice, that means that the electoral area

[0:57:35] Voice 3: director essentially is the boss of the other water districts

[0:57:39] Voice 3: for the water district.

[0:57:43] Voice 3: In principle, in law, no.

[0:57:47] Voice 3: The CRD board has that authority,

[0:57:50] Voice 3: not the electoral area director.

[0:57:52] Voice 3: So it's not quite the same.

[0:57:54] And much to our surprise, the LCC

[0:57:57] Voice 3: and thanks to Harry, the LCC got administrative authority

[0:58:04] Voice 3: of the services and it would be advisory authority

[0:58:09] Voice 3: that would be more the equivalent.

[0:58:11] Voice 3: Right, okay.

[0:58:15] Voice 3: All right.

[0:58:18] Voice 3: This meeting came about in a motion made by Peter Grove

[0:58:21] Voice 3: and I in August of 22, ahead of the election,

[0:58:26] Voice 3: assuming that the LCC was going to be informed.

[0:58:29] Voice 3: We thought we were being proactive in saying that the parties should dust off this agreement and make sure it recognized the LCC.

[0:58:36] Voice 3: So we're still kind of back to, there is an action, I think it's above our pay grade, it's mine, of somebody saying, what can we do to tweak this to recognize the LCC appropriately?

[0:58:47] Can it be tweaked in this agreement, or do we need to have a new agreement that's between

[0:58:51] Voice 3: the local trust committee and,

[0:58:54] Voice 3: and it would still have to be and the southern gulf islands because the local

[0:58:59] Voice 3: salisbury local trust area includes islands that are in the southern gulf island as simple as that

[0:59:06] Voice 3: yeah so it's not simple but so the board would have to sign for me the lcc could sign right

[0:59:13] Voice 3: for salisbury so i think

[0:59:14] Voice 3: there just needs to be some minor changes to make that happen lawyers

[0:59:27] I think from a simple perspective what we want to do is what's minimally required to

[0:59:34] prevent there being prohibitions from us actively working with the LTC

[0:59:41] and if though there are no such prohibitions

[0:59:44] Voice 3: from free interplay that we can work out

[0:59:48] Voice 3: between our two organizations what we need to do we can formalize that in our

[0:59:54] understanding that's appropriate and go forward

[1:00:00] like a fewer tweaks at this higher level easier it is but the

[1:00:05] Voice 3: invention of the SEC at least needs

[1:00:07] Voice 3: to be part of that do we need a resolution to get the ball rolling from the local press

[1:00:17] Voice 3: they're going to have seen shaking heads over there

[1:00:20] Voice 3: to at least get that review made

[1:00:36] suggest that we should be passing a motion and requesting that our staff

[1:00:44] Voice 3: yeah the way they say our staff is like kind of my staff too right

[1:01:00] Voice 3: okay i mean that can be part of our next steps

[1:01:04] Voice 3: right i will express that i um i found it really helpful um that uh three gentlemen

[1:01:13] bring this agenda to bear um it really is truly not a work that i think really

[1:01:24] driven with the hands-on, very direct line of communication that we have in the creative agenda, but to have

[1:01:33] having to evolve in this agenda, if it's so outside of everyday work, understand they want this group

[1:01:42] to officially move forward. I think as we're crafting that resolution, it's important to

[1:01:48] consider what ways the chairs, I think, maybe can support this this draft and work, help guide

[1:01:57] be able to monitor what your experience is, what that time should be for the coming back

[1:02:04] to the table. I just wanted to request that.

[1:02:08] Voice 3: That's something I think would really help

[1:02:09] Voice 3: us move along a little bit.

[1:02:17] Voice 3: I'm just going to offer some personally practical advice just for myself as I'm looking across

[1:02:23] Voice 3: my table. I'm hearing LCC should be included in the documents. Do I agree? That's one of

[1:02:31] Voice 3: the reasons we're here. Instead of us, three agencies running around doing all the same

[1:02:36] Voice 3: work and coming back if there's if it's possible to get the crd to take its first draft at that

[1:02:41] Voice 3: bring it back to this table let's talk about it so so i'm not trying to get away from work

[1:02:46] Voice 3: i told you i'll do the work i'm going to do the work but it just means

[1:03:09] Voice 3: okay so uh we're ready to move on to section five then i think

[1:03:17] Voice 3: I think some agreement there is do we need a motion

[1:03:20] Voice 3: if we're gonna take a first step

[1:03:23] Voice 3: at what needs to be changed

[1:03:25] Voice 3: for the public to recognize the LCC?

[1:03:29] Voice 3: It's a little procedurally awkward in a joint meeting.

[1:03:32] Voice 3: We are also having a full meeting of the LCC on Thursday.

[1:03:36] Voice 3: And so if we can come to a consensus today,

[1:03:39] Voice 3: we can actually pass the motion on Thursday morning

[1:03:41] Voice 3: unless, or we do something I've never done before,

[1:03:44] Voice 3: which is have a split meeting here

[1:03:45] Voice 3: and we just move and vote our motion,

[1:03:47] Voice 3: which i'm comfortable doing as well if we can't work together on this

[1:03:53] Voice 3: yeah we don't need a motion i don't need a motion

[1:04:25] Voice 3: Okay, so the next section is notification and consultation on legislative initiatives.

[1:04:38] Voice 3: Both parties agree to notify and consult the other party on legislative initiatives.

[1:04:43] Voice 3: So for the local child spring local trust committee, we don't have any bylaws under

[1:04:50] Voice 3: development at this point other than we have uh the adoption of uh bylaw 537 accessory dwelling

[1:04:59] units which is on hold um and yes

[1:05:05] Voice 3: sir um one of my other maybe of interest is um i don't think

[1:05:09] Voice 3: you've read it the first time yet but the impending uh land use application on the

[1:05:14] Voice 3: Vesuvius Bay Terminal may be of interest to this table. Sure yeah that is for that's a

[1:05:26] Voice 3: redevelopment of Vesuvius um

[1:05:32] Voice 3: yes sir yeah um I'm just slightly confused because at least in our agenda uh it showed the

[1:05:46] Voice 3: the protocol agreement relating to parkland

[1:05:49] Voice 3: and permits that are understanding.

[1:05:54] Voice 3: You're right, we can go through those.

[1:05:56] Voice 3: Sure, I don't know how much we need to do that.

[1:06:01] Voice 3: Obviously the letter of part of the parkland one

[1:06:07] is totally out of date and needs to be done with the LCC.

[1:06:13] We may just

[1:06:14] Voice 3: be able to agree to include that one

[1:06:16] Voice 3: at the same time as the other the building promoter one is differently different

[1:06:22] Voice 3: under our administration yeah yeah but definitely the department okay yeah thanks for pointing that

[1:06:29] out um and

[1:06:32] Voice 3: so i'd be happy just to refer it to staff at the same time because a lot of the

[1:06:37] Voice 3: changes or something crd is already in a kind of a housekeeping way helping up on a few things

[1:06:44] Voice 3: after the establishment of the LCC and this is just an example of sort of collateral damage

[1:06:51] Voice 3: to the change that was made I'd be happy simply to pluck the part by one in at the same time as

[1:07:00] Voice 3: the other because it's similar changes a lot of them just search and replace great well that's

[1:07:07] that's straightforward I think uh yeah I think that's something we didn't work with on with the

[1:07:14] protocol agreement in itself and building code sets or electoral areas committee things so

[1:07:23] Voice 3: sure so uh so we can we can move on from the parkland

[1:07:28] Voice 3: and then yeah let's let's take a pause on and anything on the permit building permits

[1:07:37] Voice 3: um either from local trust committee or directors i haven't looked at that closely

[1:07:43] Voice 3: closely chair i'm just i'm just aware of one very prominent situation where that

[1:07:50] Voice 3: came up it was the bullet lake resort where the trust was uh in the midst of the downzoning

[1:08:02] Voice 3: actually downzoning all c4 properties on salisbury maybe maybe before your time stuff

[1:08:07] Voice 3: um and bullet plate was included but they had submitted a building permit to the cod

[1:08:17] and the the issue hung on whether the building permit was complete uh the protocol

[1:08:25] it basically says if the trust is engaged in the down zoning and you don't have a complete

[1:08:30] building permit you'll delay the permit process until the trust finishes its process

[1:08:38] uh so there was a debate about whether there was a complete building permit in the end crd

[1:08:46] Voice 3: uh proceeded despite in my recollection objections from the trust but the basic

[1:08:54] Voice 3: principles and the the protocol and the understanding to work together in a situation

[1:09:00] like that i

[1:09:02] Voice 3: i haven't looked at that closely but i don't see any major

[1:09:06] Voice 3: with that agreement that just says in those situations, this is how we move forward.

[1:09:12] And they are very potentially very sensitive situations.

[1:09:18] Voice 3: Litigation can be involved, etc., etc.

[1:09:22] Voice 3: Anyway, with that, I don't have any specific suggestions for amendments.

[1:09:28] I would just note that again, this mentions Section 981.

[1:09:33] of the units blacked over and over again um so that's certainly out of date

[1:09:38] and

[1:09:38] Voice 3: what i'm wondering here is perhaps this could be referred to the electoral area committee and

[1:09:57] Voice 3: we could discuss it with building inspection about what they felt and by the way sorry

[1:10:02] Voice 3: sorry does this apply to both this applies to um this is Islands Trust so it also applies to the

[1:10:12] Voice 3: so is

[1:10:13] Voice 1: that

[1:10:15] Voice 3: something that we could bring to the electoral area committee to discuss Paul or how

[1:10:19] Voice 3: would you personally I just think we update it and leave it the way it is I don't see if it's

[1:10:26] Voice 3: infrequent why are we going to bring it to the electoral areas committee meeting we have enough

[1:10:30] Voice 3: stuff on our agendas okay so this is all around doing stuff effectively right yeah it's between

[1:10:36] Voice 3: the administrative staff that's an administrative problem yeah yeah and so i mean really that's the

[1:10:45] Voice 3: the uh what i'm hearing then from tables that they updated for the act and the section is

[1:10:53] Voice 3: really all that needs to be done all right yeah yeah excuse me

[1:10:59] Not on building permits, right. Okay.

[1:11:07] Voice 3: That's easy. I like easy. Okay. All right. Now we're

[1:11:13] on to notification and consultation on legislative initiatives.

[1:11:17] Voice 3: Sorry, jumping the gun there.

[1:11:19] Voice 3: But so that's where Salt Spring LTC is at. And is there anything underway at the CRD

[1:11:30] Voice 3: that salt spring ltc should be aware of i see laura patrick well i think this is where i mean right

[1:11:35] Voice 3: now we have our traditional referrals which we don't hear about until well did we we did refer

[1:11:41] Voice 3: about that um or did we not so it's like at what point do you want to know about early bylaws do

[1:11:52] Voice 3: you want to wait to be like first reading which would have a standard referral which does or

[1:11:56] Voice 3: doesn't make it to the lcc that's a good question to um how you know what what type of bylaws are

[1:12:06] we

[1:12:06] Voice 3: want all of those sent to you at a certain time early so rationally we don't like first nations

[1:12:17] Voice 3: don't want referrals on absolutely everything and it's up to the people using their noodle

[1:12:24] Voice 3: rule saying oh this is an important one yeah maybe one will get missed once in a while but

[1:12:30] Voice 3: let's keep things simple so it's up to the parties to determine whether it's appropriate to

[1:12:40] Voice 3: refer it frankly that means we reuse our brains not just follow road stuff that comes through

[1:12:47] Voice 3: and everyone ignores that's fair enough yep and

[1:12:51] Voice 2: we're also very lucky that gary and girl

[1:12:54] Voice 2: rural are attending most of the LTC at least attending parts of the meeting and they speak

[1:13:01] Voice 2: a lot with Laura so it seems to me that at least locally we don't need a protocol a letter of

[1:13:08] Voice 2: agreement we need everyone to be kind of aware of what's coming on do you feel comfortable just

[1:13:13] Voice 2: being aware of what's happening reach out to Laura and Jamie when there's something that

[1:13:18] Voice 2: that we need more time with, or, I mean, is it working?

[1:13:24] Voice 3: Yeah, is it working is a good question.

[1:13:26] Voice 3: It works now, but the one thing we do have to be mindful of,

[1:13:30] Voice 3: Gary may not always be with us.

[1:13:33] Voice 3: Oh, I'm sorry, Jamie, I won't be.

[1:13:36] Voice 3: No, but I'm being a little flip here,

[1:13:38] Voice 3: but there's the ebb and flow

[1:13:40] Voice 3: of how these protocol agreements work,

[1:13:42] Voice 3: and so some regional directors are disengaged

[1:13:46] Voice 3: because it's connected with LTCs and vice versa so it's good to have a little lunch again public

[1:13:53] Voice 3: shaming perfect Laura I do know there's a citizen that writes synopsis of our meetings and sends it

[1:14:04] Voice 3: out probably to each of you and I think I that does concern me a little bit because sometimes

[1:14:11] that information could be incorrect and

[1:14:14] Voice 3: you're getting third-party information that could

[1:14:17] Voice 3: nightmare in you know oh my gosh they're doing what you know so i think it would be nice to

[1:14:21] Voice 3: formalize either we give you our minutes or something as well so that you're reading directly

[1:14:26] Voice 3: from the record rather than filtered information yeah yeah i think uh director

[1:14:40] what's working right now compared to what might be working or not working five years from now

[1:14:45] may not be the same and i think also this is part of just i don't even call it growing pains

[1:14:53] adjusting to the existence of the lcc there's a bunch of stuff where in the past

[1:14:58] asked you maybe you can tell me how I've had informal conversations between one or both of

[1:15:07] our locally elected LTC representatives and the electoral area director on a topic and then people

[1:15:13] sort of figure out what to do where to go with

[1:15:15] Voice 3: it things are a little different now those same

[1:15:18] Voice 3: conversations can happen but if they do then there's a filter that is applied before stuff

[1:15:25] Voice 3: stuff comes to the LCC. Right now, we have a library director who I think is very well

[1:15:33] integrated with the LCC, but there's no guarantee we'll always be that

[1:15:39] Voice 3: way. And I, over the

[1:15:42] Voice 3: year that we've been in office, have struggled a little bit with how to deal with some of

[1:15:49] Voice 3: the mutual issues, watershed protection, harbor management, Ganges revitalization, all three are

[1:15:56] examples of areas where the LTC

[1:16:00] Voice 3: has been very involved in stuff and where the various CRD

[1:16:07] Voice 3: salt spring services have also or maybe haven't as much as they might. And so for example,

[1:16:16] Voice 3: want to look at the ganges thing i know there's a history of stuff that's happened and stuff that's

[1:16:21] Voice 3: stopped and stuff that's started and then stopped but we're sitting in a position where we are

[1:16:27] Voice 3: responsible for centennial park the old fire hall site the rotary park right on the other side of

[1:16:35] Voice 3: that the harbor block project to run right along the park we now occupy since the former middle

[1:16:42] Voice 3: go slow. I could go on and on. We have an active transportation network plan that could

[1:16:52] Voice 3: quite significantly reshape how people travel around Ganges. Is that relevant to the LTC?

[1:17:01] Voice 3: I kind of think it is. And so I think we need something more or something different from

[1:17:08] Voice 3: what we have at the moment you and i have had one or two kind of quick conversations talk about

[1:17:14] watershed stuff but the lcc beyond uh hearing some

[1:17:20] Voice 3: uh comments and reports from gary hasn't

[1:17:24] Voice 3: ever had a discussion yet of of that and so i think there's a gap that needs to be filled on

[1:17:33] Voice 3: on that connection so that we can work together

[1:17:36] Voice 3: in a kind of an organized continuous way

[1:17:39] Voice 3: instead of crossing our fingers

[1:17:41] Voice 3: that there are good connections between individuals.

[1:17:45] Voice 3: Earl, did you have something that I'll come to you again?

[1:17:48] Voice 3: Yeah, I was just going to comment on,

[1:17:51] Voice 3: there's one level where we're talking about

[1:17:55] initiatives originating here.

[1:17:57] So we're talking about your bylaws,

[1:17:59] new bylaws change the bylaws

[1:18:01] or the bylaw change recommendation

[1:18:03] we pass up to the security board,

[1:18:05] which is something we're gonna be getting into

[1:18:07] in more depth here.

[1:18:08] And certainly I think we should probably

[1:18:10] formalize something there

[1:18:11] that acknowledges that it doesn't have to be complicated,

[1:18:16] but just acknowledges that we do report to the other party

[1:18:20] when we're contemplating bylaw changes

[1:18:24] that could conceivably have an impact.

[1:18:26] It's something we've been routine trying to do informally,

[1:18:29] but i think it's important to say that because we're not all going to be here in the future

[1:18:35] but then there's another category of where it's maybe not so much legislative our legislative

[1:18:40] initiatives but legislative

[1:18:43] Voice 3: initiatives by others at senior levels of government and where we

[1:18:47] may choose to chime in from an advocacy standpoint and i think we need to be aware especially on

[1:18:55] one significant and touching matter

[1:18:57] is that we are in contact with one another

[1:19:01] when we advocate a higher levels of government

[1:19:04] in a way that would have a direct impact

[1:19:06] on the other group or sharing interest on subjects.

[1:19:11] I think that is something we need to agree to

[1:19:16] at least keep one another in those areas.

[1:19:21] I'm not sure how we define that,

[1:19:23] but I think that's the other part

[1:19:25] of the science of the local initiatives.

[1:19:26] yeah

[1:19:28] Voice 3: good point okay so under item six protocol says the party agreed to

[1:19:42] Voice 3: schedule regular meetings I'm very willingness to to do that I don't know

[1:19:53] that we're gonna hammer out a schedule today but Earl and I talked actually

[1:19:57] just briefly before the meeting that we

[1:20:00] Voice 3: can look at dates that might be um so if everyone was okay

[1:20:06] Voice 3: with it girl and i could talk some more and come up with a some proposed dates and then shop them

[1:20:11] Voice 3: out to everyone and see what's what's going to land for things working well and uh we were talking

[1:20:19] Voice 3: uh as early as september or yeah we'll

[1:20:24] Voice 1: see see how it

[1:20:24] Voice 3: goes quarterly um suggested i don't see

[1:20:28] Voice 3: a problem with that i think we can be flexible um i think there's probably an advantage to meeting

[1:20:34] more frequently at the beginning as we're getting things worked out over time that may change um

[1:20:41] but i think i'd like to offer the lcc as opposed to the next meeting and i think something

[1:20:49] september time frame

[1:20:50] Voice 3: when you're not meeting in august is that right no no nothing in august and

[1:20:55] Voice 3: we can look at the july date if you want we don't have to do that in this but yeah i think we can

[1:21:01] Voice 3: work something with our time we set a date that will make sure the staff will have sites are

[1:21:07] comfortable with that yeah and we don't let it sit okay so i want to check in with the local trust

[1:21:14] committee members if they're content for a roll about it to do this and get

[1:21:21] Voice 3: get together some

[1:21:22] Voice 3: potential dates and then chalk them up is that okay?

[1:21:26] Voice 3: Jeff Harris? I don't know I wanted to type up at some point.

[1:21:29] Voice 3: You know I'm hearing lots of talk and

[1:21:32] Voice 3: seeing some of these you know gearing up for lots more talk

[1:21:35] Voice 3: and what it is I don't know. I hope that the priority for the work

[1:21:43] that would be done between the two entities

[1:21:46] Voice 3: would be addressing the workforce ownership housing crisis

[1:21:50] Voice 3: Because that's, in my opinion, and in many of these communities, the number one issue

[1:21:55] Voice 3: we're having.

[1:21:56] Voice 3: Though the community, we have number one.

[1:21:59] Voice 3: You know, spending tax dollars on years of talk, it goes nowhere, or even worse, backwards,

[1:22:05] Voice 3: as we're seeing now.

[1:22:10] Voice 3: I'm hoping people acknowledge this.

[1:22:12] Voice 3: What I've seen, I'm not confident that this, although it sounds great, and it's nice that

[1:22:17] Voice 3: people are reaching out, I don't think, I don't think it's going to happen.

[1:22:21] Voice 3: that this can work. It would be more fruitful I would think for Salt Spring Island if we could

[1:22:28] Voice 3: all acknowledge this housing crisis that's happening it's very severe and we do have the

[1:22:33] Voice 3: opportunity to do something about it being that we're not going to and so I think it'd be more

[1:22:40] Voice 3: fruitful if everyone here could acknowledge the damage that the dysfunction between the CRD

[1:22:45] Voice 3: and the island's trust has had in the community and is having and um if we could acknowledge that

[1:22:52] Voice 3: and join together and reaching out to the province and um and asking that souls for

[1:22:59] Voice 3: him to be released and put me on the trust mandate and that uh i mean it's a felony

[1:23:05] Voice 3: okay um so as far as earl and i working together for dating dates to shop around

[1:23:23] Voice 3: Yes, the only loophole, though, is the electoral

[1:23:28] Voice 1: area director and things

[1:23:30] Voice 3: that aren't your power, but, like, when you brought the motion to the city or for salt spring opting into the short term rental accommodation, how would we ever know that you were going to do that because this is LCC business, we're talking about, probably was LCC specifically.

[1:23:55] Well, you certainly wouldn't know because we had meetings with the minister about it.

[1:24:01] Accommodation Act?

[1:24:02] Voice 3: Yeah.

[1:24:03] Voice 3: Speculation time.

[1:24:04] Voice 3: Robinson?

[1:24:05] Voice 3: Speculation time.

[1:24:07] Voice 3: Oh, sorry.

[1:24:08] Voice 3: Accommodation Act.

[1:24:11] Anyway, there's two bits of it.

[1:24:13] There's two trains here.

[1:24:15] Sorry, what was the accommodation?

[1:24:18] You had

[1:24:19] Voice 3: a motion to opt in, Salt Spring to opt in.

[1:24:22] Voice 3: to a short-term vacation rental ban right but that ended up being irrelevant because it was clear that

[1:24:30] Voice 3: the wireless trust had the sole authority for that yeah so i never took i've discussed it with you i

[1:24:36] mentioned it to the osc but i never took it forward formally because

[1:24:40] Voice 3: it's the trust that has

[1:24:41] Voice 3: to do that but i mean it's still though there's there could be other there's two streams of

[1:24:47] Voice 3: information that's all i'm bringing to my point is that so we can we can work out our lcc

[1:24:52] Voice 3: relationship yes i see i totally get what you're saying is we just we've actually read into it

[1:24:58] Voice 3: today this is the parts that the local trust committee and lcc and then as soon as we got

[1:25:04] into the building permit protocol that actually didn't have

[1:25:09] Voice 3: anything to do so there are those

[1:25:11] Voice 3: two days and

[1:25:11] Voice 2: it could have piers islands and other islands that are

[1:25:17] Voice 3: so oh great so chair if the lcc of the ltc agreed to meet regularly

[1:25:28] Voice 3: i'm part of the lcc so if there are regional sub-regional issues that are relevant to

[1:25:35] either party it's my responsibility to

[1:25:38] Voice 3: you know report on that race it address it so i'll be

[1:25:42] Voice 3: included in those meetings it's a matter of course but we could have something separate

[1:25:47] Voice 3: more formally separate but like i was saying before better just have it when he's sitting

[1:25:53] Voice 3: in the same room some of us have different slightly different paths right we still are

[1:25:59] Voice 3: in the same room and speak to it so I can still speak to CRD issues with larger that the LCC

[1:26:06] Voice 3: delegated authority if I'm in the room and would do so and that's my responsibility that going back

[1:26:13] Voice 3: to that we were talking about should we try to just have one big protocol agreement to make

[1:26:19] Voice 3: changes or should we have a separate level of understanding I think there was general agreement

[1:26:28] Voice 3: that we should we can do both but they're not usually exclusive that we should make changes

[1:26:33] Voice 3: on the protocol agreement that uh where the lcc needs to be mentioned they can be mentioned

[1:26:41] Voice 3: but you know we're starting about then more specific details around regular meetings etc

[1:26:47] Voice 3: etc that does suggest a level of understanding that that where there would be presumably an

[1:26:53] Voice 3: overlap there would be a reference to the protocol agreement i mean that's kind of a

[1:26:57] Voice 3: overarching thingy but there'd be more detail what we're going to get into as an lcc and an ltc about

[1:27:04] Voice 3: when to meet and should we exchange the minutes should we exchange agendas for you know those

[1:27:10] Voice 3: sorts of things so anyway harking back to that conversation now i think we need to do both we

[1:27:16] Voice 3: need to revise the protocol and the parkland agreement staff security staff agreed to take

[1:27:23] it first crack but i think we do need a separate better understanding with the lcc

[1:27:28] Voice 3: and yeah i mean

[1:27:29] Voice 3: you could have a separate group with the director but the director is bound by the protocol right

[1:27:35] i'm not sure that helps but

[1:27:37] Voice 3: then we just need to figure out how we how we do that so here's

[1:27:44] Voice 3: how i suggest you do it if you think it's relevant to the southern gulf islands just do it we don't

[1:27:49] Voice 3: need a bloody protocol agreement agreement for it and i'm going to address a little bit of what uh

[1:27:54] Voice 3: what jamie has talked about so um you're right we we do acknowledge i think that housing is critical

[1:28:00] Voice 3: right we may have different paths to get there but i can tell you that our top three top priorities

[1:28:08] Voice 3: housing housing and housing okay so it is that and the trust and the crd are working together we just

[1:28:17] Voice 3: have to do a better job right part of this stuff is how we get there but it's frustrating as hell

[1:28:25] Voice 3: so i understand anyway just a little bit of a diversion there all right uh yes sir um two

[1:28:36] Voice 3: quick points um one the lcc identified housing for burton people and their families as the top

[1:28:45] economic sustainability priority of self-reliance so shortly after our election so

[1:28:52] Voice 3: we're aware and

[1:28:58] Voice 3: pushing forward secondly the issue that laura raised is one that's going to be always the

[1:29:07] Voice 3: case as long as we have our current local government structure the lcc is not able to

[1:29:15] Voice 3: to fetter the discretion of the electoral area director

[1:29:19] and what

[1:29:20] Voice 3: they say or do at the board,

[1:29:23] Voice 3: that's a legal reality.

[1:29:25] Voice 3: And so we never can.

[1:29:27] Voice 3: And there will always be the risk,

[1:29:29] Voice 3: if you wanna call it that,

[1:29:31] Voice 3: of an LCC heading in one direction

[1:29:34] Voice 3: and a director headed in perhaps not the same direction.

[1:29:39] Voice 3: And that's something that we need to manage

[1:29:40] Voice 3: whether it's through duplicate agreements or not, I don't know.

[1:29:45] Voice 3: But we have to acknowledge that that's a court system.

[1:29:51] Voice 3: It's a legal work that we are not going to change.

[1:29:54] Voice 3: And we just accept it as part of the landscape that we deal with.

[1:30:00] Voice 3: complicate life for everybody who deals with us and with crd for sure

[1:30:09] Voice 3: let's go to the electoral area directors right so they can always the lcc can always

[1:30:14] Voice 3: try to sweet talk in the way they want right that should scare you

[1:30:27] yep so moving forward

[1:30:29] Voice 2: on it sounds like a letter of agreement um between the ltc and the lcc

[1:30:37] Voice 2: director doesn't really include you paul so i'm not exactly sure but i think we need a letter

[1:30:41] Voice 2: and i'm kind of wondering whether the two of you would like to start drafting it and then we have

[1:30:47] Voice 2: our meeting in september we can look at it because i think it's important and i think it's going to

[1:30:51] Voice 2: be brass checked we get down and say how are we going to be in the same room so that some of the

[1:30:56] Voice 2: issues that happen in the problem do we need a resolution i

[1:31:06] Voice 3: i don't think we need a resolution

[1:31:07] Voice 3: for earl and i to read it to come up suddenly for us to look at so i think we're it's pretty much a

[1:31:13] consensus so we need to again drop down to a level lower than the protocol where we're not involving

[1:31:20] ltc's from all the other southern gulf islands we're just talking about salt spring

[1:31:24] bring LCC and the consults bring LCC and how we agreed to work together and I think we could

[1:31:31] fashion something there that talks about how we do it and then at our meetings we can deal with

[1:31:37] the specifics of what we're doing and so a protocol agreement or a memorandum of understanding

[1:31:45] doesn't have to delve into how we're going to address how it's like how we're going to address

[1:31:49] department but

[1:31:50] Voice 3: how we're going to work together and then those other things come out of our

[1:31:57] Voice 3: meetings this

[1:31:58] Voice 2: is going to sound pretty basic so i apologize in advance but i once gary was elected

[1:32:05] Voice 2: he started coming to the ltc meetings and he was there for the town hall and always talked about

[1:32:10] Voice 2: what the crd was doing at the time but we haven't extended this so i think we as an lcc need to

[1:32:18] Voice 2: discuss how we're going to get what the local trust committee is doing into our meetings whether

[1:32:24] Voice 2: it's a we do director and chair reports maybe it's a brief report that can be done by technology but

[1:32:32] Voice 2: i would just say that we need to put that in a little more structure because other electoral

[1:32:37] Voice 2: directors might not do it but okay

[1:32:44] Voice 3: um noticing would have less than half an hour scheduled

[1:32:49] Voice 3: um so i don't know just take the temperature of the room here uh we do have identifying

[1:33:00] Voice 3: prioritization issues around committee planning service arrangements administrative statements

[1:33:05] regional growth on the agenda uh i don't know that how deep we're wanting to get into this

[1:33:14] these specifics today um we've talked a bit about the next steps uh as far as meeting and

[1:33:22] or

[1:33:22] Voice 3: when i'm working together on some of that um or yeah we'll make you look at uh

[1:33:30] Voice 3: they have a list of issues in terms of identification or do is that something we

[1:33:37] Voice 3: want to delve into at uh at a future meeting i see your yeah i'm thinking looking forward to

[1:33:44] Voice 3: the next meeting that the focus of that meeting is for me to look at what are the areas of

[1:33:50] Voice 3: potential cooperation and then try and prioritize which ones really matter most some of this may be

[1:33:55] Voice 3: obvious but formally do that and then come up with a way to address them starting with the most

[1:34:02] Voice 3: important ones and recognize it won't deal with some of these others down the list at least not

[1:34:07] Voice 3: for a while you can certainly start today if we wanted to just lay out some of throw out some of

[1:34:13] Voice 3: those areas of cooperation or maybe some that we haven't all know housing's right up there

[1:34:22] but i think that might be a useful way to get started that could be incorporated then into

[1:34:27] the agenda for the next meeting so i would have a bit of time to think about just what that means

[1:34:34] work together on these

[1:34:35] Voice 3: sort of things yeah no i appreciate that and and and i think the yeah maybe

[1:34:41] Voice 3: maybe identify as for today and prioritize as necessary for protection for that meeting gary

[1:34:46] Voice 3: yeah i agree with today with uh others who have said here today housing is a top priority

[1:34:54] obviously clearly involves uh the zoning issue and also involves servicing

[1:35:00] Voice 3: um and there's some

[1:35:03] Voice 3: complication in ganchi's village around north salt spring but there's the ganchis sewer and

[1:35:09] Voice 3: and other water districts, et cetera, et cetera.

[1:35:12] Voice 3: So the LCC had a meeting here

[1:35:17] where

[1:35:19] Voice 3: the trust was invited and other stakeholders,

[1:35:22] Voice 3: I think even it was an open,

[1:35:24] Voice 3: it was a public meeting to get feedback

[1:35:28] Voice 3: on what the LCC's role should be and could be

[1:35:33] Voice 3: in terms of affordable housing.

[1:35:35] Voice 3: And so I don't,

[1:35:38] Voice 3: and i obviously don't speak for the lcc but i know that is a top priority particularly for as brian

[1:35:43] Voice 3: mentioned the community economic development service and there are things that we can do

[1:35:48] Voice 3: with that service around affordable housing there's some constraints where we've asked to

[1:35:53] Voice 3: have to amend the bylaw to expand the authority of the bylaw as far as we can go within the local

[1:36:00] Voice 3: government act constraints and we want to hear back from that that that may have an influence on

[1:36:05] and the sorts of things we want to do,

[1:36:07] Voice 3: but I know the LCC will want to take a next step.

[1:36:11] Voice 3: And so we're considering,

[1:36:13] Voice 3: and I think I've proposed a financial plan amendment

[1:36:17] Voice 3: to bring some of our operating reserve

[1:36:20] Voice 3: and that service into 2024.

[1:36:23] Voice 3: So there's dollars available to take a next step

[1:36:27] Voice 3: as we feel appropriate.

[1:36:30] Voice 3: And personally, I think a next step

[1:36:35] Voice 3: could be to have a more detailed workshop on housing led by the LCC, but inviting the trust.

[1:36:45] So this is just my view. And I think having people

[1:36:49] Voice 3: like Justine Stark, who supported Juan

[1:36:53] Voice 3: with Stephen and basically moderated the meeting. She's a former trust planner, now works for the

[1:36:58] Voice 3: CRD, like really eminently qualified to speak to housing, was instrumental in bringing forward

[1:37:05] Voice 3: or the Rural Housing Program at the CRD level.

[1:37:09] Voice 3: Justine, and maybe somebody like Janice Gauthier,

[1:37:11] Voice 3: maybe trust staff to talk about

[1:37:14] Voice 3: how we can very specifically work together

[1:37:18] Voice 3: on filling the gaps where there's some funding needed,

[1:37:22] Voice 3: there's specific projects to consider.

[1:37:25] Voice 3: So I would suggest that as a very first meeting,

[1:37:31] Voice 3: not around the agreements,

[1:37:33] Voice 3: months but around the substantive issues like to me affordable housing were the first and foremost

[1:37:38] Voice 3: where both organizations have clear jurisdiction and responsibilities uh in the case of the lcc

[1:37:45] Voice 3: some emerging responsibilities like how far can we push that bylaw how much funding do we have

[1:37:51] Voice 3: available so people know we have already just funded to the tune of about twenty three thousand

[1:37:58] Voice 3: dollars uh the housing now initiative that was started in the southern north islands

[1:38:03] Voice 3: and it's now being applied on salt spring island and that 23 000 was to help housing now to

[1:38:10] Voice 3: develop a salt spring specific program it's basically a landlord tenant matching service

[1:38:17] Voice 3: we've asked them to have a particular focus on workforce housing employee housing although

[1:38:23] Voice 3: would be necessarily preclude other types of other other clients anyway just my thought if in terms of

[1:38:32] Voice 3: a first thing to talk about on a substantive basis you know aside from the agreements we

[1:38:38] Voice 3: could do it in parallel but affordable housing to me would seem to me to be absolutely the most

[1:38:45] Voice 3: important thing that we could get together to talk and not just you know the generalities and

[1:38:49] Voice 3: but get into the devil in the detail

[1:38:52] Voice 3: of what both organizations can and can't do,

[1:38:56] should be advocating for, et cetera.

[1:39:00] Thanks, Chair.

[1:39:01] A subcategory of that is the short

[1:39:06] Voice 3: -term rentals,

[1:39:07] Voice 3: which is an Economic Development Commission subject completely.

[1:39:13] The Salisbury Accommodation Group has requested

[1:39:17] of the branding being scheduled to talk and participate in that and there's i think it's

[1:39:24] it is a it is like a subcategory of portable housing because it doesn't allow people to be

[1:39:29] able to afford

[1:39:29] Voice 3: their mortgage um who gets that opportunity doesn't so and my pitch here is this

[1:39:38] Voice 3: is where it's important that i think we work together with the southern gulf islands i mean

[1:39:44] Voice 3: southern gulf islands it was a rural housing program that was developed by justine who worked

[1:39:49] Voice 3: for the southern gulf islands housing now same thing these have been and we're focusing now on

[1:39:55] Voice 3: both electoral areas so i think there's a real benefit to bringing in the southern gulf islands

[1:40:02] Voice 3: and not making this a simple lcc lpc conversation but but working together and the more we work

[1:40:11] Voice 3: together with the same servicing issues it's servicing is a challenge bc housing doesn't want

[1:40:17] Voice 3: to touch us because our servicing is so difficult so we face the same challenges i'm here today

[1:40:25] Voice 3: because we need to work together we're going to if we're going to win this right and so that's my

[1:40:32] Voice 3: pitch or i've got the done postulating through to an electoral area directors they're new uh coming

[1:40:40] Voice 3: I mean, from the Cortez, Mark Panache, and then Quadra, Robin Mulvaney, are kicking off an activity to ask the electoral area directors to try to get motions passed at the regional district boards in the Vancouver Island Coastal Community region about advocacy to the province for programs that are relevant to rural island communities in particular.

[1:41:09] Voice 3: And they're trying to get that. That's going to be planning on your email boxes in your future as an advocacy role.

[1:41:18] Voice 3: They want to try to get that done like in July. So that's influencing the election.

[1:41:24] Yeah, well, I think that's amazing. And I think it needs to land sooner.

[1:41:28] Voice 3: So if you can connect me to those guys, I'll be there.

[1:41:33] Voice 3: And I suggest, Gary, you should probably be part of that.

[1:41:37] Voice 3: That would be so cool.

[1:41:40] Voice 2: Yep.

[1:41:42] Voice 2: A lot of talk and a bit of phone calls and stuff that's really important,

[1:41:47] Voice 2: but it's not really, you know, right here where we are.

[1:41:51] Voice 2: And we're all great about housing.

[1:41:52] Voice 2: And I just wondered if we could spend about five minutes saying, you know,

[1:41:55] Voice 2: if we ruled the world, if we ruled Salisbury,

[1:41:58] Voice 2: what could the Islands

[1:41:59] Voice 2: Trust and LCC actually do together just in the next

[1:42:03] Voice 2: six months to make a difference?

[1:42:05] Voice 2: And I just love some kind of creative thinking about, you know, do we all get together and we'll get one project by Kings Lane and say, this is where we're going to put a lot of our energy.

[1:42:15] Voice 2: What can we do?

[1:42:17] Voice 2: Because I think it would feel good to me leaving this meeting and saying, yeah, you know, we actually can do this.

[1:42:23] Voice 2: So just wondered if that conversation would be appropriate for a few minutes.

[1:42:29] Voice 3: I'm not necessarily opposed to that.

[1:42:31] Voice 3: i did i do i know where where the clock is running out um i do want to give space to identifying

[1:42:40] Voice 3: other issues if there's any other that want to come up and if we have and then let's let's do

[1:42:46] Voice 3: that okay well i don't know why um but i want to make sure that we leave space for

[1:42:54] Voice 3: the identification of issues clearly housing's top of everyone's list

[1:43:05] Voice 3: If you're just taking items, we have an active transportation plan which is going to require

[1:43:11] Voice 3: collaboration, so we would also like to start figuring out some solutions to our parking

[1:43:16] Voice 3: challenges and dangers, the adjacent parkland sale or acquisition, those are where we obviously

[1:43:25] collaborate, making the Salish Sea Trail possible, another big one, sort of included that in

[1:43:30] or regional park service but with completing

[1:43:35] Voice 3: more of that um i'm not sure if it's going to matter

[1:43:38] Voice 3: but when no yeah when we solve our wastewater treatment uh challenge whether that involves any

[1:43:46] Voice 3: rezoning or land use issues not sure just thought of bringing up uh brian's mentioned already the

[1:43:51] Voice 3: fireball project um and also emergency planning um salt spring or transitions is sort of always

[1:44:00] Voice 3: is reminding us that that emergency planning is something that we should take more seriously and

[1:44:04] Voice 3: that's a group effort and also the dual advocacy role that we have in promoting agriculture

[1:44:12] on the island both through our economic development service and your land use five

[1:44:20] lots and

[1:44:20] Voice 3: so this is my interest so i mentioned a few of them earlier watershed protection

[1:44:34] then touched on a couple of aspects of both the other two i had kennedy's revitalization

[1:44:41] and but i'm using the r word have a viability of agriculture

[1:44:55] I

[1:45:01] Voice 3: think clarifying on that, I know we had a meeting with the Ag Alliance and Agriculture

[1:45:08] Advisory Committee recently, and it was asked

[1:45:14] Voice 3: for some clarity between our two bylaws.

[1:45:17] Voice 3: You know, we have zoning of what we allow, and then there's the noise bylaws of what's

[1:45:21] Voice 3: not allowed.

[1:45:21] Voice 3: So there was some begging that we sort of align them more clearly somehow.

[1:45:28] Voice 3: And we're being asked in the Southern Gulf Islands to align with Saltzman Island in terms of the focus of the future in terms of supporting agriculture.

[1:45:40] So, yeah, I think that raises a broader issue.

[1:45:46] i'd like to make sure we don't overlook um and that is just making sure we understand the effect

[1:45:51] of overlapping bylaws between various jurisdictions and wherever on paper at least setting different

[1:46:00] rules and regulations for the same area or the same activity make sure that either we're not

[1:46:07] Voice 3: in conflict or we can make sure that they're complementary um and um that's an area i don't

[1:46:16] Voice 3: have a great deal of knowledge about but i understand that it's a potential problem and

[1:46:21] like you mentioned some of the rural questions that's an area i think we need to look at is

[1:46:28] where we're

[1:46:29] Voice 3: working at cross purposes in the area of bylaws yeah that's a good point and of course

[1:46:36] Voice 3: um i think from that from that constituent point of view right it gets confusing if one says one

[1:46:45] and one

[1:46:46] Voice 3: of us together that's certainly something we definitely heard at that meeting of our legend

[1:46:51] Voice 3: uh trust here one of the other things that maybe people think about is the fact that

[1:47:02] Voice 3: the way the local government act is set up the way we're structured now with their governments

[1:47:08] Voice 3: there's bylaws that exist which have no teeth there's no way to enforce or cmp can

[1:47:17] Voice 3: can't do it. The only way to enforce this is to have a municipality set up. A municipality

[1:47:27] Voice 3: can create bylaws that actually have teeth. We're seeing issues with Ganges. I don't think

[1:47:33] Voice 3: I need to repeat them. Definitely not rural things happening in Ganges. Municipality could

[1:47:41] Voice 3: deal with that. But it is now. It's not going to happen. They're going to have to sell

[1:47:45] Voice 3: we're just supposed to go always turn a blind eye to this element that is having such a

[1:47:52] Voice 3: negative impact on businesses tourism overall and just hope that it's just going to stay

[1:47:59] Voice 3: the way it is maybe it's gotten a little bit better it's definitely not cleaned up

[1:48:03] Voice 3: so that aspect of enforcement may be going to be addressed and how it differs

[1:48:18] Voice 3: Mr. Chair, I just want to just provide one possibility. I appreciate the comments.

[1:48:30] The Isles Trust is currently undertaking, as you well know, the Complete Communities Assessment, which is the first step in creating a university development model.

[1:48:42] model. A lot of the things we talked about, the LCC has, the active transportation plan,

[1:48:49] the work that CRD is doing, all of that being into our planning, the way that it gives us

[1:48:56] actual, giving you the information to make land use decisions is really critical to the

[1:49:03] way we need to start planning on this island. We can plan for, you know, we can zone land

[1:49:08] all day. If you can't get water to it, you can't get explosive waste, you can't know it's going to

[1:49:13] build it. No sense if all the developers can build it anyway. And

[1:49:18] Voice 3: affordable housing providers are

[1:49:20] Voice 3: even more cautious about that. So finding areas where we can actually build housing is going to

[1:49:26] look at this housing, creating communities that are affordable. I'll have to say that I kind of

[1:49:34] I hope that that's something that we'll have pretty much at about a 90

[1:49:38] Voice 3: % level by the time we get in the fall.

[1:49:43] Voice 3: This may be an opportunity, you know, something you can work around anyways on a direction to work through this policy and understand how to move that forward.

[1:49:57] Finding ways for the LCC to see that it has a clear relational role.

[1:50:02] so we talked about earlier about um the division of authority and that stuff like you know

[1:50:09] respecting each other i think that's really

[1:50:10] Voice 3: great because it's an iterative process

[1:50:18] Voice 3: um you know having worked in municipalities i've walked down a lot of hallways towards here

[1:50:21] Voice 3: i feel like i've spent a lot of time walking towards the engineering director's office a lot

[1:50:26] Voice 3: in municipalities it still happens between those those two you know at the operational level and i

[1:50:33] Voice 3: I think that it's something that I'm really pleased to see this conversation happening

[1:50:39] in the collection of issues that

[1:50:44] Voice 3: we've been talking about.

[1:50:47] Voice 3: Oh, and one other thing on the enforcement issue that's on my plate, but what we didn't

[1:50:52] Voice 3: realize, I don't think, is that when there's a salt spring enforcement issue and there's

[1:50:58] Voice 3: funds that have to be requisitioned for that or expended, Southern Gulf Islands are a part

[1:51:04] Voice 3: of that.

[1:51:04] Voice 3: So we're on the hook.

[1:51:06] Voice 3: so we have to really work together to make sure so i have an enforcement issue that i've been

[1:51:11] Voice 3: talking to gary the other uh electoral director about and um it takes a lot of money to go to

[1:51:21] Voice 3: court and so if i were to initiate that in the south of the violence and gary and al's budget

[1:51:30] Voice 3: would be impacted so we have to work on that together say does this make sense you know to

[1:51:38] Voice 3: to ramp it up because yeah there's issues with enforcements and our bylaws and there's multiple

[1:51:45] Voice 3: parties that need to be involved and i think it's even complicated for municipalities less so maybe

[1:51:50] Voice 3: but it's insane for us uh just quickly um the violent enforcement issue so i sent an email to

[1:52:02] Voice 3: to Corporal, sorry, Sergeant Seabrook to Depp and Huffington

[1:52:10] Voice 3: around Centennial Park and asking some of the questions

[1:52:13] Voice 3: Jamie has asked about enforcement of rules and regulations.

[1:52:18] Voice 3: So as yet, we haven't had a response,

[1:52:21] Voice 3: but I'll continue to follow that up.

[1:52:23] Voice 3: Actually, Sergeant Seabrook replied,

[1:52:26] Voice 3: they just, they lost three detachment members temporarily

[1:52:32] Voice 3: because they came down with COVID.

[1:52:35] Voice 3: So he's been struggling to deal with that

[1:52:37] Voice 3: and has been able to respond,

[1:52:38] Voice 3: but it replied to me that he will get back to the store.

[1:52:43] Voice 3: I'm pursuing it, at least in terms of

[1:52:45] Voice 3: we have our current framework and current responsibilities.

[1:52:50] Voice 3: I think I would disagree, though,

[1:52:52] Voice 3: about municipalities being able to solve street disorder.

[1:52:56] Voice 3: I mean, go to Victoria, go to Nanaimo,

[1:52:58] Voice 3: will uh many other municipalities with with the tools and far more resources than we have that

[1:53:05] Voice 3: are still struggling public disorder but in any case within the context of our rules and ranks

[1:53:11] Voice 3: and deals with them i'm trying to follow that up just uh just in terms of issues they're virtually

[1:53:17] Voice 3: all being mentioned i will come back to climate which is kind of an overarching it touches on a

[1:53:22] Voice 3: number of areas that have been mentioned like watershed protection for example but again both

[1:53:28] Voice 3: organizations there is a climate action 2.0 that transition kind of oversees and they do

[1:53:36] Voice 3: a report and they sort of wrap our chain about what you're doing but i think it should at least

[1:53:41] Voice 3: be on the list another one the salish trail and i mentioned that specifically uh a because it's

[1:53:48] Voice 3: an ongoing interagency discussion convened under emily olsen's office uh trustee patrick

[1:53:55] Voice 3: participates i participate uh ngos mlt but the trust does have a protocol agreement around

[1:54:04] Voice 3: roads with mlt so that that's why the why it's a an issue where they can particularly

[1:54:10] Voice 3: um yeah make a contribution

[1:54:14] you mentioned chair i got one more

[1:54:17] Voice 3: yep it is a reconciliation because we've all made

[1:54:21] Voice 3: statements of reconciliation and you know i point out that i was on on salt spring 10 days ago or

[1:54:27] Voice 3: whatever uh talking with penelope right and on this trust was uh mentioned quite a bit and

[1:54:35] Voice 3: and so again working together right we we share a lot of the same territories from

[1:54:42] Voice 3: with respect to the first nations it's really important and i'd say provincially and federally

[1:54:49] Voice 3: really important. So let's not forget it should be part of everything we do.

[1:54:56] Voice 3: Just to thank you, Mr. Chair, to go back to what Director Cohen was saying in this example.

[1:55:09] Voice 3: So here we have right now there's three police, for sure, I think we found them all, three

[1:55:13] Voice 3: police officers. Municipality out there, Nelson, you may be familiar with, same kind of people,

[1:55:21] Voice 3: super-sized community. They have 22 Nelson PD, full-time. Stay in the community,

[1:55:28] community, live in the community, are invested in the community, know the community members

[1:55:32] who have to leave every four years. And it's up to the municipality to prioritize without

[1:55:40] law enforcement being just focused. Some municipalities like Victoria, maybe they have different

[1:55:46] Voice 3: men or men going there. Us being as an island, we have a great opportunity to not have that

[1:55:57] Voice 3: happen on Salisbury County. We don't have the services. At this point we do not have the police

[1:56:03] Voice 3: services to deal with that complexity or just the general health services to deal with it and much

[1:56:10] Voice 3: of our you know small amount of police services that we have because we are not incorporated

[1:56:17] Voice 3: is spent I think so 15 percent of their time is spent on calls to this element that we're speaking

[1:56:24] Voice 3: about and that's a very small amount of people compared to the size of the population is taking

[1:56:31] Voice 3: up a large percentage of the police time as a municipality definitely okay um time is

[1:56:47] Voice 3: drawing really near uh i was considering maybe doing a lightning round on gail's uh suggestion

[1:56:55] Voice 3: but i just want to check in any other issues i've been missed oh chair just on the complete

[1:57:03] Voice 3: finisher uh and i think steven anderson might be talking to staff i think it would be and there's

[1:57:12] Voice 3: a there's a like a working group or whatever being formed and uh i think it would be helpful

[1:57:18] to help both an lcc rep and the director

[1:57:20] Voice 3: uh attend that if that's possible when it's not a quorum of

[1:57:24] Voice 3: the lcc just again because of what's been mentioned before there's most local issues

[1:57:30] Voice 3: are lcc delegated but there's some that still could have a bearing well again the sewer division

[1:57:35] Voice 3: for example uh still have a bearing on your complete community's process um that aren't

[1:57:41] necessarily delegated to the lcc great director um

[1:57:48] What I'm going to do is I'm going to talk to the project manager and talk to the CRD staff about how we're going to evolve.

[1:58:02] Voice 3: Okay, we've got one minute left.

[1:58:04] Voice 3: Do we want to do the lightning round on housing?

[1:58:09] Voice 3: And I'm just going to include everyone.

[1:58:11] Voice 3: So one thing each for the local trust committee and CRD.

[1:58:17] Voice 3: Go.

[1:58:21] Voice 3: Sorry.

[1:58:22] Voice 3: One thing the local trust committee do, one thing the CRD do.

[1:58:26] Voice 3: Oh, we can work collaboratively to identify areas where higher density housing is appropriate.

[1:58:40] Voice 3: It doesn't infringe on agricultural land, et cetera.

[1:58:43] Voice 3: an example maybe being drake road here on salt spring where we can work together in terms of

[1:58:50] Voice 3: identifying zoning changes and associated service requirements for example there's a lack of really

[1:58:59] Voice 3: any active transportation options along drake road at the moment that's something that we could at

[1:59:05] Voice 3: some expense but we could address in sync with the island trust that's just an example it doesn't

[1:59:12] Voice 3: have to necessarily be able to put that kind of a collaborative process to identify zoning changes

[1:59:19] Voice 3: and service requirements for higher density housing okay you took my advice it always happens

[1:59:28] Voice 3: i wouldn't attach power back to transportation

[1:59:36] But, yeah, the way that that all flows into us wanting to connect these areas in Ganges,

[1:59:45] Voice 3: into Ganges and through Ganges, I think that's going to be a lot of collaborative work together.

[1:59:51] Voice 3: Kind of a one-on-one, but I see there's a place to go on.

[1:59:55] Voice 3: Okay.

[1:59:55] Voice 3: Gail?

[1:59:56] Voice 3: They

[1:59:56] Voice 2: took mine, but I also think we've got so many.

[2:00:00] Voice 2: projects and each one of them has challenges or kind of stopping them at least larger projects

[2:00:05] Voice 2: so i would say get together take a look say what is the most possible that we can actually all get

[2:00:12] Voice 2: together and advocate help with the funding whatever on a single project for the next six

[2:00:18] Voice 2: months and so i would like to do everything like that but also say you know how can we help one

[2:00:25] Voice 2: one project, get moving and stuff.

[2:00:27] Voice 3: Okay, well, yeah, and just taking off from that,

[2:00:32] Voice 3: I think if we can identify all the projects

[2:00:35] Voice 3: we've got that have a realistic shot of things

[2:00:38] Voice 3: and identify where they are, if they've hit a roadblock,

[2:00:41] Voice 3: what that roadblock is, then what, if anything,

[2:00:43] Voice 3: we can do to remove those roadblocks

[2:00:46] Voice 3: so that they get to the point where they can make a request

[2:00:50] Voice 3: for funds that's likely to be successful.

[2:00:56] Voice 3: I think the key, a lot of things, but I think maybe one of the most important, if not the

[2:01:03] Voice 3: most important, is the rural housing program at the CRE level to make sure that that program

[2:01:12] Voice 3: is going to be connected well with the electoral areas and connected well and doing things that are

[2:01:26] that are most significant in terms of moving housing

[2:01:29] Voice 3: forward here and depending on how that

[2:01:34] Voice 3: that that program where it's more fully defined which will be later this year than implemented

[2:01:39] Voice 3: next year that's going to really help ACC decide to where it fits in the new picture as far as the

[2:01:46] Voice 3: trust is concerned I would say two things you'd be glad to know one a dedicated planner for

[2:01:53] Voice 3: affordable housing that would serve projects uh throughout the the trust area so you develop that

[2:02:00] Voice 3: expertise in the form of a person and you're not giving and maybe unfair but not reinventing the

[2:02:07] Voice 3: wheel with a different planner for a different project so it's a thought and the highway

[2:02:13] Voice 3: suggests that years ago when we were going through the crofton brook thing and the other thing and

[2:02:17] Voice 3: And again, related to Croftonbrook, is a resulting proposal, move the land use decision-making forward, like the readings, to the point of final approval, which is still conditioned on water, sewer, servicing, whatever.

[2:02:36] Voice 3: So you still have the trump card.

[2:02:38] Voice 3: This does not get approval until those issues that other agencies are responsible for are dealt with, but you move the land use planning process forward.

[2:02:49] Voice 3: So they have at least that certainty. And for sure, this came up with Croftonbrook, don't require expensive detailed studies.

[2:02:59] Voice 3: for example water supply which at one point was a little bit of a sticking point with procter and

[2:03:05] Voice 3: brook but the ltc uh relented on that but don't require expensive upfront studies designs whatever

[2:03:20] Voice 3: before you've before you've essentially given my news approval because it just creates a

[2:03:26] Voice 3: serve you for a few months okay i want to take his one minute and apply it to the rest of my life

[2:03:33] Voice 3: because that was way more than one minute so rural housing program what crd is going to do is

[2:03:41] Voice 3: less talk more money okay more funding um what uh islands trust and crd can do together is to

[2:03:50] Voice 3: continue working as effectively as we have been and i speak specifically with justine stark and

[2:03:56] Voice 3: and Larissa Chadwick and others

[2:03:58] Voice 3: because they've done great work.

[2:04:00] Voice 3: What we can also do together is lobby the province

[2:04:03] Voice 3: for relaxation of the building code

[2:04:06] Voice 3: in respect of small homes or tiny homes.

[2:04:10] Voice 3: It's a no-brainer and make it a political issue.

[2:04:14] Voice 1: There, many.

[2:04:15] Voice 3: Thanks.

[2:04:16] Voice 3: Laura.

[2:04:17] Voice 3: Oh, I love the local, the LCC and the electoral areas

[2:04:21] Voice 3: support of accessory dwelling units on this island.

[2:04:29] Voice 3: And Jamie, I'd like to see the LTC amend the housing portion of the OCP and reopen bylaw

[2:04:42] Voice 3: 530 under a new number and pass it in its entirety, as it will be in line with the new

[2:04:49] amendments to the housing section of the OCP.

[2:04:52] I pass for this since day one, but we would also ask for high density to be added to surface

[2:04:58] zoning classification similar to what has been

[2:05:01] Voice 3: done in Whistler and to FEMA which has worked to

[2:05:04] Voice 3: address the ownership housing crisis there. These are things that we can do, these are solutions

[2:05:10] Voice 3: that work. If there's better ideas I'd love to hear them but again we've stopped talking for

[2:05:16] years and years and years and

[2:05:18] Voice 3: actually do so. All right well I want to thank everybody.

[2:05:24] Voice 3: Obviously we're not going to solve anything in the lightening round but you know

[2:05:29] Voice 3: it was worth going around the table for um thanks so much for coming out and uh

[2:05:34] Voice 3: we're all going to work together to come up with some perspective dates for for our next round

[2:05:40] Voice 3: where i can go more in depth on the important priorities here and uh thank the staff and

[2:05:48] Voice 3: members of the public for coming up and uh really appreciate it i think it's a positive first step

[2:05:54] Voice 3: that, then I'll call for adjournment.

Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes                                 ADOPTED 1 
Special Meeting Minutes 
June 17, 2024 
  
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Special Meeting 
 
 
Date: Monday, June 17, 2024 
  
Location: Meaden Hall 
120 Blain Road, Salt Spring Island
 
  
 
Members Present: 
 
 
Timothy Peterson, Chair 
Laura Patrick, Local Trustee   
Jamie Harris, Local Trustee 
 
 
Staff Present: Stefan Cermak, Director of Planning Services  
Chris Hutton, Regional Planning Manager 
Rob Pingle, Legislative Clerk 
Lisa Millard, Recorder (Zoom) 
 
Others Present: Earl Rook, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commission Chair  
Gayle Baker, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commissioner 
Ben Corno, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commissioner 
Brian Webster, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commissioner 
Gary Holman, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Electoral Area Director 
Paul Brent, Capital Regional District Southern Gulf Islands  
Electoral Area Director  
Stephen Henderson, Capital Regional District Senior Manager Southern 
Gulf Islands and Salt Spring Local Community Commission 
Justine Starke, Capital Regional District Service Delivery Manager 
Southern Gulf Islands (Zoom)  
 
There were 2 members of the public in attendance 
 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
  Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. and acknowledged that the meeting is 
held in the territory of Coast Salish First Nations. 
 
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
By general consent, the agenda was adopted as presented. 
3. INTRODUCTIONS 

 
 
 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes                                 ADOPTED 2 
Special Meeting Minutes 
June 17, 2024 
  
Chair Peterson introduced Islands Trust Trustees and Staff and welcomed Earl Rook, Capital 
Regional District Salt Spring Island Local Community Commission Chair who introduced the 
Capital Regional District attendees. 
4. PROTOCOL AGREEMENTS 
 
Chair Peterson made the following comments about the Protocol Agreement; 
 It was implemented to guide relationships between the parties and allows for the 
scheduling of regular meetings of the Regional Directors, Local Trust Committees, and Staff 
to review the agreement and letters of understanding; 
 It came into existence before the Local Community Commission was established; 
 The agreements in place include the Islands Trust Council / Capital Regional District (CRD) 
Protocol Bylaw, an agreement regarding the provision of parkland between the Salt Spring 
Local Trust Committee (LTC) and the Salt Spring Parks and Recreation Commission which is 
now the Local Community Commission, and a letter of understanding regarding the 
withholding of building permits; and 
 The focus of this meeting is the Protocol Agreement between the Islands Trust and the CRD. 
Earl Rook pointed out the following issues: 
 The parties to the agreement are six LTCs and the CRD Board; 
 It does not acknowledge the existence of the Local Community Commission (LCC) which has 
administrative authority over eleven services and advisory authority over another three; 
 There are six LTC’s listed as parties to the Agreement and the LCC is only relevant to Salt 
Spring Island; 
 The LCC does not have the same status of the Advisory Commissions that it replaced;  
 The document needs to be updated to reflect these changes; and 
 There is concern about renewing an agreement that does not recognize the existence of an 
agency that has an administrative authority over the locally delivered island wide services 
that the CRD provides. 
 
In response to the concerns of the LCC the following was noted: 
 There may be a way to recognize the existence of the LCC without necessarily creating 
separate agreements for the Southern Gulf Islands and Salt Spring Island; and 
 There is a Protocol Agreement between Salt Spring Island and the Parks and Recreation 
Commission, which is focussed on parkland, and there is a possibility it could be rewritten to 
be between the Salt Spring Island LTC and the LCC. 
 
Discussion ensued about the five principals of the Protocol Agreement and the following 
comments were made: 
 Both parties need to continue to respect the jurisdiction and areas of authority of the other 
party and one does not take precedence over the other; 
 The parties are limited to some extent by decisions the other has made; and 
 The principle of a commitment to promoting a spirit of partnership remains valid. 
 
Discussion ensued regarding the co-operation section of the Protocol Agreement and the 
following comments were noted: 
 It is unclear what servicing arrangements the parties are to agree to jointly coordinate; 

 
 
 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes                                 ADOPTED 3 
Special Meeting Minutes 
June 17, 2024 
  
 The parties have ongoing cooperation regarding bylaw enforcement and parks planning and 
have worked together on renewing the climate action plan, water use, and affordable 
housing; 
 Renewing the agreement might limit the areas in which the parties can cooperate due to the 
language contained within; 
 The parties can agree to discuss any topic and the existing categories are broad; and 
 The parties can revisit the Protocol Agreement as required and list important topics. 
 
Discussion ensued regarding the Conditions section of the Protocol Agreement and the 
following comments were noted: 
 The language needs to be updated to reflect the existence of the LCC; 
 If more than minor edits are required to recognize the LCC then the work might have to be 
directed to Staff;  
 Staff indicated that updating the agreement would be a similar to the development of a 
bylaw and there would be a requirement for ministerial approval; 
 Letters of agreement can not be executed in the absence of a protocol agreement; 
 Capital Regional District staff offered to work together with Islands Trust staff to review 
Protocol Agreement language 
 
5. NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION ON LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE 
 It is important for an LTC to determine if a referral is appropriate to send to the CRD as the 
CRD does not want to receive referrals for all applications; 
 When bylaw changes are being contemplated reporting should be provided to the other 
parties;  
 There is a need for more formal discussion between the LTC and the LCC regarding mutual 
issues  such as watershed protection, harbour management, and Ganges revitalization as 
these issues overlap with some areas of authority of the LCC; 
 When one party is advocating to a higher level of government in a way that would have a 
direct impact on the other parties, or about a topic of shared interest, then the other parties 
should be informed. 
 
6. COMMUNICATIONS 
 The principles listed around communications are still relevant; 
 The parties need to schedule regular quarterly meetings; 
 There is a need for a letter of agreement between the LTC and LCC to address how they can 
work together. 
7. COMMUNITY PLANNING, SERVICE ARRANGEMENTS, ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS, AND 
REGIONAL GROWTH 
a) Identify and prioritize issues  
All parties identified and prioritized housing as the top economic sustainability issue.  
 
Other issues and areas of collaboration that were identified included the following: 
 Short term vacation rentals; 
 The Active Transportation plan; 
 The Ganges revitalization plan; 
 Parks and trails; 
 Interagency discussions on the Salish Trail; 

 
 
 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee Minutes                                 ADOPTED 4 
Special Meeting Minutes 
June 17, 2024 
  
 Wastewater treatment; 
 Emergency Planning; 
 Watershed protection; 
 Viability and support of agriculture; 
 Alignment of agriculture bylaws; 
 Bylaw enforcement collaboration; 
 Ensure overlapping bylaws are not in conflict; 
 Climate change; and 
 Reconciliation; 
 
5. NEXT STEPS DISCUSSION REGARDING JOINT PUBLIC MEETING AND OR REGULAR MEETINGS 
 The LCC would like to host the next meeting in September 2024; 
 The parties agree to meet quarterly; 
 The LTC and LCC agree to meet about sub-regional issues that are relevant to either party; 
 Chair Peterson and Chair Rook agree to discuss draft changes to the Protocol Agreement. 
6. ADJOURNMENT 
 
  By general consent the meeting adjourned at 5:08 p.m. 
 
 
 
_________________________ 
Timothy Peterson, Chair 
 
 
CERTIFIED CORRECT: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Lisa Millard, Recorder