Islands Trust Council regular meeting, August 15, 2024

[0:00:00] Voice 1: is preparing. My screen is live.

[0:00:05] Voice 1: Yeah, we're good now.

[0:00:07] Voice 13: All right. Thank you. So starting this

[0:00:10] Voice 13: meeting, calling it to order and first order of business is a land acknowledgement. So I'm living

[0:00:16] Voice 13: and working on Bowen Island. I butcher the pronunciation all the time, but it's in the

[0:00:23] Voice 13: the Squamish language, it's Nikwelekum. And I'm loving where I'm living. And it's a beautiful

[0:00:32] Voice 13: place. We've managed to import a cougar. So we're getting real live, constant reminders of living

[0:00:40] Voice 13: with nature in this beautiful part of the world. And it's very, very interesting, all the reactions

[0:00:46] Voice 13: that people have to living with a big cat. But it's August, it's the most beautiful time to be

[0:00:53] Voice 13: be here and uh it's a wonderful place so um i thank all the first nations people for their

[0:01:00] Voice 13: wonderful stewardship and look forward to learning more in terms of um both governing protocols and

[0:01:09] Voice 13: um just living in nature and um enjoying this place so um there's a start uh and the next order

[0:01:22] Voice 13: is order businesses the agenda are there any additions or changes to the agenda I

[0:01:33] Voice 13: don't see any okay so can I get a general approval of the agenda as posted

[0:01:40] Voice 13: an agreement to that yeah

[0:01:44] Voice 4: okay

[0:01:45] Voice 13: so next order is the correspondence so this was

[0:01:52] Voice 13: was put in as a point of information the letter from the district of Nanaimo and it basically was

[0:02:01] Voice 13: to give us some background and some ideas about what is happening at UBCM and the regional districts

[0:02:07] Voice 13: and a general interest from UBCM on local government legislative changes so there and

[0:02:19] Voice 13: And that's been brought up and referred to in the letter that has been created by the working group.

[0:02:23] Voice 13: So that's, I would like that to simply be accepted as information.

[0:02:30] Voice 13: Is that agreeable?

[0:02:34] Voice 13: Anybody objecting?

[0:02:36] Voice 13: No objection here.

[0:02:37] Voice 13: Thank you.

[0:02:38] Voice 13: Okay.

[0:02:39] Voice 13: Not seeing any objections, then we'll switch down to, sorry, Robert, if I can get the agenda again.

[0:02:48] Voice 13: There it is.

[0:02:50] Voice 13: the business work program ideas so there's um the working group has been very good in terms of

[0:02:57] Voice 13: working and we've got all of their material that has been attached to this agenda so if we can get

[0:03:04] Voice 13: a verbal report um i don't know if you've allocated somebody to to do that

[0:03:09] Voice 3: actually we didn't decide

[0:03:12] Voice 3: side on that we're uh busy sliding away on the documents to make that happen all right i'm happy

[0:03:19] Voice 3: to report out on it if if okay if you

[0:03:22] Voice 3: want okay sorry

[0:03:24] Voice 13: wait a second so here present are yourself

[0:03:27] Voice 13: and trustee harris and trustee gavreau and this thing is trustee patrick yeah

[0:03:33] Voice 4: that

[0:03:34] Voice 13: was the working

[0:03:34] Voice 13: group all right so um any of you if thank you joe if you want to report out and if anybody has

[0:03:42] Voice 13: has anything to add or comment, that would be helpful.

[0:03:46] Voice 13: Go ahead.

[0:03:48] Voice 3: Right. Thank you.

[0:03:49] Voice 3: Well, what the working group endeavored to do was to, you know,

[0:03:55] Voice 3: follow the direction that we feel that we received from Trust Council as a

[0:04:00] Voice 3: group in the first instance, which was, you know,

[0:04:04] Voice 3: we need to respond to the minister's reply of 2022 to the initial overture by

[0:04:14] Voice 3: by trust counsel seeking a comprehensive systemic review of the legislation.

[0:04:21] Voice 3: And that approach, I mean, the strategy in, I should, the strategy in drafting, first of all,

[0:04:30] Voice 3: the RFD is to recapitulate the original resolution. Even though, you know, there might

[0:04:43] Voice 3: might be some quibbles about drafting it and we do we did have some quibbles about the language of

[0:04:47] Voice 3: it and there's you know it could be could have been originally drafted perhaps in a slightly

[0:04:51] Voice 3: different way that might make it a little clearer or whatever we decided that that wasn't important

[0:04:56] Voice 3: the important thing was to have a forceful message to the province that we're serious about this

[0:05:01] Voice 3: review that it's necessary and that there is it's the same problem that they the trust council two

[0:05:09] Voice 3: two years ago or two and a half years ago was responding to,

[0:05:13] Voice 3: it's a very same issues remain.

[0:05:15] Voice 3: And it seemed important to us to make that point that this is the same thing.

[0:05:20] Voice 3: Hint, hint, you guys, we asked you for help two years ago.

[0:05:24] Voice 3: Hint, hint, you didn't deliver it and it's the same thing.

[0:05:28] Voice 3: So how about you guys get off your rear ends and help us out here?

[0:05:31] Voice 3: So that's kind of the theory here, which is,

[0:05:35] Voice 3: let's be very clear that we're asking for the same thing because the problems are the same.

[0:05:41] Voice 3: We had to think, and so that's the theory behind the RFD.

[0:05:46] Voice 3: That covers the first two resolutions that are in the RFD.

[0:05:50] Voice 3: The third resolution is the new one, and that proposes a communication strategy.

[0:05:55] Voice 3: And I know the staff has some comments about that, but, you know, we can address those later.

[0:05:59] Voice 3: But the purpose of the communication strategy is, again, an element of being forceful about getting the message out.

[0:06:07] Voice 3: We have not gotten attention.

[0:06:08] Voice 3: We would like not so much to make this, quote, an election issue, but bring it to the forefront of the candidates who are running for MLA positions in the writings that encompass the Islands Trust, which is principally sent to the islands.

[0:06:26] Voice 3: but there's there's others and uh our view of it is and i think this is consistent where trust

[0:06:34] Voice 3: council is coming from which is if we get something to trust council by september that will be in time

[0:06:42] Voice 3: to get it out in circulation before the election and it'll land on the minister's desk it'll land

[0:06:48] Voice 3: on candidates desk and it gives us a small window to do a certain amount of advocacy to simply give

[0:06:54] Voice 3: the issue some attention and hopefully make it an election issue within those those specific writings

[0:07:01] Voice 3: so that after the election irrespective of who's in power uh we'll have foregrounded the issue so

[0:07:08] Voice 3: that's that's the structure of the rfd with respect to the letter structure uh we did it was

[0:07:15] Voice 3: it was a lot of work on our part we're starting from scratch here trying to figure out how to

[0:07:19] Voice 3: how to get the message out part of the message is the one i mentioned before this we're repeating

[0:07:25] Voice 3: where we were at. The organization is repeating where it was at two and a half years ago because

[0:07:29] Voice 3: nothing's changed. Those structural issues are still there. But further discussions that we've

[0:07:34] Voice 3: had here in Governance Committee and at Trust Council, there's a pretty strong consensus that

[0:07:41] Voice 3: one of the reasons the last letter didn't get the attention we hoped for was that it didn't provide

[0:07:49] Voice 3: provide uh enough of a description of what the issues were now again staff has some comments

[0:07:56] Voice 3: about that uh but we struggled with that and if there was a difference of opinion in the working

[0:08:03] Voice 3: group it was principally i think between you know uh you know frankly mostly between laura and

[0:08:13] Voice 3: myself whereas i was i won't surprise you uh any of you to hear this i was for more detail

[0:08:18] Voice 3: and more of an argument and laura's saying no this is a political document that needs to be

[0:08:26] Voice 3: tighter stripped down you can't get the message like it's more important to get the essential

[0:08:32] Voice 3: message out than get the details out the details will come out later in the process of the dialogue

[0:08:38] Voice 3: the point is provoke the conversation by giving give the province enough detail

[0:08:42] Voice 3: detail and also for the communication strategy put enough detail in there that it's sufficient

[0:08:50] Voice 3: to give a reader the sense and the reader isn't only going to be the minister but to give readers

[0:08:55] Voice 3: the sense that yeah these are some serious structural issues that that the islands trust

[0:09:00] Voice 3: people think need examining and laura's view that that's that's sufficient she preferred even she

[0:09:06] Voice 3: would have preferred that we went with bullet points and then eventually you know she folded

[0:09:10] Voice 3: it on that because you have to have a bit more detail. I had to fold on the level of detail I

[0:09:15] Voice 3: wanted to put in some of those things. I had quite a bit more on the democracy point and more on the

[0:09:22] Voice 3: reconciliation stuff. But anyhow, after a certain amount of hashing back and forth, this is where

[0:09:27] Voice 3: we landed, which is we feel that this is a good balance between the detail that's needed to sort

[0:09:32] Voice 3: grab attention and identify the issue and the concision that's needed to make the message

[0:09:41] Voice 3: forceful, to make it clear that this is an actionable thing that we're asking for.

[0:09:48] Voice 3: And so that's the logic behind the structure of the letter. We put a lot of work into the letter

[0:09:52] Voice 3: and I think we're pretty happy with it.

[0:09:57] Voice 13: All right. So how do you want to handle

[0:10:02] Voice 13: the discussion um do we get through all of these three items and then open it up to general

[0:10:08] Voice 13: discussion about the the documents um i'm feeling like part of what joe has uh said has possibly

[0:10:17] Voice 13: generated some ideas and some comments but um there's a lot more than in the other um material

[0:10:24] Voice 13: how would you like to handle the discussion hear it all first the background and then open it up

[0:10:31] Voice 13: well

[0:10:34] Voice 4: um i don't know about background i mean

[0:10:37] Voice 3: it's like i don't know i mean we've all been around for

[0:10:40] Voice 3: two years and we kind of know the history of this thing and why we're here pretty strong message

[0:10:45] Voice 3: from trust council that this is going to happen so um i think you know we've got really there's

[0:10:52] Voice 3: the our task of the working group was to prepare these drafts i think i'd prefer that we um just

[0:11:00] Voice 3: simply get into the drafts uh i'm not sure which one we should go through first and then deal with

[0:11:04] Voice 3: the cao comments on the drafts uh at the end of the piece but i think it's important for the other

[0:11:10] Voice 3: trustees who weren't part of the working group to you know i'm not sure we need to spend a tremendous

[0:11:15] Voice 3: amount of explaining it but i think more like questions and queries coming from well frankly

[0:11:20] Voice 3: you judy and others who weren't part of it so that you

[0:11:23] Voice 4: know let's

[0:11:25] Voice 3: get your views up in the table and

[0:11:26] Voice 3: and let's have that discussion that way.

[0:11:29] Voice 3: Sorry,

[0:11:31] Trustee Luckham: Chair Luckum.

[0:11:33] Trustee Luckham: Thank you, Chair Getty, actually,

[0:11:35] Trustee Luckham: Trustee Luckum in this particular instance.

[0:11:38] Trustee Luckham: Not withstanding the excellent work,

[0:11:43] Trustee Luckham: the very good quality and the presentation just now

[0:11:49] Trustee Luckham: by Joe Bernardo on the content

[0:11:52] Trustee Luckham: and the work that undertook was undertaken.

[0:11:55] Trustee Luckham: taken. I just want to feel it necessary to say that I think we should be more respectful in the

[0:12:02] Trustee Luckham: language that we use with respect to ministry staff or ministers or otherwise. This is publicly

[0:12:10] Trustee Luckham: recorded, viewable by everyone, and suggesting that people need to get off of their rear ends,

[0:12:19] Trustee Luckham: um i i just find disrespectful because i would suggest in fact that the minister did respond

[0:12:25] Trustee Luckham: reasonably promptly to our communications we have not undertaken the work we have spent all this time

[0:12:35] Trustee Luckham: deliberating on what it is we want to say and how we want to say it and i just think that's

[0:12:38] Trustee Luckham: necessary to say um and i don't have any other remarks at the moment okay if i may

[0:12:45] Voice 3: respond

[0:12:45] Voice 3: Bond, Chair Getty?

[0:12:50] Voice 3: Briefly.

[0:12:51] Voice 3: Briefly, yeah.

[0:12:51] Voice 3: Let's stick to the substance of this.

[0:12:55] Voice 3: We're dealing with, frankly, decades of neglect from the province.

[0:12:59] Voice 3: That's what I'm talking about, all right?

[0:13:02] Voice 3: And, you know, if you can find a particularly respectful way

[0:13:06] Voice 3: that caters to people's feelings to express that in a nicer way

[0:13:10] Voice 3: than saying that, well, let me know.

[0:13:12] Voice 3: But we're dealing with neglect.

[0:13:13] Voice 3: If

[0:13:14] Voice 13: I can. All right. If I can comment on that, my overall impression was that we need to tweak this so that it's a whole lot more positive and somehow or other get our message across in terms of the difficulties and the frustration at the same time that we're actually asking for, you know, what it is we're asking for.

[0:13:37] Voice 13: So, and several times I've thought through a process. Oh, good. Trustee Patrick's joined us. When I was teaching in Hong Kong, legal skills, one of the first things that we did was to get the students to write a letter, gave them a fact pattern and said, okay, you need to write four letters.

[0:13:57] Voice 13: The first one is going to be really confrontational. And the second one is going to be, you know, more doormat conciliatory. And there's two in between in terms of figuring out what your objective is and how you're going to phrase the letter.

[0:14:13] Voice 13: and just thinking of of your contact with the other side in the context of you know what what

[0:14:20] Voice 13: you want the results to how you want it to play out um and it's it was an exercise that um reminded

[0:14:28] Voice 13: me all the time when i'm writing things to figure out what is the result that i want to get out of

[0:14:33] Voice 13: this so if what we're trying to set up um when i go through adam olson's material if what we're

[0:14:39] Voice 13: trying to set up as a select committee of MLA's new to representing Ireland's trust to work on

[0:14:45] Voice 13: the issues we want to be part of that we want to be you know make it so that they're interested in

[0:14:52] Voice 13: working with us so I tend to agree with both overall as a group I'm hoping that we can come

[0:15:05] Voice 13: mode of this with something that um makes the the minister and um any of the mlas that might

[0:15:13] Voice 13: be involved in this and the bureaucrats um the the ministers and the deputy ministers that are

[0:15:18] Voice 13: aware of um probably more aware than a lot of the um the elected representatives um

[0:15:26] Voice 13: that were a group of people that they want to work with and that it's going to be

[0:15:30] Voice 13: of of interest to them as well so yeah i think there's some tweaking that needs to go on trustee

[0:15:36] Voice 13: patrick your hand is up yes

[0:15:39] Trustee Patrick: i i want to apologize for uh for it was not 10 o'clock in my mind so i

[0:15:44] Trustee Patrick: was off busy away prepping for the meeting and not here so my apologies um i'm not having the

[0:15:51] Trustee Patrick: benefit of the conversations that have already occurred a select committee would be belong to

[0:15:58] Trustee Patrick: the province, the legislature in BC. And they would create a terms of reference for doing

[0:16:05] Trustee Patrick: this work. And of course, we would be prominent in that involvement in a very transparent and

[0:16:15] Trustee Patrick: open way, just like the report I shared with you, the report from the Police Act. When that was

[0:16:21] Trustee Patrick: reviewed, the report was thorough. It named every person they talked to and spoke to and provided

[0:16:26] Trustee Patrick: information and had extreme detailed beginning of what the issues are i went back just to read the

[0:16:34] Trustee Patrick: the motion that was made in the legislature for setting that up and it was to set up a special

[0:16:39] Trustee Patrick: committee on reforming the police act to examine inquire into and make recommendations to the

[0:16:44] Trustee Patrick: legislative assembly on reforms related to the modernization sustainability of policing under

[0:16:49] Trustee Patrick: the police act the role of the police respect that goes on but it

[0:16:53] Trustee Patrick: steps it out in just simple

[0:16:55] Trustee Patrick: statements.

[0:16:56] Voice 13: So is this something that you would be in

[0:16:59] Voice 13: agreement that we're trying to possibly work towards?

[0:17:03] Voice 13: Well, that's exactly what we're working towards, but we can't tell them

[0:17:07] Voice 13: what this is. Yeah. Trustee Bernardo.

[0:17:13] Voice 3: Yeah, I just wanted to follow up on what Trustee Patrick is saying

[0:17:16] Voice 3: here, which, you know, I think it's a point that really has to

[0:17:20] Voice 3: be emphasized here, which is this letter is important, but it's just the start

[0:17:25] Voice 3: of what should be a conversation that's what we're trying to do here we don't know what

[0:17:32] Voice 3: as trustee patrick has pointed out that we don't know how the provinces want to deal with this we

[0:17:37] Voice 3: we would prefer something like a select committee but at the end of the day it's going to be i mean

[0:17:43] Voice 3: it's perfectly within the realm of possibility of the problem to just take this you know make

[0:17:47] Voice 3: this a ministry job and look at it that way and work with us at that front so i think we have to

[0:17:51] Voice 3: to be careful i mean we're dropping hints about you know what we'd like to see but at the end of

[0:17:56] Voice 3: the day it is for the province to decide and the and that highlights what the function of this

[0:18:02] Voice 3: letter is it's not a white paper that is supposed to sort of spell out all the problems and the

[0:18:08] Voice 3: proposed solutions and you know some big analytical piece it's too that's it's too premature for this

[0:18:14] Voice 3: the letter has really one basic function get the attention of the province and start this

[0:18:19] Voice 3: this conversation that we need to have with the province about how to get the

[0:18:22] Voice 3: change happening.

[0:18:23] Voice 13: So

[0:18:24] Voice 3: when you talk about, you know, tweaking the letter, sure.

[0:18:27] Voice 3: To make, to change the tone. And if you think that's helpful,

[0:18:30] Voice 3: we can do that obviously, but this letter,

[0:18:34] Voice 3: its job isn't to persuade is not, it's,

[0:18:37] Voice 3: it's not relevant to persuading people to work with us and sort of whether

[0:18:42] Voice 3: they like us and that kind of stuff.

[0:18:43] Voice 3: It's really to get the attention of the ministry and the ministry and

[0:18:47] Voice 3: And everything else will flow from there.

[0:18:51] Voice 3: Thank you.

[0:18:52] Voice 12: Trustee Harris.

[0:18:57] Voice 15: Thanks, Chair Getty.

[0:19:00] Voice 15: As Joe said earlier, there was quite a bit of back and forth and, you know, quibbling about content.

[0:19:11] Voice 15: And, you know, to me, there was a better version.

[0:19:15] Voice 15: And there's been some major compromise here.

[0:19:18] Voice 15: and I think this is actually a really good start

[0:19:22] Voice 15: as Trustee Bernardo just mentioned as well.

[0:19:26] Voice 15: This is just the start.

[0:19:28] Voice 15: And so to try and fine tune,

[0:19:31] Voice 15: I don't see, I'm hoping we can just get this through

[0:19:36] Voice 15: and everybody be on board

[0:19:38] Voice 15: and bring it to trust council

[0:19:43] Voice 15: and be positive about it.

[0:19:45] Voice 15: I don't think I don't see a bad tone here I'm not sure I'm hearing this these words and about

[0:19:54] Voice 15: it being more respectful and um and I'm not I'm not um pertaining to what chair um chair

[0:20:00] Voice 15: mentioned about you know earlier you know he was talking about just talk on the um on the

[0:20:06] Voice 15: recording here but um I don't see any disrespect or or anything in the letter I I see the opposite

[0:20:12] Voice 15: it's just something that's clear um and if if some of these things are alarming maybe might be a word

[0:20:19] Voice 15: that can be used it's because that this is alarming and um and it's not something that should

[0:20:25] Voice 15: be ignored or tried to or tried to have that lesson because um you know this is serious we've

[0:20:31] Voice 15: got communities that have suffered and and have had a major negative impact on their social well-being

[0:20:36] Voice 15: because of um the issues that we're bringing up uh in this letter and um and with that letter

[0:20:44] Voice 15: being the start we're hoping to have uh you know hopefully there will be floodgates opened and and

[0:20:50] Voice 15: and things will happen um so i'm just hoping that this doesn't turn into a you know fine

[0:20:56] Voice 15: tuning and we got to change this word and change that word i i i'm really hoping that does not

[0:21:01] Voice 15: not happen um okay i'll

[0:21:04] Voice 15: leave it at that thank you

[0:21:05] Voice 13: trustee peterson yeah

[0:21:09] Voice 14: thank you uh i just

[0:21:10] Voice 14: wanted to sort of express my um my support for not getting too prescriptive as as trustee bernardo

[0:21:20] Voice 14: mentioned what we're doing is i mean the intent here is to bring this to the province

[0:21:27] Voice 14: and get the province to do the work and if the province takes it up then as as mentioned whether

[0:21:35] Voice 14: i mean sure it'd be great if it was a select committee but which we just want to basically

[0:21:39] Voice 14: hand this back to them um you know in response to minister collins a letter of two years ago

[0:21:46] Voice 14: um i think as far as the specific wording um sure we can sort of rehash stuff in this committee

[0:21:56] Voice 14: uh um if if there's a strong desire to do that i'm i'm not attached to that at this point the

[0:22:03] Voice 14: awarding the letter but just also recognizing what comes out of this committee is a recommendation to

[0:22:09] Voice 14: trust council um so no matter how much time we spend on this today um what we're what the goal

[0:22:18] Voice 14: i think out of out of today is what are we getting what are we sending to trust council and and

[0:22:24] Voice 14: and if the goal is success then let's think about how you know our best guess of how trust council

[0:22:32] Voice 14: So we'll look at the product, the recommendation that we're sending them and what they might do with it.

[0:22:38] Voice 14: So just my little two cents on that.

[0:22:41] Voice 13: Okay, so that's very helpful in terms of focusing on the content and the points that are raised as opposed to how we're phrasing it.

[0:22:48] Voice 13: And maybe we can do some fine tuning, but that's not the main thrust of today's time.

[0:22:55] Voice 13: Trustee Luckham?

[0:23:00] Trustee Luckham: Thank you very much, Chair Getty.

[0:23:01] Trustee Luckham: um i will uh you know ostensibly i will be supporting the general direction that's been

[0:23:08] Trustee Luckham: provided here by the working group at council um i had lots of questions about it but i really

[0:23:16] Trustee Luckham: appreciate the quality of the work here and that the thought that's gone into this to to make this

[0:23:21] Trustee Luckham: capture the essence of the concerns i also want to acknowledge and thank uh laura patrick actually

[0:23:28] Trustee Luckham: for the email that she sent out yesterday, I think it was, capturing the essence of the crisis

[0:23:35] Trustee Luckham: that exists not only on Salt Spring, but on other islands and throughout the province

[0:23:39] Trustee Luckham: generally. I think what's significant here is the letter, the correspondence from Vanessa Craig

[0:23:46] Trustee Luckham: captures it eloquently with respect to the changes to the local government act.

[0:23:52] Trustee Luckham: This, that is certainly something that needs to see some action and commitment to advancing. And that needs, and obviously the Islands Trust Act needs to be worked on in parallel to that, as well as anything associated with incorporation of municipalities.

[0:24:07] Trustee Luckham: municipalities. And so I think this is a placeholder in order to get this on the table

[0:24:14] Trustee Luckham: and that post-election, we need to send a reminder to say, this came to you and we really seriously

[0:24:22] Trustee Luckham: need some action on this. And I think it captures the essence of it, what needs to be done. I will

[0:24:28] Trustee Luckham: also say, however, that we are in the midst, clearly in the midst, of a very important decision

[0:24:35] Trustee Luckham: trust council which is hiring of a new cao and we are specifically out seeking skills to assist us

[0:24:41] Trustee Luckham: in a number of areas this being definitely one of them and that person whomever the successful

[0:24:47] Trustee Luckham: candidate will be will be able to help us in this and that may become more and more evident as

[0:24:54] Trustee Luckham: time marches on here so um yeah and i think this is positive i didn't have any inclination that

[0:25:02] Trustee Luckham: there's anything negative particularly about the letters and the work that's been done by

[0:25:07] Trustee Luckham: the committee i appreciate it and i thank you and i will be supporting it

[0:25:12] Voice 13: trustee patrick

[0:25:13] Voice 13: uh

[0:25:15] Trustee Patrick: well did we discuss time being that i was late did you discuss timing as to why

[0:25:19] Trustee Patrick: we wanted to do this at this point not after the provincial election has that been discussed

[0:25:26] Trustee Patrick: No.

[0:25:28] Voice 3: Well, sort of, if I may, Chair.

[0:25:32] Voice 3: All right. I had given a background in terms of explaining how we got to these drafts.

[0:25:39] Voice 3: And I did briefly explain that the logic of Resolution 3 in the RFD and that the idea here is the reason we want to get this done before the election is that we want to make this request.

[0:25:56] Voice 3: a prominent issue for the candidates for the writings that um overlap with the trust area

[0:26:03] Voice 3: so that uh it is uh you know we want to forefront the issue for them for all the candidates so that

[0:26:10] Voice 3: they can be questioned and their views can be you know examined about that sort of thing and also

[0:26:16] Voice 3: you know to put it on the plate of the ministry irrespective of who wins the election

[0:26:20] Voice 3: to say okay this is like this new government that comes in after october

[0:26:25] Voice 3: You know, we want this, you know, on the table. And as I think, Trustee Luckham, I think correctly pointed out, you know, it's smart to look at this as a two-step thing. This is the first step. And then after the election, you know, follow up with reminder one, reminder two, and just keep nagging at them.

[0:26:45] Voice 3: because we'll have with this letter we will have framed the question in a very clear way

[0:26:49] Voice 3: so it's like okay can we have the answer and the way we framed it is it requires a substantive

[0:26:56] Voice 3: answer from the province and that's all we need and that's the first step so yes we have talked

[0:27:01] Voice 3: about uh just that that that's the context did

[0:27:07] Voice 13: you want to add

[0:27:08] Trustee Patrick: yeah i just wanted wanted to

[0:27:11] Trustee Patrick: reiterate as well i went i went back and read you know the when when the cabinet is set up the

[0:27:15] Trustee Patrick: the minister writes a letter to each and every cabinet minister.

[0:27:20] Trustee Patrick: And our minister, Minister of Municipal Affairs, we're not even mentioned.

[0:27:24] Trustee Patrick: The premier only identifies municipalities and regional districts as vital partners.

[0:27:30] Trustee Patrick: And we have a region that we're supposed to be managing on behalf of the entire province of BC.

[0:27:36] Trustee Patrick: So I think this is part of the timing is so that we're recognized, we're talked about,

[0:27:41] Trustee Patrick: and we're not forgotten at the time when these ministries are being established after the

[0:27:47] Trustee Patrick: election thank

[0:27:51] Voice 13: you all right so timing is one of the content points that we need to

[0:27:56] Voice 13: flesh out and talk more about uh what else what other content um well actually before we get into

[0:28:04] Voice 13: that let's i i would like to do 4.2 the cao comments and have that as part of our general

[0:28:10] Voice 13: discussion. Can we go there? Any objection? All right. Director Mobs, do you want to

[0:28:22] Voice 13: speak to your written report?

[0:28:27] Voice 2: Sure, I'm happy to do that.

[0:28:32] Voice 13: Whichever.

[0:28:34] Voice 2: Yeah, my assumption is everyone has read the report, the CAO comments, but I'm happy

[0:28:40] Voice 2: to speak to it briefly and certainly can respond to any questions. So, of course, you know, as the

[0:28:46] Voice 2: the CAO, any advice that I give related to this topic is meant for the decision-making body,

[0:28:51] Voice 2: which ultimately is Trust Council. So although a lot of this information was shared with the

[0:28:56] Voice 2: working group, it does just naturally have to come to this recommending body and then flow to

[0:29:01] Voice 2: Trust Council as well. So there's a few different topics that I've touched on in my report. The

[0:29:06] Voice 2: first is around timing, which we were just talking about. So there's definitely a consideration that

[0:29:12] Voice 2: needs to be had around timing. We're hearing, obviously, working groups' recommendation is to

[0:29:16] Voice 2: get this to the province in advance of the election to make sure it's an issue up front.

[0:29:22] Voice 2: There is a consideration to be had around the interregnum period that's happening

[0:29:26] Voice 2: during the election period this year. So that interregnum period takes place from September

[0:29:32] Voice 2: 21st to November 2nd, and so any letter that is sent to the province will remain largely untouched

[0:29:39] Voice 2: during that time frame. So it might be that if Trust Council, as the decision-making body on

[0:29:45] Voice 2: this does want to provide more facts to support the arguments in the letter or a deeper analysis

[0:29:51] Voice 2: there's opportunity to take that time to do that

[0:29:54] Voice 2: so that's something that some I think both this committee and trust council should be aware of

[0:30:00] Voice 2: There's also a consideration of tailoring the letter to whatever government, you know, is formed post-election and whether or not a different government might change our approach to this exercise.

[0:30:13] Voice 2: There's a number of protocol agreements. I actually wasn't aware of this when we met with the working group, so this piece of information wasn't shared with them, but it's been brought to my attention.

[0:30:20] Voice 2: We've got some memorandums of understanding and protocol agreements with different bodies that may impact the timing of this.

[0:30:28] Voice 2: Whether or not it will impact it will largely depend on what the letter ends up looking like.

[0:30:33] Voice 2: So it's a bit difficult to make that assessment at this stage in the game.

[0:30:36] Voice 2: In particular, there is a protocol agreement with Bowen Island Municipality, which says that the Islands Trust will consult with them if there's going to be any request to enact legislation by the Islands Trust.

[0:30:50] Voice 2: There's also an agreement with the Islands Trust, or sorry, a bylaw related to the Islands

[0:30:55] Voice 2: Trust Conservancy Board that says that we will engage with them if there's a legislative

[0:31:00] Voice 2: proposal to the province.

[0:31:02] Voice 2: So those two things, assessing those might impact the timing of this letter.

[0:31:07] Voice 2: There's a third proposal in the RFD, sorry, a third resolution, which speaks to communications

[0:31:12] Voice 2: exercise.

[0:31:13] Voice 2: It is very specific in saying the communications exercise and strategy will be developed before

[0:31:20] Voice 2: for the election, but post-Trust Council.

[0:31:23] Voice 2: That's a three-week period of time.

[0:31:25] Voice 2: So we need to acknowledge that's a fairly short window

[0:31:27] Voice 2: of time to develop that strategy.

[0:31:29] Voice 2: So that's another thing to consider with timing as well.

[0:31:33] Voice 2: The general approach, of course, the working group

[0:31:36] Voice 2: really doesn't want to be providing solutions

[0:31:38] Voice 2: to the province in this letter.

[0:31:40] Voice 2: So we're hearing that loud and clear.

[0:31:42] Voice 2: The analysis piece that staff are recommending

[0:31:46] Voice 2: is informed really by an understanding

[0:31:48] Voice 2: of how the province prefers to receive information

[0:31:52] Voice 2: and the types of communication

[0:31:54] Voice 2: that are more likely to drive them to action.

[0:31:57] Voice 2: So we've been engaging with the province,

[0:31:59] Voice 2: communicating with the province for a number of years.

[0:32:01] Voice 2: We've had conversations with provincial staff

[0:32:03] Voice 2: who have told us what type of conversation,

[0:32:08] Voice 2: what type of correspondence will assist them

[0:32:11] Voice 2: in taking action more rapidly.

[0:32:14] Voice 2: And the way that they want to receive information

[0:32:17] Voice 2: is to actually see a deeper analysis of issues,

[0:32:21] Voice 2: talk about some of the historical work

[0:32:23] Voice 2: that Islands Trust has undertaken on its own

[0:32:25] Voice 2: to demonstrate that issues are of great importance

[0:32:28] Voice 2: to Islands Trust and where we can demonstrate

[0:32:31] Voice 2: we've attempted to solve this problem on our own.

[0:32:33] Voice 2: We haven't been successful.

[0:32:35] Voice 2: It's been a longstanding issue for us

[0:32:36] Voice 2: that we've talked to you about before.

[0:32:39] Voice 2: That all lends weight to the argument

[0:32:41] Voice 2: that they need to be stepping in

[0:32:42] Voice 2: and assisting on a particular topic.

[0:32:44] Voice 2: So that's the background

[0:32:45] Voice 2: ground of where staff's advice is primarily being driven from. So I don't think I need to get into

[0:32:54] Voice 2: the particulars or the specifics of each of the topics that's in the staff report for trustees

[0:33:01] Voice 2: to consider. Certainly, I can take questions on any of those things. One of the things I will

[0:33:06] Voice 2: just highlight, though, is a shared topic of interest with the province really is around

[0:33:11] Voice 2: around First Nations relations and reconciliation.

[0:33:15] Voice 2: So the stronger we can make that argument in this correspondence,

[0:33:19] Voice 2: the more likely we are to get a hook with the province

[0:33:22] Voice 2: to have them take this up on our behalf.

[0:33:26] Voice 2: As it's structured right now,

[0:33:27] Voice 2: we're tying a little bit back to our funding model

[0:33:30] Voice 2: and saying our reconciliation efforts are hindered by our funding model.

[0:33:36] Voice 2: There's a little bit of facts that maybe don't support that,

[0:33:39] Voice 2: being that we don't typically spend all of our Reconciliation Action Plan budgets each year.

[0:33:45] Voice 2: So if we're saying funding is the problem, that fact doesn't really support that argument.

[0:33:51] Voice 2: You know, it's true we do have a large number of First Nations that have an interest in the area.

[0:33:58] Voice 2: We are advancing a lot of agreements with nations who are interested,

[0:34:02] Voice 2: but I think that's a solid place where we can get a hook with the province to advance this

[0:34:07] Voice 2: if we frame that argument well um the there's a second topic in there as well around um collaborative

[0:34:14] Voice 2: decision making with indigenous governing bodies um there's uh section seven agreements under dripa

[0:34:22] Voice 2: is something i'm less familiar with but director marla can speak to it if there's

[0:34:26] Voice 2: interest of this committee to hear about it those are agreements that islands just could request of

[0:34:31] Voice 2: of the province to engage with and develop on our behalf.

[0:34:36] Voice 2: I'm recognizing that is a specific ask

[0:34:39] Voice 2: that is essentially proposing a solution to a problem

[0:34:42] Voice 2: with which working group is not interested in undertaking

[0:34:45] Voice 2: but it is an option that this body

[0:34:47] Voice 2: and trust council should be aware of.

[0:34:48] Voice 2: There's certainly other options

[0:34:50] Voice 2: if we're looking for collaborative decision-making

[0:34:52] Voice 2: with indigenous governing bodies

[0:34:54] Voice 2: that would be achieved through legislative reform.

[0:34:58] Voice 2: And if we want the province to do that work directly

[0:35:00] Voice 2: that's a specific ask um so yeah i won't i won't take up too much time looking at the other topics

[0:35:09] Voice 2: i just wanted to mention that one specifically um general considerations i'd mentioned in ceo

[0:35:14] Voice 2: comments is just alignment with our act when we're talking about the object as well as discussion of

[0:35:19] Voice 2: who is signing um this letter there's some problems with how it's structured right now

[0:35:22] Voice 2: particularly having all trustees who vote in favor of these resolutions sign the letter is a problem

[0:35:27] Voice 2: given there's three resolutions and it's possible a trustee might vote in favor of one but not

[0:35:32] Voice 2: fall um i think i can leave it there but take questions all

[0:35:41] Voice 13: right any specific questions for

[0:35:43] Voice 13: um director marler cao marler oh sorry let me get that back um cao mobs trustee harris

[0:35:56] Voice 13: thanks

[0:35:57] Voice 15: um just to the last thing you spoke of i'm not sure i see a problem with um with

[0:36:04] Voice 15: with, you know, as far as the signatures go,

[0:36:07] Voice 15: trustees, if not all are on one,

[0:36:10] Voice 15: you know, as long as there's a majority,

[0:36:15] Voice 15: hopefully there'll be, you know, a strong majority.

[0:36:17] Voice 15: I'm not sure if I see that as a problem,

[0:36:19] Voice 15: but I'd love to hear other thoughts on that in particular.

[0:36:23] Voice 15: You know, you mentioned earlier as well

[0:36:24] Voice 15: about province would like to hear more detailed,

[0:36:28] Voice 15: you know, some more detailed information.

[0:36:31] Voice 15: And geez, I've got some details I'd love to put forward,

[0:36:34] Voice 15: but i'll just have to bite my tongue on all that um anyway i'll leave it at that thanks

[0:36:43] Voice 13: trustee patrick oh

[0:36:44] Voice 2: sorry

[0:36:46] Voice 13: ceo mobs may

[0:36:48] Voice 2: i may i respond to trustee harris's question on the

[0:36:51] Voice 2: resolution so the draft letter to the province um copies and pastes the three proposed resolutions

[0:37:00] Voice 2: um that are going to trust council um two of them relate to this ask in particular and one relates

[0:37:06] Voice 2: to the communication strategy it's possible the trustee could vote in favor of two of those

[0:37:12] Voice 2: resolutions for example but not vote in favor of the communications resolutions they may not agree

[0:37:17] Voice 2: with that part of it um and so then if we are seeking specific signatures on the letter would

[0:37:22] Voice 2: that trustee sign or would they not because they've are in agreement with only part of the

[0:37:27] Voice 2: resolutions that are in that letter um and so that's where the tension is um you know our standard

[0:37:33] Voice 2: Under policy practice, as the chair of council, as spokesperson for council usually signs the letters, that would be more customary.

[0:37:40] Voice 2: So those are the two things that have been raised in relation to that.

[0:37:43] Voice 15: Okay, thank you.

[0:37:44] Voice 15: Again, I'm not sure if I understand why that's a problem, but thank you.

[0:37:52] Voice 13: Also, if we're short of time, then one signature is a whole lot easier than 26 or 14 or however it breaks out.

[0:37:59] Voice 13: So I think just the physical manifestation of it in terms of keeping track of numbers and making sure that everybody agrees that's where their signature goes and whatever.

[0:38:09] Voice 13: Trustee Patrick.

[0:38:11] Trustee Patrick: Yeah, I don't have any comments on the signatures.

[0:38:14] Trustee Patrick: Making it simple is fine with me.

[0:38:16] Trustee Patrick: Any trustee, once the motions are passed, can also forward the letter to the attention of the MLA candidates that are running in their area so they can bring to attention and add their voice to the matter.

[0:38:28] Trustee Patrick: matter. I want to thank you for your comments. And I think generally, yes, we want to make sure

[0:38:32] Trustee Patrick: that the letter is, you know, factually correct. I know the funding aspect of the original motion

[0:38:39] Trustee Patrick: was in, it was particularly talking about once a new structure of any type is put into place,

[0:38:46] Trustee Patrick: it's the funding of that structure in the model of a future, whatever that organization was,

[0:38:51] Trustee Patrick: was what that motion was referring to.

[0:38:55] Trustee Patrick: I think one thing we have not addressed in the letter,

[0:38:59] Trustee Patrick: I know you mentioned that we have the power

[0:39:02] Trustee Patrick: to fix these things.

[0:39:03] Trustee Patrick: And I think we don't question that,

[0:39:05] Trustee Patrick: we perhaps have the power,

[0:39:07] Trustee Patrick: it's the will is always the other piece.

[0:39:10] Trustee Patrick: Back in 2003, we had a huge governance renewal process

[0:39:14] Trustee Patrick: of the Islands Trust that was undertaken and lasted years.

[0:39:18] Trustee Patrick: I'm not sure what the outcome of,

[0:39:20] Trustee Patrick: You point out in your letter that four trustees were offered to Islands Trust with full voting on Trust Council.

[0:39:25] Trustee Patrick: Quite, might want to correct that one.

[0:39:27] Trustee Patrick: We were offered four trustees, but we were only offered two voting seats on Trust Council.

[0:39:35] Trustee Patrick: And that was voted down, as you're aware.

[0:39:39] Trustee Patrick: So we want to make sure that that is all correct.

[0:39:42] Trustee Patrick: So I think, and also from the protocol opportunities here, this is not a legislative proposal.

[0:39:49] Trustee Patrick: We are not assuming legislation by this request that could be an outcome. There will be a report with lots of recommendations, and we're a long ways away from any proposal for legislative change. So I don't believe we have concerns with protocol agreements at this time, but that's all I'll make for comments right now.

[0:40:11] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo. Oh, sorry. If I can pause there. So CAO Mobs, did you have a response?

[0:40:19] Voice 13: points uh

[0:40:21] Voice 2: yes i just have a quick comment in relation to uh the 2007 request of the province

[0:40:28] Voice 2: to increase the local trustees on salt spring island um so the request that was made of the

[0:40:33] Voice 2: province as i understand it was a request to have um four elected trustees and have all of those

[0:40:40] Voice 2: four trustees have a vote on trust council that's what the request was the province came back and

[0:40:45] Voice 2: and denied having four votes on Trust Council,

[0:40:49] Voice 2: but understood that having more locally elected trustees

[0:40:52] Voice 2: and a larger local trust committee made sense

[0:40:55] Voice 2: given the increase in workloads in that area.

[0:40:58] Voice 2: And so they did put forward to referendum

[0:41:00] Voice 2: whether or not the locally elected trustees

[0:41:03] Voice 2: should be increased from two to four.

[0:41:05] Voice 2: So I do see what you're saying.

[0:41:07] Voice 2: It's not quite clear in my comments.

[0:41:09] Voice 2: So I will update that before this travels to Trust Council.

[0:41:11] Voice 2: But our request was we want more local trustees

[0:41:14] Voice 2: in Salt Spring Island area

[0:41:15] Voice 2: and we want them to have more votes um so i you know and i mentioned that in the report because

[0:41:20] Voice 2: i think that is a historical fact that can lend weight to that piece of the request to say you

[0:41:26] Voice 2: know what this has been a long-standing issue and we asked for help with it previously and we didn't

[0:41:31] Voice 2: get it and we're still suffering because of it um you know i think that could help create some

[0:41:37] Voice 2: weight to that particular request and so that's why i've mentioned it here um in relation to the

[0:41:43] Voice 2: protocol agreements um you know they're here simply to acknowledge that this letter as mentioned is

[0:41:49] Voice 2: draft and ultimately trust council is going to decide what's in it so it's possible that the

[0:41:54] Voice 2: content or the structure of the letter might change such that those protocol agreements

[0:41:58] Voice 2: or memorandums of understanding become relevant um so it's important for for us to just be aware of

[0:42:03] Voice 2: them all

[0:42:08] Voice 13: right i

[0:42:09] Voice 3: had my hand up i thought i was going to speak go

[0:42:12] Voice 13: ahead yes

[0:42:13] Voice 3: thank you um there's

[0:42:15] Voice 3: There's an awful lot in the CAO comments, and so I'm not quite sure how we're going

[0:42:19] Voice 3: to deal with them.

[0:42:19] Voice 3: We could deal with them one by one, and I'd certainly be prepared to do that, because

[0:42:24] Voice 3: I think there are things that are problematic, I'm sorry to say, pretty much with all of

[0:42:29] Voice 3: those comments.

[0:42:36] Voice 3: Reconciliation in those protocol agreements, I think, are the two points that I'd like

[0:42:39] Voice 3: to address right now.

[0:42:40] Voice 3: I agree with Trustee Patrick.

[0:42:42] Voice 3: trick uh in fact i'm going to use the protocol agreements are just not relevant and i'm i was

[0:42:49] Voice 3: frankly surprised to see that in the in the comments because the language that uh those

[0:42:57] Voice 3: points were made refers to uh requests for legislative changes or legislative proposals

[0:43:04] Voice 3: this is not what this is this is an invitation to have a conversation about the possibility of

[0:43:11] Voice 3: doing that it's about an invitation to develop uh changes that go in a particular direction but

[0:43:20] Voice 3: does not propose particular changes as i said before this is the beginning of a process

[0:43:26] Voice 3: and that's why i have got a general objection to all of the ceo comments i don't think they're

[0:43:31] Voice 3: that helpful in fact they're not helpful at all because they actually misunderstand

[0:43:35] Voice 3: the nature of what we're doing here and i'm a little uncomfortable with some of the comments

[0:43:40] Voice 3: because what we're really getting from the staff are tactical suggestions on a political strategy.

[0:43:46] Voice 3: I'm not sure that's the staff's role.

[0:43:48] Voice 3: This is a purely political gesture.

[0:43:52] Voice 3: We're not asking for technical changes to the Act and that we're going to support by reams of facts and history.

[0:43:59] Voice 3: We're not looking for technical changes to get a specific outcome.

[0:44:05] Voice 3: We're asking for a larger systemic principled examination and reassessment.

[0:44:11] Voice 3: it's quite different in nature so when we talked about you know past history this you know we've

[0:44:16] Voice 3: had success but you know making requesting legislative changes in a specific way i mean

[0:44:24] Voice 3: the comments are building the criticism out of the whole cloth there it says if you want to get

[0:44:29] Voice 3: results you should be really specific and then it says well if you can ask for specific results you

[0:44:33] Voice 3: got to go talk to uh these different groups that you have the protocol agreements with

[0:44:38] Voice 3: it that's not what we're doing in any way and if we follow what the staff is saying we end up in

[0:44:44] Voice 3: the protocol agreement situation which we don't want to get into because this is an invitation

[0:44:49] Voice 3: so and on to the reconciliation issue the section 7 of DRIPA is not helpful because it requires us

[0:44:57] Voice 3: where we're at the cutting edge of having to deal with reconciliation of having to go cap and hand

[0:45:03] Voice 3: to the province to get the province to do the negotiation the province to initiate the work

[0:45:09] Voice 3: obviously the minister is going to have to sign off on any agreements that lead to collaboration

[0:45:14] Voice 3: but right now we do not have the authorities to negotiate collaborative agreements we don't have

[0:45:20] Voice 3: that directly the minister does but do we want to be in a position where we have to send a letter

[0:45:26] Voice 3: every time and we have to sort of you know uh make working with a particular first nation

[0:45:34] Voice 3: it's not if it's a priority for us we have to work really hard to make a priority for the

[0:45:40] Voice 3: province every time or do we want to be in a position where we can initiate negotiations

[0:45:44] Voice 3: do some of the development work so that we can work together with the province to move ahead

[0:45:51] Voice 3: and section seven just relying on section seven for for these agreements is not going to cut it

[0:45:56] Voice 3: now i've said enough but uh i've got similar criticisms frankly about the rest of the uh

[0:46:01] Voice 3: rest of the comments. And one of the things in those comments

[0:46:05] Voice 3: is an invitation at the end to change the

[0:46:09] Voice 3: comments if this committee thinks that's

[0:46:13] Voice 3: appropriate. And I'd like to see that. Thank you.

[0:46:20] Voice 13: Trustee Middleton,

[0:46:23] Voice 13: and then I'm going to put my hand up because I want to weigh in on some of this instead

[0:46:27] Voice 13: of just doing traffic control. Trustee Middleton?

[0:46:31] Voice 13: Thank

[0:46:32] Trustee Middleton: you, Chair, and apologies for my delay. As I said, power crane issues are very prominent, as you can imagine, this week with that crane collapse on Dunbar Street.

[0:46:46] Trustee Middleton: Anyway, I'm here and you have my full attention now, so apologies for the late start.

[0:46:52] Trustee Middleton: So I appreciate staff waiting in and giving analysis.

[0:46:57] Trustee Middleton: analysis um it's a note of caution yes um however I do agree with um uh with trustee Bernardo and

[0:47:06] Trustee Middleton: and uh Patrick um and perhaps others who spoke before I joined this is not a letter that we

[0:47:12] Trustee Middleton: expect staff to uh engage in any action on this is not basically an invitation for our CEO or any

[0:47:20] Trustee Middleton: director level staff to engage with their colleagues in the province um this is an entirely

[0:47:25] Trustee Middleton: separate matter. This is basically something where a group of elected officials are making a note

[0:47:32] Trustee Middleton: to another elected government saying, we require change. We require the mandate to be looked at

[0:47:43] Trustee Middleton: to face the next 50 years. We don't expect staff to be carrying that bag internal to the ministry

[0:47:48] Trustee Middleton: and all the comments about how best to get results really might apply in a staff-to-staff

[0:47:54] Trustee Middleton: type negotiation but this this is not that so we need to be comfortable that the wording of this

[0:47:59] Trustee Middleton: this letter is a is a strong uh change request that we all support um and it is step one the

[0:48:08] Trustee Middleton: letter cannot be perfect um for all of our needs but it is an announcement to the province that

[0:48:14] Trustee Middleton: we are serious about engaging in a political review process and we're going to continue

[0:48:19] Trustee Middleton: working toward that there will be letters there'll be conversations uh when we did the governance

[0:48:23] Trustee Middleton: this review we didn't ask staff to engage with their colleagues at the province we went directly

[0:48:27] Trustee Middleton: to the province and began talking to uh to uh officials and and uh elected officials there and

[0:48:34] Trustee Middleton: they weren't um i see that we were going to have to be doing this is yes does there need to be a

[0:48:39] Trustee Middleton: plan about how we as a group of 26 engage with the province uh in a politically active way yeah

[0:48:45] Trustee Middleton: for sure but that's a decision and a plan that we can come up with and we will and as i think

[0:48:51] Trustee Middleton: Tristie Bernardo said this is the beginning of a process or beginning of the journey

[0:48:57] Trustee Middleton: and we don't necessarily need to know or can know what all those steps are yet because

[0:49:01] Trustee Middleton: we have to see what the response is we have to be reactive in a constructive way when we when we see

[0:49:08] Trustee Middleton: how is our letter received or not received or what action or inaction does it does it engender

[0:49:14] Trustee Middleton: and then we would proceed from there and build our plan so I guess what I'm saying is

[0:49:19] Trustee Middleton: uh yeah appreciate the attention and the comments i think this letter however is a different beast

[0:49:28] Trustee Middleton: and needs to be treated differently and presented to trust council differently

[0:49:32] Trustee Middleton: and um i'll leave it there thank you all

[0:49:37] Voice 13: right uh trustee harris i'll let you go but i still

[0:49:42] Voice 13: have my i don't physically have my you can

[0:49:45] Voice 15: go go ahead don't chargetti i put my hand up after

[0:49:47] Voice 15: you mentioned you were going to speak so i'm happy to wait

[0:49:49] Voice 13: when i was summarizing a lot of

[0:49:52] Voice 13: this material i went through um adam olson's uh comments at the last trust council the letter from

[0:49:59] Voice 13: a naimo uh regional district and the staff briefing um as after i had read the um

[0:50:09] Voice 13: work from the working group so what and i've summarized that so i'm adam olson was talking

[0:50:15] Voice 13: talking about UNDRIP and a lot of the different things that we need to pay more attention to

[0:50:20] Voice 13: in terms of the bipolarization and the history of the communications between the nations and

[0:50:30] Voice 13: how we can learn from that. And he mentioned that there's a half dozen MLAs that are involved with

[0:50:36] Voice 13: the jurisdiction of the trust and that there's common ground that something needs to be done.

[0:50:41] Voice 13: and there's it's politically hot for the ministers to touch but the bureaucrats understand and that

[0:50:50] Voice 13: he recommended that we make a request to the new minister and get into that process of the letters

[0:50:55] Voice 13: to the new minister he didn't necessarily focus on work to be done prior to the election but that

[0:51:03] Voice 13: we could and should be working with the potential MLAs that would get elected in the letter from

[0:51:10] Voice 13: from Nanaimo, it pointed out that there's similar questions and problems for regional districts

[0:51:15] Voice 13: and that UBCM had set up a working group. I don't know if that is something that we've

[0:51:22] Voice 13: formally been involved with, but it's certainly something that I think we should be.

[0:51:26] Voice 13: And they had received a letter back from the ministry and that they found that very helpful,

[0:51:31] Voice 13: said to list specifics, have concrete examples of local issues and distill it for the minister,

[0:51:37] Voice 13: that they needed to take a position of support

[0:51:41] Voice 13: and working with and not in conflict with

[0:51:44] Voice 13: and also examine what works well

[0:51:47] Voice 13: and make sure that that gets left in.

[0:51:48] Voice 13: So there's follow-up with them.

[0:51:51] Voice 13: And they thought that it would be important

[0:51:54] Voice 13: to align carefully with the government priorities.

[0:51:57] Voice 13: In this case, in our case,

[0:51:58] Voice 13: it would be probably housing and First Nations

[0:52:01] Voice 13: and possibly election mechanics

[0:52:04] Voice 13: that we needed to ensure somehow

[0:52:07] Voice 13: how that all voices get heard and we can make recommendations to that effect in the staff

[0:52:12] Voice 13: briefing uh there were four different points in terms of timing so the um i'm not sure what the

[0:52:19] Voice 13: interregnum period is and whether the recommend the suggestion is that that's just going to

[0:52:24] Voice 13: a letter is just going to lie dormant uh and i think that's the difference between the ministers

[0:52:31] Voice 13: that are and all the politicians that are campaigning and but the bureaucrats that would

[0:52:36] Voice 13: would be able to respond to it and work on it.

[0:52:40] Voice 13: There's protocol agreements, not just with First Nations,

[0:52:43] Voice 13: but the whole thing with respect to the Conservancy

[0:52:47] Voice 13: and the Bowen Island Protocol Agreement.

[0:52:50] Voice 13: And I haven't read that recently to know how that would play out,

[0:52:55] Voice 13: but I don't think there'd be any objection from Bowen,

[0:52:58] Voice 13: but it's part of the protocol is to at least have some contact.

[0:53:02] Voice 13: talk. The communication strategy in advance of the election. If the interregnum period is September

[0:53:09] Voice 13: the 21st and our meeting is September the 24th, I'm questioning whether or not that presents a

[0:53:15] Voice 13: problem. And if we have the trust council meeting on the 24th and the election less than a month

[0:53:25] Voice 13: later, I think it's, you know, three weeks is mentioned in the staff report, but I think it's

[0:53:31] Voice 13: less than that in terms of coming up with speaking points and strategies. And that's pretty tight in

[0:53:37] Voice 13: terms of putting everything else aside and working on this. And with respect to the previous asks

[0:53:47] Voice 13: and what we can learn from those and reviewing those, that also takes time. So Adam Olson is

[0:53:56] Voice 13: suggesting that we have something in place and we get on the agenda of the new minister. So that's

[0:54:06] Voice 13: once the election is over and they're working on who gets assigned to what positions in cabinet

[0:54:14] Voice 13: and that we get ourselves on that letters to the minister. So that gives us a little bit more time.

[0:54:20] Voice 13: with respect to DRIPA and whether we can approach the province in terms of the agreements that we've

[0:54:32] Voice 13: got with First Nations and the way that we've worked through in terms of the protocols with

[0:54:37] Voice 13: the trust and nations that could be perceived as a modeling for them and it's something that they

[0:54:44] Voice 13: could help us with in terms of building relations. And it might be something that they would be

[0:54:51] Voice 13: interested in having as a model for themselves. But that is going to take some other work.

[0:54:58] Voice 13: The governance structure and the shortcomings of the federation model and just how we understand

[0:55:05] Voice 13: and describe that. And the whole question in terms of the funding strategy that's presently

[0:55:12] Voice 13: before the executive committee and and what that means and having sorting how to sort that out in

[0:55:18] Voice 13: terms of this letter and that project so i found all of those comments very very interesting and

[0:55:25] Voice 13: i think that that is something that that's content that we need to consider with respect to this

[0:55:31] Voice 13: letter trustee patrick i'm sorry i'm

[0:55:39] Voice 15: sorry oh i was in the queue right i had my hand up and you

[0:55:42] Voice 15: went first who's speaking

[0:55:43] Voice 15: jamie okay

[0:55:46] Voice 13: sorry jamie go ahead it's

[0:55:48] Voice 15: okay just yeah anyhow just um you

[0:55:51] Voice 15: know in regards to um to the cao um comments um and staff comments um uh you know to go along with

[0:56:01] Voice 15: the body of the rfd um you know it's um i'm so happy that um cao mobs is with us i can't

[0:56:09] Voice 15: very very pleased um just you know i'll just cut to the chase i suppose um because it's it sort of

[0:56:18] Voice 15: seems like the staff comments here are are um you know non-supportive of of this letter in a lot of

[0:56:25] Voice 15: ways um and um and i i would hope that this like to me this this isn't helpful um to go you know

[0:56:34] Voice 15: to trust council with that in front of this letter in RFD. So I'm hoping that we have a great strong

[0:56:45] Voice 15: CAO MOBS and thank you for that. And clearly I'm sure you'll bring that back to staff saying

[0:56:53] Voice 15: non-support for what trustees are trying to do isn't something that we really want.

[0:57:03] Voice 15: want, but I'll leave it at that. Thanks.

[0:57:08] Voice 13: Trustee Patrick.

[0:57:10] Trustee Patrick: Thank you. So in your recap,

[0:57:15] Trustee Patrick: Trustee Getty, on what the Regional District and MIMO had kicked off is a process. It was a process

[0:57:21] Trustee Patrick: where they initiated the conversation that has gone back and forth. We did initiate the conversation

[0:57:27] Trustee Patrick: in 2022, and it was kicked down the road.

[0:57:31] Trustee Patrick: So this is a re-initiated conversation with a little more kick.

[0:57:39] Trustee Patrick: There is a huge fundamental difference between us

[0:57:43] Trustee Patrick: and just the regional districts asking,

[0:57:45] Trustee Patrick: and that is the whole coordination portion

[0:57:51] Trustee Patrick: of what this governance shows up for in these islands,

[0:57:55] Trustee Patrick: And I think is some of the root issues that Emily Olson was referring to. I think his office acts as a regional local government because he gets every issue, every problem, everything that's gone wrong in every one of the different governments that have been dealt a card to manage something in these islands.

[0:58:15] Trustee Patrick: And this comprehensive review, I'm certain, will not just look at the Islands Trust. It has to look at the overall picture of what's occurring in the island. Who's doing what? Are we working together? The Islands Trust was initially supposed to be that coordinating body. We were supposed to be the conductor leading this and helping all parties coordinate in a fashion.

[0:58:38] Trustee Patrick: 50 years later, we have exactly the same conditions that were found 50 years ago. And that will be discovered as part of this review. So I think it's important to recognize that. And the timing for now is about asking each of the MLAs.

[0:58:56] Trustee Patrick: The Gulf Islands in northern Saanich is the only one that has a significant number of population in it. The other six are drops in the water, easy to ignore and have been ignored by MLAs for quite a long time.

[0:59:12] Trustee Patrick: going so being asked during the election to at least ask how are they going to support what are

[0:59:18] Trustee Patrick: they going to do as a candidate running gets it out there it's the message they are hearing it

[0:59:24] Trustee Patrick: they're going to be talking about it in writings that they normally can kind of play down what's

[0:59:28] Trustee Patrick: going on in the islands but it will be important in this writing.

[0:59:36] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo?

[0:59:40] Voice 3: Yeah I've got

[0:59:42] Voice 3: a concern here about how we're going to make progress today you know it's already 10 o'clock

[0:59:48] Voice 3: we've got two hours left here we haven't really delved that much into the drafts let's not forget

[0:59:54] Voice 3: what the job was the trust the trust council gave us which is to prepare the rfd repair a letter

[1:00:00] Voice 3: comments we got from staff are basically no more analysis let's delay it let's take our time

[1:00:06] Voice 3: uh which misses the urgency of the of the issue uh with respect to the timing before the election

[1:00:14] Voice 3: that really highlights the political nature of what we're trying to do here

[1:00:18] Voice 3: of what this is all about and why we have to be mindful that this is not about

[1:00:24] Voice 3: analysis and doing more footwork it's about getting the attention of the province

[1:00:31] Voice 3: Again, we're not trying to get a specific outcome.

[1:00:34] Voice 3: We're trying to start a conversation, which is quite different than what we just heard

[1:00:38] Voice 3: CAO Mobb talking about in terms of what's been successful in the past and what the province

[1:00:42] Voice 3: prefers when specific legislative requests are being made.

[1:00:46] Voice 3: This is a systemic thing.

[1:00:48] Voice 3: It's not a specific thing.

[1:00:51] Voice 3: So with respect to the timing issue, I'm wondering whether or not in the interest of efficiency

[1:00:57] Voice 3: and actually seeing if we can get these drafts sorted out

[1:01:00] Voice 3: so we can get them to Trust Council in September.

[1:01:04] Voice 3: Maybe we defer the timing question to Trust Council.

[1:01:07] Voice 3: Leave that for debate there

[1:01:09] Voice 3: because that is an eminently political issue

[1:01:11] Voice 3: and we have different views about it here.

[1:01:16] Voice 3: And it's not essential that we settle on the timing

[1:01:22] Voice 3: in order to review these drafts.

[1:01:24] Voice 3: So I'm going to suggest we take that approach.

[1:01:25] Voice 3: Let's get into the guts of the drafts,

[1:01:28] Voice 3: rfd and um and the letter and get into you know what do we as trustees think about this i mean

[1:01:39] Voice 3: the working group put a lot of effort into this we think we've covered this off we've gotten into

[1:01:45] Voice 3: this territory where we're talking about the ceo comments but we're not talking about what the

[1:01:50] Voice 3: trustees actually think for themselves about what's in the letter and what's in the rfd so

[1:01:56] Voice 3: So I would like us to do that.

[1:01:57] Voice 3: Thank you.

[1:02:01] Voice 13: We're getting there.

[1:02:02] Voice 13: Trustee Peterson.

[1:02:05] Voice 14: Thank you, Chair.

[1:02:07] Voice 14: First off, I just want to acknowledge and thank staff for doing their due diligence and providing their advice.

[1:02:16] Voice 14: We can disagree with it.

[1:02:17] Voice 14: That's our prerogative.

[1:02:19] Voice 14: But I just want to acknowledge that staff does what they're supposed to do and give us their words of caution.

[1:02:27] Voice 14: We can decide to plow ahead.

[1:02:30] Voice 14: That's that's totally fine. But anyway, I appreciate staff for doing doing your job there.

[1:02:37] Voice 14: One of the things that stands out for me specifically with the resolutions and in respect of the timing or the timing that seems to be desired here,

[1:02:46] Voice 14: which I agree with in advance of the provincial election, is a resolution.

[1:02:52] Voice 14: So the third resolution delegates to ECE to develop a communication strategy to inform the public about the request and the reasons for it.

[1:03:06] Voice 14: And the reasons for it is what I wanted to highlight here.

[1:03:11] Voice 14: We need to have that.

[1:03:14] Voice 14: I mean, Peter and I sit on executive.

[1:03:17] Voice 14: That's great.

[1:03:17] Voice 14: how much uh uh does this committee want to defer laying out the reasons for it how much does trust

[1:03:25] Voice 14: council want to um delegate laying out the reasons for it to executive committee so that's a question

[1:03:31] Voice 14: that hasn't really come up so much in today's discussion but i think it's important to put

[1:03:37] Voice 14: our minds to not that we can necessarily um lay that all out today but just to be aware that uh

[1:03:44] Voice 14: The more direction executive committee has when it comes to assuming that this resolution passes, but the more that executive committee has to go on, if that's the case, the better and the higher likelihood that the executive will, in fact, lay out those reasons as this committee and trust council thinks are important.

[1:04:07] Voice 14: So, that's all for that. I'm happy to get into the details of the letter if that's where we're going as a group.

[1:04:22] Voice 13: Thanks,

[1:04:26] Voice 2: Chair Getty. I just want to echo what Trustee Peterson has said.

[1:04:29] Voice 2: It is my job to provide my professional opinion to this group and to Trust Council.

[1:04:35] Voice 2: It is not a trustee's job to necessarily agree with staff's opinion.

[1:04:39] Voice 2: it's here because that's what I'm hired to do if there's a different opinion of this group and of

[1:04:46] Voice 2: Trust Council that's absolutely acceptable and Trust Council can go in any direction it wishes

[1:04:51] Voice 2: I want to briefly address the comments that were made around staff not being supportive of this

[1:04:57] Voice 2: letter so within the working group you know there were some edits made to the initial draft letter

[1:05:03] Voice 2: and the feedback there was that staff's input had really made the letter stronger and better

[1:05:08] Voice 2: which I think demonstrates that staff are not opposed to this exercise and truly when this

[1:05:15] Voice 2: organization has issues and concerns and struggles staff are impacted by that and staff struggle

[1:05:24] Voice 2: within that structure and within those problems so where we have issues and the province can assist

[1:05:30] Voice 2: us absolutely staff are supportive of us making those requests of the province staff comments are

[1:05:35] Voice 2: really attempting to assist trustees to make their requests stronger and of course there's

[1:05:43] Voice 2: definitely seems to be a difference of opinion of how to structure those arguments and how this

[1:05:49] Voice 2: letter will have the best weight or the strongest weight and that's okay um i just wanted to be

[1:05:56] Voice 2: clear that you know staff are not against asking the province of assistance uh where we need it

[1:06:04] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo.

[1:06:11] Voice 3: I want to address Trustee Peterson's point about the communication strategy and why the EC is in there.

[1:06:18] Voice 3: Well, I drafted that part of it, and we didn't really particularly discuss the EC part of it.

[1:06:23] Voice 3: It just seemed like the obvious choice to go with in terms of the logistics of who should manage it.

[1:06:32] Voice 3: uh i mean it's just as plausible i suppose if trust committee wanted to set up a select

[1:06:40] Voice 3: committee to run it or just delegate the job to a handful of trustees yeah they're going to be

[1:06:45] Voice 3: the communication gurus and spokespeople for this issue uh and no i'm not volunteering for that

[1:06:53] Voice 3: forget it somebody else will have to do that job but the uh i don't think there's any great science

[1:06:59] Voice 3: into terms of who is responsible for that it was just a logistical choice if there's an alternative

[1:07:06] Voice 3: that would work just as well and with respect to the reasons that would be expressed in

[1:07:14] Voice 3: in the communication strategy I don't think I mean we actually didn't get into that in particular

[1:07:22] Voice 3: detail in the working group but I think it was implicit that it's basically the reasons as

[1:07:28] Voice 3: spelled out in the letter and the communication strategy would actually be around disseminating

[1:07:34] Voice 3: the letter making it you know bringing to the attention of relevant candidates possibly press

[1:07:42] Voice 3: releasing it you know and that the letter would be the centerpiece of the communication strategy

[1:07:48] Voice 3: because it states the essential case that we're trying to make right now it's not the whole case

[1:07:53] Voice 3: in the future but it states the essential case and that's why it's crafted in what we hope is

[1:08:00] Voice 3: a more accessible way than a longer technical you know you know you could look at this section or

[1:08:07] Voice 3: that section yak yak yak no we're trying to lay out the broad issues so that to to forefront them

[1:08:15] Voice 3: in the mind to the minister but also to make it easier to communicate what the issues actually

[1:08:18] Voice 3: are so i don't think this communication strategy has to be that complicated the reasons are the

[1:08:23] Voice 3: the letter and uh i think that's probably enough for the communication strategy at least that was

[1:08:28] Voice 3: my reasoning uh and implicitly i think the rest of the group seemed to you know it seemed you know

[1:08:35] Voice 3: we didn't actually discuss it i said before but i uh i do think that's kind of the general approach

[1:08:41] Voice 3: of the group but other people can speak to that one point thank you

[1:08:45] Trustee Luckham: christy luckham um thank you

[1:08:49] Trustee Luckham: very much again chair um i just want to say i you know i don't know that we need to get you know

[1:08:57] Trustee Luckham: lost in the weeds actually on this i think actually the what i'm seeing in this package

[1:09:03] Trustee Luckham: is excellent in all respects and and the advice uh in as well from the cao is is excellent and

[1:09:11] Trustee Luckham: indeed it's up to us to determine um how we want to proceed with that but as i'd indicated earlier

[1:09:17] Trustee Luckham: This is kind of a placeholder. And the question is pretty simple. We want your attention on this topic that we've raised before. Certainly, there's some political rationale for getting this out now and creating something of an election platform and all that sort of stuff.

[1:09:36] Trustee Luckham: But realistically, in terms of getting lost in the weeds, any new potential hopeful MLA candidate is not going to be familiar with this in the way that we are.

[1:09:48] Trustee Luckham: We're the only people that know these details.

[1:09:51] Trustee Luckham: It's going to be a surficial.

[1:09:54] Trustee Luckham: It will require a lot of research and engagement in order to determine any kind of a position that an individual might want to take.

[1:10:01] Trustee Luckham: and so I think we simply need to get this letter out. It's unfortunate that it's actually this late

[1:10:09] Trustee Luckham: because what would be ideal for the executive committee and those members that are attending

[1:10:13] Trustee Luckham: UBCM is to have this letter in hand and be able to speak to it. Certainly I will speak to the

[1:10:18] Trustee Luckham: continued interest in changing governments and elect and legislative reform but certainly the

[1:10:24] Trustee Luckham: details of that are not provided as specific direction from council for me to do so unless

[1:10:30] Trustee Luckham: unless that is done in the near future here.

[1:10:33] Trustee Luckham: But of course, a council meeting is coming up

[1:10:35] Trustee Luckham: and the timing is just not great.

[1:10:38] Trustee Luckham: So I just think we need to get this out

[1:10:41] Trustee Luckham: in a simple fashion to get the ask

[1:10:46] Trustee Luckham: so that we can follow it up.

[1:10:48] Trustee Luckham: And then I would just say,

[1:10:49] Trustee Luckham: having some experience in this area

[1:10:51] Trustee Luckham: of working with the province,

[1:10:53] Trustee Luckham: is that if they take this up either now or later,

[1:10:57] Trustee Luckham: the first thing they're going to do is say,

[1:10:59] Trustee Luckham: Hey, let's get together and talk about the details of this. And that likely would be an invitation more so to the executive committee, which I would assume would also, I would like to see that extended to the governance committee body to indeed have that conversation face to face with the province with respect to what it is that we're actually asking for.

[1:11:24] Trustee Luckham: because they're not just going to take this letter and pick it up and run with it they're

[1:11:29] Trustee Luckham: going to want to figure out more of the details and indeed as they have indicated in the past that

[1:11:34] Trustee Luckham: we are the best people to advise on some of this and you know it's clear to me may not be clear to

[1:11:40] Trustee Luckham: them that actually we want them to actually advance this out of the interests of the province

[1:11:47] Trustee Luckham: more so than us necessarily influencing any particular outcome other than the greater

[1:11:55] Trustee Luckham: ability to conduct the work that we are the agents of the crown on. So let's try not to get

[1:12:08] Trustee Luckham: lost in the detail given the time. And I apologize for speaking so much, but I think you get the

[1:12:12] Trustee Luckham: message i'm trying to convey christy harris thanks

[1:12:16] Voice 15: i'm not concerned with the timing i think

[1:12:19] Voice 15: that i'm getting this out um you know before even if it's tight i you know just to be blunt that's

[1:12:24] Voice 15: like you know so what it's tight it's tight it's it's great um and the you know um i happen to bump

[1:12:30] Voice 15: into the conservative mla david bush uh and um and he's actually quite aware of the island's trust

[1:12:38] Voice 15: and issues and he and i you know i i tried to um you know parlay what's happening at the

[1:12:46] Voice 15: governance committee and um and again he said he was actually been well aware and he realized it's

[1:12:52] Voice 15: been a problem he actually cited some dates from long past that i wasn't even aware of um

[1:12:58] Voice 15: things with the islands trust and the provincial government and he assured me that many of his

[1:13:01] Voice 15: colleagues are also aware so i think you know to me it's i think it's a great idea get this out

[1:13:07] Voice 15: before this is just going to help advance and then as peter um you know mentioned that uh then

[1:13:13] Voice 15: afterwards we haven't keep sending some reminders after the election i think it's just a great idea

[1:13:18] Voice 15: and can be nothing but positive

[1:13:21] Voice 13: trustee middleton excuse

[1:13:25] Trustee Middleton: me yes uh thank you yeah i think it is

[1:13:28] Trustee Middleton: important that we get in to the election cycle with the the issue particularly from a federation

[1:13:33] Trustee Middleton: perspective um our responsibility to our our colleagues on salt spring where there's a real

[1:13:40] Trustee Middleton: issue with local governance and and and the needs of the community and as i think emily

[1:13:47] Trustee Middleton: olson pointed out that one riding his riding sandwich in the islands

[1:13:52] Trustee Middleton: represents well over half the population of the trust area and so that the trust matters are a

[1:14:00] Trustee Middleton: very important um conversation leading up to the election to be had in in the writing of

[1:14:07] Trustee Middleton: sandwiching the islands and i think this letter captures our federated interest as 26 trustees

[1:14:13] Trustee Middleton: from the the trust area federation and shares um the concern over over the health of uh certainly

[1:14:22] Trustee Middleton: salt spring island as well as the trust area in general and i yeah i i think it it sets the right

[1:14:28] Trustee Middleton: tone i thank the working group for for what they've done as i said timing issues and the

[1:14:33] Trustee Middleton: details of communication plan yeah what can be done is what can be done but i think what's

[1:14:38] Trustee Middleton: important is um is that the letter is out um in in time for the uh the pre-election discussion and

[1:14:46] Trustee Middleton: then as has been said can be followed up with um the duly elected government with the appointed

[1:14:50] Trustee Middleton: minister and senior staff and uh but the conversation will begin at a very important time

[1:14:57] Trustee Middleton: thank you all

[1:15:01] Voice 13: right um no other hands up um it is 22 minutes oh trustee patrick well i actually

[1:15:10] Trustee Patrick: wanted to get into the wording of of you know if we're going to word it motion three do we want to

[1:15:15] Trustee Patrick: clean that up because it no you don't

[1:15:17] Trustee Patrick: want to talk

[1:15:17] Voice 13: about it well no what i'm going to do is we need

[1:15:20] Voice 13: to have a break at some point in this meeting and we're coming up to shortly after 20 after 10

[1:15:27] Voice 13: and uh that's close enough to 10 30 i'm going to suggest that we take a 10 minute break now

[1:15:32] Voice 13: and that we come back and we start digging into both the the specifics of the request for decision

[1:15:38] Voice 13: and the letter so you can briefly go through that and review that we'll come back in 10 minutes

[1:15:44] Voice 13: is that all right okay 10 minute break um robert is that okay with you are you there

[1:15:57] Voice 12: I'm sorry, I was trying

[1:15:59] Voice 1: to unmute. It's fine with me. Yes, I'll indicate 10.23 now. You'll be back at 10.33. Is that correct?

[1:16:07] Voice 1: Okay. Is that long

[1:16:08] Voice 13: enough for everybody? Okay, let's do it.

[1:16:12] Voice 13: Okay.

[1:16:13] Voice 13: Thank you. What time have you got, Robert?

[1:25:38] Voice 13: 10.33.

[1:25:40] Voice 13: Okay, I think we've got a quorum. Shall we call the meeting back to order, please?

[1:25:47] Voice 13: so if i might interject um i have a question for uh staff marler um with respect to the protocol

[1:26:02] Voice 13: agreements with bowen and the conservancy and they're specific to uh that for bowen is it's

[1:26:10] Voice 13: worded as a request to enact legislation and with the conservancy it's for a legislative proposal

[1:26:15] Voice 13: So if this letter and the RFD are not talking about a specific legislative proposal, can we alert those other members of an MOU and explain that it's not falling within the particulars of the MOU?

[1:26:36] Voice 13: you yeah

[1:26:37] Voice 5: i think if i think the main thing is to recognize that there is a protocol and agreement

[1:26:43] Voice 5: so if you feel that it doesn't meet the letter of those agreements i think you could

[1:26:47] Voice 5: you should definitely alert those organizations as to what you're doing and why you don't believe

[1:26:53] Voice 5: the engagement is necessary to give them the opportunity because it is an agreement to either

[1:26:58] Voice 5: agree with you or disagree with you

[1:27:00] Voice 13: okay and is that similar to the whatever protocol agreements

[1:27:05] Voice 13: we've got with any of the first nations yep

[1:27:09] Voice 5: similar thing would apply you probably want to

[1:27:10] Voice 5: look at the wording um but um yeah what i'm thinking is you know if you're just asking for

[1:27:18] Voice 5: review i think it's probably worthwhile making sure these people are aware of what you're doing

[1:27:24] Voice 5: because it could lead to some changes and having them in earlier may help with um whatever comes

[1:27:31] Voice 5: comes forward rather than them being blindsided down the road all

[1:27:36] Voice 13: right but in terms of the

[1:27:37] Voice 13: timing and getting a specific response that we wouldn't necessarily have to postpone um to get

[1:27:45] Voice 13: that no like i said seeking

[1:27:47] Voice 13: is not specifically a legislative proposal yeah

[1:27:51] Voice 5: if you're not if you're

[1:27:52] Voice 5: not you're not seeking anything specific but you're asking for the review okay um i don't

[1:27:57] Voice 5: think you need to engage in that to that level i think the intent of that agreement is that if you

[1:28:03] Voice 5: got some specific ideas you want to discuss it with them because it may have impacts on them as

[1:28:09] Voice 5: well okay like born's part of the island's trust and so is the island's trust conservancy so there

[1:28:15] Voice 5: could be something in there that may be of concern that they would like to raise with you in this

[1:28:20] Voice 5: instance it's a review i mean that could be a concern so they may want to engage with you on

[1:28:27] Voice 5: that so i give them the opportunity give them a heads up under the agreements and protocols

[1:28:33] Voice 5: and then let them let you know if they think there's a concern on that okay cao moms um thanks

[1:28:41] Voice 2: chair also part of why we note or i note this in the cao comments is because of course this letter

[1:28:48] Voice 2: is draft and trust council could make changes and if trust council makes changes and something lands

[1:28:53] Voice 2: in there that does represent a specific legislative request we then have to take these into

[1:28:59] Voice 2: consideration so you know we're acknowledging um that as part of um the timing consideration

[1:29:06] Voice 2: um just so that everyone is aware that making those changes could have an impact okay

[1:29:11] Voice 13: so that's

[1:29:12] Voice 13: a heads up and pay attention trustee gavro

[1:29:16] Voice 10: yeah i just wanted to add that uh when it comes to

[1:29:20] Voice 10: working collaboratively with First Nations, that is a big topic at ITC right now. And I would say

[1:29:26] Voice 10: that the ask for the review of anything along this nature, you know, to have a more coordinated

[1:29:37] Voice 10: ask to the province informed from ITC board, then I think that could strengthen the letter.

[1:29:48] Voice 13: Okay. All right. Trustee Patrick?

[1:29:53] Trustee Patrick: Well, I think the alternative is that that's part of the communication strategy piece, and that could be elaborated in that motion number three.

[1:30:00] Trustee Patrick: I mean, this is just like regional district in Nanaimo.

[1:30:02] Trustee Patrick: It's the first request.

[1:30:03] Trustee Patrick: There will be extensive involvement

[1:30:05] Trustee Patrick: if the province decides to take him up on it.

[1:30:07] Trustee Patrick: And each and all these other parties

[1:30:09] Trustee Patrick: could also add their voice to the request to the province

[1:30:14] Trustee Patrick: in a way that meets their own needs.

[1:30:24] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo.

[1:30:25] Voice 3: Yeah, with respect to sort of informally

[1:30:28] Voice 3: or outside of the protocol agreements,

[1:30:31] Voice 3: but just sort of giving interested parties a heads up.

[1:30:36] Voice 3: We do have a timing issue here in the sense of trust council,

[1:30:39] Voice 3: you know, optimally, this is going to be voted on

[1:30:42] Voice 3: by trust council in September.

[1:30:45] Voice 3: I think we have a logistical issue here in the sense that

[1:30:48] Voice 3: I don't think this committee has the jurisdiction

[1:30:54] Voice 3: and I stand to be corrected, I don't know,

[1:30:56] Voice 3: but I don't think this committee's got the jurisdiction

[1:30:58] Voice 3: to do that outreach to those different bodies by itself.

[1:31:04] Voice 3: So, following up on what Trustee Patrick is saying, it seems to me that she's right, that since this is not requesting a

[1:31:15] Voice 4: specific

[1:31:18] Voice 3: outcome, it's not really clear to me that even with consultation with other bodies, you know, like we can say in the abstract, it might make the letter stronger, but what does that actually mean?

[1:31:29] Voice 3: We just want this review happening. If we reach out to Bowen Island or the ITC or some other body and say, well, we're not that keen on a review, it's like, well, okay, whatever. Again, paralysis by analysis. It seems to me that given the time, it has to be, like the informal reach out to Bowen Island, ITC and others has to be part of the communication strategy.

[1:31:53] Voice 3: They're all going to be CC'd on this. It seems to me that on the CCing of it, we just provide a much fuller explanation about it, that we're not requesting specific changes. We look forward to working with each one of these groups, including every one of those First Nations, to develop the review together, collaboratively.

[1:32:14] Voice 3: We say that in the letter. We want to work with all of the community groups. And we just reiterate that in a more direct way to each one of them when we CC the letter. And I think logistically, that's probably the avenue that we have available to us. Thanks.

[1:32:31] Voice 3: All

[1:32:33] Voice 13: right. So let's get into the RFD. And I would assume that there's no questions with respect to the actual recommendations, and that the discussion would focus on the background and the letter, and then possibly circle back if we think that there should be amendments and changes, additions to the recommendations.

[1:33:02] Trustee Patrick: Trustee Patrick?

[1:33:04] Trustee Patrick: Sorry, you said circle back. I was, again, wanting to bring up number three and say, do we want to just correct some of the wording in number three right now to make it a more broad communication strategy and maybe not get into the details of what it is to pertain to?

[1:33:18] Trustee Patrick: And it doesn't need to say in advance of the next election. It's just a communication strategy over this whole entire issue.

[1:33:24] Trustee Patrick: Because that would include notifying, you know, how much detail do you want to put into that? Notifying

[1:33:31] Voice 13: various

[1:33:33] Trustee Patrick: parties.

[1:33:34] Voice 13: We've got an hour and a half, so I'm thinking that if we spent an hour talking about the content, the background, and the letter, and then once we have that hopefully fulsome discussion, we can circle back to the specifics of how we, if any, changes we want to make to the recommendations.

[1:34:03] Voice 13: All right, I don't see any hands being raised.

[1:34:06] Voice 3: When you say recommendations, what are you referring to, just so I'm clear?

[1:34:12] Voice 13: The first page of the RFD.

[1:34:15] Voice 3: Oh, the three resolutions.

[1:34:17] Voice 13: Yeah.

[1:34:18] Voice 3: Oh, okay.

[1:34:21] Voice 13: Well, in this document, they're called recommendations, but I thought that's quibbling, I think.

[1:34:26] Voice 13: Yeah, okay.

[1:34:27] Voice 13: All right.

[1:34:28] Voice 13: So then the second page of the RFD gets into background.

[1:34:36] Voice 13: and uh do we want to do any without getting into wordsmithing um do we want to get into

[1:34:46] Voice 13: anything that should be added or uh removed changed i've got a couple of

[1:34:52] Voice 13: strokes through various lines um just in terms of of um i think making well i suppose it might

[1:35:02] Voice 13: might be wordsmithing but i think it's tone um let me let me start um with respect to the um

[1:35:12] Voice 13: unique mandate um i think that um one of the comments that uh director or cao mobs made

[1:35:20] Voice 13: is with respect to to the language changing the mandate so if we were to tweak that so that the

[1:35:27] Voice 13: The mandate is preserve and protecting, and the power that we have been given is with respect to land use planning.

[1:35:35] Voice 13: And just switch that sentence a little bit so that it's not getting into raising any of those mandate arguments.

[1:35:45] Voice 13: arguments and the putting in maybe some brief mention there of the letter from Nanaimo district

[1:35:52] Voice 13: in terms of we're not alone in the necessity to update some of the local government issues and

[1:36:06] Voice 13: the third bullet down with respect to previous trust recognizing an urgent need for review

[1:36:13] Voice 13: view uh the uh the minister replied with a letter um that and i would leave out the next part of

[1:36:22] Voice 13: that sentence and just say that encouraged trust council to address the concerns of utilizing its

[1:36:27] Voice 13: existing authorities and uh it's one of those things where when i was reading it it was like

[1:36:32] Voice 13: there could be a reaction and if uh and that's the whole business with respect to tone i think

[1:36:39] Voice 13: um the uh the rest i don't really have specific problems with anybody else trustee patrick

[1:36:56] Trustee Patrick: the reference to the regional district and animo work is already in the rfd it's in

[1:37:02] Trustee Patrick: item number two on page 18 or the third page of the rfd

[1:37:07] Voice 13: right well

[1:37:08] Trustee Patrick: it's already there all right

[1:37:13] Voice 13: it was just moving it up into the um the background part as well there's no mention

[1:37:20] Voice 13: of Delgamook and fishing rights and land claims either.

[1:37:23] Voice 13: And I think that that's, you know,

[1:37:25] Voice 13: the major difference from 15, 35 years ago.

[1:37:29] Voice 13: Trustee Peterson?

[1:37:32] Voice 14: Yeah, thank you, Chair.

[1:37:34] Voice 14: Just on the background bits here.

[1:37:37] Voice 14: The section on the object of the trust,

[1:37:40] Voice 14: I get the general drift.

[1:37:44] Voice 14: However, of course, Trust Council did come up

[1:37:50] Voice 14: with the uh uh the this the statement um the interpretation statement uh last fall obviously

[1:38:00] Voice 14: that's um there was the difference of opinion uh we certainly heard from the public and and

[1:38:08] Voice 14: other groups at trust council around the process there um i'm just wondering i guess it's i mean

[1:38:19] Voice 14: I mean, it's probably, I don't know, maybe it's not germane, but just some recognition of that process.

[1:38:26] Voice 14: Just that paragraph kind of doesn't really touch on that part of it.

[1:38:31] Voice 14: So I just wanted to point that out.

[1:38:34] Voice 13: It comes up in the letter a little bit more.

[1:38:41] Voice 13: Yeah, okay.

[1:38:42] Voice 13: Staff Marlowe, Director Marlowe.

[1:38:46] Voice 5: Yeah, thank you.

[1:38:47] Voice 5: I just wanted to comment so that staff can capture the committee's edits to the document

[1:38:53] Voice 5: so that we know what we're advancing to council.

[1:38:57] Voice 5: Could you ensure that the changes are either by general consent or by a resolution so that

[1:39:04] Voice 5: we know exactly what they are?

[1:39:05] Voice 5: Because otherwise we may lose them and we may not understand that the committee's changes

[1:39:10] Voice 5: are just edits of one individual, which is not supported by the group.

[1:39:14] Voice 13: Okay.

[1:39:15] Voice 13: Okay. I don't think we're there yet, but point taken.

[1:39:17] Voice 13: Yeah, thank you.

[1:39:19] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo.

[1:39:24] Voice 3: Yeah, I don't know how to phrase this.

[1:39:27] Voice 3: I think that, let's not forget that this RFD is going to our colleagues

[1:39:34] Voice 3: who are pretty sensitized to this issue already.

[1:39:37] Voice 3: We had the strategic review in June.

[1:39:41] Voice 3: There's this just overwhelming support for the idea that we do something like this.

[1:39:46] Voice 3: i don't think we have to necessarily make a huge meal out of the rfd uh it's important to create

[1:39:51] Voice 3: the the essential framework to it but i think in terms of framing the issue it's really the rfd

[1:40:00] Voice 3: together with the letter when it goes that is the package that's the explanatory package it goes to

[1:40:06] Voice 3: the uh to our colleagues on trust council and really at the end of the day uh you know what

[1:40:13] Voice 3: what we say in the RFD is less important than what we say in the letter.

[1:40:16] Voice 3: And we have to be satisfied that, and they'll tell us if they're not,

[1:40:20] Voice 3: we have to be satisfied that our, you know,

[1:40:23] Voice 3: we're sending something to our colleagues that reflects what they want and

[1:40:28] Voice 3: what we've heard from them. And, you know,

[1:40:30] Voice 3: working group thinks that we've done that with the letter, but you know,

[1:40:33] Voice 3: that's why we're here today to discuss that. But I don't think, you know,

[1:40:39] Voice 3: I'm going to suggest we spend more energy looking at the letter rather than the

[1:40:41] Voice 3: rfd uh trustee patrick was suggesting well you know there's some question about item three in

[1:40:47] Voice 3: the rfd that's what people have talked about maybe that's some wording that needs to be looked at

[1:40:51] Voice 3: chair getty you've made some comments about some wording okay let's drill into that stuff but let's

[1:40:56] Voice 3: not also make a meal out of this because it's really the rfd is is throat clearing that introduces

[1:41:02] Voice 3: a letter and then the letters where the action is and read the two together trustees pretty much

[1:41:07] Voice 3: have what they need here director

[1:41:10] Voice 13: marler is your hand still up uh no

[1:41:14] Voice 6: sorry thank you okay

[1:41:16] Voice 13: anybody

[1:41:19] Voice 13: else have any comments with respect to the rfd that need to be considered trustee harris um

[1:41:26] Voice 15: does it need to be considered i don't know but um as far as myself goes um

[1:41:32] Voice 15: i think it looks great and um i'm not really keen to to reward um the rfd

[1:41:40] Voice 15: thank you

[1:41:43] Voice 12: all right so

[1:41:49] Voice 13: um let's get back then into um the third recommendation

[1:41:57] Voice 13: trustee patrick you wanted to comment with respect to um possible rewording of that

[1:42:07] Trustee Patrick: um yeah um i just think i think we could just broaden it a bit i think we're hearing from

[1:42:16] Trustee Patrick: staff there will be a need for perhaps numerous uh activities for a comprehensive um you know

[1:42:22] Trustee Patrick: communication strategy because it'll involve perhaps communications with the province if

[1:42:27] Trustee Patrick: they decide to start digging deeper into this so i think we could just um you know either

[1:42:34] Trustee Patrick: just cut it off and just say conjunction with staff develop a uh communication strategy um

[1:42:43] Trustee Patrick: or we have to get into the details of it

[1:42:45] Trustee Patrick: and say that informs protocol holders

[1:42:49] Trustee Patrick: and this and that and all the others.

[1:42:52] Trustee Patrick: So I think we could either just leave it a little bit broad

[1:42:56] Trustee Patrick: and the timing of it would be what it'll be.

[1:43:05] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo.

[1:43:07] Voice 3: Well, Trustee Patrick and myself

[1:43:10] Voice 3: and the other members of the working group,

[1:43:11] Voice 3: this is the language we settled on.

[1:43:13] Voice 3: I mean, I think that this item three issue came up, I think initially Trustee Peterson had some reservation or questions about that.

[1:43:24] Voice 3: And, you know, now we're jumping into the phrase saying, oh, let's fix it.

[1:43:27] Voice 3: But perhaps we should hear from the other trustees who weren't part of the working group.

[1:43:30] Voice 3: I mean, what is it? Is it is this language as written unsatisfactory or not?

[1:43:36] Voice 3: But if it isn't, what are your suggestions?

[1:43:38] Voice 3: Because, as I mentioned before, the reason the executive committee is mentioned in there and all that stuff is a logistical issue.

[1:43:46] Voice 3: A communication strategy has to be, I think we do have to give staff direction to whom the communications are supposed to be directed.

[1:43:54] Voice 3: And from what I heard before, maybe it should say informs the public and elected officials of trust requests.

[1:44:04] Voice 3: Requests? You know, I don't know. But I mean, the original point was why executive committee? I explained that. So, you know, I don't know if Trustee Peterson or anybody else has, they specifically have comments about what they would like to see in this item, what they'd like to see changed. Perhaps we could hear from them. Thank you.

[1:44:22] Voice 3: There

[1:44:27] Voice 13: wouldn't be specifics in the actual bullet point three, right? It might be part of the background and it might be something that we could add as information for the executive committee to consider.

[1:44:43] Voice 13: I mean, I think the only thing that has come up to my recollection is the part of the phrase that's in advance of the next provincial election.

[1:44:56] Voice 13: Trustee Peterson?

[1:44:57] Voice 13: Yeah,

[1:45:00] Voice 14: so just wanted to sort of reiterate my, my thoughts on this part. Just want to from the perspective of being on executive committee and being tasked with this just really was more wanting to ensure that if there's reasons if there's rationale that this committee thinks are important for that communication strategy, that that executive committee is clear on what those are.

[1:45:29] Voice 14: um if there's specifics that are that people think are really really important to be to be

[1:45:34] Voice 14: there just to make sure we don't miss anything that's vital that's all obviously trust council

[1:45:39] Voice 14: may have some additional thoughts uh beyond the members of this committee but um i know you've

[1:45:45] Voice 14: all been putting your minds to this uh pretty deeply so that that was it not that i'm concerned

[1:45:50] Voice 14: that um that we can't make it work but just that if there's if there's specifics that people think

[1:45:56] Voice 14: think are vital um i think it'd be helpful for the executive committee just to be you know provided

[1:46:04] Voice 14: provided anything you think is is is really important that's all well

[1:46:09] Voice 13: with respect to that

[1:46:10] Voice 13: comment on um the uh i think it was from the nanaimo district correspondence it was to align

[1:46:16] Voice 13: with some of the ministry's uh priorities so if those are housing uh first nations agreements and

[1:46:24] Voice 13: and land claims, and probably the business of protecting the bays and inlets, the water

[1:46:32] Voice 13: jurisdiction. Those would be the, I think, the three priorities that jump out at me.

[1:46:38] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo?

[1:46:41] Voice 3: Yeah, I mean, I hear what Trustee Peterson is concerned, and it's fair enough, which

[1:46:47] Voice 3: is like, you know, the executive committee needs more than just sort of this blank direction.

[1:46:52] Voice 3: direction. But as I tried to explain before, I guess we're satisfied with just giving this

[1:46:58] Voice 3: blank direction in this resolution because I certainly don't view the communication strategy

[1:47:05] Voice 3: as particularly complicated. The CEO comments reviewed all this whole full spectrum of public

[1:47:11] Voice 3: engagement, potentially public engagement type stuff that we do. And that's not the idea. The

[1:47:16] Voice 3: idea here is we've passed these resolutions, get them out there, get them out there into the world,

[1:47:22] Voice 3: get them out there in front of the eyes that need to to know about it and the reasons which is the

[1:47:28] Voice 3: most trenchant part of trust what trustee peter is talking about they're in the letter i don't

[1:47:33] Voice 3: and i think it would be inappropriate and risky for us to offer reasons that are other than what

[1:47:41] Voice 3: we specifically say in the letter i don't think we should go any further because that would be

[1:47:45] Voice 3: really annoying to the minister to say you know we send this one letter that's very precise and

[1:47:51] Voice 3: what i'm trying to say and then we have a communication strategy where we go on blabbing

[1:47:55] Voice 3: about all sorts of ancillary things that we haven't raised that's that's um anticipating

[1:48:00] Voice 3: the content of the discussion we have want to have with the province and i don't think we should do

[1:48:04] Voice 3: that that would be disrespectful uh and so that's why i think the communication strategy can be

[1:48:10] Voice 3: pretty simple stick to what the letter says that's it i just get it out there not that complicated

[1:48:16] Voice 3: it

[1:48:18] Voice 13: trustee luckham you're

[1:48:26] Trustee Luckham: mute that off that's weird um i agree with tim and i agree with joe

[1:48:34] Trustee Luckham: i also agree with perhaps it was you trustee getty that uh mentioned about aligning our um

[1:48:43] Trustee Luckham: our interests with the provincial interests and of course there are numerous agencies involved in

[1:48:51] Trustee Luckham: some of this uh ministry of water and resources and environment uh immediately comes to mind with

[1:48:59] Trustee Luckham: respect to the marine uh foreshore uh conversation but uh in terms of communication strategy i

[1:49:07] Trustee Luckham: you know i don't really have anything else to say other than supporting that there's a long-term

[1:49:13] Trustee Luckham: interest in trust councils to seek legislative reforms based upon these factors. And when,

[1:49:23] Trustee Luckham: you know, we can't anticipate what the province is going to ask and then therefore communicate

[1:49:29] Trustee Luckham: that. And so, and how well this is going to be received and what the outcome of the election

[1:49:36] Trustee Luckham: is, there's so many factors. And we have communication staff now on board and I expect

[1:49:42] Trustee Luckham: that will maintain that for some time.

[1:49:44] Trustee Luckham: We had some changeovers there in recent history,

[1:49:47] Trustee Luckham: which made communication challenging.

[1:49:50] Trustee Luckham: And we can be nimble,

[1:49:52] Trustee Luckham: but all communication, I think,

[1:49:54] Trustee Luckham: is the most effective

[1:49:56] Trustee Luckham: when we align our interests

[1:49:58] Trustee Luckham: with what we perceive to be

[1:50:00] Trustee Luckham: the interests of the province,

[1:50:02] Trustee Luckham: and certainly UNDRIPA and reconciliation

[1:50:04] Trustee Luckham: and looking at the big picture of co-governance

[1:50:09] Trustee Luckham: And of course, the bigger, more immediate concerns are the social aspects of housing and economies and governance all in there.

[1:50:22] Trustee Luckham: So I think we need to, this is anything that we need to craft to support this work would be helpful.

[1:50:32] Trustee Luckham: But this is, I think it's actually pretty substantive already.

[1:50:35] Trustee Luckham: ready how

[1:50:39] Voice 13: workable is it to leave the phrase in advance of the next provincial election

[1:50:44] Voice 13: we all want to have important questions to ask candidates and we all want to try and bring it up

[1:50:50] Voice 13: as an election issue for at least education if not some ideas but in terms of having the

[1:51:00] Voice 13: executive and staff have something ready in advance of the next provincial election seems

[1:51:06] Voice 13: It seems to me that that's been identified as a problem.

[1:51:09] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo?

[1:51:11] Voice 3: Yeah, it's not a problem if we keep it simple in advance of the provincial election and then continue to continue.

[1:51:16] Voice 3: And, you know, it's implicit that the communication strategy once commenced is going to continue because this is engagement with the province.

[1:51:25] Voice 3: It's a back and forth.

[1:51:26] Voice 3: It's going to be iterative.

[1:51:27] Voice 3: and i i mean i don't understand why it would be a problem even if you've only got a few weeks

[1:51:34] Voice 3: beforehand to just do a basic outreach for one thing communication strategy i mean we could

[1:51:41] Voice 3: just as easily have said that that that the staff press release this stuff because the

[1:51:48] Voice 3: communication strategy in advance the provincial election isn't going to be i mean if we're

[1:51:53] Voice 3: realistic about it and we just knuckle down to do the work it's not going to be much more than

[1:51:57] Voice 3: issuing a press release reaching out to all those different communities we talked about

[1:52:00] Voice 3: first nations but also bowen island and as well as the itc you know we want to talk to them give

[1:52:06] Voice 3: it give them and explain it you know um a richer explanation that's in the letter perhaps uh and

[1:52:13] Voice 3: that's probably pretty much it like get it out there into the world and then you know if it

[1:52:21] Voice 3: emerges from that that there are other dimensions to communications well we'll deal with them after

[1:52:26] Voice 3: the election but you know of course we're limited the amount of time given the fact that trust

[1:52:31] Voice 3: committee or council will meet in september the election is going to get underway no we don't

[1:52:36] Voice 3: expect the province to do something in the interregnum period because the election is

[1:52:40] Voice 3: underway but that's not the point the point is to put it on the table make it an election issue and

[1:52:45] Voice 3: then be able to sort of uh poke at the province after the election whoever happens to be the

[1:52:51] Voice 3: government say okay this is a big issue for us we've raised it we're still here any event i don't

[1:52:56] Voice 3: see the communication strategy being that complicated trustee

[1:53:01] Trustee Luckham: luckham yeah thank you again

[1:53:03] Trustee Luckham: um you know um working with staff on communications the constant reminder is don't overreach your

[1:53:10] Trustee Luckham: grass um don't uh say anything that isn't already been articulated in written documentation or as a

[1:53:18] Trustee Luckham: a or as a position of council and uh because that would be foolish and and of course we don't want

[1:53:25] Trustee Luckham: to get caught between candidates debates because in my experience candidates will talk about

[1:53:31] Trustee Luckham: everything and anything um not necessarily uh um based upon facts in some situations but um that

[1:53:41] Trustee Luckham: will unfold as it unfolds but we obviously need to support all candidates because of course we

[1:53:47] Trustee Luckham: We have no understanding of who it is, no guess really about who's going to be successful.

[1:53:51] Trustee Luckham: And so we need to provide the same unequivocal support to all candidates.

[1:53:57] Trustee Luckham: And I think the less we can say, the better.

[1:54:01] Trustee Luckham: And of course, the obvious answer is we've made a request on any question is we've made

[1:54:07] Trustee Luckham: a request of the province and we're waiting for a response from the province and we'll

[1:54:12] Trustee Luckham: determine that provincial engagement when that conversation begins. So, yeah, let's hear what

[1:54:21] Trustee Luckham: the candidates have to say, but let's not get caught in the middle of a debate between candidates.

[1:54:29] Voice 13: So what you're saying is be clear in terms of the letter and simply the

[1:54:38] Voice 13: messaging, it would be that we've made the request that's in the letter.

[1:54:45] Voice 13: Trustee Patrick?

[1:54:46] Trustee Patrick: Well, a very common tactic of many agencies during an election is to simply forward it to the candidates and ask them how will they be supporting it.

[1:54:55] Trustee Patrick: Just a simple question.

[1:54:57] Trustee Luckham: Yeah, exactly.

[1:55:06] Voice 13: Any other comments?

[1:55:08] Voice 13: Trustee Middleton.

[1:55:10] Trustee Middleton: Thank you.

[1:55:11] Trustee Middleton: Yes, I agree to forward this as drafted to Trust Council.

[1:55:17] Trustee Middleton: I think it hits the points.

[1:55:19] Trustee Middleton: And I think that Chair Luckham and Trustee Bernardo and their comments are well received in regards to the simplicity of the communication strategy and that it does not say anything beyond what is stated in the letter.

[1:55:35] Trustee Middleton: If the executive wants some kind of general guidance, we have a meeting on September 9th.

[1:55:40] Trustee Middleton: We could just have a minute of discussion about people we think should receive this.

[1:55:44] Trustee Middleton: and that would be you know in advance of the executive needing to do any work um just if we

[1:55:50] Trustee Middleton: wanted to offer so many any helpful guidance but i think as drafted it's it's clear um i would

[1:55:58] Trustee Middleton: suggest the package that goes to council perhaps be trimmed down i think we've received the ceo

[1:56:03] Trustee Middleton: uh report and discussed it i'm i'm thinking that we want to frame the receipt of this uh

[1:56:12] Trustee Middleton: RFD

[1:56:14] Trustee Middleton: perhaps in a

[1:56:16] Trustee Middleton: shall we say a more

[1:56:19] Trustee Middleton: streamlined fashion to make

[1:56:21] Trustee Middleton: working towards ideally a

[1:56:23] Trustee Middleton: unanimous decision on the part of the council

[1:56:25] Trustee Middleton: members a reality.

[1:56:27] Trustee Middleton: So that would be my comment

[1:56:29] Trustee Middleton: is that we kind of need to package this differently

[1:56:31] Trustee Middleton: than it currently is

[1:56:34] Trustee Middleton: which would basically be

[1:56:37] Trustee Middleton: an acknowledgement of the discussion we've had

[1:56:39] Trustee Middleton: and then

[1:56:42] Trustee Middleton: and the reinforcement that we would strongly encourage Council to vote in favor of these three motions

[1:56:51] Trustee Middleton: and send the letter in the timeframe outlined.

[1:56:56] Trustee Middleton: Thank you.

[1:56:59] Voice 13: CAO Marbs.

[1:57:02] Voice 2: Thanks, Sarah.

[1:57:03] Voice 2: Just some brief comments on the third resolution about a communication strategy.

[1:57:07] Voice 2: It's helpful to have these comments that have come up because, of course,

[1:57:10] Voice 2: the communication strategy involves a lot of additional work outside of just circulating

[1:57:17] Voice 2: a letter to various bodies. Normally, there's frequently asked questions that are put together,

[1:57:23] Voice 2: there's prepping of the spokesperson, we are preparing to deal with media inquiries and how

[1:57:28] Voice 2: to respond to, you know, requests for comments, those types of things. So I think what Jesse

[1:57:35] Voice 2: Missy Middleton has said, you know, to be clear that this isn't necessarily all of that,

[1:57:41] Voice 2: but it's just a let's get the message out.

[1:57:46] Voice 2: It's helpful.

[1:57:47] Voice 2: Now, we, you know, of course, are going to have or potentially have some media inquiries

[1:57:51] Voice 2: and we'll have to deal with it.

[1:57:53] Voice 2: So making it very clear that the expectation is that staff will redirect their resources

[1:57:58] Voice 2: to this work will be important.

[1:57:59] Voice 2: important. There is currently potential for a committee, the whole meeting around the policy

[1:58:04] Voice 2: statement to be taking place on October 3rd, which is very shortly after council executive

[1:58:08] Voice 2: committee meets on October 9th. And so there's, you know, time is, is there's, we're pressed for

[1:58:17] Voice 2: time in that window. So we will need to be very clear that this is priority and keep it simple.

[1:58:21] Voice 2: All

[1:58:26] Voice 13: right. So are there any suggestions with respect to any changes or amendments to these recommendations? All right. I don't see any.

[1:58:41] Voice 13: So then let's leave that as accepted and well, a motion then in terms of what Director Marla was saying, can we have a motion to recommend to that governance committee is recommending this request for decision to trust council at the next trust council meeting in terms of the recommendations?

[1:59:17] Voice 3: do you mean just limited to the recommendations and then we're going to

[1:59:22] Voice 3: continue working on the RFD or is it to just move the RFD as written to

[1:59:27] Voice 3: trust council?

[1:59:29] Voice 13: I would like, okay.

[1:59:30] Voice 13: I would like to focus on that third bullet point under the previous,

[1:59:35] Voice 13: previous trust council need for review.

[1:59:38] Voice 3: Okay. Well, my suggestion is that just leave the record. You know,

[1:59:41] Voice 3: we've, we've reached a point here where this appears to be a consensus.

[1:59:44] Voice 3: The recommendations need to be left alone.

[1:59:46] Voice 3: I don't think we need a resolution there.

[1:59:48] Voice 3: Following up on Director Marler's point, I think what we should do is just work through

[1:59:51] Voice 3: any other changes to the RFD that we might reach consensus on, and then just have a single

[1:59:58] Voice 3: resolution at the end of the period.

[2:00:00] Voice 3: saying this is the rsd that will go to um uh that will go to uh the trust council all right

[2:00:08] Voice 13: that's another way to do it good enough um all

[2:00:14] Voice 3: right you have that third point that you wanted

[2:00:16] Voice 3: to change uh it wasn't you don't like the not responsive uh poking the ribs yeah

[2:00:21] Voice 12: well okay

[2:00:24] Voice 3: it is by the way a communication that's directed to our our colleagues but you know it's a public

[2:00:30] Voice 13: document and it could easily be read yes

[2:00:32] Voice 3: and i uh i actually um that's i'll be up front that's

[2:00:38] Voice 3: my language because i actually thought a certain and you should have seen what i'd written before

[2:00:43] Voice 3: julia got her hands on it before laura got their hands on it but the i the logic behind that was

[2:00:50] Voice 3: yeah the province does need to sort of be uh you know given a bit of a poke to say look you know

[2:00:55] Voice 3: He really didn't answer the question.

[2:00:57] Voice 3: This whole thing is...

[2:00:59] Voice 3: Yeah, okay, but I'm not going to make a meal of it.

[2:01:01] Voice 3: I mean, if the consensus is that we ought to change it

[2:01:03] Voice 3: because it's just smoothed it out, that's fine too.

[2:01:05] Voice 3: I'm just trying to explain where that comes from,

[2:01:07] Voice 3: but this is not a hill to die on, that's for sure.

[2:01:11] Voice 13: So I'm going to suggest an amendment.

[2:01:16] Voice 13: That third bullet read,

[2:01:17] Voice 13: on September the 23rd, 2022,

[2:01:19] Voice 13: the minister replied with a letter

[2:01:23] Voice 13: that...encouraged Trust Council

[2:01:24] Voice 13: Council to address its concerns by utilizing its existing authorities and the rest of that down to

[2:01:31] Voice 13: the last line on the requested review.

[2:01:36] Voice 3: Okay, why don't we just have that change made to the text

[2:01:39] Voice 3: so that we can see what it looks like and then maybe we can bank

[2:01:44] Voice 13: that one and we can move on to

[2:01:45] Voice 3: the next edit.

[2:01:46] Voice 13: Okay, so Robert, it's removing, was not responsive to the Trust Council's request for

[2:01:51] Voice 13: systemic review instead the minister so if that's yeah that's a cross out oh uh

[2:02:01] Voice 3: you need the that

[2:02:01] Voice 3: you lost the that okay

[2:02:03] Voice 6: so just

[2:02:06] Voice 5: let me know okay is that correct that

[2:02:11] Voice 13: is correct or that is my

[2:02:13] Voice 13: suggestion all

[2:02:15] Voice 15: right can we also see the letter the wording that was removed at the same time or

[2:02:20] Voice 15: just put a line through it or i'm not sure okay

[2:02:23] Voice 13: so go back all

[2:02:26] Voice 5: right uh a

[2:02:27] Voice 13: line through was not

[2:02:29] Voice 13: responsive to the trust uh yeah okay is that right uh reply what no and include the minister

[2:02:41] Voice 13: in the block out yeah okay from right yeah yeah okay

[2:02:47] Voice 6: so that is what's going to get

[2:02:53] Voice 6: editing tools here review just

[2:02:57] Voice 13: highlighted it's fine yeah

[2:02:58] Voice 3: it's in review track changes

[2:03:03] Voice 3: sorry what's what's that it's in review track changes you can get the strike through that way

[2:03:09] Voice 3: oh yeah yeah okay i can do it that way that's a good point all right all right

[2:03:13] Voice 12: without

[2:03:13] Voice 13: the yellow highlighting there you go

[2:03:17] Voice 13: yeah let

[2:03:25] Voice 7: me get rid of that

[2:03:25] Voice 5: okay okay there

[2:03:28] Voice 3: we go okay

[2:03:28] Voice 3: Okay, so that's one.

[2:03:33] Voice 3: Perhaps we can just go through all of the recommendations.

[2:03:35] Voice 3: I mean, if nobody objects, move on to the next one.

[2:03:37] Voice 3: We just have a single resolution and move on.

[2:03:39] Voice 13: All right.

[2:03:40] Voice 13: Third paragraph, under background.

[2:03:43] Voice 13: The Trust's unique statutory mandate is to, no, up.

[2:03:50] Voice 13: Yeah, sorry.

[2:03:52] Voice 13: This one here.

[2:03:54] Voice 13: The Trust's unique statutory mandate is to preserve

[2:03:58] Voice 13: and protect the islands of the Salish Sea

[2:04:01] Voice 13: and are given the power to do that with land use planning,

[2:04:07] Voice 13: something like that.

[2:04:11] Voice 13: So get rid of all that highlighting.

[2:04:14] Voice 13: The trust's unique statutory mandate is to dot, dot, dot,

[2:04:19] Voice 13: preserve and protect.

[2:04:23] Voice 13: Okay.

[2:04:25] Voice 5: Is to?

[2:04:26] Voice 5: Okay.

[2:04:27] Voice 5: Get rid of this?

[2:04:28] Voice 13: Well, just space it for now.

[2:04:31] Voice 13: Okay.

[2:04:31] Voice 13: Drop it down.

[2:04:33] Voice 13: Okay.

[2:04:35] Voice 13: okay is to preserve and protect oh what do we got here um the islands in the salish sea of the

[2:04:48] Voice 13: salish sea right so

[2:04:51] Voice 6: i want to get rid of this right

[2:04:55] Voice 13: all right so what you're trying to say

[2:05:00] Voice 13: it seems to me is that the way that we do that is with land use planning yeah the um that's the

[2:05:07] Voice 13: the power that's been granted it's limited to that power right trustee harris um

[2:05:15] Voice 15: i don't know

[2:05:16] Voice 15: i i just wholeheartedly i disagree i think this kind of changes the whole

[2:05:22] Voice 15: what is said there and i think wait wait

[2:05:26] Voice 13: until we've got these on the board and then we're

[2:05:28] Voice 13: going to be folding on them trustee bernardo uh

[2:05:33] Voice 3: right i mean it seems to me what i'm hearing is

[2:05:37] Voice 3: you actually haven't finished your edit you wanted to say something like to preserve and

[2:05:40] Voice 3: protect the islands of the salish sea through land use planning yes

[2:05:45] Voice 12: okay

[2:05:47] Voice 3: i don't object to it

[2:05:48] Voice 3: but i have to be honest i see zero difference in meaning from what was there before if that

[2:05:53] Voice 3: makes you happier fine but i really hope i mean this is that was the comment this is this is

[2:06:00] Voice 3: wordsmithing it's not changing the meaning at all

[2:06:02] Voice 13: that was a comment from cao mobs in terms of us

[2:06:06] Voice 13: rewording the mandate and that that creates problems can possibly on

[2:06:12] Voice 3: that point i want to

[2:06:14] Voice 3: be very clear it's not rewording the mandate it's explaining what it is and you know and

[2:06:20] Voice 7: this is the

[2:06:20] Voice 7: same explanation

[2:06:21] Voice 3: we don't change anything simply by using more efficient language in our references

[2:06:26] Voice 3: to it i mean we don't have to ape absolutely the language of the statute every time we refer to the

[2:06:30] Voice 3: second. All right.

[2:06:33] Voice 3: But, you know, I'm not going to argue about this, but let's, I mean, there's

[2:06:36] Voice 3: more important things to talk about. Let's, let's move on.

[2:06:38] Voice 13: All right. Thank you. And that's, those

[2:06:40] Voice 13: were the amendments.

[2:06:43] Voice 3: Those are all the ones that you have? Yep.

[2:06:46] Voice 3: Does anybody else have anything

[2:06:47] Voice 3: else? In that case, I move that we staff make those amendments to the RFD and that the amended

[2:07:05] Voice 3: intended RFD be submitted by Governance Committee to Trust Council.

[2:07:15] Voice 13: Seconder?

[2:07:22] Voice 13: I'll second.

[2:07:24] Voice 13: Trustee Harris, is that you?

[2:07:26] Voice 13: That

[2:07:28] Voice 15: was my hand up, yeah.

[2:07:29] Voice 13: Okay. All right. So any more discussion? Trustee Bernardo, your hand is still up.

[2:07:38] Voice 13: Sorry, my mistake.

[2:07:40] Voice 13: CAO Mobs.

[2:07:43] Voice 2: Just to offer up a comment as to why I had recommended using the language directly from

[2:07:49] Voice 2: the act and not interpreting is one of the things we said in the letter is that we can't get to

[2:07:54] Voice 2: agreement on interpretation of the mandate and the object and there is different interpretations

[2:07:59] Voice 2: out there so in order to not spark significant debate if the intent is to move this through trust

[2:08:06] Voice 2: council efficiently it is the safer option to just use the language that is in the act when we are

[2:08:12] Voice 2: talking about our object object and mandate any

[2:08:20] Voice 13: other comments all right call the vote

[2:08:25] Voice 13: sorry

[2:08:26] Voice 15: i was slow

[2:08:27] Voice 15: i was slow on my end go ahead and there um just yeah i'm i'm not in favor of

[2:08:33] Voice 15: changing it i i you know i'll just leave it i don't want to get into a big long drawn out

[2:08:37] Voice 15: argument but um i i i believe that the the purpose of the islands trust is land use planning and

[2:08:44] Voice 15: all right

[2:08:49] Voice 13: any other discussion okay all those in favor of these amendments

[2:08:55] Voice 13: i see

[2:09:03] Voice 5: five hands up

[2:09:04] Voice 13: thank you hands down hands down sorry thank you opposed all

[2:09:21] Voice 12: right one opposed

[2:09:22] Voice 12: all right so the letter get

[2:09:37] Voice 6: to it oh sorry that's the wrong one page

[2:09:52] Voice 13: 19 of the agenda okay

[2:09:54] Voice 6: Okay, thank you.

[2:10:06] Voice 12: There we go. All right.

[2:10:08] Voice 12: So,

[2:10:08] Voice 13: any comments, suggestions, amendments, anything?

[2:10:19] Voice 13: Christy Peterson.

[2:10:23] Voice 14: Yeah, I brought this up earlier,

[2:10:25] Voice 14: and I guess there was a little bit of confusion about where I was at.

[2:10:29] Voice 14: I apologize for that.

[2:10:31] Voice 14: But, yes, the section on the object of the trust here,

[2:10:36] Voice 14: um it does not just in light of the trust council interpretation that we hit on in september

[2:10:44] Voice 14: it's not mentioned here and i just see that as a little bit uh at odds with

[2:10:50] Voice 14: and not that i disagree with it with the text but there's i just feel like we're missing

[2:10:58] Voice 14: some way of acknowledging what did happen there um i don't want to i don't want to i wouldn't

[2:11:07] Voice 14: want to put this out as it is and then have um have it brought back to us saying oh but you guys

[2:11:14] Voice 14: agreed to an interpretation in september that's my thought about that particular paragraph i'm

[2:11:21] Voice 14: not sure how to address it uh

[2:11:27] Voice 13: trustee bernardo could

[2:11:29] Voice 4: we have could we have

[2:11:30] Voice 3: the um uh the part

[2:11:33] Voice 3: part of the letter that refers to

[2:11:36] Voice 13: the

[2:11:37] Voice 3: mandate up on the screen okay

[2:11:39] Voice 13: um because Mr

[2:11:41] Voice 13: Barlow that

[2:11:42] Voice 13: is page 20 at the bottom the object of the trust I appreciate

[2:11:49] Voice 3: uh trustee Peterson's uh point yeah

[2:11:51] Voice 3: that that episode that we went through uh since last September I guess the the drama and the

[2:11:58] Voice 3: the public confusion uh over the miscommunication of the changes or not changes but the interpretation

[2:12:04] Voice 3: they've come up with yeah that's an issue and it has been an issue but we have to uh i don't think

[2:12:10] Voice 3: we should specifically refer to it in the letter uh it's a very specific issue and it what it is

[2:12:17] Voice 3: it's a controversy it was a mess basically that was unnecessary and what we say here

[2:12:25] Voice 3: in a general way covers it off by saying look it's we've got deliberations that are and you know

[2:12:32] Voice 3: persistently troubled by inconclusive debates um and there's chronic division among trustees in

[2:12:39] Voice 3: the public well that's what that's what happened again after what we did was attempted to do in

[2:12:45] Voice 3: terms of section three interpretation i don't think we add anything to the issue uh by referring

[2:12:50] Voice 3: to it here and uh if somebody brings it up how come you didn't mention it you can say look we

[2:12:57] Voice 3: covered it by saying this division exists and if you want to get into the details well then that

[2:13:01] Voice 3: comes up in the discussion with the minister and when we get into more specifics so i don't think

[2:13:06] Voice 3: there's a risk in not disclosing it because we actually in a general way have already covered it

[2:13:10] Voice 3: i do see uh a negativity risk if we sort of zero in on like we you know we tried to do an

[2:13:18] Voice 3: interpretation and people sort of took a piece out of us for it and we didn't do a great job of

[2:13:22] Voice 3: communicating it i mean it starts getting complicated and that's the last thing we

[2:13:26] Voice 3: want is a complicated letter here so uh with respect i don't think we really need to address

[2:13:31] Voice 3: that point because that actually is addressed already thanks trustee

[2:13:36] Voice 13: peterson yeah

[2:13:39] Voice 14: i i take

[2:13:40] Voice 14: your your point um trustee bernardo i'm not necessarily and of course i wasn't uh i didn't

[2:13:47] Voice 14: didn't offer a resolution to that. I just wanted to think about how we might take into

[2:14:00] Voice 14: account what has happened. We don't have to include it in the letter, but I'm just a little

[2:14:06] Voice 14: bit troubled about just in light of that process. I mean, maybe it's, I don't know, maybe it's

[2:14:14] Voice 14: covered and maybe it's just me that's um not quite sure about that so i'll let it be well

[2:14:23] Voice 13: if we were

[2:14:24] Voice 13: to um update this or make it more current it might be uh with respect to the second sentence in here

[2:14:32] Voice 13: the undefined term unique amenities has led to competing interpretations of the meaning and scope

[2:14:37] Voice 13: of the Island's Trust jurisdiction and has, even recently, adding those words,

[2:14:44] Voice 13: generated division among trustees and the public.

[2:14:50] Voice 3: Sure, why not?

[2:14:52] Voice 3: Like, has, even recently, generated chronic division.

[2:14:58] Voice 3: Does that work, Tim?

[2:15:02] Voice 14: Yeah, no, I'm happy with that.

[2:15:04] Voice 14: That covers it off for me.

[2:15:09] Voice 13: All right.

[2:15:09] Voice 13: right so after uh before generated chronic division so even recently do we want even

[2:15:22] Voice 13: but anyway even recently generated and take out chronic well

[2:15:31] Voice 3: we do we do need to keep the concept

[2:15:33] Voice 3: of chronic because that's that's the real issue it just doesn't go away

[2:15:36] Trustee Patrick: more yeah more division

[2:15:39] Voice 13: more of the chronic division more to the chronic place chronic with more

[2:15:49] Trustee Patrick: or

[2:15:54] Voice 2: ongoing

[2:15:56] Voice 13: yeah

[2:15:58] Voice 14: i like ongoing even better than more generated

[2:16:01] Voice 13: ongoing division amongst trustees

[2:16:03] Voice 13: uh

[2:16:05] Voice 4: well but then that would yeah okay um trustee lockham um

[2:16:14] Trustee Luckham: thank you for recognizing my hand up

[2:16:18] Trustee Luckham: i think uh i think uh trustee patrick's suggestion is the best one i've heard just

[2:16:24] Trustee Luckham: simply more i i have learned over the years it's better not to say more than you have to because

[2:16:31] Trustee Luckham: the choice of words um creates often more division and certainly um i'm just going to say that i i

[2:16:41] Trustee Luckham: I liked actually indicating to the province that you need to chime in on this

[2:16:48] Trustee Luckham: because we've had difficulty with it because this is a hurdle that we have to

[2:16:55] Trustee Luckham: get over in order to be able to have policy statement conversations,

[2:16:59] Trustee Luckham: have governance conversations and any support and assistance we can get there.

[2:17:05] Trustee Luckham: And if it's another agency that overrules,

[2:17:09] Trustee Luckham: overrules whatever we might think that that might be a good thing but then of course that creates

[2:17:13] Trustee Luckham: its own set of division but i think you need to make it simple not uh and i wouldn't use the word

[2:17:20] Trustee Luckham: chronic but more division would be excellent thank you not ongoing

[2:17:26] Trustee Luckham: well sure fewer words are

[2:17:31] Trustee Luckham: always better all right trustee harris yeah

[2:17:34] Voice 15: well we seem to be adding more words and not fewer i

[2:17:36] Voice 15: I like the original.

[2:17:37] Voice 15: I think that that, you know, really spells it out.

[2:17:40] Voice 15: But could we not still tag on something about this is continuing this term, but leave the initial sentence there and tag something at the end if you want to add.

[2:17:55] Voice 15: But I see it changing.

[2:17:57] Voice 13: The request or the suggestion was to reference the date that's been going on since March of this year.

[2:18:08] Voice 13: Well, September, no.

[2:18:09] Voice 13: That was even recently.

[2:18:11] Voice 3: Yeah.

[2:18:11] Voice 3: Trustee Bernardo?

[2:18:13] Voice 3: Yeah, you know, I agree with Trustee Harris that the existing language is perfect, but I also think we need to sort of move along and resolve these things.

[2:18:23] Voice 3: I don't have any objections to this language, has even recently generated ongoing division.

[2:18:29] Voice 3: And then we get to address the issue of the chronic stuff.

[2:18:31] Voice 3: uh you know that's actually still covered when we talk about uh deliberations are persistently

[2:18:38] Voice 3: troubled by inconclusive debates etc etc i mean we get the point across regardless so i think you

[2:18:42] Voice 3: know yeah i could live with this language it's fine with me

[2:18:44] Voice 15: my my reluctance to take out chronic

[2:18:47] Voice 15: was because the province is going to say well sure there's division there's there's always division

[2:18:51] Voice 15: there's division in the province there's division that's something that's goes on but the chronic

[2:18:55] Voice 15: just really um kind of highlights that this isn't your regular type of division that's happening

[2:19:00] Voice 15: um anyway that's those were my thoughts when i heard it you know the idea of it being changed

[2:19:10] Trustee Luckham: trustee lockham yeah i only kept my hand up because i i uh wanted to support what trustee

[2:19:17] Trustee Luckham: bernardo just said because i could say more but i'm gonna not um let's make it simple

[2:19:22] Voice 13: cao moms

[2:19:28] Voice 2: this would be adding more words so maybe is is not the desire um if you were wanting to retain

[2:19:34] Voice 2: in the original language you could just at the end of the sentence put comma in this and previous

[2:19:40] Voice 2: term that

[2:19:42] Voice 15: was what i was trying to get at my thank you for putting it so eloquently um ceo

[2:19:47] Voice 15: mobs and

[2:19:51] Voice 3: so with that suggestion you would remove that you would just go back to has generated

[2:19:55] Voice 3: chronic division

[2:19:58] Voice 2: it's a

[2:19:59] Voice 2: thought yeah for consideration actually

[2:20:02] Voice 3: ceo mobs suggestion

[2:20:04] Voice 3: it reads better because it covers the whole period of time so that that works even better

[2:20:10] Voice 3: i think than this change okay

[2:20:12] Voice 13: so david then uh yeah take out on it yeah leave chronic okay

[2:20:21] Voice 13: how's

[2:20:22] Voice 12: that perfect chair

[2:20:27] Trustee Luckham: luckham yeah i i sometimes just stick in the mud i don't like

[2:20:34] Trustee Luckham: the word chronic and i don't want to um undermine those that have expressed a point of view on this

[2:20:41] Trustee Luckham: but let's remember there is roughly 30 000 people in the island's trust area many more that have an

[2:20:48] Trustee Luckham: interest in the trust area and chronic would imply to me the majority of people are complaining about

[2:20:54] Trustee Luckham: this it's not there are a number of groups and individuals that have taken this as an issue

[2:21:02] Trustee Luckham: and it's certainly been consuming a lot of time and there has been communication but

[2:21:06] Trustee Luckham: chronic is not the characterization i think that is is right so but it's up to you guys what you

[2:21:14] Trustee Luckham: want to do i

[2:21:16] Voice 13: tend to agree i'm not entirely sure i would articulate it the same way but i have

[2:21:19] Voice 13: problems with the word chronic but uh trustee

[2:21:24] Voice 15: harris um i i really don't see a problem with

[2:21:27] Voice 15: the word chronic i don't interpret that as a majority um it doesn't seem like a offensive word

[2:21:33] Voice 15: or it seems to really get to the point i'm not sure i understand the reluctance to use it um

[2:21:40] Voice 15: maybe there's anyway i think it's great and i would uh move to keep it

[2:21:45] Voice 13: trustee gravel i

[2:21:50] Voice 10: i agree

[2:21:51] Voice 10: with peter i think we need a more palatable word there i don't think chronic is uh is the right

[2:21:57] Voice 10: flavor. Or I think perhaps maybe

[2:21:58] Voice 10: long-standing.

[2:22:04] Voice 13: Trustee Peterson.

[2:22:07] Voice 14: I agree. I don't like chronic either. I could go

[2:22:09] Voice 14: with long-standing, continuing, ongoing,

[2:22:11] Voice 14: any of those three.

[2:22:13] Voice 13: Or just omit it?

[2:22:16] Voice 13: Generated division?

[2:22:18] Voice 14: Continuing, ongoing,

[2:22:20] Voice 14: more.

[2:22:21] Voice 14: I think, I mean,

[2:22:23] Voice 14: more.

[2:22:24] Voice 13: Is it not the same as in this and previous terms?

[2:22:28] Voice 3: Yes. Problematic?

[2:22:29] Voice 3: Why don't you just...

[2:22:32] Voice 3: Why don't we

[2:22:32] Voice 3: just get rid of chronic?

[2:22:33] Voice 14: We can just drop chronic and it'll be fine.

[2:22:35] Voice 3: And get rid of chronic, get rid of the comma after public, and we say the same thing in a softer way.

[2:22:40] Voice 12: Yeah.

[2:22:41] Voice 3: So it has generated evasion among trustees and the public in this and previous terms.

[2:22:46] Voice 3: It gets the point across.

[2:22:48] Voice 3: I don't know why people are allergic to the word chronic, but if they are, fine, let's get rid of it.

[2:22:52] Voice 3: We say the same thing this way, and that's fine.

[2:22:59] Voice 13: All right.

[2:23:00] Voice 13: So there's an amendment.

[2:23:04] Voice 13: generated division among trustees and the public

[2:23:06] Voice 13: in this and previous terms.

[2:23:10] Voice 15: The comma's still there. I don't know if that's...

[2:23:12] Voice 15: Yeah, let's

[2:23:13] Voice 15: get rid of it.

[2:23:15] Voice 13: That's real wordsmithing. Okay, good.

[2:23:19] Voice 13: So, do we need a motion to amend this part of the letter?

[2:23:23] Voice 13: Edit?

[2:23:24] Voice 13: I

[2:23:24] Voice 3: suggest we proceed like we did with the RFD.

[2:23:26] Voice 3: Collect all the changes and then just do one thing.

[2:23:29] Voice 13: All right. Any other changes? Good plan.

[2:23:35] Voice 13: C.A.O. Mobs.

[2:23:39] Voice 2: Obviously, the approach is up to you, Chair,

[2:23:42] Voice 2: but if we've got a lot of different things in a single resolution,

[2:23:45] Voice 2: the person may be opposed to part of it.

[2:23:48] Voice 2: Right.

[2:23:49] Voice 15: And

[2:23:49] Voice 2: then how do you vote, right?

[2:23:51] Voice 15: That's a good point.

[2:23:52] Voice 13: All right.

[2:23:54] Voice 15: I'm going to vote on the word strong.

[2:23:55] Voice 13: Okay, Straw Poll,

[2:23:56] Voice 13: is there any objection to the amendments for this paragraph?

[2:24:01] Trustee Luckham: If I might just interject for a moment.

[2:24:05] Trustee Luckham: Yeah.

[2:24:05] Trustee Luckham: Certainly, fully respect CAO Mob's concern about some may choose to vote only partially.

[2:24:16] Trustee Luckham: The opportunity always exists to split a motion or that can come up in the discussion at council.

[2:24:23] Trustee Luckham: So I would just say, let's go with the recommendation from this committee and let council decide what it wants to do to find full endorsement.

[2:24:33] Voice 13: and we're at the point of trying to sort out what the recommendation is so we've got an amendment

[2:24:39] Voice 13: um let's vote on this one we'll do it one at a time and then we won't get into any kind of

[2:24:43] Voice 13: complications and extra um this amendment is on the floor i'm not sure whose motion it is

[2:24:52] Voice 13: that was i'll

[2:24:53] Voice 15: consider it as i'll move it i'll second it for um expedience who's

[2:25:00] Voice 13: that seconding

[2:25:01] Voice 15: me

[2:25:01] Voice 13: trustee harris yes okay

[2:25:04] Voice 13: all right any more discussion um

[2:25:08] Voice 15: i'm not in favor i think the word

[2:25:10] Voice 15: chronic should stay okay but

[2:25:13] Voice 15: the uh thank

[2:25:14] Voice 13: you any more discussion all right all those in favor

[2:25:19] Voice 13: okay any opposed lower your hands first of all any opposed okay one

[2:25:31] Voice 5: opposed five in favor

[2:25:32] Voice 5: All

[2:25:34] Voice 13: right. Any other amendments, changes, comments on the content of the letter? Is there any benefit to...

[2:25:54] Voice 13: One of the comments that Adam Olson raised was that the legislation was crafted 50 years ago and reviewed 35 years ago.

[2:26:06] Voice 13: And that's long before any of the court cases and any of the changes and significant changes with respect to First Nations relations.

[2:26:17] Voice 13: populations so when we've got um the identified challenges at the top of page 20 one is the

[2:26:25] Voice 13: alignment with the declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples act um you know is it worth

[2:26:31] Voice 13: highlighting that there's been so many significant changes in the just the culture the basic culture

[2:26:39] Voice 13: of the the province with respect to um all of the um ways that we have to start thinking differently

[2:26:48] Voice 13: differently trustee

[2:26:49] Trustee Luckham: luckham yeah thank you um you know i don't think we need to state the obvious

[2:26:53] Trustee Luckham: actually um the this is the reason why the government is having difficulty and is even

[2:26:58] Trustee Luckham: initiated the local government act reform uh certainly one of them um yeah i don't think we

[2:27:06] Trustee Luckham: need to state the obvious but

[2:27:07] Voice 13: is that not one of the things we're aligned with yeah

[2:27:12] Voice 3: okay

[2:27:14] Voice 13: trustee

[2:27:15] Voice 13: Bernardo?

[2:27:15] Voice 3: Yeah, I agree with Treti Luckert on this one, in that it would just be, you know,

[2:27:22] Voice 3: Coles to Newcastle. It's really stating the obvious. This is the urgency with which we're

[2:27:26] Voice 3: talking about reconciliation. That's why we're doing it. I mean, you wouldn't even be talking

[2:27:30] Voice 3: about reconciliation except for those legal decisions. So it's built into the whole thing,

[2:27:35] Voice 3: really.

[2:27:35] Voice 13: Okay. The other comment that CAO Mobs raised was that we are getting funding. We don't

[2:27:45] Voice 13: spend it all and that we have made pretty significant progress in terms of some of the

[2:27:52] Voice 13: agreements that we have and should we re twist this a little bit tweak it in terms of we want

[2:27:59] Voice 13: to be able to increase and then continue and increase that that kind of work and it would

[2:28:07] Voice 13: help us greatly if we had you know some adjustments to the funding model we can show them how

[2:28:13] Voice 13: how well we've spent, you know, the $120,000 that they've given us for five years.

[2:28:19] Voice 13: And, you know, we can do even better.

[2:28:22] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo?

[2:28:25] Voice 3: Short answer to that is no, I don't think that would be helpful because what we're doing now in funding,

[2:28:32] Voice 3: and the CEO's comments included some reference to there's some unspent money.

[2:28:36] Voice 3: So maybe the ministry will say, what are you complaining about?

[2:28:38] Voice 3: You gave me lots of money.

[2:28:39] Voice 3: You haven't even spent it.

[2:28:41] Voice 3: That's not the point.

[2:28:42] Voice 3: It's not about spending. It's not about funding the current arrangement, which is inadequate. It's about constructing a workable structure where that we can actually engage in negotiations and develop collaborative co-management models with our First Nations.

[2:29:04] Voice 3: and that whole exercise of doing that level of outreach to actually get something substantive

[2:29:10] Voice 3: done that's an enormous undertaking that is cannot be funded under the current model

[2:29:15] Voice 3: so it's it's what we're trying to say here is the funding model needs to change to suit the task

[2:29:21] Voice 3: that needs to be accomplished not the task that we're left with right now which is you know we

[2:29:27] Voice 3: can talk about negotiating protocol agreements but what are they they're really structures for

[2:29:31] Voice 3: talking to each other not actually moving the ball forward what we're talking about here is

[2:29:37] Voice 3: getting the legislative change that allows us to take an active role in the negotiations and

[2:29:41] Voice 3: development of collaborative agreements okay that's that

[2:29:44] Voice 3: funding that's the funding we're

[2:29:46] Voice 3: talking about so i don't think we need to spend any time talking about current funding issues

[2:29:52] Voice 3: well

[2:29:54] Voice 13: that's what we're talking about the current funding model yes but i'm

[2:29:59] Voice 3: to

[2:30:00] Voice 3: What I'm saying is the revenue that we have now

[2:30:02] Voice 3: and what we're spending it on isn't relevant to what we're talking about.

[2:30:06] Voice 13: Okay, got it.

[2:30:06] Voice 13: Trustee Peterson?

[2:30:09] Voice 14: I think that the short answer to the question of what if the province says,

[2:30:17] Voice 14: hey, you haven't spent all the money, there's a piece here,

[2:30:21] Voice 14: which is the capacity of First Nations.

[2:30:25] Voice 14: That's a huge issue in terms of our communications,

[2:30:31] Voice 14: in terms of developing protocols and stuff if if trust council if

[2:30:37] Voice 14: if trust council was providing adequate capacity funding to all 27 nations um

[2:30:45] Voice 14: god knows all the money would be gone right away i mean that that's just it's a really it's that's

[2:30:52] Voice 14: a big issue so i think that's the easy answer is if that is that if that is questioned by the

[2:30:58] Voice 14: the province um if it's there's there's sure there's some there's some nations um that maybe

[2:31:06] Voice 14: not have uh as serious capacity issues but i think that's that's the quick answer to

[2:31:12] Voice 14: what are you doing with the money i mean how big

[2:31:16] Voice 13: is the problem is

[2:31:17] Voice 14: big okay

[2:31:18] Voice 13: that's forecasting

[2:31:19] Voice 13: and we're going to focus on the letter trustee patrick yeah

[2:31:24] Trustee Patrick: i mentioned it earlier today this

[2:31:26] Trustee Patrick: This is really about aligning the funding with whatever the outcome of the review is.

[2:31:32] Trustee Patrick: So it is a future state of what that funding is, not what the current state.

[2:31:37] Trustee Patrick: One of the original recommendations for the Allen's Trust 50 years ago, it made it very clear that it was not going to be funded just by taxpayers amongst this area.

[2:31:46] Trustee Patrick: And it did start with large grants initially, and they went down to a very small amount.

[2:31:52] Trustee Patrick: So the whole topic of funding needs to be reexamined thoroughly.

[2:31:56] Trustee Patrick: and aligned with whatever outcome comes from the review.

[2:32:02] Voice 13: Christy Luckham.

[2:32:05] Trustee Luckham: Yeah, agreeing generally with everything I've heard.

[2:32:09] Trustee Luckham: I don't think we need to delve into our current financial status

[2:32:14] Trustee Luckham: if we're operating appropriately.

[2:32:19] Trustee Luckham: If we were running a deficit all the time,

[2:32:20] Trustee Luckham: we'd have attention to that matter.

[2:32:22] Trustee Luckham: It is about the funding model,

[2:32:24] Trustee Luckham: model but that indeed as sort of touched on that funding model needs to be revisited province-wide

[2:32:31] Trustee Luckham: because regional districts and municipalities are in the same situation associated with

[2:32:34] Trustee Luckham: lack of capacity of the nations to be able to undertake the work that we need to work on

[2:32:41] Trustee Luckham: together and so it is about the model and if we blue sky it

[2:32:47] Trustee Luckham: it's a really big topic and that'll

[2:32:49] Trustee Luckham: be a detailed conversation of which the province needs to initiate broadly. Do we need to focus on

[2:32:56] Voice 13: the blue sky and maybe change the word the verb unattainable no

[2:33:01] Trustee Luckham: it is unattainable

[2:33:03] Voice 13: yeah well but do we need to would it be better if we focused on what we think is obtainable

[2:33:10] Trustee Luckham: i don't think we know but anyway yeah that's a good question

[2:33:13] Voice 13: ceo mobs you're are you there

[2:33:22] Voice 13: you're mute i think oh

[2:33:25] Voice 2: thanks chair um so we're we're talking a little bit about the funding

[2:33:29] Voice 2: model as well as alignment with with DRIPA here so I'll just focus a little bit on on DRIPA.

[2:33:36] Voice 2: With 27 Indigenous governing bodies of interest in the trust area you know not all of them may

[2:33:42] Voice 2: want to engage that's just a thought. We've certainly seen more uptick when we've been

[2:33:47] Voice 2: able to provide enhanced levels of capacity funding to those nations who are interested

[2:33:52] Voice 2: in engaging with us so that can support this argument. The province you know again might

[2:33:58] Voice 2: point out well you've got the money for that um the some of staff's comments or my comments in

[2:34:06] Voice 2: the cao report is to help us dig into a topic to get clarity what i see happening in this discussion

[2:34:15] Voice 2: is a little bit of you know trustee will have a comment and the response will be oh but that's not

[2:34:19] Voice 2: the intent here so that to me says that maybe the intent here isn't as clear as it could be

[2:34:26] Voice 2: and we may want to examine

[2:34:28] Voice 2: if there's a way to make it more clear

[2:34:29] Voice 2: so that when it lands in the province,

[2:34:31] Voice 2: they also are clear on exactly what's being asked.

[2:34:38] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo.

[2:34:40] Voice 3: Well, again, that misunderstands what we're doing here

[2:34:43] Voice 3: because what we're doing is stating,

[2:34:44] Voice 3: like in this section here and the rest of them,

[2:34:47] Voice 3: the illustrative examples,

[2:34:49] Voice 3: is we're stating a proposition.

[2:34:51] Voice 3: We're declaring,

[2:34:52] Voice 3: like engaging with 27 Indigenous governing bodies

[2:34:56] Voice 3: that have interests in the trust area.

[2:34:58] Voice 3: We're declaring it's enormous scope, and it's going to cost more in terms of resources than is available to us under the current model. Justifying that, we can justify that.

[2:35:14] Voice 3: trustee Peterson's remark about funding capacity that's a response as he correctly pointed out if

[2:35:20] Voice 3: we if we get a question that comes back to us like what are you even talking about you have

[2:35:25] Voice 3: some money we given it to you haven't spent it all that's that's fine we can then get into the

[2:35:30] Voice 3: conversation at that point to point out that sure that's good enough for this limited restricted

[2:35:36] Voice 3: form of engagement but it's nowhere close to being what's necessary to develop collaborative

[2:35:42] Voice 3: of governance arrangements at that which is the point and so uh i don't see uh i don't see it an

[2:35:53] Voice 3: issue being a particular issue in terms of getting a response from the province if we're not specific

[2:36:00] Voice 3: at this juncture again we're trying to start a conversation about this there's a lot of dimensions

[2:36:06] Voice 3: to it there's a limit to what we can do with this letter it needs to be accessible and we're

[2:36:12] Voice 3: We're touching on the issue because we're raising a question that we want to

[2:36:16] Voice 3: have answered. And then we want to engage in that debate.

[2:36:21] Voice 13: So I agree with all of that.

[2:36:24] Voice 13: I'm just concerned about the way that we're phrasing it. And again,

[2:36:29] Voice 13: it's that, you know, pointing fingers and, and using negatives and,

[2:36:34] Voice 13: you know, trying to figure out if what we want to be is collaborative with the

[2:36:38] Voice 13: province, instead of slapping them in terms of, you know, how,

[2:36:42] Voice 13: how they've let us down, then, you know, we need to, we're doing good things, and they could pay

[2:36:48] Voice 13: attention, and they could help us. And, you know, they could accept that what is happening in terms

[2:36:56] Voice 13: of the agreements that we've been able to reach is a model, and it's a good step. And I don't

[2:37:02] Voice 13: think that this paragraph says that kind of positive blue sky kind of message. And I think

[2:37:12] Voice 13: that that's um you know that it's the the tone more than anything else that needs to be tweaked

[2:37:19] Voice 13: so um don't

[2:37:20] Voice 3: we undercut ourselves if we're celebrating all the great things we do like

[2:37:24] Voice 3: that leads to the problem saying what are you complaining about i mean the point here is to

[2:37:28] Voice 3: apply a certain amount

[2:37:29] Voice 13: but we've only got seven out of the 27 and we need but

[2:37:31] Voice 3: how do we how do

[2:37:32] Voice 3: we apply political pressure by celebrating and saying you know all this good news that we're

[2:37:38] Voice 3: sending the province. Yeah, we can talk about the positives later, but we're highlighting the need

[2:37:42] Voice 3: here. We're trying to transmit a certain amount of urgency. We undercut that message by sort of

[2:37:47] Voice 3: muddling it with saying, on the one hand, we're doing this, but then in order to do this other

[2:37:51] Voice 3: stuff, it seems to me that's a little complicated for a letter like this.

[2:37:56] Voice 13: Well, it just means it's

[2:37:58] Voice 13: not complicated. It just means tweaking. Sorry. Trustee Harris.

[2:38:03] Voice 15: Yeah, I struggle with, you know,

[2:38:07] Voice 15: know it's exactly you know joe said it pretty good there but you know we want them to to recognize

[2:38:15] Voice 15: there's a problem so yes there will be negatives um and and to to water it down and i don't i don't

[2:38:24] Voice 15: see how the thought of the of us saying something negative or or alarming or whatever the word right

[2:38:33] Voice 15: the right word may be i don't see how that's going to have the province not want to deal with it if

[2:38:37] Voice 15: If any, if any, you know, if in any way that should that should lead them to do more.

[2:38:43] Voice 15: If we water it down and say and blue sky, it is a part of terms being used, then then, you know, they'll be less likely to want to help us.

[2:38:51] Voice 15: It goes back to that motion we had removing the word chronic. There should have been some kind of a descriptive word in there because, yeah, sure, there's division.

[2:38:57] Voice 15: There's division all the time, but should have been, you know, there should be a descriptive word and taking, you know, any word could have been in there.

[2:39:03] Voice 15: but at least that would be descriptive we're watering this the essence of this letter down

[2:39:07] Voice 15: and that's to me that's very problematic to hearing these things and i'm not in favor of

[2:39:14] Voice 15: removing or watering down this paragraph ceo

[2:39:18] Voice 13: mobs um

[2:39:22] Voice 2: a middle ground here which i think could

[2:39:25] Voice 2: resonate with the province is to frame this as a significant opportunity for the province to

[2:39:32] Voice 2: to advance its own interest, as well as the interest of the island's trust by investing

[2:39:38] Voice 2: in this topic with us. That might be a good way to frame it is to say, you know, there's a

[2:39:44] Voice 2: significant opportunity here, and we're struggling to advance it on our own. But you know, we know

[2:39:49] Voice 2: you have a keen interest here. So if you're looking for a tone adjustment, that might be a

[2:39:54] Voice 2: sweet spot all

[2:39:58] Voice 13: right it is quarter to 12 and um we're running out of time trustee bernardo i'm

[2:40:04] Voice 13: going to suggest that i don't have a specific amendment and uh i might i'm not sure if i'm

[2:40:11] Voice 13: going to have another opportunity to raise it with this group prior to council but um i'll give

[2:40:16] Voice 13: you a heads up i'm going to try and work on this can we leave it for now uh we could

[2:40:26] Voice 3: i i was about

[2:40:28] Voice 3: what to say before yeah we could leave it for now i don't think it's you know although you know

[2:40:36] Voice 3: we're not doing the trust council any favors by bringing disagreements amongst ourselves forward

[2:40:40] Voice 3: to them uh and i'm wondering perhaps we could just put a little bit more effort we could try

[2:40:44] Voice 3: to resolve this ceo mob's suggestion it seems workable to me i wouldn't want to change any

[2:40:51] Voice 3: existing language but you know after the sentence says this is an undertaking of enormous scope etc

[2:40:58] Voice 3: etc. Leave that alone and just insert another sentence

[2:41:01] Voice 3: right after that to the effect of it is also

[2:41:05] Voice 3: a major opportunity to advance

[2:41:10] Voice 3: reconciliation or something like that. Or it also

[2:41:17] Voice 3: represents a significant opportunity to advance

[2:41:21] Voice 3: reconciliation in the province.

[2:41:26] Voice 13: What Julio said was significant opportunity to advance our own

[2:41:30] Voice 13: and islands or the provinces and islands trust um by investing with the trust okay that doesn't

[2:41:39] Voice 3: make any sense i'm sorry what are you saying trying

[2:41:42] Voice 13: to write it down it's significant uh it's

[2:41:45] Voice 13: both of our interests and it's a significant opportunity to advance both the province and

[2:41:50] Voice 13: the islands trust interest why

[2:41:51] Voice 3: don't we just say it first of all it shouldn't say this represents

[2:41:54] Voice 3: represents is it is also okay it also represents because we're counterweighting the the negative

[2:42:01] Voice 3: part it also represents a significant opportunity to advance reconciliation in the province and

[2:42:09] Voice 3: that that's it's implicit that it's our interest in the province that way it's all covered what

[2:42:14] Voice 3: think yep

[2:42:18] Voice 12: uh

[2:42:24] Voice 4: promise singular capital p thank

[2:42:29] Voice 3: you and i i think that uh working with the

[2:42:35] Voice 3: ceo moffs the suggestion i think um i think that answers it

[2:42:42] Voice 3: and

[2:42:42] Voice 4: stops you from

[2:42:43] Voice 3: making mischief at trust council any

[2:42:50] Voice 13: more discussion all right so um

[2:42:56] Voice 13: joe do you want to move that amendment sure

[2:42:59] Voice 4: Sure. Yeah,

[2:43:03] Voice 4: I move that the

[2:43:07] Voice 3: second paragraph, how should I reference it? I move that

[2:43:12] Voice 3: the second paragraph under the heading alignment with DRIPA be amended with

[2:43:22] Voice 3: the addition

[2:43:27] Voice 3: of the sentence. It also represents a significant opportunity to advance reconciliation in the

[2:43:38] Voice 3: the province put that in quotation marks yeah after

[2:43:49] Voice 4: uh the words uh current funding model

[2:43:55] Voice 4: i think that works so that's the motion sorry

[2:44:26] Voice 13: i'm muted i had a dog barking i'll second that

[2:44:29] Voice 13: any more discussion all right all those in favor all right hands down any opposed

[2:44:48] Voice 13: motion carries all right any other comments changes amendments any problems with the letter

[2:45:05] Voice 13: Good. Last chance. Seven minutes to 12.

[2:45:12] Voice 15: Let's get it done.

[2:45:14] Voice 15: Trustee Harris.

[2:45:16] Voice 15: Okay, well, if we've got seven minutes, I say we add the word constant in front of division on the Section 3 part where we took out chronic.

[2:45:27] Voice 13: Sorry, that's...

[2:45:28] Voice 4: No,

[2:45:29] Voice 3: that's worse. Because it isn't constant. It's not true. Chronic was true, but constant is not true.

[2:45:38] Voice 3: Well,

[2:45:38] Voice 15: maybe there's a better descriptive word then. It seems to me removing a descriptive word to division waters it down. And if there's a descriptive word that anybody would be willing

[2:45:49] Voice 3: to put in, then I would be.

[2:45:50] Voice 3: With respect, Trustee Harris, I don't think that's going to add anything to it. The message gets delivered. Let's just move on. That's my suggestion.

[2:45:59] Voice 3: I'm good enough.

[2:46:02] Voice 3: Because I'm out of pure selfishness. I'm exhausted with this topic.

[2:46:07] Trustee Luckham: Trustee Lackham?

[2:46:09] Trustee Luckham: Well, nice try, Trustee Harris.

[2:46:12] Trustee Luckham: Not a bad choice of words.

[2:46:14] Trustee Luckham: Trustee Patrick did suggest more,

[2:46:17] Trustee Luckham: but I'm in agreement with Trustee Bernardo.

[2:46:21] Trustee Luckham: Let's move on.

[2:46:24] Trustee Luckham: All right.

[2:46:25] Trustee Luckham: Is there

[2:46:25] Voice 13: any more discussion on this?

[2:46:28] Voice 13: Then, if I don't see any hands popping up, yay.

[2:46:33] Voice 13: So I don't believe we need,

[2:46:35] Voice 13: do we need a motion to get this as amended

[2:46:39] Voice 13: to the Trust Council?

[2:46:42] Voice 3: Yes, you do.

[2:46:43] Voice 13: Okay.

[2:46:44] Voice 13: So.

[2:46:46] Voice 3: Okay, I'll make the motion.

[2:46:48] Voice 13: Thank you.

[2:46:49] Voice 3: I move that the draft letter to the province prepared by the working group, as amended, be

[2:47:12] Voice 4: attached to

[2:47:21] Voice 3: the request for a decision approved by governance committee, period.

[2:47:44] Voice 13: Okay.

[2:47:44] Voice 13: Seconder?

[2:47:48] Voice 13: Trustee Harris, is that a second?

[2:47:52] Voice 13: Yes.

[2:47:54] Voice 13: all right um i'm sorry to bring this up but before we get into this

[2:47:57] Voice 13: um we did not talk about the signatories

[2:48:09] Voice 3: uh well we're now in now that's being seconded we're now speaking to this

[2:48:14] Voice 3: motion right all right

[2:48:16] Voice 3: but we'll take we'll take that

[2:48:18] Voice 3: comment i'll take that comment is related to that

[2:48:20] Voice 3: and but uh first of all it's not a huge point it's

[2:48:28] Voice 3: something that we can deal with we're running against time we can deal with it

[2:48:30] Voice 3: at trust council and i do think there's a it is very much a political gesture okay the point the

[2:48:35] Voice 3: point of it was to sort of make the letter forceful you know kind of like the declaration

[2:48:39] Voice 3: of independence like y'all got a whole bunch of names which is like yeah this isn't a bureaucratic

[2:48:43] Voice 3: product these are elected people saying this it's a strategy so or sorry it's a tactic i think we

[2:48:50] Voice 3: can discuss that at trust council about whether or not we want to do it or you know it's it because

[2:48:55] Voice 3: our opinions on governance council on the political tactic side of it yeah they're helpful to the rest

[2:49:00] Voice 3: rest of the rest of our colleagues but they're not necessarily determinative so that's my thought

[2:49:05] Voice 3: can

[2:49:05] Voice 13: we say can we move this motion that the um content of the draft letter the um the body of

[2:49:15] Voice 13: the draft letter is agreed to and that we and that leaves off this whole discussion that we're

[2:49:22] Voice 13: going to have about signatories that's

[2:49:25] Voice 3: just confusing you

[2:49:28] Voice 13: know um well we've left out a

[2:49:31] Voice 13: topic that was a question that was been raised a couple of times in the discussion should we take

[2:49:36] Voice 3: a straw poll to figure out whether or not people like really object to the strategy good sure i

[2:49:44] Voice 3: mean because you know the working group devised this tactic i mean okay those of you who weren't

[2:49:50] Voice 5: can just make a comment you could just table this motion have that discussion and come back to this

[2:49:56] Voice 5: Yes.

[2:49:56] Voice 13: Okay. Have we got time? Has everybody got another 20 minutes?

[2:50:01] Voice 3: Not 20. Let's do a 10.

[2:50:03] Voice 3: Another

[2:50:03] Voice 13: 10 minutes?

[2:50:05] Voice 3: Not complicated.

[2:50:07] Voice 13: All right. So let's table this motion. Get back into the discussion about the signatories.

[2:50:15] Voice 13: So Straub-Pohl, anybody, how do I word this? Make it positive.

[2:50:22] Voice 13: All those in favor of the recommendation that it be signed by or show signatures of each of the trustees.

[2:50:36] Voice 13: Okay, hands down. Any opposed? So that's a straw poll with a division. Trustee Patrick.

[2:50:55] Trustee Patrick: Well, I think like the other issue, I mean, this is my concern is that we want to put forward something that's got confidence.

[2:51:01] Trustee Patrick: And if this creates, this is something different trustees haven't seen before. I understand the political comments that we were talking about.

[2:51:07] Trustee Patrick: And trustees can add their name to this in different ways after the vote is made.

[2:51:13] Trustee Patrick: They can attach their name to it.

[2:51:15] Trustee Patrick: So I think if this is going to be a lightning rod, let's remove it.

[2:51:22] Voice 3: Fair enough.

[2:51:23] Voice 3: I don't, I'm happy to discuss this issue, but like I mentioned before, I also don't

[2:51:29] Voice 3: think it's something that, you know, I agree with Trustee Patrick.

[2:51:32] Voice 3: It's, this is not a hilted dial.

[2:51:33] Voice 3: this is like and we do a better job for our colleagues on trust council if we can just

[2:51:41] Voice 3: simply amongst ourselves reach an agreement about this i you know we've got a three to split fine

[2:51:47] Voice 3: i'll i'll turn it around i'm prepared to sort of just change the language to have it signed by the

[2:51:53] Voice 3: chair and we'll just make that additional amendment we've bumped over that you know

[2:51:57] Voice 3: the interest of compromise let's move the baby along well let's go back to the other resolution

[2:52:02] Voice 3: it's

[2:52:03] Voice 15: a three to two split but in favor of keeping it so i don't see why we're bending and why not

[2:52:08] Voice 15: just bring it to trust council it doesn't seem like it's a big deal um i i agree but it's it's

[2:52:13] Voice 15: actually a very it would be a very um you know uh it's a good strategy to open the eyes of of

[2:52:21] Voice 15: right so let trust council decide

[2:52:25] Voice 3: in the door uh i'm just talking about finding a compromise that

[2:52:30] Voice 3: It works for this group. So we can just move this darn thing to trust council.

[2:52:33] Voice 3: And just as, you know, Chair Getty was talking about before that, you know, a trust council, she might have, you know, she might want to tweak it some more.

[2:52:42] Voice 3: Well, on that point, Trustee Harris, I think you and I, frankly, if I get into the mood for it, when we start discussing it there, I think we can propose that as a as a political tactic.

[2:52:53] Voice 3: I mean, it's not you know, it's it's a marginal point, though it really counts as what we're going to say.

[2:52:59] Voice 3: so i'd rather us just you know we're running out of time get this thing to trust council and then

[2:53:03] Voice 3: we can fight over this whether it's included now or later we can have that debate at trust council

[2:53:08] Voice 3: so i'm just i

[2:53:09] Voice 3: that's why i'm that's why i'm kind of comfortable with like rolling over on this at

[2:53:13] Voice 3: this point i'm

[2:53:15] Voice 15: not sure i just don't understand the reluctance i don't see how this can be

[2:53:18] Voice 15: something that's negative and why we're going to remove it i i really don't get that there's

[2:53:23] Voice 15: well

[2:53:24] Voice 4: i don't either

[2:53:24] Voice 15: very very confusing to me and and clearly we just had three saying yes

[2:53:28] Voice 15: and only two saying no so but i hear i take your point we want to talk about it at trust council

[2:53:34] Voice 15: and then fine but yeah i don't know it's very concerning to me anyhow it's

[2:53:41] Voice 13: hard to predict

[2:53:41] Voice 13: what trust council is going to do with this and in terms of us presenting something to trust council

[2:53:48] Voice 13: I think that, you know, if the norm is for the chair to sign and this is something that we want to emphasize and change, then that's the discussion I think that we need to have.

[2:54:01] Voice 15: But is there a norm? Like when is a letter of this magnitude been sent? I don't see a norm here at all.

[2:54:08] Voice 15: And in fact, again, just to emphasize, I'm not sure I understand the reluctance as to why this is something that's positive.

[2:54:15] Voice 15: So, while we wouldn't want to do that, I completely, I don't understand as to why we wouldn't want to do this.

[2:54:22] Voice 13: We're not 100% on board.

[2:54:23] Voice 13: So, you know, whatever, however that works out.

[2:54:26] Voice 13: If you want 100% on board, we don't have it.

[2:54:28] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo.

[2:54:31] Voice 3: Yeah, it's, you know, just to be, for Trustee Harris's benefit, I don't understand either.

[2:54:36] Voice 3: It looks pretty straightforward to me.

[2:54:37] Voice 3: But the main point is, it's most helpful to trust counsel if we're able to speak with one voice as much as possible.

[2:54:45] Voice 3: We don't want to have needless distraction that emerges from here.

[2:54:51] Voice 3: So I don't think it's important enough for us to have a fight over it at this stage.

[2:54:56] Voice 3: So that's why I'm going to move that the draft letter to the province be amended by making the chair of Truss Council the signatory.

[2:55:13] Voice 13: Just cross out, insert signature lines for all trustees who voted in favor.

[2:55:18] Voice 13: or just remove that.

[2:55:20] Voice 3: Yeah.

[2:55:23] Voice 3: So the resolution is, well, should I repeat it

[2:55:27] Voice 3: or what are we doing here?

[2:55:28] Voice 13: Are you not just removing that line?

[2:55:31] Voice 3: Well, and that's what will happen.

[2:55:33] Voice 3: Like, that's what this does, right?

[2:55:36] Voice 7: Okay.

[2:55:37] Voice 3: So, let's see.

[2:55:39] Voice 3: The request of the draft legislative process

[2:55:41] Voice 3: to prepare the work can be amended

[2:55:42] Voice 3: by making the chair of trust council the signatory.

[2:55:44] Voice 3: Yeah, that does the job.

[2:55:46] Voice 13: Right.

[2:55:48] Voice 13: I'll second that.

[2:55:50] Voice 13: Any discussion?

[2:55:51] Voice 13: discussion well

[2:55:52] Voice 15: as as far as discussion goes i would like to know why you don't want to have it

[2:55:57] Voice 15: on there i just started like we just don't like well why what's the rationale behind not having

[2:56:02] Voice 15: everybody sign it i if there's a

[2:56:05] Voice 15: good rationale then yeah i'll vote in favor but i don't see the

[2:56:09] Voice 15: rationale it seemed i don't get it well

[2:56:13] Voice 13: if we're going to spend time trying to convince you i'm

[2:56:15] Voice 13: not sure that we're going to be able to do that but um in the staff advice there's potential

[2:56:22] Voice 13: potential confusion in terms of keeping track of the numbers. There may be some people that

[2:56:28] Voice 13: would vote against one or part of this, and it's really hard to predict. And I haven't even looked

[2:56:38] Voice 13: at the letter that was sent in 2022, but it might be the first time that a letter has gone out with

[2:56:43] Voice 13: other than simply the chair. Trustee Leckham, you're mute.

[2:56:51] Trustee Luckham: All right, thank you. I just wanted

[2:56:53] Trustee Luckham: to state as a matter of fact 18 years on council i think there have only ever been maybe three

[2:57:00] Trustee Luckham: letters out of dozens or more that were ever signed by anybody else other than the chair of

[2:57:06] Trustee Luckham: council a decision of council is a decision of council whether you voted in favor or not and

[2:57:12] Trustee Luckham: that is broadly accepted as a fact in other agencies and the province would see it as that

[2:57:17] Trustee Luckham: and it's that's the norm is for the chair to sign letters on behalf of council end of story well

[2:57:27] Voice 15: i'm happy to hear that there was some other instances where it didn't happen and there was

[2:57:31] Voice 15: more than one signature and clearly this is not the norm this letter is not the norm this is

[2:57:37] Voice 15: completely you know um a very special letter so you know in that i'll be voting against this

[2:57:45] Voice 15: thank you

[2:57:47] Voice 13: trustee peterson um

[2:57:51] Voice 14: just a note of caution the reason that i support this

[2:57:55] Voice 14: is actually if if it were a closer if trust council were a closer vote and only signatories

[2:58:02] Voice 14: were only from that part of trust council that supported a resolution and if that was just over

[2:58:11] Voice 14: half I actually don't think that would look very good so that's that's my

[2:58:16] Voice 14: rationale you know if we had 14 out of 26 trustees I actually think that would

[2:58:28] Voice 14: send a worse message than just having the chair sign it fair point

[2:58:34] Voice 13: all right

[2:58:36] Voice 13: any more discussion let's call the vote on this amendment moved and seconded

[2:58:45] Voice 13: that Governance Council

[2:58:47] Voice 13: request the draft letter of the province prepared by the

[2:58:49] Voice 13: working group be amended by making the chair

[2:58:51] Voice 13: of the Trust Council the signatory.

[2:58:54] Voice 13: All those in favor?

[2:59:01] Voice 13: Hands down?

[2:59:02] Voice 13: Five in favor.

[2:59:04] Voice 13: And opposed?

[2:59:07] Voice 13: One opposed. That passes.

[2:59:10] Voice 13: All right. And then there was

[2:59:11] Voice 13: the other motion that was tabled.

[2:59:14] Voice 13: Yeah. Give me a second.

[2:59:16] Voice 6: Got to rebuild it.

[2:59:33] Voice 13: Okay, there you go.

[2:59:35] Voice 13: Governance moved and seconded

[2:59:37] Voice 13: the governance committee requests that the draft letter to the province prepared by the working

[2:59:40] Voice 13: group as amended be attached to the rfd as approved by governance committee and forwarded to the trust

[2:59:47] Voice 13: council well

[2:59:50] Voice 3: it will be by virtue of being on the rfd okay

[2:59:53] Voice 13: so we just leave it at the end of

[2:59:54] Voice 13: governance committee yeah okay

[3:00:00] Voice 13: That

[3:00:01] Voice 6: works for staff. That's good.

[3:00:03] Voice 13: Okay, so Julia just had a comment.

[3:00:06] Voice 13: Governance Council forward the draft RFD as amended and draft letter to the province as amended to Trust Council for discussion at its September 2024 meeting.

[3:00:15] Voice 13: Yes, that may be more direct.

[3:00:21] Voice 4: That also works.

[3:00:24] Voice 13: Okay.

[3:00:27] Voice 2: Yeah, I think just, I may interject there, Chair.

[3:00:29] Voice 2: I think Governance Committee now owns this as a collective body.

[3:00:35] Voice 2: so i don't think

[3:00:36] Voice 2: we need to make reference to the working group um this would sort of be a more

[3:00:40] Voice 2: customary streamlined clear okay

[3:00:44] Voice 13: so governance committee is forwarding the draft rfd as amended

[3:00:48] Voice 13: and the draft letter of the province as amended to trust council for discussion at its september

[3:00:53] Voice 13: 2024 meeting all right tim i'll send

[3:01:01] Voice 4: uh

[3:01:04] Voice 13: julia can't move it so tim you're gonna move it i'll

[3:01:09] Voice 13: move it i'll second it any more discussion at

[3:01:15] Voice 3: the risk of the technical stuff the previous

[3:01:18] Voice 3: resolution had been moved and seconded already ah so so this has to be treated as a friendly

[3:01:24] Voice 3: amendment or something i moved it first one you seconded it i'm fine with this change uh i don't

[3:01:30] Voice 3: know how we deal with that

[3:01:31] Voice 13: okay so friendly amendment trustee

[3:01:36] Voice 15: harris of the discussion i'm

[3:01:38] Voice 15: I'm just curious, does this mean that the Governance Committee is good with this letter

[3:01:43] Voice 15: and we're not going to be trying to change the letter?

[3:01:46] Voice 15: Any of us aren't going to be trying to change the letter at the Trust Council.

[3:01:49] Voice 15: Is that what this means?

[3:01:51] Voice 13: It means that this has the votes recorded at this meeting and it's going forward to

[3:01:58] Voice 13: the Trust Council.

[3:01:59] Voice 13: So I think you've on record as objecting to most, if not all of the motions.

[3:02:04] Voice 13: motions so you can speak as the minority um at the trust council no

[3:02:09] Voice 15: i'm that's not what i asked

[3:02:11] Voice 15: i'm asking does this mean that we're not going to be making changes to the letter at trust council

[3:02:16] Voice 15: we're going to be okay with this if we vote for this so

[3:02:19] Voice 13: far i mean time will tell but so far sorry

[3:02:23] Voice 13: um mr barlow you've got your hand up

[3:02:28] Voice 1: what's up

[3:02:29] Voice 10: thank you

[3:02:33] Voice 1: chair i think you've recognized me

[3:02:35] Voice 1: I just wanted to clarify that the previous motion that was tabled was not seconded, so there's no need for a friendly amendment.

[3:02:46] Voice 1: It was just a motion that was tabled.

[3:02:50] Voice 1: That's all.

[3:02:50] Voice 3: Thank you.

[3:02:55] Voice 5: Director Marler.

[3:02:57] Voice 5: Yeah, I was trying to respond to Trustee Harris' counsel as a member of Trust Council.

[3:03:04] Voice 5: you're free to vote any way you want on this so if you want to suggest changes even changes

[3:03:10] Voice 5: suggested here that were not approved you can certainly do that and council can debate that

[3:03:16] Voice 5: with you so you're free to do and vote however you feel at trust council you're not bound by

[3:03:22] Voice 5: the governance committee's recommendations thank

[3:03:25] Voice 15: you in response to that um i guess in in response

[3:03:29] Voice 15: to Chair Getty. Yes, I was opposed to things in this meeting, but I was opposed to changing the

[3:03:35] Voice 15: letter. So when I asked that, I'm hoping that we're not going to be seeing us wanting to change

[3:03:40] Voice 15: the letter even more. I'm very much in support of this letter and want to get it to the province

[3:03:46] Voice 15: as least watered down as possible. So that's, I guess, where I was moving towards the question.

[3:03:56] Voice 15: But

[3:03:56] Voice 13: there's no there's no censor. So, you know, if if something comes up and you change your mind and there's more ideas, then that's what the discussion at Trust Council is going to be about.

[3:04:06] Voice 13: But at this point, you know, we have voted to forward this as amended.

[3:04:13] Voice 13: Trustee Bernardo.

[3:04:15] Voice 3: I know what Chair Getty is saying is absolutely right.

[3:04:18] Voice 3: I mean, everybody is free to do what they want at Trust Council in their capacity as trustees there.

[3:04:23] Voice 3: but informally or just simply as a governance committee being responsible as members of the

[3:04:31] Voice 3: governance committee unless something unless circumstances change and those circumstances

[3:04:40] Voice 3: are sufficient to really cause like a major rethink on the part of one of our members on

[3:04:45] Voice 3: this governance committee about the merits of the letter sure i could see i could see that being

[3:04:50] Voice 3: kind of appropriate but it'd be it's extremely unhelpful for any committee to agree on something

[3:04:55] Voice 3: have debated the thing send it on to trust council as a committee and then have the under

[3:05:01] Voice 3: have members sniping and trying to take it apart piece by piece trying to take a second bite of

[3:05:07] Voice 3: the apple they're entitled to do it but it's incredibly unhelpful for the business of the

[3:05:12] Voice 3: trust council so i would just urge you know from a moral standpoint think law anybody any one of us

[3:05:19] Voice 3: think long and hard before going back to the well in terms of making changes to this letter

[3:05:24] Voice 3: because we do have a responsibility to make things easier for trust council thank you i would agree

[3:05:29] Voice 3: thank you choice

[3:05:31] Voice 13: of verbs sniping at any rate all right i think we've finished the work of today

[3:05:38] Voice 13: and there is another governance committee meeting before the trust council

[3:05:43] Voice 13: all don't we

[3:05:43] Voice 15: have to vote we haven't voted yet oh

[3:05:46] Voice 13: sorry all right i thought we had okay um all those

[3:05:53] Voice 13: in favor of this motion that's before us that's everybody well

[3:06:00] Voice 4: done good

[3:06:01] Voice 13: work all right so that

[3:06:03] Voice 13: carries um now we have another um governance committee meeting i believe it is the can

[3:06:14] Voice 13: Can anybody help me?

[3:06:17] Voice 13: 6th?

[3:06:19] Trustee Middleton: 9th, September 9th.

[3:06:20] Voice 13: 9th of September.

[3:06:21] Voice 13: Thank you.

[3:06:22] Voice 13: All right.

[3:06:22] Voice 13: So let's, I'm sorry, Trustee Middleton, did you want to add something?

[3:06:30] Trustee Middleton: Oh, I'll wait till you're finished here.

[3:06:32] Trustee Middleton: I just have a question about how we're now going to package this for presentation to

[3:06:38] Trustee Middleton: Trust Council, but I'll let you finish your thoughts by all means.

[3:06:41] Voice 13: All right, go ahead.

[3:06:42] Voice 13: head

[3:06:43] Trustee Middleton: okay yeah so basically the uh the rfd um will be accompanied by a document i believe the

[3:06:52] Trustee Middleton: standard template um and i i um i think we should talk about what that looks like and what is in

[3:07:02] Trustee Middleton: there and what information we're going to send in addition to uh uh what we've just approved to

[3:07:08] Trustee Middleton: council all

[3:07:10] Voice 13: right can we table that to september the 9th i

[3:07:14] Trustee Middleton: think we can yeah because that would

[3:07:16] Trustee Middleton: be in advance of the uh the agenda deadline for council i believe i

[3:07:21] Voice 13: think we've got a couple of

[3:07:22] Voice 13: days not very long but some in terms of um what we want in the are to be in the package

[3:07:30] Voice 13: um and cao mobs you're going to have uh the same or an update on your uh staff report

[3:07:36] Voice 13: for the council i

[3:07:39] Voice 2: i'll review yeah so rfd is going to council are required to have co comments

[3:07:44] Voice 2: with them by policy so my comments will travel to the council table i will do a review um see if i

[3:07:50] Voice 2: have any change of opinion or thought based on discussion that's come out of the committee today

[3:07:55] Voice 2: and i'll update that um just a brief comment related to timing executive committee meets

[3:08:00] Voice 2: to look at the trust council agenda package i believe on september 11th um and so the agenda

[3:08:06] Voice 2: going to them is circulated the Friday before that so a meeting on the 9th is

[3:08:14] Voice 2: is September 9th oh actually let me just have a look here is September 6 so

[3:08:20] Voice 2: governance committee will be meeting after that agenda is gone to executive

[3:08:24] Voice 2: committee there's certainly opportunity to make some amendments if there if we

[3:08:28] Voice 2: needed to do that have some lead items going to EC okay

[3:08:31] Voice 13: so then we've got two

[3:08:36] Voice 13: members of the executive here and uh we might be able would we be able to do a late thing if there

[3:08:43] Voice 13: was a something for the template for an rfd cao moms uh

[3:08:52] Voice 2: we could propose a late item it would be

[3:08:54] Voice 2: up to executive committee whether or not um they would be receiving that and including it in trust

[3:08:58] Voice 2: council's package okay

[3:08:59] Voice 13: all right it's very very tight so um i don't think that we've got our

[3:09:07] Voice 13: Our minds around it are an ability to deal with it today.

[3:09:10] Voice 13: So let's put that, make sure it's on the agenda for the 9th.

[3:09:13] Voice 13: Any ideas that you've got for anything else that should go to the Executive Committee and Trust Council?

[3:09:21] Voice 13: And perhaps I will share the template so that we know what the categories are that we can include.

[3:09:30] Voice 13: All right?

[3:09:33] Trustee Middleton: Yes, I guess what you're saying then, Chair, is that we will offer the RFD template at the next meeting and make a request of executives that they take a late item from us?

[3:09:45] Voice 13: Yes, if there's anything we want to have in the template that's different from this, in addition.

[3:09:52] Voice 13: So I'll circulate the template as part of the agenda for the next business meeting, September the 9th.

[3:09:59] Voice 13: So anything else that we need to cover today?

[3:10:04] Voice 13: It's a regular business meeting on the 9th and I have no idea what's going to be on that agenda. I've been focusing on this. I'll let you know. And if there's anything that you want to add, then let me know. And that agenda comes out a week ahead. So that's fairly soon as well.

[3:10:20] Voice 13: Well,

[3:10:21] Voice 3: there's one thing I'd like to add, which is I think as a committee, we should just take a moment to reflect that I think we've done a pretty decent job here.

[3:10:31] Voice 3: I mean, this is a tough task and the nature of discussions and the issues that are coming up, it's like this is a very big deal, what we're trying to get done here.

[3:10:42] Voice 3: And I think governance committee as a group, you know, we've dealt with it in an efficient way, pretty effective.

[3:10:51] Voice 3: And I think we're entitled to feel good about that.

[3:10:55] Voice 3: We got it. We were given a tough task. We've done it.

[3:10:57] Voice 3: Now we get to hand it over to trust counsel.

[3:10:59] Voice 13: Well, and thanks to the working group.

[3:11:01] Voice 13: I mean, this is, you know, a huge, big help in terms of having something to work with.

[3:11:06] Voice 13: So

[3:11:07] Voice 3: that's what I was fishing for. Thank you.

[3:11:10] Voice 13: There you go.

[3:11:10] Voice 13: thank you all right motion to adjourn i

[3:11:16] Voice 3: move that we adjourn

[3:11:17] Voice 13: all right any discussion

[3:11:19] Voice 13: see you on the 9th nobody opposed adios all

[3:11:26] Trustee Luckham: adios