Gambier Island Local Trust Committee public hearing, October 1, 2024

[0:00:00] Voice 17: and members of the public, welcome to the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee meeting of October

[0:00:05] Voice 17: the 1st. Holy smokes, where's the year gone? Anyway,

[0:00:10] Voice 17: my name is Peter Luckum, elected on

[0:00:13] Voice 17: Thetis Island, Chair of the Local Trust Committee, Chair of Council. A pleasure to be able to work

[0:00:18] Voice 17: and live in Coastal Illinois Territory here in Lacks and Penelope Territory.

[0:00:22] Voice 17: And I'll turn to trustees to introduce yourself. Trustee Stamford is in the top corner of my screen.

[0:00:27] Voice 17: Good

[0:00:28] Trustee Stamford: morning, everyone. Welcome from Al-Qatsam House Sound. I'm on Chaldnawek, the island otherwise known as Gambier, and looking forward to a good meeting.

[0:00:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Very

[0:00:41] Voice 16: good. Joe Bernardo.

[0:00:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Hello, everybody. My name is Joe Bernardo. I'm the trustee who comes from Keats Island, also known as Lactine. And here we are, another meeting.

[0:00:56] Voice 17: and joining us uh today are a couple of staff members uh marlis mccarger planner good morning

[0:01:02] Voice 17: marlis thank you for joining us and all the preparatory work and sonja zupanek nice to see

[0:01:07] Voice 17: you as well and uh also thank you very much for your contribution to today's work program

[0:01:14] Voice 17: and lisa millard thank you for recording and looking after the technology and the minutes

[0:01:19] Voice 17: That's very much appreciated.

[0:01:20] Voice 17: All right.

[0:01:24] Voice 17: Without further ado, we have an agenda before us.

[0:01:27] Voice 17: And there was one late item from Trustee Bernardo, some requested amendments.

[0:01:35] Voice 17: A little late to receive it in the agenda for members of the public, but you can speak

[0:01:41] Voice 17: to it when we get to that section of the agenda.

[0:01:46] Voice 17: Is there anything further to add or remove from the agenda?

[0:01:52] Voice 17: Nope.

[0:01:53] Voice 17: All right, then.

[0:01:53] Voice 17: So let's receive the agenda as presented by general consent, and we'll move immediately to trustee reports.

[0:02:03] Voice 17: What's happening in your neighbourhood?

[0:02:07] Voice 17: Trustee Stamford, where do you go first?

[0:02:08] Voice 17: You're at the top of my screen.

[0:02:11] Voice 17: I

[0:02:11] Trustee Stamford: think I'll just leave my trustee report.

[0:02:14] Trustee Stamford: I have a written report that was sent out to members of the Gambier community.

[0:02:19] Trustee Stamford: I can forward that copy, and I'll focus on my director's report.

[0:02:24] Trustee Stamford: later.

[0:02:25] Voice 17: Okay thank you. Trustee Bernardo do you have anything?

[0:02:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Well I can be very brief on that

[0:02:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you'll be grateful for once. There's not a heck of a lot to report at least in my trustee capacity

[0:02:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for the local trust area. We've been very busy all of us not just myself on the trust council

[0:02:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): side doing a whole bunch of different things but those are matters of general application. The most

[0:02:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): important thing is that the trust council meeting there's there was a trust council meeting last

[0:02:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): week and the trust council um endorsed a letter to go to the province um on behalf of the trust

[0:03:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): council that uh basically says uh the trust is uh in a situation where it needs to work with

[0:03:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the province and community groups in first nations to re-examine um the island's trust

[0:03:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Act and the structure and basically look at the legislation with a view to modernizing

[0:03:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it, making it better fitting for the challenges we face in the future.

[0:03:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The intent there is, I think, that it doesn't ask for anything specifically.

[0:03:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It asks that we start a conversation, and that's about as far as it goes.

[0:03:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That's a pretty important step because it's calling for re-examination of the legislation in a general way.

[0:03:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Apart from that, I think, you know, there's a regular things that we've been doing at Trust Council to move things along.

[0:03:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But that, in my view, is the prominent item. Thank you.

[0:04:00] Voice 17: Thank you. Yeah, I only would share that we've all been very busy at Trust Council and at UBCM,

[0:04:11] Voice 17: conducting the work of the federation and at ubcm networking and learning

[0:04:19] Voice 17: um i'm both ungrateful to have those opportunities to do that work um just want to note um i enjoyed

[0:04:27] Voice 17: actually uh being over in uh in your neck of the woods at our last go around for public hearing and

[0:04:34] Voice 17: stuff and i'm grateful to have those opportunities to visit the communities in person um that's um

[0:04:39] Voice 17: It really helps build a sense of a place where I assist you in governance.

[0:04:45] Voice 17: I'm grateful for those opportunities.

[0:04:48] Voice 17: So let us move on.

[0:04:49] Voice 17: Electoral Area Directors Report.

[0:04:52] Voice 17: Director Stanford.

[0:04:54] Voice 17: Thank

[0:04:54] Trustee Stamford: you, Chair.

[0:04:57] Trustee Stamford: I'm going to move backwards.

[0:04:59] Trustee Stamford: Yesterday, I had the privilege of attending the Sechalt Truth and Reconciliation event in Sechelt.

[0:05:07] Trustee Stamford: It acknowledged the abuse and cultural genocide that occurred at St. Augustine's Residential School that operated in Sechelt from 1905 to 1975.

[0:05:20] Trustee Stamford: This particular facility held children from 50 different nations up and down the coast.

[0:05:28] Trustee Stamford: and we had members from several different nations come to this particular event that was attended

[0:05:37] Trustee Stamford: by well over a thousand people so it was it was hugely impactful yesterday and i appreciate

[0:05:44] Trustee Stamford: being part of it um the last sunshine coast regional district board meeting we reviewed the

[0:05:52] Trustee Stamford: the budget status report for all our 186 discrete unfinished projects

[0:06:01] Trustee Stamford: that ranged anywhere from recycling receptacles and cemeteries

[0:06:07] Trustee Stamford: to a proposed vertical expansion of the seashell landfill

[0:06:11] Trustee Stamford: and the long-term solution for waste on the coast is that same said.

[0:06:16] Trustee Stamford: Landfill is due to be closed probably within the next five years

[0:06:21] Trustee Stamford: because it's twofold.

[0:06:22] Trustee Stamford: um the sunshine coast regional district has a large and aging infrastructure challenge with

[0:06:29] Trustee Stamford: a comparatively small population and this is a situation that is a growing challenge throughout

[0:06:36] Trustee Stamford: bc this became very apparent at ubcm where multiple regional districts and municipalities

[0:06:44] Trustee Stamford: were concerned about the level of downloading the level of work that has to be done to support

[0:06:52] Trustee Stamford: Aging Infrastructure and Mitigate for Climate Change Impacts.

[0:07:00] Trustee Stamford: At UBCM, I participated in two minister meetings, which were sort of overshadowed by the fact

[0:07:09] Trustee Stamford: that one minister was retiring in 24 hours, and the other minister was getting ready to

[0:07:17] Trustee Stamford: head into full campaign mode.

[0:07:19] Trustee Stamford: So they were a little distracted.

[0:07:21] Trustee Stamford: I found the three staff meetings a little more useful. Most of my work with the staff was around trying to find a solution to the New Brighton Dock. I think I'll just have that tattooed across my forehead.

[0:07:36] Trustee Stamford: head. Another highlight for, I just found this particular UBCM really insightful as to where

[0:07:45] Trustee Stamford: the priorities are for governments around BC, local governments. Unfortunately, my two resolutions

[0:07:52] Trustee Stamford: did not make it to the floor. I had two resolutions around support for rural docks and prioritization

[0:08:01] Trustee Stamford: for those infrastructure or marine highway infrastructure pieces.

[0:08:09] Trustee Stamford: Although the executive at UBCM said they would consider those motions

[0:08:18] Trustee Stamford: that have been forwarded by the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities to UBCM,

[0:08:26] Trustee Stamford: they'll they'll look at those and make rulings on them and follow up accordingly because there was

[0:08:32] Trustee Stamford: probably about 30 or 40 resolutions that didn't quite make it we ran out of time

[0:08:37] Trustee Stamford: um so yes it was a very uh useful um UPCM this time and I'll leave it at is there any

[0:08:44] Trustee Stamford: questions or comments yeah yes

[0:08:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um uh thank you uh uh trustee Samford um just one question relating

[0:08:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Relating to your comment about climate change impacts and how that intersects with aging infrastructure, in your meetings about that and when you have those discussions, is there a collective sense of urgency and recognition that we're on the edge of a precipice here?

[0:09:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Because it's pretty clear things aren't going to get easier from year to year.

[0:09:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): are um the new bright and dark isn't directly related to it but we do have a lot of aging and

[0:09:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): beat up infrastructure and you can only look at the single example of of um more energetic tides

[0:09:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): especially in the winter

[0:09:36] Voice 4: beating

[0:09:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the hell out of things that are already kind of beat up i mean

[0:09:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is that sense of urgency and and frankly what ought to be a certain amount of freak out about

[0:09:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): out the need to sort of beef things up is it there i

[0:09:50] Trustee Stamford: think it is um certainly that's what i heard at

[0:09:54] Trustee Stamford: the local government level um and i'm not sure if um chair luckham also noticed that um but it's not

[0:10:02] Trustee Stamford: just it's not just water it's fire it's what to do the ash after the fires um there was just one

[0:10:09] Trustee Stamford: thing after the other and um it's trying to find that commitment from all levels of government i

[0:10:15] Trustee Stamford: I don't want to land it at the province, but all levels of government to be more strategic about this, because right now it feels like they're silos.

[0:10:22] Trustee Stamford: So you go to one, you go to Walrus for one thing, and then you have to go to Modi for the same thing, but they're not coordinated necessarily as much as you would think they should be.

[0:10:35] Trustee Stamford: So there needs to be sort of an overall strategy.

[0:10:40] Trustee Stamford: How this is going to be paid for, I mean, it's in the billions and billions.

[0:10:45] Trustee Stamford: And it's not just local governments. You hear the same thing from BC Ferries. And it's years and years and years of not investing in infrastructure capitalization. And now that issue has been exacerbated by a significantly increasing situation with extreme weather.

[0:11:06] Trustee Stamford: So I did hear a lot of stress and emergency talk.

[0:11:15] Trustee Stamford: It's how that's going to be coordinated, I think, is going to be the challenge.

[0:11:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Do you have any sense or a view about which ministry would be best suited to serve this coordinating function that doesn't seem to be there right now?

[0:11:32] Trustee Stamford: It could be any number.

[0:11:34] Trustee Stamford: They do slide over.

[0:11:36] Trustee Stamford: The permitting comes from one.

[0:11:38] Trustee Stamford: And the actual authority comes from somewhere else, you know, and that's very easily, the docks are a really strong example of that. And, you know, even just getting permits to fix Hopkins Landing Dock or Keats Landing Dock is permits on one side, and then structural engineering, you work through another side.

[0:12:05] Trustee Stamford: for church road well 130 permits to get that online um so you can see how it all builds up

[0:12:14] Trustee Stamford: they all have a rationale behind them it's just overall it's getting more and more difficult so

[0:12:20] Trustee Stamford: i'm looking forward to seeing how they make changes um but that it's it's the silos that

[0:12:27] Trustee Stamford: i'm concerned about well

[0:12:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): 130 permits there's something wrong with that it's a lot yeah

[0:12:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yeah. All right. Thank you. Thank you. That's informative.

[0:12:41] Voice 17: Audio, Peter.

[0:12:44] Voice 17: Right. You probably don't want to hear my voice, actually. But anyway, Trustee Stanford, thank you very much.

[0:12:50] Voice 17: So we'll move to public comment period. I see Raphael Shea with the SCRD is in the attendees section.

[0:12:58] Voice 17: I'm not sure if he wants to

[0:12:59] Voice 16: address the local trust committee or it's just viewing today.

[0:13:02] Voice 16: But if you wanted to address the local trust committee, you could raise your hand and we'll promote you to speak.

[0:13:07] Voice 16: through the chair

[0:13:08] Planner McCargar: um he's actually a delegation so he'll be uh coming up on 7.1 okay

[0:13:17] Voice 17: i missed that

[0:13:18] Voice 17: thank you yes nameless okay perfect then that's great thank you for joining us rafael so let us

[0:13:28] Voice 17: continue then uh minutes um are um at 5.1 that's minutes from the meeting dated july the 30th

[0:13:36] Voice 17: Are there any changes to those minutes?

[0:13:39] Trustee Stamford: No, and I appreciate the change in style of how the minutes are being taken.

[0:13:44] Trustee Stamford: They're more clear for me.

[0:13:45] Trustee Stamford: Thank you.

[0:13:46] Voice 17: Oh, great.

[0:13:47] Voice 17: That's good.

[0:13:47] Voice 17: Thank you, Lisa.

[0:13:51] Voice 17: So then I will take it then by general consent that the minutes of July the 30th be adopted as presented by general consent.

[0:13:57] Voice 17: Thank you.

[0:13:58] Voice 17: Local Trust Committee meeting dated July the 31st.

[0:14:02] Voice 17: Also here for adoption.

[0:14:03] Voice 17: Any changes to those?

[0:14:06] Voice 17: No.

[0:14:07] Voice 17: All right.

[0:14:07] Voice 17: So let's adopt those by general consent as presented.

[0:14:12] Voice 17: Local Trust Committee public hearing record, also July the 31st, for receipt.

[0:14:18] Voice 17: That's there for our information and for the public to see what happened at that meeting.

[0:14:25] Voice 17: And unless there's some questions, we'll just receive that information.

[0:14:28] Voice 17: Trustee Stanford?

[0:14:29] Trustee Stamford: This is probably better brought up later on, but there were a number of comments in the public hearing.

[0:14:38] Trustee Stamford: that I think require some clarification, you know, and they were consistent, they've been

[0:14:45] Trustee Stamford: consistent over the years. So I'd like to talk later in the process about some kind of brochure

[0:14:51] Trustee Stamford: or communication, for instance, that you're, if, if your place burns down, you can't build

[0:14:58] Trustee Stamford: anywhere on your property, those, those kinds of ongoing misunderstandings, and how do we approach

[0:15:05] Trustee Stamford: that so that's what I like to see out of those as well okay

[0:15:09] Voice 17: so I'll look for you

[0:15:13] Voice 17: to advance that when we get through to the bylaws section later so section 26

[0:15:19] Voice 17: resolution without meeting report dated September the 23rd that's also there

[0:15:24] Voice 17: just for information and that's all right I'll continue on advisory planning

[0:15:29] Voice 17: Commission meeting minutes there are none here today so this brings us to a

[0:15:34] Voice 17: business arising from the minutes the follow-up action list report is there on page 24 of the

[0:15:40] Voice 17: agenda and unless there's any more recent changes to that report i would just go to questions from

[0:15:47] Voice 17: trustees so i'm not seeing any interest from staff to advise any of any changes so are there

[0:15:56] Voice 17: any questions on the follow-up action list nope okay so we'll receive that for information also

[0:16:06] Voice 17: Great. So here we are, Gambier Island Advisory Planning Commission, bylaw number 159, a staff report.

[0:16:16] Voice 17: That seems pretty succinct and not much room for variation there.

[0:16:23] Voice 17: So, staff, do you want to say anything above and beyond what's in the printed word?

[0:16:28] Planner McCargar: I don't have any additional comments. If there's any questions or anyone wants a little bit of an explanation, I can do that.

[0:16:35] Planner McCargar: Right.

[0:16:36] Voice 17: So then it's a requirement for any other further explanation or there's a motion, I believe. I've switched videos. So go ahead, Kate.

[0:16:48] Voice 17: Kate?

[0:16:50] Trustee Stamford: How do we resolve this? I mean, I seem to remember we got to this point before, and I had

[0:16:56] Trustee Stamford: thought that something had changed, and that's why we were going through the process again.

[0:17:04] Trustee Stamford: We have a project further on down the agenda where the APC is integral to participation,

[0:17:13] Trustee Stamford: participation but this advisory planning commission cannot operate effectively with

[0:17:19] Trustee Stamford: the in-person restriction so um is this something we talk about later or yeah we turn it into a

[0:17:27] Trustee Stamford: group we need the apc to function it just doesn't need to function as an apc and what are the

[0:17:36] Trustee Stamford: the implications of that just a little question

[0:17:38] Voice 17: what did you have in mind uh

[0:17:43] Trustee Stamford: we've been using the

[0:17:45] Trustee Stamford: word group we've been and recognizing that doesn't have the legislative status of uh advisory

[0:17:54] Trustee Stamford: planning commission um but at the same time it doesn't have the restrictions and and given the

[0:18:02] Trustee Stamford: specific geographical situation for our local trust area, APCs just don't work with the way

[0:18:12] Trustee Stamford: they're set up. And I'm frankly really disappointed that we're still having to deal with this,

[0:18:20] Trustee Stamford: whereas we've been able to move ahead on so many other aspects of meeting, including Zoom.

[0:18:29] Trustee Stamford: So, you know, other than just being really disappointed, I need to be able to move forward with the OCP project with some form of representational group.

[0:18:43] Planner McCargar: So through the chair, I can, we can talk about this at the project, or I can just briefly say there are a few options.

[0:18:51] Planner McCargar: You know, one of them would be to continue with the APC.

[0:18:54] Planner McCargar: they can meet those that can meet in person those that can't can zoom in to the call but they

[0:19:01] Planner McCargar: wouldn't be able to vote but they would be able to participate you could suggest meetings in

[0:19:08] Planner McCargar: Vancouver or Gibson's if that was a geographically an easier location or there is the option to

[0:19:15] Planner McCargar: appoint the APC members to a working group which would then allow them to meet fully electronically

[0:19:22] Planner McCargar: electronically okay

[0:19:24] Voice 17: it's not the end of the world okay louise um

[0:19:30] Trustee Stamford: uh because this is apcs in general

[0:19:35] Trustee Stamford: i'd like to be able to talk about this now not just the apc for for our particular project um

[0:19:42] Trustee Stamford: i mean apc members just provide recommendations i mean their ability to vote has limited impact

[0:19:53] Trustee Stamford: on the overall outcome of that particular meeting.

[0:19:58] Trustee Stamford: They can record that they disagree,

[0:20:02] Trustee Stamford: but it isn't necessarily part of a vote.

[0:20:08] Trustee Stamford: So, and the other question would be for Gambier,

[0:20:13] Trustee Stamford: is the equipment available, is the technology available

[0:20:17] Trustee Stamford: for us to have combined meetings in person slash Zoom

[0:20:23] Trustee Stamford: Do we have that support available to our APCs?

[0:20:30] Planner McCargar: Through the chair, it would be up to an APC member to bring their laptop.

[0:20:36] Planner McCargar: You know, if the meeting was going to be at the community hall on Gambier, the APC member would bring a laptop and would hook other members into Zoom that way.

[0:20:45] Planner McCargar: That's been done on other islands.

[0:20:48] Planner McCargar: It's done on Gabriola here.

[0:20:50] Planner McCargar: when APC members can't make the in-person meeting they'll they'll zoom in there are

[0:20:56] Planner McCargar: definitely times during the APC meeting where the members will vote on on various decisions that are

[0:21:03] Planner McCargar: being made recommendations that are going forward so that would just be a time when the members

[0:21:10] Planner McCargar: members participating online wouldn't be able to participate in that vote.

[0:21:17] Voice 12: Okay.

[0:21:20] Trustee Stamford: I guess I'm sorry, go ahead, Joe, if you have another.

[0:21:26] Voice 9: Yeah.

[0:21:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Thank you. If I may, Chair, well, Trustee Stanford collects your thoughts for

[0:21:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): her next point related to this. I'm actually jumping off a point that Trustee Stanford just

[0:21:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): made which is these are advisory groups there's no legislative effect they simply provide advice

[0:21:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): which you know the ltc may or may not accept so i'm having trouble understanding um the rigor

[0:21:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with which this um this this this aspect is being interpreted i i'm struck i mean i guess i'm

[0:22:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): grasping here i'm thinking well gee if this thing doesn't have any legislative effect you know

[0:22:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): there's got to be some room in here some wiggle room to interpret the language in the community

[0:22:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Charter and the other relevant legislation to sort of, you know, reach a different interpretation.

[0:22:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Without going into too much detail, are we absolutely sure there's no wiggle room here?

[0:22:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, how do we get to this interpretation that this non-legislative body falls under

[0:22:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): this obligation to have in-person meetings?

[0:22:44] Planner McCargar: You go ahead.

[0:22:45] Voice 17: You probably have the better answer than I do.

[0:22:48] Planner McCargar: Well, this has come from senior management who have had discussions at the province level, and it is the Islands Trust Act that has not been amended.

[0:22:57] Planner McCargar: So the community charter has been amended, local government act, but not the Islands Trust Act.

[0:23:03] Planner McCargar: So that's,

[0:23:03] Voice 3: I've

[0:23:04] Planner McCargar: asked quite a few questions, and I feel like this has been pursued at length, and that's the decision that we've heard from senior management.

[0:23:15] Planner McCargar: That being said, it's low risk to have APCs meet electronically.

[0:23:22] Planner McCargar: However, I'm just letting you know what the legislation says.

[0:23:27] Voice 9: I hear you, but

[0:23:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the difficulty is, you know, yeah, it may be low risk, but it's still, we're obligated to comply with what the rules are.

[0:23:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): You know, if the best interpretation is this is it, then we have to live with it and sort of figure out some alternative.

[0:23:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i don't think we can uh i don't think it would be wise or appropriate for us to try to

[0:23:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): sneak it through that would be wrong but i was intrigued by trustee stamford's idea that perhaps

[0:23:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we could have an apc by another name like not constitute an apc constitutes something more

[0:24:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): informal that is doesn't have a formal status and that we in our discretion as the ltc would

[0:24:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): would treat their advice as you know uh on an equal on an equal take it or leave it basis uh

[0:24:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): as we would with the apc i don't know if i mean we gotta end

[0:24:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): anything if we did something informal

[0:24:27] Voice 10: like that through

[0:24:33] Planner McCargar: the chair a working group is how the projects have worked in the past that's how

[0:24:39] Planner McCargar: the ltc has been advised for the keats shoreline project uh there was a a working group for this

[0:24:46] Planner McCargar: ocp project a few years ago so it's pretty standard for the gambier lta to do a working

[0:24:52] Planner McCargar: group instead of an apc okay

[0:24:54] Voice 12: so oh sorry so

[0:25:00] Voice 17: in the meantime we should go ahead with a motion

[0:25:03] Trustee Stamford: yeah um i i just want to add and i think you've definitely answered my questions because i was

[0:25:08] Trustee Stamford: like well i'm doing apcs for regional district all the time online but it's because it's the islands

[0:25:15] Trustee Stamford: trust act which is the distinct legislative feature and i think the difference to understand

[0:25:21] Trustee Stamford: is they do have a certain legislative um presence apcs do whereas groups don't so um i'm happy to

[0:25:31] Trustee Stamford: move not happy but i will move their recommendation i move that the gambier island local trust

[0:25:38] Trustee Stamford: committee uh proceed no further with bylaw number 159 cited as gambier island local trust committee

[0:25:45] Trustee Stamford: Committee Advisory Planning Commission Bylaw 2018, Amendment Number 12024.

[0:25:52] Voice 17: Move to have a seconder.

[0:25:54] Voice 17: Joe, thank you very much.

[0:25:56] Voice 17: Any further discussion?

[0:25:58] Voice 17: All those in favor?

[0:26:00] Voice 17: That carries.

[0:26:01] Voice 17: Ian Adams.

[0:26:03] Voice 17: Okay.

[0:26:04] Voice 17: Let us move on.

[0:26:06] Voice 17: Yeah, Kate, I'll just say you're right.

[0:26:09] Voice 17: It is a formal structure that exists for a reason, and it lends weight to the recommendations that they would provide us, so we need to figure out a way to make it work.

[0:26:20] Voice 17: Obviously, advocating for legislative change is something that could be done.

[0:26:26] Voice 17: Next item is delegations and coastal flood mapping project, Sunshine Coast.

[0:26:33] Voice 17: host, and we have a guest who's joined us, Raphael Shea from the SCRD. Good morning, Raphael. Thank

[0:26:42] Voice 17: you for joining us, and I'll turn it over to you.

[0:26:47] Voice 14: Thank you, Chair, for having me.

[0:26:50] Voice 14: Our pleasure to be here with you today. I'm just going to share a screen.

[0:26:59] Voice 14: Hey, is this working for folks?

[0:27:01] Voice 17: Yep, I can see it.

[0:27:03] Voice 14: Awesome. So I just have a brief presentation about

[0:27:06] Voice 14: about the Community Climate Action Plan

[0:27:09] Voice 14: and our Coastal Floodplain Mapping Project.

[0:27:13] Voice 14: Let me see if I can change slides here.

[0:27:16] Voice 14: There we go.

[0:27:17] Voice 14: We'll

[0:27:18] Trustee Stamford: do a quick-

[0:27:18] Trustee Stamford: Raph, could

[0:27:18] Trustee Stamford: you, Raph, sorry to interrupt,

[0:27:20] Trustee Stamford: but could you just explain your role in the SCRD?

[0:27:23] Voice 14: Oh, okay.

[0:27:24] Voice 14: Yeah, I'm Raphael Shea,

[0:27:26] Voice 14: the Manager of Sustainable Development

[0:27:28] Voice 14: at the Sunshine Coast Regional District.

[0:27:31] Voice 14: And my role is funded in part by Function 136,

[0:27:37] Voice 14: which is regional sustainability. And through that function, the SCRD and member municipalities

[0:27:45] Voice 14: and our work on regional sustainability initiatives, which are mostly geared towards

[0:27:51] Voice 14: climate change. And at this point, through that process, we have now adopted a, the SCRD has now

[0:28:01] Voice 14: adopted a community climate action plan, which is structuring the community sustainability work

[0:28:06] Voice 14: plan moving forward. So I'll dive a little bit into that and into some of the other work that

[0:28:13] Voice 14: we've done around the climate risk assessment. And specifically for today, the reason I'm here

[0:28:22] Voice 14: as a delegation is to speak about our coastal floodplain mapping project, which is one of

[0:28:26] Voice 14: the projects underway right now to which Islands Trust is a partner.

[0:28:35] Voice 14: So I don't remember how long ago Islands Trust moved that the SCRD apply on behalf of

[0:28:48] Voice 14: Sechelt, Gibsons, Islands Trust and SCRD for a coastal floodplain mapping project

[0:28:52] Voice 14: project. And through that resolution from Islands Trust, we were able to secure some funding

[0:28:58] Voice 14: to move towards a coastal floodplain mapping. So I'll dive a little bit into that today and

[0:29:04] Voice 14: happy to have some questions or to answer some questions if you have any. But first,

[0:29:09] Voice 14: a little bit of some contextual pieces. The SCRD now has a community climate action plan,

[0:29:16] Voice 14: which is primarily structured around three pillars of actions. So there's some good

[0:29:22] Voice 14: governance and enabling actions that will enable all the others to to succeed there's some actions

[0:29:29] Voice 14: in the adaptation category and some actions in the mitigation category and the community climate

[0:29:35] Voice 14: action plan is or ccap for short is structured around two dimensions one of them is what does

[0:29:43] Voice 14: the community at large need and the other dimension is where does the scrd have control

[0:29:49] Voice 14: role or influence to take a leadership role in some areas and in the other areas is where

[0:29:55] Voice 14: can we convene or facilitate or support to accelerate climate action.

[0:30:01] Voice 14: So, on the good governance, we're talking about things like integrate, collaborate, and form.

[0:30:07] Voice 14: On the adaptation, it spans quite a bit of ground around buildings and infrastructure.

[0:30:14] Voice 14: There, we've also elevated natural assets, given the work underway and the co-benefits there.

[0:30:20] Voice 14: Water is a big priority for everybody.

[0:30:23] Voice 14: Ecological stewardship, there's a few actions there.

[0:30:27] Voice 14: And then there's community, connectivity, community health and support, which includes a bunch of more socially beneficial climate adaptation actions.

[0:30:41] Voice 14: On the mitigation, we've structured all the actions in the three buckets of mobility, buildings, so better new buildings and better existing buildings, as well as carbon dioxide removal, which is taking carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere.

[0:30:58] Voice 14: and sequestering that primarily through things like better forest management practices better

[0:31:04] Voice 14: agricultural practices and technologies that may not exist yet not that we're going to be

[0:31:10] Voice 14: developing these technologies but just to be open to the supporting those things as they come to

[0:31:16] Voice 14: light because that's where that's what we need as well now one of the building blocks to our

[0:31:24] Voice 14: our community climate action plan is the climate risk assessment, which was developed primarily

[0:31:29] Voice 14: in 2021 and 2022. And since then, there's been quite a bit of updates to the science. So we

[0:31:37] Voice 14: try to stay in tune with all those updates and generate our own information in a way that we can

[0:31:45] Voice 14: be best prepared and help allocate resources in a focused manner and in a way that's not alarmist.

[0:31:55] Voice 14: because these are these can be heavy topics so this original document was on is available on

[0:32:02] Voice 14: scrd.ca slash climate and we're looking at creating some addendums to to find a way to

[0:32:07] Voice 14: continuously update these so specifically with relevance to these projects is um climate change

[0:32:16] Voice 14: will lead to storm intensification um things like atmospheric rivers will be three times more

[0:32:22] Voice 14: more frequent. And with the intensifying storms, that will also mean more intense wave action,

[0:32:30] Voice 14: which

[0:32:31] Planner McCargar: is one of the

[0:32:31] Voice 14: key drivers for coastal floodplain mapping. The coastal flooding,

[0:32:38] Voice 14: from what I've been learning, is we've been generally, the science has generally been

[0:32:44] Voice 14: converging on that one, maybe a little bit more, one meter by 2100 sea level rise. So that means

[0:32:52] Voice 14: that all the material all the shoreline that hasn't been exposed to wave action in the past

[0:32:56] Voice 14: is now going to start to interact into those those dynamics so for this project

[0:33:03] Voice 14: we have hired a consultant nhc which combines a group of geomorphologists which can focus on

[0:33:14] Voice 14: the science of wave and sediment movement on the coast as well as coastal engineers

[0:33:22] Voice 14: to dive into the mapping project. There's also a sub-consultant that they've brought into the team

[0:33:29] Voice 14: called Ecoplan which are planners that have a focus on climate adaptation and have done quite

[0:33:36] Voice 14: a few coastal adaptation projects in the area as well so we've got that expertise. The intent

[0:33:44] Voice 14: of the project is to come up with a map that gives us a better understanding of the probability of

[0:33:51] Voice 14: flood. So it's not a question of the whole area is going to be underwater 100% of the time. It's

[0:33:57] Voice 14: when will there be a king tide? When will there be that intense wave action? And what's the

[0:34:04] Voice 14: probability of those flood events occurring? So these are some of the scenarios we're going to be

[0:34:09] Voice 14: working towards having a better idea of where that line on the map will look like.

[0:34:16] Voice 14: The products that we'll be getting by spring or summer of 2025 will also include as you can see

[0:34:25] Voice 14: on the bottom right here erosion susceptibility of the shoreline. So a lot of our local governments

[0:34:31] Voice 14: in the area have gone through similar exercises in the past and Powell River for example when

[0:34:37] Voice 14: they've gone through their exercise they found that flooding wasn't necessarily a high concern

[0:34:43] Voice 14: for them. Erosion, which was a much higher concern. So as they're moving towards the next

[0:34:49] Voice 14: phases of their projects, they're focusing more on erosion at this point. Because we have so much

[0:34:57] Voice 14: shoreline, we're also going to be getting a collection of maps for the area. And some of

[0:35:03] Voice 14: those maps will have higher resolution, as you can see in these little black squares. And this

[0:35:07] Voice 14: is just a draft from the consultant's proposal. And some of the red squares will have slightly

[0:35:13] Voice 14: less resolution. So we're focusing on the areas that have critical infrastructure like the docks

[0:35:21] Voice 14: for example and areas that have high population or high growth potential. At this point we're

[0:35:31] Voice 14: well underway in the data collection so thank you to Islands Trust staff for sharing a lot of

[0:35:39] Voice 14: information including your maps with shoreline composition for this is the one for Gambier for

[0:35:46] Voice 14: example

[0:35:46] Voice 4: and

[0:35:47] Voice 14: then we've had some of our consultants doing data collection on the actual shorelines to

[0:35:55] Voice 14: validate the lidar data that we have for the entire area and they're into the model construction

[0:36:03] Voice 14: right now which will create the wave model and the wind model depending on the amount of fetch

[0:36:09] Voice 14: that's available. So we'll be able to start to see some data shortly. We've

[0:36:16] Voice 14: also started a little bit of outreach and education. So we have a Let's Talk

[0:36:20] Voice 14: page which is our public participation portal. It's letstalk.scrd.ca

[0:36:26] Voice 14: slash coastal hyphen flooding and there there's information about the project.

[0:36:32] Voice 14: There's also it's we're just building it right now but there's a map so if people

[0:36:36] Voice 14: want to drop a pin for an area of concern or an example that they see is very promising

[0:36:44] Voice 14: um they can drop it on the map there or leave us some comments and questions

[0:36:49] Voice 14: um the project is primarily about mapping so getting that getting that line on the map

[0:36:55] Voice 14: but there's also some recommendations that we'll be getting from our consultants on initial

[0:37:01] Voice 14: adaptation recommendations and given that there's some planners on the team we'll we'll have

[0:37:07] Voice 14: certainly some planning related recommendations in the final reports and we've started doing this

[0:37:14] Voice 14: is just one public event where we had a table to talk about the concept of people on the bottom

[0:37:21] Planner McCargar: left

[0:37:21] Voice 14: here is a picture where we hosted a green shores workshop for local government staff on

[0:37:28] Voice 14: the Sunshine Coast so we're also trying to increase the level of literacy amongst ourselves

[0:37:33] Voice 14: so that we can better dive into the discussion

[0:37:37] Voice 14: in the next year or two,

[0:37:39] Voice 14: and be ready for the conversations

[0:37:40] Voice 14: that will happen after the project

[0:37:43] Voice 14: once we have those good maps.

[0:37:46] Voice 14: So that's a very brief overview of what we're up to

[0:37:49] Voice 14: and where we're coming from.

[0:37:51] Voice 14: I'd be happy to take any questions from the chair.

[0:37:53] Voice 14: Should you have any?

[0:38:02] Voice 7: Chair Locke, you're muted.

[0:38:05] Voice 17: Thank you very much.

[0:38:06] Voice 17: Joe Bernardo, question.

[0:38:09] Voice 9: Thank you.

[0:38:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): First of all, I want to say thank you

[0:38:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for making this presentation and giving us a you know a thumbnail sketch of what the nature of the

[0:38:19] Trustee Bernardo (probable): work is it's it's um this is really important work and and i hope that the srd will be able

[0:38:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to continue to work with our staff and with the islands trust to help you with the mapping and

[0:38:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): modeling um in any way we can because it really is quite important and um and it sounds from what

[0:38:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you've said that uh you know the island's definitely in the sunshine coast regional

[0:38:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): district uh which overlaps with us obviously uh i was very pleased to hear that you know

[0:38:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you're already working on gambier in terms of modeling there uh and so uh i'm gratified to

[0:38:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): see that the islands are a priority um a couple of questions uh are you currently modeling other

[0:38:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): islands in the srd or how do they fit into the schedule of modeling and but the more important

[0:39:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): question is, have you identified any particular vulnerabilities in terms of flooding and erosion

[0:39:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with respect to the islands? Or do you anticipate that there might be some special issue there?

[0:39:27] Voice 14: Through the chair, yeah. The mapping project will highlight most of the coast, so Keats,

[0:39:36] Voice 14: gambier are in scope uh to some extent the nelson will also be in there um at this point

[0:39:45] Voice 14: the exercise is um is asking for the community to make sure that um we are aware of areas of

[0:39:53] Voice 14: particular concern um we are aware of areas where we would like to have data for sure

[0:40:02] Voice 14: for example on the assets that we manage for like the the docs for example um so we want to have

[0:40:09] Voice 14: data that we will enable us to better plan asset renewal in the long term um and asset

[0:40:16] Voice 14: prioritization as well um you know we've got several community halls that are on the coast

[0:40:22] Voice 14: for historical valid reasons it was a lovely place to build a community hall but um but now

[0:40:29] Voice 14: we want to better understand the hazards and the risks that they face. So part of the idea is that

[0:40:35] Voice 14: my role at the SCRD is trying to facilitate a more holistic decision-making framework to support

[0:40:40] Voice 14: elected representatives like yourselves and having a variety of information sources so that when

[0:40:46] Voice 14: you're making decisions, you can make them with an understanding of the entire climate risk

[0:40:53] Voice 14: matrix in mind um if there's any areas in particular that you'd like us to make sure we

[0:41:00] Voice 14: we have on our radar i'd be happy to note those down and share those with our consultants

[0:41:06] Voice 14: well i don't have any particular

[0:41:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): areas uh that like super jump out as uh deserving say a priority

[0:41:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): examination over others there may be they may be there but i don't know i i can say that uh

[0:41:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh for what it's worth uh for my own observations i would think that um for the island certainly for

[0:41:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): gambier and definitely for keats flooding as far as is frankly well i could speak about keats i

[0:41:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): think flooding is kind of non-existent uh the real issue i think is erosion um and uh i would

[0:41:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i would hope that uh the project will put a particular focus on erosion when it comes to

[0:41:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of the islands, because that's just definitely a thing.

[0:41:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Thank you.

[0:41:55] Voice 18: Yeah.

[0:41:55] Voice 18: Kate Louise?

[0:41:58] Trustee Stamford: Yes.

[0:41:58] Trustee Stamford: I noticed that briefly looking at the planned maps that I was pleased to see that North

[0:42:06] Trustee Stamford: Orimbee has a black rectangle around it, which indicates higher resolution.

[0:42:12] Trustee Stamford: I think that is one of the areas that we do want to see focused on.

[0:42:16] Trustee Stamford: The only difficulty I have is I don't know if Trustee Bernardo has specific connections with Tharmanby, but it's been difficult to reach out consistently to that group now that their on-island coordinator is no longer there, their supervisor is no longer there.

[0:42:37] Trustee Stamford: So I'm not sure if we've completely lost contact with North Tharmanby, but that is definitely one of the areas.

[0:42:43] Trustee Stamford: And I think today it's on my list to get some areas that I would like to see focused on, at least around Gambier, as well as the Tharman Bees.

[0:42:58] Trustee Stamford: And yeah, some of the areas that I'm going to be talking about are definitely around cliff erosion.

[0:43:05] Trustee Stamford: And it's loose soil and banks that are being undercut by high tides.

[0:43:11] Trustee Stamford: So I'll be working on that today and have it through.

[0:43:15] Trustee Stamford: And the only other question I have is, is there any connection with the municipality of Gibson's source to sea project?

[0:43:28] Trustee Stamford: Are we, is there any coordination value with that particular project that was highlighted in the Coastal Reporter this week?

[0:43:38] Voice 14: Thank you, through the chair.

[0:43:40] Voice 14: the town of Gibsons is a member of this project

[0:43:43] Voice 14: and we have a steering advisory committee

[0:43:45] Voice 14: that's meeting regularly.

[0:43:48] Voice 14: So we're working with Gibsons on this project

[0:43:51] Voice 14: and on collaboration more broadly as well with their staff.

[0:43:57] Voice 14: The source to see, as I understand it,

[0:43:59] Voice 14: is primarily focused on the riverine flooding hazard and risks.

[0:44:04] Voice 14: So our models or our consultants' models

[0:44:07] Voice 14: will take into consideration the river coastal interactions

[0:44:14] Voice 14: at certain areas, because it is different

[0:44:17] Voice 14: than a coastline without a river coming in.

[0:44:22] Voice 14: Yeah, so the work that Gibson's is doing

[0:44:26] Voice 14: will probably mitigate the input of flow

[0:44:29] Voice 14: at that specific location,

[0:44:31] Voice 14: which is something that you keep in mind.

[0:44:34] Voice 14: Thank you.

[0:44:36] Trustee Stamford: Thanks, that's all, thanks.

[0:44:38] Voice 17: Yeah, so I'll just mention that my introduction to the Gambier Local Trust Committee was the Thornby Islands.

[0:44:45] Voice 17: And certainly the settlement patterns on that island and the exposure that that island is subjected to certainly has erosion and sea level rise issues.

[0:44:59] Voice 17: And so, yeah, that's definitely an area that needs some thought to consider what might be done.

[0:45:11] Voice 17: Anyway. Okay, Joe, you have something else?

[0:45:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Just briefly to follow up on

[0:45:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Trustee Sanford's point, and you're actually remarkable in Thornby. I think I was a bit remiss in not

[0:45:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): commenting before, because I think Trustee Sanford's quite right. Of all of our

[0:45:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): islands, North Thornby is, by nature

[0:45:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of the geography there, it's unusually

[0:45:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): vulnerable, because it's quite different than

[0:45:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the house on so house on islands which are big basically these rocky oak crops it is much more

[0:45:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): prone to erosion and in fact uh may well be um more vulnerable to uh real flooding so i would

[0:45:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): think that uh if there was gonna be a priority put on island research that's probably that probably

[0:45:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): should be somewhere near the top of the in fact should be at the top of the list so and with

[0:46:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): respect to uh yeah i do have uh some contacts i could reach out to north hornby if um if that's

[0:46:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of assistance so uh if that's necessary perhaps people whoever wants to do that can contact me

[0:46:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): offline and i can help with that if it's necessary okay

[0:46:20] Voice 17: that's great

[0:46:22] Voice 14: yes he already also has uh the

[0:46:26] Voice 14: pomos the the ports advisory committee or i don't know what the pomo acronym stands for but um we do

[0:46:32] Voice 14: We do have, and we have a park on the low-lying areas that has, I forget if it's an endangered species or just a species at risk.

[0:46:43] Voice 14: Yeah, we're aware of several things on North Thornby Island.

[0:46:50] Voice 18: Okay, Louise?

[0:46:54] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, there's the, I think there's some species at risk focus through the conservancy as well that have been identified.

[0:47:04] Trustee Stamford: um and i've totally lost the point so i'll back out now disappeared on me thanks

[0:47:14] Voice 17: all right rafael do you have anything else for us no

[0:47:20] Voice 14: thank you for the opportunity to

[0:47:22] Voice 14: to share about our project and uh we'll be back next year with a little bit more information but

[0:47:28] Voice 14: feel free to reach out if um in the interim as well we'll um we're here okay

[0:47:35] Voice 17: great thank you

[0:47:36] Voice 17: you very much thank you for the presentation thanks

[0:47:39] Voice 12: right all

[0:47:43] Voice 17: right let us continue on then

[0:47:46] Voice 17: to uh no there are no applications or referrals today and that brings us to uh local trust

[0:47:52] Voice 17: committee projects and if that's all right we'll just continue on um the first item being 9.1

[0:47:59] Voice 17: minor project sheet shore key shoreline protection project bylaws number numbers 153 and 154

[0:48:07] Voice 17: um perhaps i'll ask staff to just give us a very a brief summary and then trustee bernardo has

[0:48:15] Voice 17: provided some additional amendments and

[0:48:19] Voice 18: um i think staff you've seen these amendments as well

[0:48:23] Voice 18: the

[0:48:26] Voice 17: context of changing the intent of the bylaw i guess with post-public hearing

[0:48:30] Voice 17: and so any further changes would have to take that fact into consideration so over to you

[0:48:38] Voice 17: Great,

[0:48:40] Planner McCargar: thanks. So I'll just do a quick introduction for the report. So this is a post-public hearing report supporting next steps for proposed bylaws 153 and 154. The bylaws seek to establish a shoreline development permit area for the purposes of protecting the natural environment, its ecosystems, and biological diversity, and protecting development from hazardous conditions.

[0:49:04] Planner McCargar: Staff are recommending the LTC amend proposed bylaws 153 and 154 for clarity and to correct a few small editing errors.

[0:49:15] Planner McCargar: The recommendations are supported as all statutory requirements have been completed, including required notification and a holding of a public hearing.

[0:49:25] Planner McCargar: public government and First Nation concerns raised with the proposed bylaws have been

[0:49:32] Planner McCargar: considered by the LTC and all Islands Trust bylaw amendments require the approval of the

[0:49:39] Planner McCargar: Executive Committee prior to consideration of adoption. The project was first initiated in 2018.

[0:49:46] Planner McCargar: 2018 both bylaws were given first reading in 2021 first reading was rescinded in October of 2021 and

[0:49:57] Planner McCargar: amended by the LTC and then given first reading again so the proposed bylaws were given second

[0:50:03] Planner McCargar: reading September 2022 and then in 2023 the LTC requested a bylaw review from a qualified

[0:50:12] Planner McCargar: environmental professional specializing in aquatic biology, as well as further staff review and LTC

[0:50:19] Planner McCargar: initiated amendments at that time. As a result of the additional work, proposed bylaw number 154

[0:50:27] Planner McCargar: was given second reading as amended on May 14, 2024. Throughout the project, four community

[0:50:36] Planner McCargar: information meetings were held, community engagement activities included an informational

[0:50:41] Planner McCargar: mail-out, community information meetings, and working group meetings, and also a community

[0:50:48] Planner McCargar: questionnaire. Referrals and re-referrals were sent out to government agencies, organizations,

[0:50:54] Planner McCargar: and First Nations. Squamish First Nation responded with concerns related to the marine ecosystem

[0:51:02] Planner McCargar: and the building setback regulation of seven and a half meters from the natural boundary of the sea.

[0:51:08] Planner McCargar: staff LTC and Squamish First Nation met to discuss the concerns and some minor changes were made

[0:51:16] Planner McCargar: based on the discussion however the building setback remains at seven and a half meters and

[0:51:22] Planner McCargar: not the 15 meters recommended by Squamish First Nation the bylaws received legal review in June

[0:51:29] Planner McCargar: of 2024 and the public hearing was held July 31st 2024 there were 18 written submissions of

[0:51:37] Planner McCargar: correspondence received by the ltc and 16 people spoke at the public hearing representing a variety

[0:51:44] Planner McCargar: of perspectives in support and not in support of the bylaws as presented and if there's any

[0:51:52] Planner McCargar: questions um i'm here to answer those now right

[0:52:06] Voice 17: any questions so

[0:52:13] Voice 8: um well um no

[0:52:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): questions really

[0:52:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): really about the review we've had, but I do have a resolution I want to put forward, but I'm just

[0:52:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): thinking that in the interest of efficiency, I'm wondering if we should review the proposed

[0:52:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): changes staff is proposing before I get into my thing. And I was thinking perhaps we could

[0:52:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): zip through the red line view, red line version, so we can see the changes in their context

[0:52:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and make whatever comments we have.

[0:52:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I have a few comments.

[0:52:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I view all of these.

[0:52:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I agree with the staff.

[0:52:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): These are all kind of technical drafting changes.

[0:53:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I've got a few quibbles here and there about them,

[0:53:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): but that's about it.

[0:53:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So I just thought in terms of, I don't know,

[0:53:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): kind of housekeeping, cleaning up the draft

[0:53:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): before we get into the hard part,

[0:53:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): maybe we could do that first.

[0:53:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I don't know.

[0:53:13] Voice 17: Yeah, no, that sounds like a good suggestion.

[0:53:16] Voice 17: That's what I was thinking,

[0:53:17] Voice 17: is if we address the first recommendation,

[0:53:19] Voice 17: looking at Schedules 1, Sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.4,

[0:53:23] Voice 17: and then if we can endorse those uh amendments um then we could move on to any additional

[0:53:34] Voice 17: amendments before we went to a second reading does that sound reasonable approach yes thank you

[0:53:47] Voice 17: okay so um you know i think we've all read it so perhaps you have notes and you might want to just

[0:53:56] Voice 17: to ask questions on each of the sections there um otherwise well my preference would be uh

[0:54:07] Voice 8: my

[0:54:08] Voice 8: preference

[0:54:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): would be that we um uh for the record we just simply put the red line versions of the

[0:54:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): two bylaws up there and we just simply proceed through each one of those and every amendment

[0:54:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that or proposed amendment that we we see i mean if we got anything any comments uh we make them

[0:54:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): okay that one's okay move on to the next one fine no objection fine no objection that kind of stuff

[0:54:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and then you know that might be a pretty efficient way to go because i do think it's important to um

[0:54:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to review the the changes in their context you know so we can see their meaning uh in the documents

[0:54:49] Voice 17: yeah fair enough so um marla should i lead us through that or do you want to lead us through

[0:54:59] Voice 17: that and what page does that begin on i can do

[0:55:03] Planner McCargar: a share screen if that's helpful it begins on page

[0:55:07] Planner McCargar: 35 of the agenda is the redlined version of the uh bylaw 153. okay if

[0:55:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i may chair um uh i would

[0:55:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): suggest it would be helpful if marlis uh uh kind of like walked us through all of this stuff i mean

[0:55:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): she that will allow us to uh quickly ask questions get them answered and she can explain whatever

[0:55:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): needs explaining very promptly and we could just quickly move through it

[0:55:32] Voice 17: okay let's do that so page

[0:55:34] Voice 17: uh starting on page 36 and i'll get you to pop that up on the screen carlos although i've got

[0:55:40] Voice 17: a copy here that i'm looking at as well can

[0:55:48] Planner McCargar: everyone see that here yeah

[0:55:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um i need it a little

[0:55:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): bit bigger for my screen or maybe i can oh i can do that myself sorry uh

[0:55:59] Planner McCargar: so the first so this is

[0:56:02] Planner McCargar: just looking at proposed bylaw number 153 right and starting on page 36 we have two uh just for

[0:56:13] Planner McCargar: clarity here and

[0:56:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): what did it say before just um it

[0:56:19] Planner McCargar: just didn't refer to a subsection so there was

[0:56:21] Planner McCargar: nothing there well

[0:56:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): okay uh no comments about those two i'm

[0:56:26] Planner McCargar: good all

[0:56:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): right let's keep going

[0:56:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): so

[0:56:30] Planner McCargar: this in the justification section uh second paragraph adding the words including the

[0:56:37] Planner McCargar: construction of uh

[0:56:40] Voice 9: no objection to that that's fine and

[0:56:47] Planner McCargar: that was it for the uh 153 thank you

[0:56:52] Planner McCargar: so should we move on to 154 or did you want to pass the motion for the changes of 153 um

[0:57:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yeah, I suppose we have lost track here.

[0:57:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): There's a separate motion addressing 153.

[0:57:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Perhaps you could go to that motion and one of us can make it.

[0:57:15] Planner McCargar: That's page 30, I think.

[0:57:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yes, that's correct.

[0:57:18] Planner McCargar: Got it on the screen here.

[0:57:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): All right, I'll just read it out.

[0:57:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): We'll just move along here.

[0:57:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I move that the Gambier Local Island Trust Committee Bylaw number 153 cited as

[0:57:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): As keyed on an official community plan 2002, amendment number 1, 2021, be amended as follows.

[0:57:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): A, Schedule 1, Section 1.1, Part A, Administration and Interpretation, add subsection 3.5 after the word Interpretation.

[0:57:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): B, Schedule 1, Section 1.2, Part B, Goals, Objectives, and Policies, add subsection 5.11 after the words Policies.

[0:57:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And Schedule 1, Section 1.4, Part C, Development Permit Areas, Justification Section, add the words, including the construction of before buildings or structures should not result in a loss of significant marine or coastal habitat.

[0:58:17] Voice 17: Okay, moved.

[0:58:18] Voice 17: I have a seconder, Trustee Stamford.

[0:58:20] Voice 17: That's great.

[0:58:20] Voice 17: Thank you.

[0:58:21] Voice 17: And is there any further discussion?

[0:58:24] Voice 17: No.

[0:58:25] Voice 17: Then I'll call the vote.

[0:58:25] Voice 17: All those in favor?

[0:58:26] Voice 17: All those in favor?

[0:58:27] Voice 17: And that carries unanimously.

[0:58:29] Voice 17: That's great. So if we stick to Bylaw 153, one of your proposed amendments, Joe, is for Bylaw 153, the second one. That seems to be relatively simple. So if I'm correct, can you explain why you want to remove the ward and restoration?

[0:58:50] Voice 17: duration it's

[0:58:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): difficult me to it's it's i i can't explain that without getting really into the weeds

[0:58:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with respect to 154 oh so i think it's best if we defer that discussion for later so

[0:59:08] Trustee Stamford: we can't pass

[0:59:09] Trustee Stamford: anything else until we now go into 154 oh

[0:59:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): well can we not go into 154 uh deal with staff's comments

[0:59:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): on that and then return to

[0:59:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the resolutions I have in mind

[0:59:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): like including for 153 later and

[0:59:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): 154

[0:59:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we

[0:59:28] Voice 17: can if that

[0:59:31] Voice 17: seems to be important

[0:59:33] Voice 17: I

[0:59:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): think it would be far more efficient

[0:59:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for the purpose of the meeting because it's like

[0:59:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if we get into the discussion of

[0:59:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): what looks like this small little

[0:59:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): amendment to 153

[0:59:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we could really

[0:59:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): get into the swamp there

[0:59:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's going to rope in

[0:59:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): all the other issues I have with 154

[0:59:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and and why I'm making that other resolution returning to this idea of the

[0:59:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): additions things so

[1:00:00] Voice 17: Okay. Fair enough, then. So, where are we, then? So, let's go over the redline version of 154, as we had just previously done, and I'll turn it over to Marla.

[1:00:16] Planner McCargar: Okay. So, I have it up on the screen here, and I'll just move through.

[1:00:21] Planner McCargar: What's the page?

[1:00:23] Planner McCargar: So,

[1:00:23] Trustee Stamford: page 48.

[1:00:24] Trustee Stamford: 48. Thank you.

[1:00:26] Planner McCargar: so we have uh change section 1.2 just uh numbering error yeah

[1:00:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i see that that's i get that no problem

[1:00:38] Voice 9: i don't have any problem with that and

[1:00:46] Planner McCargar: then section 1.9 so this is uh changed suggested

[1:00:52] Planner McCargar: to be changed in all of these that reference the shared doc

[1:00:57] Voice 8: uh-huh yeah um on

[1:01:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that i do um first of all i appreciate the direction that's going in it's

[1:01:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): much more precise from a legal perspective uh and it's clearer in that respect but i've got

[1:01:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh two comments uh one is where it says per resident that suggested changes to get rid of

[1:01:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the word dwelling to have lot um i i i think we need to keep the word dwelling because

[1:01:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um there are lots of situations where uh there's more than one dwelling on a lot and the the

[1:01:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): dwellings are uh owned basically by you know different members of of the same kind of clan

[1:01:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or the same family because a lot of these are our legacy properties so you know just having a

[1:01:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the idea that there's a single lot and there's just like this single family or single group of

[1:02:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): people that is served by the dock that goes with that lot is not quite right because multiple

[1:02:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): dwellings with different owners on lots so i i think we need to keep the the word dwelling there

[1:02:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And you'll note that that doesn't have an effect on the change of the maximum float size.

[1:02:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But I think we need to have the room to increase the float size according to the number of dwellings or sort of, you know, that actually reflect the number of people that are going to use it.

[1:02:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And then I have another comment on that, which is kind of, which is grammatical.

[1:02:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if you read through the language it's here provided a covenant is registered

[1:02:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): on titles to each of the participating residential lots which does not have its own

[1:03:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): dock identifying the property which the shared dock shall be situated

[1:03:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and prohibiting the use or construction of a dock

[1:03:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): on or from that residential lot and an easement etc that reference to that residential lot

[1:03:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it seems to me can be confused as a reference to the property on which the shared dot shall

[1:03:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): be situated and i think the way to fix it is to is to move uh the prohibiting phrase

[1:03:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and make it first so it says residential lots which uh each of the present participating

[1:03:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): pitting residential lots which does not have its own dock comma prohibiting the use or construction

[1:03:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of a dock owner from that residential lot and identifying the property which the shared dock

[1:03:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): shall be situated etc etc so those are my two comments on that one

[1:04:06] Voice 17: right so um there's subtle

[1:04:11] Voice 17: piece in there which i don't necessarily understand but it doesn't seem to me that

[1:04:17] Voice 17: changing the language uh trustee stanford or staff do you have any remarks associated with that

[1:04:24] Voice 16: uh um

[1:04:25] Trustee Stamford: uh sort of uh i guess i'm trying to to clarify and make sure that by changing from

[1:04:37] Trustee Stamford: from a lot back to dwelling, that there is a clear line of responsibility in the covenants

[1:04:48] Trustee Stamford: that every owner on that piece of property recognizes or has some legal recognition of

[1:04:57] Trustee Stamford: their responsibility to the neighboring property stock and vice versa.

[1:05:03] Trustee Stamford: I don't want to lose sight of that. And I think maybe how Trustee Bernardo has reworded it could make that clear. I think that clarifies the language. So I think I understand what the change in language would accomplish.

[1:05:23] Trustee Stamford: And I guess my other question to Trustee Bernardo, just, you know, guessing here, not specifically accurate, how many properties do you think this would impact? Like, how many properties that you know of have multiple dwellings that would be looking at a neighbor for dock access?

[1:05:46] Trustee Stamford: uh

[1:05:48] Voice 9: i'm

[1:05:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): familiar uh personally just amongst my neighbors including myself

[1:05:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh quite a few uh it's fairly common um especially amongst the legacy properties

[1:06:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh for and it's typically two neighbors share one dog but and they have multiple

[1:06:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): multiple houses sorry yeah

[1:06:15] Trustee Stamford: and they have multiple houses on yeah yeah i'm just trying to

[1:06:19] Trustee Stamford: get a sense

[1:06:20] Trustee Stamford: of it i know of one uh on keats but that's what i was trying to think of yeah

[1:06:25] Voice 8: well

[1:06:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i um well i can

[1:06:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): tell you from my experience on plumper cove uh there's um there is a pattern where you've got

[1:06:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): one dock that serves uh two lots but on each of those lots there are two separate families

[1:06:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that make use of it so you actually have like four different dwellings you know like equivalents to

[1:06:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): dwellings four different families four different dwellings that are sort of making use of the dock

[1:06:54] Voice 3: okay so

[1:06:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh i'm uh um one two um i'm familiar two of that's a pattern that we have there's two of

[1:07:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): those in uh you know old plumper cove and the development uh further north uh right by the

[1:07:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): marine park i think there's uh that's also a thing that's going on there uh not everybody

[1:07:19] Trustee Bernardo (probable): has their own dock they're sharing it as well but it's a little different there because it's

[1:07:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): kind of a strata setup uh i i can't you know testify with you know actual no

[1:07:29] Voice 8: i wasn't asking

[1:07:30] Voice 8: as

[1:07:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): far as i'm aware it's a fairly familiar pattern uh and my understanding uh and it's

[1:07:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): only anecdotal is uh there's certainly dock sharing that's going on uh at um case landing

[1:07:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): ending at district block 696. So it's not an unusual thing,

[1:07:49] Voice 9: put it that way.

[1:07:52] Voice 17: Okay, Marla, over to you.

[1:07:54] Planner McCargar: Yeah, through the chair. I'll just add that this particular clause,

[1:07:58] Planner McCargar: although it's worded a little bit differently, it exists in the current Keats land use bylaw. So

[1:08:04] Planner McCargar: there's sections that allow for increased dock size based on sharing of dock. So this isn't a

[1:08:12] Planner McCargar: new concept that we're introducing. It's just been reworded a little bit, and the size has

[1:08:19] Planner McCargar: changed. And just to note that in the current land use bylaw, it is per residential lot,

[1:08:25] Planner McCargar: not dwelling.

[1:08:29] Voice 9: Right. I appreciate that, but okay. I guess I shouldn't repeat myself.

[1:08:37] Voice 17: So, however, the interest is in deleting the word lot and reinstating the word dwelling

[1:08:44] Voice 17: from obviously some previous version of this amendment and then some change following

[1:08:53] Voice 17: identifying the property um that those the sequence of the words is changing so is that

[1:09:01] Voice 17: that's still your intent and marlis have you captured that and presumably we would have to

[1:09:08] Voice 17: make a motion that said specifically that i

[1:09:15] Planner McCargar: did not capture it but yeah we would need a motion

[1:09:19] Planner McCargar: that would capture that

[1:09:20] Planner McCargar: okay

[1:09:22] Voice 17: so it strikes me that the easy thing to do then is to have a just

[1:09:27] Voice 17: we could just do a motion on the fly um that would remove switch the words dwelling in lock

[1:09:34] Voice 17: back and then have uh uh maybe a quotation that says that the after you know line for whatever it

[1:09:45] Voice 17: is after the word uh doc that it read as follows um that would probably be the best way to capture

[1:09:53] Voice 17: that and lisa can you snag that as trustee bernardo tells us

[1:09:59] Trustee Stamford: can we just take a break

[1:10:01] Trustee Stamford: maybe and trustee bernardo put the motion up

[1:10:04] Voice 17: because

[1:10:06] Trustee Stamford: it wasn't super clear so it'd be yeah

[1:10:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): yeah well yeah i'm struggling now to think in terms of motion because what we have in front of

[1:10:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): us is not the text of the most recent version what we have in here are proposed changes

[1:10:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that the staff is offering so when it says per residential dwelling that's what it says now

[1:10:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Because we had we had examined this section before when we'd gone through that long review of different sections and tightening up the language also by law 78.

[1:10:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And when we got into the debate of, you know, the math of calculating increased dock sizes when they're shared, we covered all that territory and we'd settle on a certain amount of language.

[1:10:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Now the staff's come back with changes, which actually I think do improve it, or at least they're going in the direction of improving it.

[1:11:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But it's the staff that's proposing to change the word dwelling.

[1:11:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So leaving it alone doesn't require a motion.

[1:11:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Flipping it around, that's all staff language that is new.

[1:11:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So I don't think I should be offering a motion to amend an idea the staff has that isn't in the legislation yet.

[1:11:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So I'm struggling to figure out how we solve this.

[1:11:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Okay,

[1:11:28] Voice 17: let's take advice from staff on how we can address the concern we've raised on that particular paragraph on page 48 or 48. No, it's page 49.

[1:11:39] Voice 17: 49 yeah

[1:11:41] Planner McCargar: through the chair so if trustee bernardo is able to just read out the wording that he's

[1:11:48] Planner McCargar: proposing so just the switch i can note that down and then when you do the big section with all the

[1:11:56] Planner McCargar: amendments like there's some that i've proposed some that you'll take some that you might not

[1:11:59] Planner McCargar: it would just read that section 1.20 delete in its entirety and replace with the following and

[1:12:06] Planner McCargar: And the following would just be the wording that's been agreed upon.

[1:12:11] Planner McCargar: And I think that would be the easiest way forward because there is going to be changes, whether they're staff proposed changes or sounds like it's going to be a combination of the two.

[1:12:20] Planner McCargar: So if we can just nail down what that wording is going to be, and then we can insert it into the motion that's going to come later with all of the changes.

[1:12:29] Voice 16: Right. And so this is, you said 2.0, this is 1.9 that we're on.

[1:12:33] Voice 16: sorry

[1:12:34] Planner McCargar: it's going to be a change yes so that will that's going to there's going to be a number of

[1:12:40] Planner McCargar: sections that need changing because this is going to be a repeat right okay then it's in the bylaw

[1:12:46] Planner McCargar: in a number of different places so it'll be 1.12 1.20 1.9 but it'll just be delete entire with it's

[1:12:54] Planner McCargar: in its entirety and replaced with the following and that following will be what hopefully trustee

[1:12:59] Planner McCargar: Bernardo if you can just read it out now that would be good

[1:13:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if I could have the text up on

[1:13:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the screen again that's what it'll be straightforward yeah

[1:13:07] Planner McCargar: okay

[1:13:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the language I have in mind is this is

[1:13:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is like this and as Marlis pointed out the same language applies to a to a bunch of different

[1:13:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): changes in bylaw 78 because the same concept carries forward despite two different zones

[1:13:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So the language I have in mind is this. Despite subsection 4.1.6, the maximum float area may be increased by 30 square meters, 322.9 square feet per residential dwelling served by the dock up to a maximum float size of 150 square meters, 1,132.2 square feet.

[1:14:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): provided a covenant is registered on the dock

[1:14:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): identifying, whoops, sorry, let me go back to that.

[1:14:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Provided a covenant is registered on the dock

[1:14:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): prohibiting the use or construction of a dock

[1:14:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): on or from that residential lot

[1:14:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and identifying the property

[1:14:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in which the shared dock shall be situated.

[1:14:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And an easement registered on title to the lot where the shared dock is located, granting the occupants of each participating the property the right to use the shared dock freely.

[1:15:08] Voice 18: Okay, Lisa, have you

[1:15:09] Voice 17: got that?

[1:15:13] Voice 17: And probably best to get it up on the screen if you can, Lisa.

[1:15:18] Voice 17: Okay.

[1:15:19] Voice 6: And

[1:15:20] Voice 16: have Trustee Bernardo just proof that.

[1:15:23] Voice 16: I

[1:15:23] Planner McCargar: might be able to share it if I, I think I got it.

[1:15:27] Planner McCargar: One second here.

[1:15:29] Planner McCargar: can you see it there perfect

[1:15:37] Voice 17: yeah so trustee bernardo yeah quickly read it i

[1:15:53] Planner McCargar: missed something

[1:15:54] Planner McCargar: with this section here uh

[1:16:03] Voice 10: prohibiting a use or construction of a dock on on or from um

[1:16:09] Voice 10: sounded

[1:16:22] Voice 17: good when you said it

[1:16:24] Voice 8: yeah i think it should be um on or from

[1:16:30] Voice 8: uh through

[1:16:34] Voice 6: the chair yeah it

[1:16:36] Voice 6: was on or from that residential lot right

[1:16:40] Voice 4: and identify

[1:16:42] Voice 6: yeah

[1:16:43] Voice 10: yes that's right sorry yeah i think that should work okay um

[1:16:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): carry forward to to a bunch of other

[1:17:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): sections where that yeah the same concept goes okay

[1:17:05] Voice 17: so let's keep that off the side then but

[1:17:09] Voice 17: But at the moment, I think if we had a motion to amend Section 1.9 to be read as follows on the screen there, that would cover us.

[1:17:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I think Marlis was contemplating that she would take care of that at the back end when we go on the overall resolution.

[1:17:30] Voice 17: That would be fine too, much easier.

[1:17:32] Voice 17: Yeah,

[1:17:33] Planner McCargar: I think if we can, once this is done, we can just have a five-minute break, then I can put the resolution forward and share it on the screen.

[1:17:42] Voice 17: Okay.

[1:17:43] Voice 17: Thank you.

[1:17:43] Voice 17: So let's go to the next section that you just passed over a big red line.

[1:17:52] Voice 17: Well,

[1:17:52] Planner McCargar: this was just the same.

[1:17:54] Planner McCargar: It's the same.

[1:17:56] Planner McCargar: So this will be replaced with the wording that was just discussed.

[1:18:00] Planner McCargar: Again, here, this would be replaced with the wording.

[1:18:04] Voice 17: Oh, okay.

[1:18:04] Voice 17: Great.

[1:18:05] Voice 18: Yeah.

[1:18:09] Voice 17: So we're just saying the same thing over and over again.

[1:18:13] Voice 10: Yeah, now that we're on to the

[1:18:14] Voice 10: the shoreline part of it, 9.3,

[1:18:19] Voice 10: I don't have a problem with what we have at 0.1

[1:18:22] Voice 10: or the proposed change at 0.2a.

[1:18:25] Voice 10: It all works.

[1:18:29] Voice 16: Okay, you're fine?

[1:18:30] Voice 10: Yep.

[1:18:33] Voice 10: Same with the grammar.

[1:18:36] Voice 10: I there, the removal of the word why.

[1:18:38] Voice 10: I just want to see.

[1:18:46] Voice 8: Just grammatical here.

[1:18:48] Voice 8: Yeah.

[1:18:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yeah, this is going to seem like a petty point, but where it says the following guidelines apply for development permits, I'm not sure for, should it say apply to development permits or am I being ridiculous?

[1:19:09] Voice 12: Yeah, maybe. Yeah. Not ridiculous, but.

[1:19:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): okay you know what i i the meaning uh it's not as artful as i'd prefer but

[1:19:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): no bylaw ever can be because it's a high law i i'm gonna pull back i'm i don't want i'm gonna

[1:19:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i'm annoying enough as it is let's leave it alone forget it that one's fine right uh i don't have

[1:19:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): any problem with any of the other changes either right

[1:19:38] Voice 4: yeah

[1:19:47] Voice 9: i'm good with everything at point three

[1:19:49] Voice 9: up to that point um i

[1:19:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): think uh based on what i'd read before i we should fly through them but i

[1:19:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): don't think i've got any comments about the rest of them um i know with interest at what is now

[1:20:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): at 0.4 sub b i thought we'd gotten rid of that before uh but somehow it seems to have

[1:20:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): have survived. But in any case, I agree very much

[1:20:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that 0.4b needs to be removed.

[1:20:25] Voice 4: So

[1:20:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if we could just zip down to see if there's anything else there I may have

[1:20:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): missed, then we should probably be done.

[1:20:33] Planner McCargar: Right. Continue on? Yeah. That's fine.

[1:20:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That's just introductory language, really. Undertaken, that's fine.

[1:20:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Isn't the word at j, isn't that supposed to be contaminants?

[1:20:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): yeah

[1:20:58] Planner McCargar: yeah okay

[1:21:01] Voice 4: is

[1:21:03] Planner McCargar: that not what you're reading it's contaminating

[1:21:06] Planner McCargar: ah i

[1:21:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): mean it's just one of those things that creeps in so so yes that word should probably

[1:21:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): be contaminants because i don't think contaminates is um a noun no no moving on

[1:21:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): again introductory there to vegetation part yeah

[1:21:34] Voice 4: and

[1:21:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i think that's it isn't it yeah

[1:21:40] Voice 17: Yeah, those

[1:21:41] Voice 10: are my comments there.

[1:21:44] Voice 17: So then let's take a five minute break, give Marlis a chance to prepare that and then we can indeed pass a simple motion to the amendments as provided.

[1:21:56] Planner McCargar: So considering that there is also, Trustee Bernardo has provided additional potential amendments, would it not make sense to deal with those now?

[1:22:08] Planner McCargar: and then at the door, do we want to do this first?

[1:22:13] Voice 16: No, I think you're probably right.

[1:22:16] Voice 16: May as well do it all at once.

[1:22:17] Voice 16: We can't, unless we want to do it separately.

[1:22:22] Voice 10: We can do it all at once,

[1:22:23] Voice 10: but I

[1:22:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): still would appreciate a brief break

[1:22:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): because I'm realizing I need something to drink here.

[1:22:29] Voice 4: Oh, well, you know what?

[1:22:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm on

[1:22:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the dry side.

[1:22:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So I'm wondering if we could break and reconvene at 11.30

[1:22:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and we can start to pick up the spread then.

[1:22:36] Voice 17: Okay, yeah, five minutes would be great.

[1:22:38] Voice 17: Yeah, thank you.

[1:22:40] Voice 4: Thank you so much.

[1:22:41] Voice 17: Yeah.

[1:30:39] Voice 4: Okay.

[1:30:53] Voice 18: So that's 153.

[1:30:59] Voice 17: So do we need to look at 154 here now as well? Or can we look at the, have I lost track?

[1:31:11] Voice 9: I think you've lost track. We've

[1:31:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): reviewed the one, we've reviewed staff's proposed amendments and I've fiddled with them. That's covered.

[1:31:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I think where we're at now is the hard part, which is consideration of my proposed changes.

[1:31:29] Voice 15: Okay.

[1:31:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I'm not entirely, you know, I tried to warn you before.

[1:31:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, after the public hearing, I've got a lot to say about this stuff.

[1:31:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I may not have to say it all, depending on the reception of my proposed changes.

[1:31:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The most important one, the one I think we really should be focusing on, is the change to 154.

[1:31:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or, you know, do it in that order.

[1:31:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm not sure if I should simply make the motion

[1:31:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and then we can proceed to debate it

[1:32:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or whether we should get into the discussion now

[1:32:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): before I put forward the motion.

[1:32:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But actually just talking about it,

[1:32:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I think what I'd like to do is make the motion

[1:32:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and then we would debate it in that framework

[1:32:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and, you know, how it goes with that is determinative.

[1:32:17] Voice 17: Yeah, well, that's the cleanest way to do it.

[1:32:20] Voice 17: I prefer the motion to debate.

[1:32:22] Voice 17: So let's do it.

[1:32:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): All right.

[1:32:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I move the proposed bylaw number 154 to be amended by the assertion of the following

[1:32:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): exemption as subsection 9.3.2 sub c additions to pre-existing buildings structures and utilities

[1:32:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): situated between 7.5 meters and 15 meters from the natural boundary of the sea

[1:32:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): provided always that one no part of the work may involve the use of earth moving machinery or the

[1:32:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): removal of native tree species the addition does not exceed 50 square meters 500 square feet

[1:33:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in area and must be erected on previously disturbed land and two three the work does

[1:33:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): not result in environmental degradation of any kind anywhere within dp3 or to ecology of the

[1:33:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): foreshore all

[1:33:20] Voice 17: right so move seconded by trustee stanford thank you trustee stanford um do you

[1:33:27] Voice 17: Do you want to speak to your motion then?

[1:33:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yes, I do wish to speak to the motion.

[1:33:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And as I said before, I've got a lot to say, and I'm not sure it's a great idea for me to say it all at once.

[1:33:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm going to sort of dive into it, and then I think there's a spot at which I should pause.

[1:33:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and perhaps we should then discuss whether we should open it up to

[1:33:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): discussion or whether I should carry on and I apologize for the amount of time

[1:34:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and I take up with this but I really as far as I'm concerned we're very close to

[1:34:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the end of the line here got an important choice to make and I you know

[1:34:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know you're supposed to start at the beginning work to your through the

[1:34:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): middle and get to the conclusion I think it's a good idea if I just I tell you

[1:34:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): what the my landing spot is on this first and then we'll sort of i can explain it where i'm

[1:34:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): at right now is if we pass the resolution resolution i'm proposing and assuming it's

[1:34:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): procedurally allowed i'm fine with proceeding with the fourth reading today if we don't pass

[1:34:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the resolution uh you know if if we don't move with the changes i'm asking for or uh sorry if

[1:34:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and if it isn't procedurally feasible to do it that way uh with the changes i'm asking for

[1:34:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh i would be very comfortable defending the bylaws before the community in the run-up to

[1:35:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the next public hearing that would be required if the changes i'm proposing aren't acceptable

[1:35:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um to the local trust committee as a whole uh then i have to be honest i'm in the opposite

[1:35:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): position i can't support the bylaws uh it's kind of a drastic place to be uh but you know

[1:35:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): all of you have endured my talk about this for the past two years and you understand how seriously

[1:35:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i take these things uh and where i'm coming from and i will recap some of that not all of it today

[1:35:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): but i think the important thing for us to do uh right now is um to go back to the public hearing

[1:35:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh and also what happened before that you know uh you know public hearing you know we had it on

[1:35:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Wednesday, July 31st, Gibsons Public Market, and when you review the correspondence file,

[1:36:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): by my count, the local trust committee had received something like 48 separate pieces

[1:36:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of correspondence from Keats Island residents relating to proposed bylaws, and when I went

[1:36:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): through the correspondence, I'm excluding the responses from trustees and comments from

[1:36:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): from people who aren't residents of Keats Island.

[1:36:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Of these, if you look at that historical record,

[1:36:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and that includes, I think, the submissions

[1:36:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for the public hearing, the most recent public hearing,

[1:36:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): three submissions overall in the history of this thing

[1:36:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): have voiced support for the bylaws.

[1:36:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The remaining 45 have either voiced opposition

[1:36:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or registered objections to the nature of the process

[1:36:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): by which the bylaws were developed.

[1:36:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And if you review those, you know, the unhappy submissions,

[1:36:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know some common themes emerge and they've been continuous from the beginning of this project

[1:37:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): residents typically characterize the bylaws as overreaching out of touch with the reality of

[1:37:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): pizza islands and the shoreline and how people deal with it you know people who are particularly

[1:37:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): upset use words like authoritarian and unfair some express fear about the cost implications

[1:37:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): prevent owners of multi-general multi-generally generational properties from being able to hand

[1:37:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): them down uh i would say that many of the ejections were voiced by keith's landing residents

[1:37:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): who occupy smaller city-sized lots in district lot 696 uh that face particular challenges

[1:37:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in terms of um repair and rebuilding and uh because their cabins fall within you know the

[1:37:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): majority if not all of them their cabins actually existing cabins fall within the proposed 15 meter

[1:37:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): developed permit area. In fact, some of them are in the 7.5 area. So those unhappy comments were

[1:38:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): consistent with those that the local trust committee has received overly at various public

[1:38:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): meetings we've had over the years, ever since the bylaws introduced. Nothing changed at the

[1:38:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): most recent public hearing in July. By my count, 33 residents attended, which is a pretty impressive

[1:38:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of turnout for meeting during working hours midweek, especially when one considers the

[1:38:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): population of the island is actually pretty low. Of the people who spoke, only two expressed

[1:38:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): support for passing the bylaws without further amendment. One was my predecessor from Keats

[1:38:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Island who had championed the project when he was trustee and he continues to champion

[1:38:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it as an interested citizen. He urged the local trust committee to disregard basically

[1:38:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): basically the underlying theory that's in my resolution.

[1:38:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And that's the notion, you know,

[1:38:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): he says LTC should disregard the notion

[1:39:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that we should give any weight to the idea

[1:39:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that previously disturbed land should be treated differently

[1:39:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for environmental purposes in pristine land.

[1:39:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The other speaker in support of the bylaws

[1:39:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): said much the same thing.

[1:39:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The rest of the speakers either criticized the bylaws

[1:39:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): as bad fit for Keats or pleaded

[1:39:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with the local trust committee to make changes or quite commonly did both. Again, a common

[1:39:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): theme, if we can boil it down, is that the local trust committee needed to strike a better balance

[1:39:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): between advancing environmental protection on the one hand and on the other continuing to allow

[1:39:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): shoreline ores to exercise the kind of normal course discretion they've always used

[1:39:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in using and managing their properties.

[1:39:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So coming from Keats, it weighs heavily on me

[1:39:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that this is where our public comes from.

[1:40:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): This is their stance on this.

[1:40:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I feel very strongly that a public hearing

[1:40:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is not a formality that's to be ticked off on our to-do list.

[1:40:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): As trustees, we're under an obligation

[1:40:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to actually think through and weigh what the public tells us

[1:40:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): when we ask for its opinion and it's not just important it's crucial that we actually listen

[1:40:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): doesn't mean we have to follow but we do have to listen we have we owe it to the people who

[1:40:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): elected us to make you know you know they've made the effort you know um let me go back

[1:40:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we owe it to the people like to do the work of understanding and thinking through

[1:40:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh what they've gone to the trouble of sharing with us i

[1:40:52] Voice 3: think

[1:40:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we all appreciate that for a lot

[1:40:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of residents you know to show up at a public meeting or make the effort of sending an email

[1:41:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's unusual for people to do that it takes a kind of extra bit of energy to push themselves

[1:41:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to do that so when they do that i think it's incumbent on us you know it is a formal proceeding

[1:41:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): meeting a public hearing and the purpose of it is to get the input of the community and if we boil

[1:41:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): down what we heard at the public at the most recent public hearing it's consistent with the

[1:41:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): key points that residents have felt held to make from the start and before I briefly review all

[1:41:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): those things you know I'm alive to the fact that many of the comments I believe that we heard on

[1:41:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): on July 31st, didn't entirely account for the fact for the changes that we've already made.

[1:41:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That's an element there. And I think what we're dealing with there is just a hangover of the

[1:41:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): frustration of the residents over the past years, over this whole process. We've done a lot to make

[1:42:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): those bylaws better. And I don't think at the communication level, and it's very hard to do,

[1:42:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): but the community hasn't caught up with what we've done uh that's probably mostly our fault

[1:42:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i mean that not identifying any individuals things like that but just our processes

[1:42:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): just don't make that very easy to communicate that way and so there i think there's a there

[1:42:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): was a a disconnect at what we heard the public hearing uh in terms of the objections and where

[1:42:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we're actually at with the current drafts but having said that it's important to

[1:42:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to get this feel for for what they're saying uh and it's all very familiar uh

[1:42:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know chief among these things that people are saying is that there's no

[1:42:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): specific necessity

[1:42:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or rationale for the proposed bylaws on keats island it just hasn't been identified this is

[1:42:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): a generic piece of work that's been dropped on the island another point that as i go through these

[1:43:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm not arguing these points, but for the purposes of our discussion today, I want us to have a proper frame of where our community is at.

[1:43:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Many people in the community still believe that the supporting scientific justification of bylaws, whether bylaws remains insufficient or it's dubious or there's this problem.

[1:43:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): there's skepticism about the best practices thing which one person said should be treated as more as

[1:43:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): a you know something that has to be adapted to local conditions it's a guideline not a it's not

[1:43:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): something you simply apply uh specifically people said there's no rational justification

[1:43:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh a few people said this uh on there's no rational justification on environmental grounds

[1:43:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for imposing a permitting requirement for construction on land that's already been

[1:43:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): disturbed. Others, most people have said the need for additional shoreline regulation has been

[1:43:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): overstated because the opportunities for new development along the shoreline are actually

[1:44:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): quite limited due to the areas amenable to residential development for the most part

[1:44:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): having already been settled. We heard from people who were in the working group who told us that

[1:44:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the proposed bylaws don't reflect the consensus view of the working group that preceded this

[1:44:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): project uh because the working group actually never arrived at a consensus there was just a

[1:44:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): lot of diverse opinions and we've heard of course um repeatedly throughout the years and as we heard

[1:44:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): last july that there's a lack of trust in the by by law approval process and i hope as an

[1:44:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): organization we can learn from that about how we can improve our communication over these things

[1:44:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and how we can improve our engagement with the public um one person uh i've made a point which

[1:44:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i think is pretty important which is imposing an overreaching development permit requirement

[1:45:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is just inviting non-compliance uh you go too far uh people resent it and they will sneak around

[1:45:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and they'll do things surreptitiously but that's bad we don't want that to happen but we all you

[1:45:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): You know, when that happens, we also we also damage our own credibility as a local government.

[1:45:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The cost of obtaining, you know, the whole process of getting a development permit.

[1:45:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): People in community object to how, from their perspective, how lightly we sort of treat that.

[1:45:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): In their view, the cost of obtaining expert reports is an issue.

[1:45:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): One person commented that her view, I mean, I guess it may be it's based on her experience.

[1:45:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): She says it can be easily within the range of $15,000 to $20,000 to get the necessary reports to get a permit.

[1:45:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And others have also said it's a mistake to think that all waterfront property owners are wealthy people who can easily afford that kind of thing when they apply for a permit.

[1:46:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): In fact, one person, and I think others, had mentioned that many, if not most, shoreline properties or families would be owned by middle-income residents for whom that type of cost level would be pretty close to prohibitive.

[1:46:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Now, a number of residents made suggestions for further changes.

[1:46:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): One was to include a development permit exception for small lots in situations where it's not feasible to build anywhere except a development permit area.

[1:46:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Another suggested that building setback from the natural boundary of the sea be allowed to vary

[1:46:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): according to where the principal dwellings on either side of the lot are located. And that

[1:46:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): person referred to a similar practice that's permitted by Section 3.17 of Bowen Island's

[1:46:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): land use bylaw. I

[1:46:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): looked that up and it appears to, it's a complicated piece of legislation.

[1:47:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Now, it's understandable from my view that residents who themselves are facing specific challenges, that top of mind for them would be specific exemptions that would apply to their situations.

[1:47:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But, you

[1:47:20] Voice 10: know, to

[1:47:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): be honest, an exemption should be a rule that reflects an overall policy orientation. It's a little tricky, you know, designing exemptions for specific and maybe not desirable for specific narrow situations.

[1:47:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Situations. Arguably, you know, some of my constituents may be unhappy for me to hear that say this, but arguably those are, in fact, the situations where staff should be exercising its gatekeeper function with respect to issuing development.

[1:47:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Tricky individual situations probably deserve a certain amount of, you know, dialogue between the staff and the person who wants to do the change.

[1:48:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Now, what do we do in terms of how do we take as a whole what our public engagement, not just in July, but over the years, has told us about this project?

[1:48:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): well we're all at the meeting it was consistent with what's happened in the past and the bottom

[1:48:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): line is this the proposed bylaws do not enjoy the support of island residents let's not kid

[1:48:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): ourselves about that that's not a trivial thing and i don't view our role as one of saying yeah

[1:48:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): okay that's all very nice but we know better it does matter uh you could have a bylaw that's

[1:48:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): absolutely necessary but if it doesn't have public support that's a problem uh we're not here to ram

[1:48:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): things down people's throats it doesn't work uh and the point that uh one constituent said about

[1:49:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh you know uh people uh surreptitiously uh getting into non-compliance that's a bad thing

[1:49:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if we're honest with ourselves the first it's pretty clear the first preference of

[1:49:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the residents we've heard from is that we dropped the whole thing the second one is that we change

[1:49:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the bylaws to eliminate the unreasonable burdens the residents believe they impose and as i said

[1:49:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): before i think many of those burdens have been lifted yeah my motivation for seeking

[1:49:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): election in the very first place was to deal with these bylaws that was my focus and it was

[1:49:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): was not to kill the thing, but to pursue the section option, fix this thing.

[1:49:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The proposed bylaws, I agree with my constituents,

[1:49:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that the proposed bylaws don't answer any kind of urgent need.

[1:50:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The shoreline of Keech Island is an amenity worth preserving

[1:50:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): precisely because the people who occupy it have been responsible over the years.

[1:50:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And they've proved that they can be relied on to continue being responsible.

[1:50:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean the shoreline is worth preserving because they've made it that way and whether or not we invent new rules because the residents it can be expected to preserve this environment that they're there because they enjoy it and they want to preserve it.

[1:50:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So there's no clear and present environmental danger, there's no imminent crisis, there's no real problem that actually needs solving here.

[1:50:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): year. So that's why if the proposed bylaws were in fact terminated today, there'd be cheers across

[1:50:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the island. But in my view, it would still be a loss. There's no urgent need for them, but the

[1:50:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): bylaws are an opportunity to introduce useful incremental improvements in environmental

[1:51:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): protection. And as I've said, the amendments we've already approved do a great deal to address the

[1:51:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): concerns about overreach. We've drawn much clearer distinctions about the circumstances under which

[1:51:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): development permit is necessary when it's not. So that brings us to this resolution I proposed,

[1:51:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): which is an exemption for additions to pre-existing structures in the development

[1:51:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): permit area. I believe it's important and necessary for all shoreline residents,

[1:51:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): but it's of particular and pressing importance for the leaseholders at Keats Landing. Those small

[1:51:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): city-sized lots at District Route 696, for those people, the bulk of the usable property falls

[1:51:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): within the development permit area so imposing that requirement to get a development permit

[1:51:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if they want to build an addition is a real imposition on a lot of people it's going to

[1:51:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): be expensive and i my argument which i have lots more to say unfortunately is we don't have to

[1:52:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): worry about uh needing a development permit when the proposed addition is going to be built on

[1:52:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): already cleared land. Now, I've gone on a bit here and, you know, I'm aware that, you know,

[1:52:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it bores people. I can continue with my argument, you know, but if my fellow trustees say,

[1:52:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know, don't bother, we're just happy to pass your resolution as is, you know,

[1:52:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that would be okay. Otherwise, I'm afraid I'll have to just carry on with my, unfortunately,

[1:52:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): unfortunately my speech here well i don't see people rising up and saying don't bother so i

[1:52:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): guess i better carry on oh

[1:52:50] Voice 17: well i don't know i i would like to actually seek some clarity about

[1:52:54] Voice 17: okay um the obvious question is whether amending the bylaw in this way requires us to go back to

[1:53:03] Voice 17: public here uh

[1:53:08] Voice 10: i can't answer that perhaps marlis can yeah does

[1:53:11] Planner McCargar: it care so i haven't i'll be honest

[1:53:14] Planner McCargar: I haven't had a lot of experience with amending the bylaw in a significant way after public

[1:53:19] Planner McCargar: hearing. Typically, the types of changes that are allowed without a new public hearing would

[1:53:25] Planner McCargar: be like clerical, typographical, minor adjustments for clarity, technical amendments that don't

[1:53:31] Planner McCargar: affect or change the intent of the bylaw. So I would seek more guidance on this, but

[1:53:40] Planner McCargar: But I think it would likely be classified as a major change, meaning it would require a new public hearing, given the exemption would have substantial impacts on environmental protection, public interest, and the precedent for future developments.

[1:53:55] Planner McCargar: I would think that a new hearing would be the safest way forward.

[1:54:00] Planner McCargar: But like I said, I would look to management for a more concrete answer.

[1:54:11] Voice 17: Yeah. Unfortunately, we only received these the other day, so there's no way to have that information before us in advance. Okay. I was hoping for something more black and white. Kate, where are you at? What do you think?

[1:54:33] Voice 17: um

[1:54:35] Trustee Stamford: I'm I'm just disturbed on so many levels here um this uh these motions or the first one

[1:54:45] Trustee Stamford: was sort of brought forward before public hearing and um the decision of

[1:54:53] Trustee Stamford: trustee Bernardo's decision was he wanted to wait till after the public hearing um this is a

[1:55:01] Trustee Stamford: significant change in my opinion um it it speaks to uh i mean i don't know where to start i've

[1:55:10] Trustee Stamford: made so many notes there were so many comments so many points made that i find it really hard

[1:55:16] Trustee Stamford: to be able to respond to all of them um so i'm not sure whether i'm speaking to the motion

[1:55:21] Trustee Stamford: or speaking to any number of of points that were made over the last 10 minutes

[1:55:28] Trustee Stamford: um this bylaw has been going on for seven years it's not perfect um it is based on

[1:55:40] Trustee Stamford: um what was perceived uh by some residents of keats as a serious situation which was the growth

[1:55:51] Trustee Stamford: of structures in the foreshore. This is not benign and there's no sense anywhere that this is going

[1:56:00] Trustee Stamford: to suddenly stop. Basing land planning on the idea that everyone is doing the best they can

[1:56:12] Trustee Stamford: in supporting the environment on the island, that's not land planning. That's assuming that

[1:56:19] Trustee Stamford: nobody's going to sell their property and somebody else isn't going to come along it's not planning

[1:56:23] Trustee Stamford: for the future it i agree people are doing good things on keats but there's also people on keats

[1:56:32] Trustee Stamford: that are expanding their um footprint into the foreshore and that there is an expansion of

[1:56:41] Trustee Stamford: of dock structures and things are getting bigger

[1:56:44] Trustee Stamford: in terms of hard shore development on that island.

[1:56:50] Trustee Stamford: It's a small island.

[1:56:52] Trustee Stamford: You can see that the growth on it.

[1:56:56] Trustee Stamford: The whole point of a development permit area

[1:57:00] Trustee Stamford: is to provide that ability for variances.

[1:57:02] Trustee Stamford: And that if there is those extraordinary circumstances

[1:57:07] Trustee Stamford: that is exactly what it's for.

[1:57:09] Trustee Stamford: is so that we can look at the specific situation that a person has before them and help work

[1:57:16] Trustee Stamford: through a planning scenario that can work for that site. And I think that is exactly what we're

[1:57:23] Trustee Stamford: looking at here. Creating planning based on a community, and I'll use the example of DL696,

[1:57:32] Trustee Stamford: which by today's standards would never have been agreed to this is a community from the 1950s

[1:57:41] Trustee Stamford: to base our modern standards planning standards on that community it doesn't it doesn't make sense

[1:57:50] Trustee Stamford: to me whereas there and many of their situations along that particular coastline this would not

[1:57:56] Trustee Stamford: benefit them their lots are so small that their side lots they wouldn't be able to move

[1:58:04] Trustee Stamford: increase any um building because of side lot issues or front frontage issues let alone

[1:58:12] Trustee Stamford: lot coverage lot coverage in this area is 33 they would um they're over it already

[1:58:19] Trustee Stamford: ready um they have some very serious concerns uh for their cottages and i want to be able to support

[1:58:28] Trustee Stamford: people continuing their recreational lifestyle in that area i just don't see how

[1:58:36] Trustee Stamford: a a motion that's specific to increasing

[1:58:44] Trustee Stamford: increasing block coverage is going to provide more support to those people

[1:58:53] Trustee Stamford: it just seems fairly random the way it's this specific issue around additions i don't see it

[1:59:02] Trustee Stamford: in a lot of other areas i did look and there's west vancouver has additions um west vancouver

[1:59:10] Trustee Stamford: Hoover does, to me, is not where we should be looking for planning scenarios.

[1:59:19] Trustee Stamford: This is Keats.

[1:59:20] Trustee Stamford: This is different.

[1:59:23] Trustee Stamford: I mean, I don't know.

[1:59:27] Trustee Stamford: It's just so much came in, Joe.

[1:59:30] Trustee Stamford: And yet I do think we've really tried to adjust these bylaws to what people have been saying.

[1:59:38] Trustee Stamford: And I recognize it's hard.

[1:59:40] Trustee Stamford: I also recognize that it's the same people that are coming forward to speak to these concerns.

[1:59:47] Trustee Stamford: They are real concerns. I would never dismiss them.

[1:59:51] Trustee Stamford: But there's a whole range of people that are not coming forward.

[1:59:54] Trustee Stamford: And I have to assume that they are not as concerned about this.

[2:00:00] Trustee Stamford: as the people that we've seen at our number of public hearings, public information meetings,

[2:00:05] Trustee Stamford: et cetera, et cetera. So right now, I cannot support this motion as it's written.

[2:00:15] Well,

[2:00:21] Voice 4: there we go.

[2:00:22] Voice 4: If I may,

[2:00:23] Voice 17: Chair?

[2:00:26] Voice 17: I said, there we go. So we have two points of view.

[2:00:30] Voice 9: Go ahead, Joe.

[2:00:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Right. As I mentioned before, I have, that was only, unfortunately, part of my, you know, comments, the actual rationale for the resolution. I mean, what I was talking about before was really the background, how we got here.

[2:00:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): here. But the rationale for the, I can't explain the rationale for this specific amendment. But

[2:00:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): before I do that, I do want to respond to some of the things that Trustee Sanford brought up.

[2:01:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): This resolution shouldn't be a surprise to anybody. I cautioned everyone when we were

[2:01:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): getting down to this and trying to deal with the frustration that I know I've caused in terms of

[2:01:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): how long this project is taking i caution you all that my approach at the end of the day

[2:01:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with respect to finalizing this thing would depend on what i heard at the public here and that's

[2:01:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): where we're at and um and it's true uh that many of the voices we heard at the public hearing uh

[2:01:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the same voices we've heard before but i don't you know the public hearing process either means

[2:01:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): something or it doesn't. Public engagement either has some value or it doesn't. But to say that when

[2:01:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you get the answers from, or you get a response from the public that you don't like, and then to

[2:02:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): dismiss it by saying, well, we're not hearing from people because they're not concerned.

[2:02:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm

[2:02:06] Trustee Stamford: not dismissing.

[2:02:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Well, when we say something like, you know, you have to assume they're not concerned because

[2:02:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you're not hearing from them i don't think we can assume anything all we know is that the vast

[2:02:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): majority of people who live on keats island who've been asked to comment the comments have been

[2:02:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): negative or

[2:02:30] Trustee Stamford: they didn't comment yes

[2:02:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): but what we the public hearing is an opportunity for people

[2:02:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to speak up we can only deal with the evidence that's in front of us the evidence not surmise

[2:02:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): not assumption. The evidence is when consulted,

[2:02:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Keech Island residents despise these bylaws. I mean, Kate,

[2:02:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you've been at these meetings.

[2:02:55] Trustee Stamford: I've also been to a number of public hearings.

[2:02:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yes. And my recollection is on July 31st,

[2:03:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you were very uncomfortable with that meeting and uncomfortable with the

[2:03:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): negative energy and land planning.

[2:03:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that's based on what some residents have you know well bothers some residents but doesn't act that

[2:03:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): isn't actually representative of the views of all the residents or a majority of the residents i

[2:03:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): don't know what that's all about i mean that's not good either and when we talk about the folks

[2:03:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that are dl696 um yeah they do have some real challenges there

[2:03:39] Voice 10: and subjecting them all to a

[2:03:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): development permit requirement um to make changes or additions to already developed land there uh

[2:03:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is um it doesn't seem fair to me now if i can i'll return to i mean this gets to this point

[2:04:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that i think is really important which is what's the what is the purpose of this what's the purpose

[2:04:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): purpose of creating a development permit area? I mean, what's the purpose of this particular

[2:04:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): development permit area? Generally, my understanding, the point of a development

[2:04:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): permit area is to ensure that development will align with the policy outcomes the local trust

[2:04:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): committees determined are appropriate for that particular area, and that there's some particular

[2:04:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): sensitivity that requires scrutiny, and therefore it makes our staff the gatekeeper.

[2:04:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that's responsible for screening permit applications against basically the policy

[2:04:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): criteria that we've specified in the permitting guidelines. And we specified them because we

[2:04:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): think there's an area of particular, there's a particular concern in that area that needs to be

[2:04:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): addressed. Turning to these bylaws, from the beginning of the project, the stated justification

[2:05:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for the bylaws in our public engagement has been, they are to enhance the environmental protection

[2:05:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of the shoreline. That's entirely appropriate. It's appropriate because it's entirely in keeping

[2:05:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with our statutory mandate under Section 3 of the Islands Trust Act. So the way I see it,

[2:05:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): imposing a development permit requirement on shoreline property owners that has the effect

[2:05:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of objectively advancing environmental protection makes sense. Crafting the requirement

[2:05:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): environment with broad language that has the effect of regulating development after it's

[2:05:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): already happened does not advance environmental protection and to me that doesn't make sense

[2:06:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that's why from the start i've argued for greater precision precision in the exemptions and

[2:06:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): guidelines in bylaw 154 my approach you know if if you go back to all the different exemptions and

[2:06:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): who I'd like to have asked for that's where I've been coming from which is let's be very clear

[2:06:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that we impose um restrictions where they are in a need for development permit application

[2:06:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): where there is uh where there may be an effect on the environment but where there isn't one

[2:06:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh it's not necessary so let's not accidentally in broad language end up creating a development

[2:06:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or permanent requirement where it's not required because what's done is done there's no value in

[2:06:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): forcing residents to apply for a development permit when all they want to do is repair and

[2:06:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): maintain existing infrastructure and the ltc you've heard me on that and you've agreed and

[2:06:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i appreciate it the point i'm getting to here is that the same logic applies with respect to

[2:07:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): shoreline property owners who want to do things on land that's already been cleared but we're not

[2:07:11] Trustee Stamford: questioning that it's the addition that is the concern that i have

[2:07:16] Voice 4: well i that

[2:07:18] Trustee Stamford: is that's specific

[2:07:19] Trustee Stamford: i have been very accommodating and worked with you for meeting after meeting after meeting to make

[2:07:26] Trustee Stamford: those exceptions for the very very reasons you're talking about and the one thing that i've had

[2:07:34] Trustee Stamford: concern about is this addition that addition increases the footprint of a structure within

[2:07:44] Trustee Stamford: that restrictive setback and that is what i i just can't go there joe

[2:07:50] Voice 4: well it's

[2:07:51] Trustee Stamford: just too much

[2:07:52] Trustee Stamford: uh

[2:07:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i hear you and you're entitled to your view of course but the difficulty i have with your

[2:08:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): position, unfortunately, is that I have not heard from the staff or from anyone as to why

[2:08:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): increasing the footprint on already developed land is a bad thing. Like I said, the logic of

[2:08:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): having greater precision in exemptions applies with respect to shoreline property owners who

[2:08:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): want to do things on land that's already been cleared. Making the staff the gatekeeper for

[2:08:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): construction and already cleared land can't reasonably called environmental protection

[2:08:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): measure like exactly what's getting protected if we restrict people from making changes to

[2:08:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the most heavily used parts of their properties around their cabins this addition amendment that

[2:08:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i'm talking about example is about allowing people to add to cabin add to their cabins

[2:08:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): but building on land that's basically already part of their yard.

[2:09:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It's not so risk-preventing.

[2:09:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): We're imposing a development permit requirement on that move.

[2:09:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It simply has never been explained how that serves to preserve the environment.

[2:09:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So I have to think, what's that all about?

[2:09:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I've struggled with this because the way this whole project has been promoted to the public

[2:09:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): has been fundamentally on two grounds.

[2:09:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): one is environmental protection and the other one is adaptation to climate change

[2:09:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): which is kind of related to the same thing okay uh but uh so when we grant the effect of

[2:09:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): not having the exemption i'm talking about would have the effect of granting the staff

[2:09:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the discretion to approve or deny changes to already disturbed land i

[2:09:58] Voice 12: think so what's the

[2:10:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): purpose like what's the purpose of that now that's why i i i've struggled with that and i've looked

[2:10:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): at i went back to look at bylaw 153 and that's why that second resolution which we'll talk about

[2:10:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): later maybe if we get to it i i see the word in restoration if the idea is that we want to restrict

[2:10:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or prevent additions from being built

[2:10:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in the development of permanent area

[2:10:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): on already basically land that's been churned up,

[2:10:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it seems to me the only plausible reason for that

[2:10:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is to open the door to rehabilitation and restoration.

[2:10:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I can't agree with that restoration language in DP, in 153.

[2:10:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I can't agree with it because it's going too far.

[2:10:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Preserving and protecting as our mandate requires is one thing.

[2:11:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): restoration is something else that's not what the mandate's all about and as i was hinting at before

[2:11:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we have a serious fair notice element here if the idea is that we want to restore the foreshore

[2:11:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the promotion of bylaws from the start has been about has not really touched on that it's been

[2:11:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): about environment protection climate adaptation public hasn't been notified that this is a big

[2:11:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): deal or this is a goal of ours

[2:11:32] Trustee Stamford: it's one

[2:11:33] Trustee Stamford: of the objectives and the objective could be simply

[2:11:38] Trustee Stamford: using um um native plants when you're planting that is part of restoration as opposed to

[2:11:47] Trustee Stamford: imported plants well i mean

[2:11:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i'm gonna trustee uh stanford i'll ask you to make your comments

[2:11:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): after i'm done i'm getting pretty close to being finished and then you can give me both barrels

[2:11:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know well it no

[2:11:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's not how i work but yeah okay uh getting

[2:12:05] Voice 9: back to the exemption

[2:12:08] Voice 9: um

[2:12:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): well i'll finish that other point which is it's an issue that our communication

[2:12:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): community community information efforts have not identified restoration as a purpose really

[2:12:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's in the bylaw 153 but we haven't talked about it but the point i'm trying to get at here if the

[2:12:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The idea of creating development permit requirement,

[2:12:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if somebody imposing that requirement on anybody who wants to build an

[2:12:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): addition within DP3 on land that's already been disturbed,

[2:12:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): if the theory behind that is that we want to have the staff as a gatekeeper

[2:12:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in order to discourage additions and encourage restoration,

[2:12:52] Voice 12: that's

[2:12:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): not on. I don't know if it is or it isn't,

[2:12:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): but what I've been struggling with, well,

[2:12:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Well, can I please finish my submission?

[2:13:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Because it's important for me to get these on the record.

[2:13:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I need to have a reason to support burdening my constituents.

[2:13:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I haven't heard one.

[2:13:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): There is no environmental protection by restricting additions on already disturbed land.

[2:13:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): There just isn't.

[2:13:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, if somebody can explain it to me, I might change my mind.

[2:13:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I've made that point before.

[2:13:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and all i've heard in response is it's no it's a bad idea there's no point to having the bad

[2:13:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the bylaws what i haven't heard is a rational explanation now if we go back getting back to

[2:13:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the exemption itself let's not forget that back in september 2023 trust council clarified

[2:13:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that the reference in section 3d unique and amenities isn't a reference to the environment

[2:13:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): environment. It's a reference to the idea about preserving and protecting other desirable

[2:14:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): useful features of the trust area. And the Trust Council, we also clarified that fulfilling

[2:14:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the mandate is a matter of striking a balance between the values expressed in Section 3.

[2:14:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Now, amenities are, frankly, they're an eye to behold. And they're a thing that can be

[2:14:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): discussed and it's open to both Trust Council and for local trust committees to reach their

[2:14:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): their own conclusions about what constitutes a unique amenity and what doesn't, so long as it's

[2:14:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): a rational argument in favor of it, it'll work. And one of the amenities of living on Keats Island

[2:14:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is the quality of life that's enjoyed by the island residents. That's something as a trust

[2:14:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that we need to take into account. It's not just about environmental protection. It includes

[2:14:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): includes recognizing um what adds up to having a good quality of life on the island and in my

[2:15:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): view that includes the freedom to decide for themselves what to do with their properties

[2:15:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): provided it doesn't conflict with preserving and protecting learn to my way of thinking that's not

[2:15:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): a secondary consideration but it's central the trust isn't equal is not an ecological preserve

[2:15:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): are it's a trust area is a place um that it's incumbent on us uh to regulate and plan in a way

[2:15:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that it answers the normal expectations of the people who live in it it comes down to this um

[2:15:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i can't support uh a bylaw that imposes a burden a regulatory burden and a requirement to get a

[2:15:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): development program that hasn't been justified on the basis of environmental protection it just

[2:15:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): hasn't the evidence isn't there the argument isn't there so where i'm at right now is i've i've

[2:15:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): basically reached the end of the line this thing we can terminate the project and i'll tell you

[2:16:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): now the majority of key silence residents will celebrate or we can have the bylaw we can save

[2:16:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the bylaws by adopting the exemption and if we do that i think uh we will be engaging in good

[2:16:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and regulation. I can live with either option. But as I said before, I want to save the good

[2:16:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and the bylaws. And I've worked hard. You know, all this trouble I've put you people through,

[2:16:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know, for every hour I've wasted of your time, I've spent 24 of my own struggling with

[2:16:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): this stuff, reading the stuff, trying to understand it, drilling through it. I've

[2:16:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): worked very hard to do everything I can to save these bylaws because I believe ultimately they

[2:16:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): are in the best interest of the island. So that's why I said before, if the local trust committee

[2:16:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Committee is prepared to approve my proposed amendment. I'm prepared to take this business

[2:16:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to fourth reading either today or after another public hearing if we need to do it. But that's

[2:17:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the end of the line. I'm done. I would view this as bylaws as finished. If the local trust committee

[2:17:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): just can't bring itself to approve that, then I cannot and will not vote for the bylaws

[2:17:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): us because that's an unreasonable thing for us to do and i'm sorry but that's where i'm at okay

[2:17:25] Voice 17: so you've asked us for a rationale for this objection to for any objections to the amendment

[2:17:34] Voice 17: that you're proposing so we could give it a go and i'm not sure that i could convince you one

[2:17:48] Voice 17: way or the other actually i'm happy to give it a go i have a few things i'd like to say

[2:17:55] Voice 17: Anyway, I can start off, or Kate, do you want to?

[2:18:02] Trustee Stamford: No, go ahead, because there's just so much.

[2:18:05] Trustee Stamford: It's very hard to respond with so many pieces to what Trustee Bernardo has said.

[2:18:14] Trustee Stamford: So, yeah, this doesn't – the way this process is working is quite difficult for me.

[2:18:22] Voice 17: Right. So I'm just going to say that I'm not going to set the expectation that we'll get

[2:18:27] Voice 17: this resolved today. It may require one or more discussions. I'm also not satisfied to

[2:18:38] Voice 17: abandon the project because indeed a lot of work has gone into this already. And it is a better

[2:18:43] Voice 17: place to be. But I guess sort of a, and so you've asked for a rationale. So I'm just going to do

[2:18:52] Voice 17: the best i can i think fundamentally lots of people not everybody consider that more is

[2:19:07] Voice 17: less beneficial to lots of things in terms of our footprint as human beings on this planet anywhere

[2:19:16] Voice 17: and so this begs the question that in terms of the quality of life being the freedoms to do

[2:19:27] Voice 17: whatever it is you want to do on on the land um is interesting because whether you know whether

[2:19:44] Voice 17: you whether it's an open space or a tent a tent platform or something else the quality of life

[2:19:53] Voice 17: pretty much stay the same certainly there would be luxuries and accoutrements associated with

[2:20:00] Voice 17: the land that makes it more enjoyable so sure that's a quality of life i suppose

[2:20:07] Voice 17: i guess what i'm trying to get around to is the more is less and in terms of the preserve and

[2:20:14] Voice 17: mandate the rationales to balance that desire to have more and do more and build more

[2:20:23] Voice 17: more and impact more to the minimum necessary that does not adversely impact the natural

[2:20:33] Voice 17: environment. And I'll just go. So, you know, there's a couple of other areas and I'll just

[2:20:41] Voice 17: touch very briefly on the setback area, seven and a half meters, 15 meters, 30 meters, whatever it

[2:20:48] Voice 17: is and one thing that was loud and clear from squamish nation is a bigger setback was important

[2:20:56] Voice 17: we've actually chose not to make that setback bigger so that's a as far as the nation's

[2:21:03] Voice 17: occurrence that's a little bit of a setback um and then you know in terms of the bylaws are

[2:21:13] Voice 17: designed and crafted and development permit areas are created to encourage people to do development

[2:21:20] Voice 17: development outside of the sensitive areas. So I think that we can agree that the waterfront and

[2:21:29] Voice 17: the immediate vegetation and wild land that may have been there at one time or is still there in

[2:21:38] Voice 17: some places is a special amenity. We just call it that. It's unique. And so protecting that

[2:21:45] Voice 17: is important because it affects numerous ecological systems uh runoff um insects habitat

[2:21:57] Voice 17: um there's all a number of elements i'm sure that you can appreciate that that's

[2:22:03] Voice 17: true so whether that um is being impacted adversely so that there are no insects and

[2:22:11] Voice 17: there are no wild grasses and the soil just runs off into the ocean and there's no nutrients for

[2:22:17] Voice 17: the fish habitat, et cetera, et cetera. Does that affect the quality of life? Well, if there's no

[2:22:23] Voice 17: fish and tadpoles and clean water, it quite possibly affects the quality of life.

[2:22:32] Voice 17: So with respect to undisturbed land, it's an interesting idea. And I'm sure that all of us

[2:22:40] Voice 17: have seen weeds and trees that make every effort to grow up through asphalt they just do and so

[2:22:52] Voice 17: the reason i say that is because a disturbed area if left alone not a great idea but if a

[2:23:00] Voice 17: previously disturbed area is left alone it will grow up to whatever the next evolution of that

[2:23:06] Voice 17: space is um and that i i'm still not i'm still puzzled about the restoration piece which

[2:23:14] Voice 17: although may be discreetly separate from what we're talking about i think does under lay

[2:23:20] Voice 17: the principles that i hold and that if we disturb some place it's a good idea to put the dirt back

[2:23:30] Voice 17: at a minimum you know if you dug a trench you put the dirt back um and and probably plant some

[2:23:35] Voice 17: some grass and plant some cover of some sort in order to provide for restoration. I don't think

[2:23:42] Voice 17: it means wholeheartedly going out and restoring, but maybe if there's been some disturbance.

[2:23:50] Voice 17: And in fact, on my own property here, and it's been amazing what has happened here,

[2:23:55] Voice 17: people roared around on this property in four by fours long before I bought it. And it was all

[2:24:00] Voice 17: all torn up and it's moss on rock very delicate and so when we built our house we actually moved

[2:24:07] Voice 17: the moss around to repair where we had to disturb the moss we took that moss and we moved it to

[2:24:13] Voice 17: other areas to restore those areas it's been hugely successful it's an amazing uh gary oak

[2:24:18] Voice 17: ecosystem wildflower grasses area and i think we've made that we've restored it and we made

[2:24:25] Voice 17: made it better because of the impacts that we were planning on doing in building a home here.

[2:24:33] Voice 17: So I have to figure out how to rationalize and justify your idea of building a 554 and 540

[2:24:42] Voice 17: square foot addition to a home within the setback when, and I actually went to Google Maps before

[2:24:50] Voice 17: we came into this meeting to kind of get a feel for the lay of the land. And I haven't walked

[2:24:55] Voice 17: the beaches on keeps island never have never had the opportunity but looking at the aerial

[2:25:00] Voice 17: photographs i can get a feel for what it looks like and how that development's gone and i wonder

[2:25:06] Voice 17: about things like the actual size of the we the phrase is bantered about cottages or cabins

[2:25:15] Voice 17: and then there's homes and then there's bigger homes and some of them are quite big homes and so

[2:25:21] Voice 17: So it's a more is better concept.

[2:25:24] Voice 17: And so is 540 square feet a bit too much?

[2:25:30] Voice 17: And is it impossible in some of these situations where a home or a cabin or a cottage maybe straddles the setback?

[2:25:41] Voice 17: So let's just say that it sits at 11, the backside of it sits at 11.

[2:25:46] Voice 17: It's one meter already into the non-DPA area, and the rest of it is in the DPA area.

[2:25:53] Voice 17: So adding an addition at the back of the house wouldn't require any permitting whatsoever.

[2:25:59] Voice 17: And if 540 square feet is a couple more bedrooms to support guests or something, that's great.

[2:26:05] Voice 17: But if it's an extension of the house along the waterfront on what I gather is very small,

[2:26:10] Voice 17: very narrow lots, there is a visual impediment associated with the shoreline.

[2:26:16] Voice 17: and a very real impediment on the natural water runoff

[2:26:23] Voice 17: and other things that may or may not grow up there

[2:26:27] Voice 17: if there was not a building in the way.

[2:26:30] Voice 17: Our footprint is what I think about probably more than anything else.

[2:26:35] Voice 17: And if I had a rationale, it's around those themes.

[2:26:40] Voice 17: schemes um yeah so um obviously there's a big divide here between us i want to respect that

[2:26:55] Voice 17: and i want to understand that and try and determine whether or not in the scheme of things

[2:27:02] Voice 17: it makes a big difference maybe it doesn't but i'd like to think that maybe we should do what

[2:27:10] Voice 17: we can. But I think that one way or the other, it is likely that this exemption, allowing the

[2:27:21] Voice 17: construction of addition, will require us to go back to public hearing. What happens in that

[2:27:29] Voice 17: state of affairs, I don't know. I'm not happy with the concept of forcing this down anybody's throat.

[2:27:39] Voice 17: but i would like to continue this conversation to kind of understand why it is that we might

[2:27:46] Voice 17: want to do this that's it i don't have anything else to say kate louise um

[2:27:55] Voice 12: i i guess

[2:27:57] Trustee Stamford: part of my

[2:27:58] Trustee Stamford: discomfort with this is is is the process as much as the topic itself we have worked for years

[2:28:09] Trustee Stamford: and worked in good faith to try and make these bylaws work in a way that Trustee Bernardo

[2:28:21] Trustee Stamford: specifically saw that they were deficient. And I think the work has been good and it's been

[2:28:27] Trustee Stamford: thorough. And it's all towards a point, can we make this something that I understand people

[2:28:38] Trustee Stamford: people don't like regulation and when I say I mean I've been to public hearings before I have been

[2:28:43] Trustee Stamford: to many public hearings and the whole concept of a public hearing is very aggressive it is not the

[2:28:51] Trustee Stamford: best way to work things out in fact the province is trying to pull back from the whole process

[2:28:58] Trustee Stamford: it's that is not a good environment to be able to understand what is happening in the community but

[2:29:06] Trustee Stamford: But right now, it's a necessary part of how we proceed with bylaws.

[2:29:12] Trustee Stamford: And I've never been to a public hearing where people have come and said, this is a great idea.

[2:29:21] Trustee Stamford: I have been to public hearings where nobody shows up.

[2:29:25] Trustee Stamford: And that is considered the top of the, that's the crane, because we know nobody is concerned.

[2:29:33] Trustee Stamford: It's just the nature of how these processes work that you only get people that are concerned about the bylaw itself.

[2:29:44] Trustee Stamford: You don't get the people coming and going out of their way to say, this is wonderful, go ahead.

[2:29:51] Trustee Stamford: And it's not just with bylaws or public hearings, it's with all sorts of public engagements.

[2:29:57] Trustee Stamford: That's how they slant is towards.

[2:30:00] Trustee Stamford: concerns rather than kudos. So, yes, I found that very uncomfortable, but it was more the

[2:30:08] Trustee Stamford: back and forth that I had difficulty with, because I just, I do recognize that people

[2:30:15] Trustee Stamford: have valid concerns, and I did want to hear them. There was not one concern that came forward that

[2:30:21] Trustee Stamford: I hadn't heard in the previous public hearing, and that we have made an honest effort to come

[2:30:29] Trustee Stamford: come to some kind of resolution that makes these bylaws more useful for the communities.

[2:30:40] Trustee Stamford: Part of my concern here today is I've been given an ultimatum, take it or leave it. After

[2:30:47] Trustee Stamford: everything we've done, now I'm being told that's it. Why was this not said a year ago?

[2:30:55] Trustee Stamford: because ultimately i think this is where we were heading and and to use this specific example

[2:31:03] Trustee Stamford: an addition i didn't hear one person say this will make my life untenable because i will not

[2:31:11] Trustee Stamford: be able to put in an addition it's not true they could put in an addition if they went through a

[2:31:17] Trustee Stamford: variance process for those very specific scenarios where addition is even possible

[2:31:22] Trustee Stamford: accessible given the size of many many of these lots this will help people with larger lots

[2:31:29] Trustee Stamford: i don't think it's going to help people with the small really difficult lots that we're going to

[2:31:35] Trustee Stamford: have to deal with on a one-off basis and they deserve that kind of attention not just for the

[2:31:41] Trustee Stamford: the person that owns a lot but for their neighbors and the island as a whole um so this is more

[2:31:49] Trustee Stamford: around where i'm i'm having difficulty with how this is being landed take it or leave it i'm out

[2:31:57] Trustee Stamford: after seven years so when i hear on the greater scheme of things why the islands trust is so

[2:32:03] Trustee Stamford: inefficient this is what i'm going to use is this kind of process where we're being narrowed down

[2:32:09] Trustee Stamford: to a pencil point you agree with me or i walk and i just don't think that's fair

[2:32:19] Trustee Stamford: so that's sort of where i'm coming from and i'm hoping we can get a break soon about this and i

[2:32:26] Trustee Stamford: agree i don't know where to go with this i really want to make this work but the idea of an addition

[2:32:32] Trustee Stamford: that increases a footprint of a dwelling on a piece of property that is near the ocean

[2:32:43] Trustee Stamford: is it's just i'm not sure how to adjust to that and i am trying because i'm that kind of person

[2:32:50] Trustee Stamford: i want to work this out so

[2:32:53] Voice 17: how do we work it out joe i

[2:32:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): don't know how we work it out um there's a

[2:33:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): lot here that i for me to respond to but i shouldn't be surprised because i i've thrown

[2:33:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): thrown a lot of things out there and a lot of points um i mean there are some points of agreement

[2:33:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): image here uh they don't help us much but i mean i have to agree the process the public

[2:33:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): consultation process hasn't been great i recognize acknowledge kate's point that when we do engage

[2:33:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the public we're more likely than not we're going to hear from the gripers and the people who are

[2:33:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): unhappy with us um arguably if something's really good you're going to have community groups who

[2:33:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): come out in support of it um haven't seen much of that here and the difficulty i have is i don't

[2:33:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): believe it's open to us to attempt to minimize the value of public input because we're skeptical

[2:34:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): about the methodology that has been put on us by the legislation the process is what it is

[2:34:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we have to deal it goes back to this if there's a single point that i'm operating from it comes

[2:34:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): back to the evidence that we have in front of us i i i'm not going to guess about what the public

[2:34:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): wants uh if it was up to if it was possible to have a referendum i'd be all for it um if it was

[2:34:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know but um we can only um work on the basis of the information that we have before us and the

[2:34:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the information we have before us has been, whether it's this public hearing or the previous

[2:34:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): experience, is pretty close to uniform opposition. So we have to respect that. That's a thing that

[2:35:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we have to take into account. And then we have to examine where it comes from. Is that opposition

[2:35:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): rationally or soundly based? Or is it just knee-jerk resistance and not in my backyard,

[2:35:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): yard or I just get off my back. Of course, people don't like more regulation and there's always

[2:35:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): going to be a certain amount of that. But when they say that, it's incumbent on us to look at it

[2:35:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and say, is it reasonable? I don't agree with all of the comments from the community. I've tried to

[2:35:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): make that clear. One of my jobs, I believe, as trustee has been to have a lot of conversations

[2:35:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with people who say, yeah, okay, you know, there are some problems here, but you know,

[2:35:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): there's there's a purpose here that's worth pursuing this thing you know it's going in

[2:35:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the right direction um i believe that's that's what's being responsive and you know i am

[2:35:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uncomfortable with you know about the take it or leave it thing i'm not exactly comfortable about

[2:36:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that uh i don't like finding myself in this position i've worked hard incrementally with

[2:36:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): this and you know as we've sort of gotten around to these things dealing with them trying to sort

[2:36:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of address issues one by one and i i reached this point of saying we absolutely need this

[2:36:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): because i genuinely feel that this is the last piece of the puzzle and it's not a question of

[2:36:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): fairness to the trustees and to us as a group it's a question of doing what it takes to make

[2:36:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): these as best as we can and this is how we've gotten to this point um and to address some of

[2:36:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the things that peter was talking about um i want to be clear about something when i talk about

[2:36:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): freedom. I'm not talking about the freedom to do whatever they want. I'm not coming from some

[2:36:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): libertarian sort of point of view, like, you know, this is my land. I want to do what I want with it.

[2:36:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): No, no, no. Please, if you look at the language of that resolution, the way I've crafted that

[2:36:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): amendment, it's crafted very deliberately to be a very specific exemption that's designed to say,

[2:37:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): say, look, yeah, you can do this, but only if you do it in a way that does not hurt the

[2:37:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): environment in any way, shape, or form.

[2:37:15] Voice 5: What does that mean?

[2:37:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Well, when you say, what does that mean?

[2:37:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I can equally ask you, what are you talking about?

[2:37:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Why is it expanding the footprint when the expansion isn't already developed land?

[2:37:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): When it's onto somebody's lawn?

[2:37:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Why is that a bad thing?

[2:37:35] Trustee Stamford: I don't

[2:37:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): know if it's a lawn.

[2:37:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I don't, I...

[2:37:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Look, an addition is going to be built

[2:37:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): right on the existing structure.

[2:37:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Whether it's a lawn,

[2:37:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's going to be built on the surrounding yard.

[2:37:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The exemption's crafted.

[2:37:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): No earth-moving machinery,

[2:37:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): no taking down of native trees.

[2:37:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): The land has to be already cleared.

[2:38:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It has to be a legacy.

[2:38:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): If it hasn't been cleared, you're out of luck.

[2:38:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's about recognizing that the land's already been disturbed and it's not going to make a

[2:38:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): difference if you put on addition or you don't and when you shake your head and you say oh it's

[2:38:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): terrible we mustn't have no but nobody's saying

[2:38:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that well when you're saying that somehow we need

[2:38:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to have a development permit requirement i still haven't heard any evidence or argument that

[2:38:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): explains why allowing exemption will be harmful and i have to go back to the folks over at dl696

[2:38:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): their ability to enjoy their lives and to carry on with these family legacies of passing these

[2:38:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): places down from generation to generation it matters you want to talk with the rural

[2:38:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): character of the islands we lose a great deal when we lose those people and it is impossible

[2:39:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It is going to be impossible for the residents of those cottages at DL 696 to develop or add to their properties or to make meaningful changes.

[2:39:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, if you go to that waterfront, that's heavily developed.

[2:39:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): They can't improve their dwellings.

[2:39:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Or, you know, as Peter had mentioned, you know, be encouraged to do things outside of DP3.

[2:39:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It's going to be impossible for them.

[2:39:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): They can't move their cabins.

[2:39:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): There isn't the room.

[2:39:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): so they're stuck so it won't do in my view um to say well you know we don't want to carry on

[2:39:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the legacy of planning that's out of date i mean what does that mean that basically means we're

[2:39:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): gonna we're gonna make the people who live there pay the price the thing is uh uh uh i believe

[2:40:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that's

[2:40:00] Voice 10: disrespectful of the reality of their lives uh people live there uh no they don't

[2:40:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): We don't want to go away.

[2:40:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): They aren't going away unless we force them to.

[2:40:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And we shouldn't, where I'm coming from is we ought not to ignore the practical reality

[2:40:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that they face.

[2:40:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And again, what's the harm?

[2:40:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm hearing a lot of generalities about, you know, less is more and all that kind of stuff.

[2:40:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But, you know, fine.

[2:40:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It's a general proposition.

[2:40:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That's true.

[2:40:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But we're dealing with actual effect on people's lives.

[2:40:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Where is the harm to allowing an addition on land that's already been cleared?

[2:40:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I don't get it. If somebody can tell me what the harm actually is, then I've got an argument or some evidence to deal with. All I've heard is this general proposition that we kind of, we just want to see the foreshore left, you know, closer to nature than it is now, you know, and that's

[2:40:54] Voice 10: just not all.

[2:40:57] Voice 12: So, who's going first?

[2:41:00] Voice 10: I noticed it's

[2:41:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): 1240. Should we take a break for a bit here?

[2:41:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Can I

[2:41:08] Trustee Stamford: just make two quick points? Any kind of addition? Well, in addition of this size, it's significant, will require permits, building permits.

[2:41:24] Trustee Stamford: requirements um and um 696 if we're talking about 696 in all practicalities number one there is no

[2:41:37] Trustee Stamford: property lines right now so it's they are this is so far down the list of things that have to be

[2:41:45] Trustee Stamford: dealt with in terms of individual properties in that area but the proper the proposed property

[2:41:52] Trustee Stamford: property lines, they have no room to expand. There will be a few of them that technically

[2:42:00] Trustee Stamford: could do this. But the majority of those properties are too small as it is. So their

[2:42:06] Trustee Stamford: lot line coverage, their lot coverage is too big. And they're going to have to get special,

[2:42:14] Trustee Stamford: they're going to have to go through a variance to get any kind of increase. And it's not based on

[2:42:20] Trustee Stamford: the the dpa it's based on the setbacks to the side lot and the lock lot line coverage um i they have

[2:42:29] Trustee Stamford: lived in these cottages for 80 years now and their lifestyle is something that they value and

[2:42:42] Trustee Stamford: and keats values and frankly so does gibson's when they look over that is a lifestyle that's valuable

[2:42:49] Trustee Stamford: And I don't have any, I think that's important. But to suggest that in order to continue enjoying their lifestyle, they should be able to increase their lock coverage by 540 feet. I just don't see the connection there.

[2:43:14] Trustee Stamford: this it's specific to this thing and I also didn't really see anywhere in the public hearing where

[2:43:20] Trustee Stamford: somebody said I need to be able to put an addition on without asking for a variance

[2:43:26] Trustee Stamford: that did not come across as a priority other things did like being able to change roofs without

[2:43:34] Trustee Stamford: feeling they had to go for a variance or to be able to do basic maintenance without having to

[2:43:39] Trustee Stamford: I totally understood that. But I haven't seen anywhere where it said my inability to put on a 540 square foot addition, which requires all sorts of permits anyway, will be what is the thing that will cause me the most difficulty. It's a big ask.

[2:44:09] Voice 17: Okay, I do think we need to go for a break. I don't think we're going to solve this today. This only showed up for me and Kate yesterday. It obviously requires a lot more deep thought in order to come up with a rationale. I think that's a completely fair question.

[2:44:31] Voice 17: um so i'm gonna suggest um i would like to know about restoration why that is particularly

[2:44:45] Voice 17: problematic but i'm going to suggest that we just table this until our next meeting

[2:44:50] Voice 17: because i don't see this getting resolved today we're too far apart um so let's have a break

[2:44:58] Voice 17: and half an hour and come back and um see what else we want to do today okay all

[2:45:06] Voice 4: right thank you

[2:45:06] Voice 4: Thank you.

[3:02:24] Voice 5: It's Kate Stanford calling.

[3:02:25] Voice 5: I'm wondering if Marlis is in the office or is she meeting us from home?

[3:02:34] Voice 5: Yes, I am.

[3:02:41] Voice 5: Yeah, we're having lunch.

[3:02:44] Voice 7: Trustee Stanford, you need to mute yourself.

[3:02:48] Voice 6: Oh, I can hear you.

[3:02:50] Voice 6: It's Lisa.

[3:02:52] Voice 6: You need to mute yourself.

[3:12:38] When

[3:12:53] Voice 19: are we coming back?

[3:12:58] Voice 16: When are

[3:13:04] Voice 19: we coming back?

[3:13:17] Voice 5: Sure, look, we can't hear you.

[3:13:20] Voice 5: Trustee Stanford, 115.

[3:13:22] Voice 5: 15. the

[3:13:33] Voice 16: problem houston oh

[3:13:35] Voice 19: i hear you now yeah

[3:13:37] Voice 16: oh there we go i think it's just the connectors

[3:13:41] Voice 16: when are

[3:13:42] Voice 12: we coming back oh very soon so

[3:13:57] Voice 17: are you there trustee bernardo

[3:14:04] Voice 4: there's marlas there's

[3:14:08] Voice 16: trustee bernardo they're so

[3:14:17] Voice 16: i'm

[3:14:19] Voice 17: not sure how we're gonna uh

[3:14:22] Voice 17: manage the rest of this today but well

[3:14:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): your suggestion that we table this might be a good one

[3:14:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um you know i

[3:14:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i i don't think we want to be if i may if i can respond to just briefly to a couple

[3:14:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): of things because i don't think we should be precipitated about this it is important

[3:14:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh to answer some of the questions you know and discomfort i've heard from trustee stanford

[3:14:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): At the public hearing, actually, we had one person actually did speak specifically to the addition issue.

[3:14:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That was, I checked my notes, that was Susan Kegel.

[3:15:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): There are also people from, a number of people from Keats Landing, that's the District Law 696 people,

[3:15:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): spoke about their need to update their cabins and their concern that the bylaws get in the way.

[3:15:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the restrictive. As to the point

[3:15:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that once fee simple is in place for property

[3:15:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): owners there, they're not going to have any room to make

[3:15:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): additions anyhow due to where the line setbacks are on the lots.

[3:15:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I don't agree with that. It's going to depend lot by

[3:15:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): lot, but

[3:15:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's not all horizontal. It can be vertical in terms of

[3:15:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you know going into the depth of their properties and that still would be uh in dp3s the real the

[3:15:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): material issue here is the cost uh that it's going to impose on average people and uh

[3:16:00] Voice 10: also um

[3:16:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the cost and also the inconvenience and uh needless uh filtering on the part of the staff

[3:16:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): here and i need to emphasize this i need to repeat it the most important consideration for me here

[3:16:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): here is that given the way I've actually worded the amendment, environmental harm is not an issue

[3:16:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with respect to any additions, as I've contemplated. And the fundamental thing here

[3:16:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is if we're going to limit people's choices, we need an actual evidence-based policy reason

[3:16:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for it. We're talking about restricting people here. And there is no evidence that I've seen so

[3:16:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): so far that allowing additions as I've contemplated in the addition or in the amendment will have a

[3:16:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): negative environmental impact to all appearances all will achieve by imposing a DP requirement for

[3:17:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): what I consider to be harmless additions is costs on projects that are necessary in terms of extra

[3:17:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): reports that it makes and also creating the delay and uncertainty that comes from making the staff

[3:17:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the gatekeeper, without there being any identified objective need for it, and I want to go hear about

[3:17:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): something. What I'm talking about here is without the exception of needless regulation, my mind is

[3:17:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): open. That's why I think it's probably a good idea to table this. Staff may need an opportunity to

[3:17:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): come back. Show me the evidence. Give me a rational argument and I can be persuaded. When I say

[3:17:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): rational arguments not rhetoric not generalities not arm waving in the direction of you know you

[3:17:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): know general ideas that you just want to have fewer people and you want to have less impact

[3:17:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i need to know what the impact actually is if there is one i don't see one uh no references

[3:18:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to best practices let's have let's identify the

[3:18:06] Voice 10: actual problem that is going to the actual good

[3:18:09] Voice 10: that

[3:18:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we're going to achieve by restricting people's options in this way and interests of

[3:18:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): transparency and being straightforward here i need to clarify one thing the 500 the 540 square foot

[3:18:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): number i'll be honest with you is kind of arbitrary i mean i was struggling to figure

[3:18:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): out what was a reasonable um number that would take into account um

[3:18:36] Voice 10: that there has to be a limit

[3:18:37] Voice 10: on this because you know the reality is um the surrounding

[3:18:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): land around people's properties that

[3:18:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): has already been developed is is typically going to be limited to some extent um and i struggle

[3:18:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with that i recognize it's arbitrary i don't know how else to

[3:18:55] Voice 10: you know and it seemed to me like a

[3:18:56] Voice 10: reasonable number all things considered uh what's reasonable to me may not be um

[3:19:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): there may be other

[3:19:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): other reasons that would justify having a smaller number, for all I know, might justify a bigger

[3:19:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): number. So I recognize that we have an issue there. I mean, at some point, I'm coming from

[3:19:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the point of the general principle here that we ought not to engage in needless regulation.

[3:19:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That doesn't really achieve anything. But that 540 number, if somebody can present me with a

[3:19:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): rational argument says that number's wrong it should be a different one uh again

[3:19:40] Voice 10: my mind is

[3:19:41] Voice 10: open and

[3:19:43] Voice 17: okay um i'll just add a few more thoughts if that's all right kate um a couple of things

[3:19:52] Voice 17: we have to be super careful about how far ranging this conversation goes because we are

[3:19:59] Voice 17: post public here um there are some topics that have potentially spread beyond what we should

[3:20:10] Voice 17: talk or has a potential to spread beyond what we should be talking about post-public hearing

[3:20:14] Voice 17: but that said you know you said there was maybe one or two people that indicated that

[3:20:21] Voice 17: building of an addition was a problem for them i have searched the documents quite closely to

[3:20:28] Voice 17: try and find a wave of that sentiment and i haven't found that but that it's there's a lot

[3:20:35] Voice 17: of documents and it goes back a lot of years so i might not be accurate on that but i'd be

[3:20:40] Voice 17: be interested in seeing that rationale spelled out in black and white. You mentioned bigger or

[3:20:53] Voice 17: smaller. Well, I'm not saying that any addition is necessarily something one should do in the

[3:21:00] Voice 17: development of a perimeter, but smaller would be better. And that maybe 100 square foot would be

[3:21:08] Voice 17: a bedroom adding on to an existing cabin. Maybe we might be able to live with that. 500 square

[3:21:16] Voice 17: square feet is half the size of my house and um you know we raised two kids in this house and

[3:21:23] Voice 17: live quite comfortably now full time um so maybe there's room there maybe there's not but at the

[3:21:33] Voice 17: end of the day you do the math a development how much does the development permit cost i actually

[3:21:39] Voice 17: don't know never applied to one but it must be five thousand to ten thousand dollars it was

[3:21:43] Voice 17: toss that out as a magic number. If you were to build any kind of construction, 500 square feet

[3:21:50] Voice 17: today, if you were able to build it below the cost, average cost of building anything in British

[3:21:56] Voice 17: Columbia, you're looking at $100,000. You can't even build a tiny home for $100,000 and drag that

[3:22:03] Voice 17: onto your property. So is the development permit really an obstacle when the opportunity exists?

[3:22:12] Voice 17: So it's not justifying the development permit, except that it offers the opportunity for the local trust committee and the local government to be involved in the management and development of that property where there does need to be special consideration.

[3:22:27] Voice 17: And that's, I think that's the rationale that I would apply to that.

[3:22:36] Voice 17: You know, a lot of these cabins have been there for a long, long time, and they were plenty good enough up until now, we'll say.

[3:22:45] Voice 17: And people's expectations and lifestyles have changed.

[3:22:48] Voice 17: I'm so sure they want their cabin on the Gulf Islands to expand and develop according to their lifestyle and expectations.

[3:22:55] Voice 17: expectations, but it doesn't necessarily justify impacting in the marine environment.

[3:23:02] Voice 17: And there are measurable things, I would just say.

[3:23:05] Voice 17: And so I guess we'll have to do some homework and figure that out and bring it to the next

[3:23:09] Voice 17: conversation.

[3:23:10] Voice 17: But just the sedimentation of the land into the sea, nutrients washing from the land into

[3:23:17] Voice 17: the sea, insects and flora and fauna that are growing along the shorelines and those

[3:23:23] Voice 17: those unique coastal habitats are all significant and they will be impacted just simply by people

[3:23:30] Voice 17: walking around, not even building anything, human impact alters things. So I think we need to bring

[3:23:36] Voice 17: those back. And so my only other thing here is, of course, what's a little bit of concern to me

[3:23:42] Voice 17: as your chair is leaving this in this post-public hearing space for too long increases the risk

[3:23:50] Voice 17: risk of us doing or saying or bringing information to the table that wasn't brought to the table

[3:23:56] Voice 17: during the public process. So just let's be super careful about that. And let's go to Kate and then

[3:24:04] Voice 17: let's pause this.

[3:24:06] Trustee Stamford: Well, Marlis has her hand up.

[3:24:09] Voice 17: Oh, Marlis, okay.

[3:24:13] Planner McCargar: Through the chair, I was just

[3:24:15] Planner McCargar: going to echo a bit about what you said, Chair Luckham, around the sensitive nature of this

[3:24:20] Planner McCargar: post-public hearing period and that we just have to be really careful i've heard trustee bernardo

[3:24:25] Planner McCargar: a few times talk about new evidence and wanting to see that in at the next meeting or whenever

[3:24:33] Planner McCargar: that might be and we're not going to be able to bring forward any new evidence any new material

[3:24:40] Planner McCargar: really aside from what we heard at the public hearing unless the ltc decides that they would

[3:24:46] Planner McCargar: would like to go to another public hearing. So I just wanted to make that clear.

[3:24:51] Voice 17: And then everything's off the table if we go to another public hearing. But actually,

[3:24:55] Voice 17: what I will say as a precautionary measure there is if you have information that you think is

[3:25:01] Voice 17: pertinent, members of the public and trustees pertinent to the conversation, provide it to

[3:25:06] Voice 17: staff, and then staff can make that judgment. No, this is new information. We haven't heard

[3:25:12] Voice 17: this before, because it may seem like new information, and it's not necessarily pertinent.

[3:25:16] Voice 17: Because it has to stand up and say, you guys considered this and it was never part of the

[3:25:24] Voice 17: original and you made your decisions based upon something that was never adopted.

[3:25:29] Voice 17: So if there's new information, give it to staff and they can make the call.

[3:25:35] Voice 17: And it's not been unusual in the past.

[3:25:38] Voice 17: Staff have said, we think you should turn back the clock and go back to first reading

[3:25:43] Voice 17: and start again because there is new information to consider.

[3:25:46] Voice 17: and i'm fine with that um but we don't want to do it any more often we have to okay thank you

[3:25:54] Voice 17: marlas and am i wrong in that what i just said no okay thank you just want to make sure i can be

[3:26:01] Voice 17: wrong uh um kate leaves um

[3:26:04] Trustee Stamford: so i just looked up the uh cost of a dvp in gambier and it's

[3:26:10] Trustee Stamford: one thousand nine hundred and seventy six dollars uh for a dvp

[3:26:14] Voice 16: so so

[3:26:17] Trustee Stamford: um and i'm not saying that

[3:26:19] Trustee Stamford: that's good or bad i'm not trying to put a judgment on there i just wanted to make sure

[3:26:24] Trustee Stamford: that that's clear um my concern at this well concern but i need to know how this ongoing

[3:26:32] Trustee Stamford: process will impact other projects in the gambia local trust committee because i understood that

[3:26:38] Trustee Stamford: that the ability to do engagement for the Gambier OCP,

[3:26:46] Trustee Stamford: the capacity was somewhat based on the completion of this particular project.

[3:26:53] Trustee Stamford: So I would like to know what the impact is on other projects.

[3:27:03] Planner McCargar: Through the chair, I'd have to speak with our RPM about that.

[3:27:07] Planner McCargar: But as I understand it, there's no more staff hours.

[3:27:10] Planner McCargar: There's no more budget left for this Keats Island.

[3:27:13] Planner McCargar: shoreline project it's it's finished you know it's completed the the process as we we thought

[3:27:20] Planner McCargar: it was going to go and the funds have run out so for this fiscal there would be no more funding

[3:27:25] Planner McCargar: no more staff time available if it's something that the LTC chooses to move forward with this

[3:27:33] Planner McCargar: key shoreline project then it would be a discussion with the RPM and whether another project would

[3:27:38] Planner McCargar: have to go on pause i'm not able to to say for sure thank

[3:27:43] Voice 17: you but us us deferring this to the

[3:27:45] Voice 17: next meeting isn't necessarily costly or harmful as

[3:27:52] Planner McCargar: long as it's not asking for more staff hours

[3:27:55] Voice 17: uh yeah exactly thank you uh trustee bernardo i

[3:28:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): just want to say for the record that you know

[3:28:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i i don't um i don't take any pleasure in the fact that you know i'm screwing things up and

[3:28:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): screwing up the process and creating a tangle uh in terms of the process um i'm not that familiar

[3:28:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): frankly but how what the the how the process worth the world rules are and all that kind of stuff but

[3:28:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i was pretty clear uh before we uh approved the bylaws uh to go to public hearing that i had

[3:28:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): residual concerns that i wasn't uh that i i supported the changes we had to date but i

[3:28:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): hadn't reached the conclusion that the bylaws as they were written were perfectly fine

[3:28:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): so um the risk has always been there just for briefly uh when we're talking about

[3:29:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): justifying the justifications for having this restriction and not having it's key to me

[3:29:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that it's for us to justify why it's necessary to restrict people's freedom to use their own

[3:29:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): properties. There are often very good reasons why we do it, which is why we have bylaws.

[3:29:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But we have to have the reasons. It's not a question of other people coming to us and saying,

[3:29:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I have a reason for why you ought not to shackle me in my choices. This is a free country. And

[3:29:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And let's respect the fact that we have that level of accountability and respect to the public.

[3:29:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Second, the human impact, Chair Luckham referred to, is already there.

[3:29:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That's my point.

[3:29:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm talking about building on land that's already being used now.

[3:29:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): When you're talking about runoff, you know, somebody putting fertilizer in their lawn.

[3:30:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): today well it's happening this is i'm talking about the the bit of the property that gets the

[3:30:05] Trustee Bernardo (probable): most active use now and in my view it makes no difference whether there's more building on it or

[3:30:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): there's not it's like i said before what's done is done another point just to repeat what i said

[3:30:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): before that 540 number is um my mind is open to um arriving because i recognize arbitrary i would

[3:30:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): prefer if

[3:30:30] Voice 10: we had a rational uh kind of argument

[3:30:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or theory as to the sizing of it that there was

[3:30:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): some kind of scientific or policy justification that made sense as it is i mean the peter you

[3:30:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): talked about something smaller 100 square

[3:30:52] Voice 10: feet 500 that's equally arbitrary i mean we're kind

[3:30:55] Voice 10: of guessing here i'd rather not guess if we could and finally the cost point

[3:31:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's not about the cost

[3:31:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): cost of the filing costs. It's the ancillary costs, which are quite a bit more. It's the

[3:31:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): expert reports that get asked for. And because the staff requires the information from whenever

[3:31:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): they see some sort of issue and they want to know about the environmental impact, they're

[3:31:19] Trustee Bernardo (probable): going to ask for a report. And that's where the cost comes in. And that's the concern

[3:31:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): at that front. It's not the filing fee. The filing fee, you know, a thousand plus, it's

[3:31:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): not trivial but you know in terms of doing a construction project it's well within the

[3:31:37] Voice 10: acceptable range thank

[3:31:40] Voice 17: you trustee bernardo i would just like to make a couple of remarks if i

[3:31:44] Voice 17: might um if i'm not mistaken gambier keeps does not have a bylaw for people and information bylaw

[3:31:53] Voice 17: for you bylaw so we actually can't ask for anything and so you if you walk in and we've

[3:32:02] Voice 17: had it happen people walk in they've got hand drawings no surveys and all this kind of stuff

[3:32:08] Voice 17: and they go i want to do this and we go well it'd be really way easier for us to make a decision

[3:32:13] Voice 17: if you had a surveyor figure that out or it would be way easier if you had this what the

[3:32:18] Voice 17: other thing and they just insist no you don't need that this is really simple and really easy

[3:32:24] Voice 17: and and i'd say you know fairly good percentages of the time they convince us that they've got it

[3:32:30] Voice 17: it all under control and in hand and that and i think that's that is actually the beauty of it is

[3:32:37] Voice 17: that somebody can come to us for two thousand bucks and um give us whatever they want and um

[3:32:45] Voice 17: and then we may or may not be able to make a decision to allow them to go forward

[3:32:49] Voice 17: with what they have been able to articulately argue is a rationale for them to be able to build

[3:32:56] Voice 17: that addition on their place in the setback on the gulf islands so it just engages us in the process

[3:33:06] Voice 17: and i i think there's some you know there's some beauty in it it might be that not everybody

[3:33:11] Voice 17: appreciates that but there is some beauty in engaging with the government to assist you in

[3:33:16] Voice 17: that work maybe bring other information to the table rather than willy-nilly going forward

[3:33:21] Voice 17: because we've seen lots of situations where people don't get permits or anything whatsoever

[3:33:25] Voice 17: so ever, and it usually turns into a disaster. So the size, sure, we could debate that, I guess.

[3:33:33] Voice 17: And quite honestly, 100 square foot would be less objectionable to me, but that might be too

[3:33:38] Voice 17: a small bedroom by anybody else's standards. And I had one other question, but I completely lost it,

[3:33:44] Voice 17: and it was in response to something you have to say. But let's bring this all back to the next

[3:33:50] Voice 17: meeting and um and see where we can get to is that okay all

[3:33:56] Voice 12: right so we're not going to pass

[3:33:57] Voice 12: any motions whatsoever there's

[3:34:00] Voice 17: a motion on the table um moved and seconded um so i moved to

[3:34:08] Trustee Bernardo (probable): table the motion um

[3:34:10] Voice 18: yeah uh

[3:34:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i moved to table uh uh my motion um advancing the proposed amendment

[3:34:22] Voice 17: Okay. And you'll table that to the next meeting.

[3:34:26] Voice 17: I think that's the rationale.

[3:34:27] Voice 17: Table

[3:34:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): my motion to the next meeting, if that's the way of doing it. Yes.

[3:34:31] Voice 17: And so I guess the question, thank you, Kate, the question is, can we advance the other issues, corrections, and get that actually out of a red line version into a final version, and then just simply deal with these last two issues at our next meeting, if that's what we choose to do?

[3:34:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I think that's a sensible way. We might as well clean out what we can.

[3:34:51] Voice 17: Yeah. Marlis, does that make sense to you?

[3:34:54] Planner McCargar: Yeah, that would be okay.

[3:34:56] Planner McCargar: So you would pass the resolutions for the changes and then each bylaw would

[3:35:01] Planner McCargar: need to be read a second time as amended.

[3:35:06] Voice 17: And what about further amendments?

[3:35:09] Planner McCargar: So if further amendments,

[3:35:11] Planner McCargar: so that would mean that we would have a bylaw at second reading with all of

[3:35:15] Planner McCargar: the amendments as approved today. And then if at

[3:35:18] Voice 17: the next meeting,

[3:35:19] Voice 17: we can do it a third time. Yeah. Okay. I understand. That's great.

[3:35:23] Voice 17: just wanted to make sure we were going on the right path and we're not presuming at any point

[3:35:27] Voice 17: in time that this bylaw is going to advance um we need to deliberate on this um in order for it to

[3:35:34] Voice 17: advance so um did you have a motion for us um because you were going to consolidate that

[3:35:40] Voice 17: information over the break i don't know if you got a chance to do that or not i do

[3:35:43] Voice 17: yes and i've

[3:35:51] Voice 17: been i don't know about you joe but i've been talking talking too much today i always talk too

[3:35:57] Voice 17: much so

[3:36:00] Planner McCargar: this is the motion with the wording here uh to reflect what was discussed and then i changed

[3:36:09] Planner McCargar: the word here to contaminants

[3:36:12] Voice 17: so do you want all of that read out correct yeah i thought you were

[3:36:18] Voice 17: going to say that because that's what i would say um so who wants to be the brave uh person and read

[3:36:24] Voice 17: to that it's definitely not me uh

[3:36:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i think uh for my sins i should probably be the one who does it

[3:36:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): okay

[3:36:31] Trustee Stamford: um um planner zepanek has got her hands up there

[3:36:37] Voice 17: oh sorry there you go planner zepanek

[3:36:40] Voice 17: what's uh happening there i can't hear you space bar sometimes oh i heard something

[3:36:51] Voice 17: nope can

[3:36:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): you hear me okay sorry about that

[3:36:55] Voice 17: now i've got you perfect sorry

[3:36:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): to interrupt but you

[3:36:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): You actually can, if Planner McCarger sends that to the minute taker, if that is the entirety

[3:37:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the text for the resolution, yeah, the local trust committee can absolutely pass

[3:37:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): a resolution as per what's shown on the screen and pass to the minute taker to save time.

[3:37:18] Voice 17: As presented.

[3:37:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): Correct.

[3:37:21] Voice 17: Okay.

[3:37:21] Voice 17: I like that.

[3:37:22] Voice 17: I'm just going to give you both, myself included, a moment to read through this to make sure

[3:37:27] Voice 17: it's what we want to say and then let's do that when you're ready just shout out and can you make

[3:37:36] Voice 17: that a bit bigger for us and maybe scroll down on that after once you get halfway through yeah

[3:37:49] Voice 4: that's good okay

[3:38:15] Voice 18: i'm ready for the next section i don't want to presume everybody else is that's

[3:38:35] Voice 4: good right

[3:38:45] Voice 16: and almost all of this was what was we haven't altered it today okay

[3:39:34] Voice 4: so

[3:39:43] Voice 17: is that it

[3:39:43] Voice 17: it the entirety then um if somebody wants to make a motion um move the

[3:40:02] Voice 16: motion as presented

[3:40:03] Voice 16: i'm

[3:40:05] Voice 18: sure how you're going to carry that

[3:40:06] Voice 16: that's joe

[3:40:19] Voice 12: we can't hear you oh

[3:40:21] Voice 4: sorry

[3:40:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): about that um i'm

[3:40:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): happy to move this um um gotta add something here but i moved that the gambler island local

[3:40:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): trust committee bylaw number 154 cited as keats island land use bylaw 2002 amendment number one

[3:40:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): 2021 be amended

[3:40:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): as presented

[3:40:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to the local

[3:40:47] Voice 10: trust committee

[3:40:49] Voice 17: so do I have a seconder

[3:40:54] Voice 17: thank you

[3:40:56] Voice 17: any discussion

[3:40:58] Voice 17: all those in favor

[3:41:00] Voice 17: that carries that's awesome

[3:41:03] Voice 17: thanks for your help Sonia

[3:41:05] Voice 17: thank you Marlis

[3:41:08] Voice 17: of course

[3:41:09] Voice 17: excuse

[3:41:11] Voice 7: me Chair Luckham

[3:41:12] Voice 17: is

[3:41:13] Voice 7: the motion to

[3:41:15] Voice 7: move the

[3:41:17] Voice 7: the Trustee Bernardo's previous motion to the next meeting.

[3:41:26] Voice 7: Do we need to do anything with that?

[3:41:27] Voice 7: Does that need to be seconded or?

[3:41:29] Voice 17: Oh, sorry.

[3:41:30] Voice 17: Yeah, and then we should ideally also do a second reading

[3:41:34] Voice 17: and then we can make amendments

[3:41:36] Voice 17: between second and third meeting

[3:41:37] Voice 17: if that's what we want to do.

[3:41:39] Voice 17: So I would say let's get that motion again,

[3:41:47] Voice 17: Again, Trustee Bernardo, to table your motion until the next meeting.

[3:41:51] Voice 17: And then I'll look for a second.

[3:41:57] Voice 17: Your microphone has to be on for the world.

[3:42:00] Voice 17: I'm sorry.

[3:42:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I move that my motion be tabled to the next meeting of the local trust committee.

[3:42:11] Voice 17: Yeah, I think probably staff, you'll put a number in there because it's actually a motion of the committee, right, at this point.

[3:42:17] Voice 17: That's seconded by Trustee Stamford.

[3:42:20] Voice 17: And I'll just go to the vote.

[3:42:22] Voice 17: All those in favor?

[3:42:23] Voice 17: So that carries. So we'll see that come back at the next meeting. And second reading would be a good place to end. So does somebody want to pick that one up? Kate Louise?

[3:42:42] Voice 16: There it is on your screen.

[3:42:49] Voice 17: You'll have to turn your microphone on for us to hear you as well.

[3:42:55] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier-on-Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 153, site is Keats Island Fish Community Plan 2002, Amendment No. 1, 2021, be read a second time as amended.

[3:43:07] Voice 17: Moved.

[3:43:07] Voice 17: Do we have a seconder?

[3:43:09] Voice 17: Thank you, Trustee Bernardo.

[3:43:12] Voice 17: All those in favor?

[3:43:13] Voice 17: I think we've talked about it enough.

[3:43:15] Voice 17: That carries.

[3:43:16] Voice 17: Okay.

[3:43:17] Voice 17: So we will continue this conversation next time.

[3:43:25] Voice 17: Yeah.

[3:43:25] Voice 18: Through

[3:43:26] Planner McCargar: the chair, we need one more because there's two bylaws.

[3:43:30] Planner McCargar: Oh.

[3:43:32] Planner McCargar: So we just gave 153 second as amended, and so now it would be 154.

[3:43:38] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:43:40] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:43:42] Voice 18: so let's

[3:43:43] Voice 17: uh do that so do we need to pass no we've done that okay so we have to do

[3:43:50] Voice 17: by the 154. somebody want to read that out i thought

[3:43:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i just did that one

[3:43:54] Voice 17: no we did 153.

[3:43:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): oh i'm sorry

[3:43:57] Voice 17: yeah so one of you want to make that motion it's on the front it's on the screen there

[3:44:11] Trustee Stamford: i moved that the gambier on local trust committee bylaw number 154 site is keats island land use

[3:44:16] Trustee Stamford: bylaw 2002 amendment number one 2021 be read a second time as amended all

[3:44:23] Voice 17: right move seconded

[3:44:24] Voice 17: thank you uh trustee bernardo all those in favor that carries well that's nice and tidy anyway we've

[3:44:33] Voice 17: got it uh we've got rid of the red line version we're now at the final version awaiting any

[3:44:38] Voice 17: potential further amendments. And it strikes me that we should seek for surety, clarity

[3:44:51] Voice 17: as to whether or not expanding the list of exceptions to include construction of a 500

[3:45:03] Voice 17: square foot addition would indeed change the intent of the bylaw. It's easy to suspect that

[3:45:10] Voice 17: it would but i think we need surety on that point and uh do you need a motion to seek that more or

[3:45:22] Voice 17: less i

[3:45:24] Planner McCargar: mean i i generally go in favor of motions it's just a little bit clearer but i could also

[3:45:29] Planner McCargar: just go on a to-do list um there isn't a yeah maybe you know what because there's a motion

[3:45:34] Planner McCargar: that's already uh yeah been tabled to next meeting i think this would be good follow-up to have a

[3:45:38] Planner McCargar: a motion that so

[3:45:40] Voice 17: i'll just move that the local trust committee asked staff to seek uh legal

[3:45:46] Voice 17: opinion on the uh um the consequences of the motion to amend the bylaw to include an exception

[3:45:58] Voice 17: that includes uh a building addition um i think

[3:46:06] Voice 4: that's probably clear does that sound

[3:46:11] Trustee Stamford: satisfactory

[3:46:12] Voice 4: clarification

[3:46:12] Trustee Stamford: chair does it require legal opinion um

[3:46:19] Voice 17: that i

[3:46:24] Voice 17: i'm just going up the up to the regional planner or the director of trust area services local

[3:46:30] Voice 17: regional planning services they should know this stuff and if they wanted to get a legal opinion

[3:46:35] Voice 17: they could get a little opinion uh

[3:46:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): can should we use different wording and just say uh request

[3:46:40] Trustee Bernardo (probable): staff to determine uh whether or not just leave it to staff to figure it out how they want to do it

[3:46:47] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um

[3:46:50] Voice 17: sure so ideally i guess we'd have that motion on the screen lisa and then we could determine

[3:46:56] Voice 17: which we can get the word one

[3:46:59] Voice 7: moment one moment yeah

[3:47:20] Voice 17: this flu the first thing that fails is your

[3:47:22] Voice 17: voice the second thing that fails is your mind yeah

[3:47:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you sound like uh you sound very sick actually

[3:47:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): yeah uh

[3:47:40] Voice 17: it's been getting worse by the minute to

[3:47:54] Voice 16: the most on the bylaw well

[3:47:59] Voice 17: i'm just going to say

[3:48:00] Voice 17: actually let's spell it out in black and white um and i don't know for some reason there's black

[3:48:04] Voice 17: screens on my screen that are hiding the text now if you scroll down it'll show up again

[3:48:09] Voice 17: it might be something to do with my computer but

[3:48:12] Voice 10: no i've got the same thing

[3:48:14] Voice 17: oh yeah moved it

[3:48:15] Voice 17: to determine consequences of others let's just say uh the motions uh brought to the ltc by trustee

[3:48:23] Voice 17: bernardo and that just makes it simple i

[3:48:27] Voice 18: agree yeah

[3:48:28] Voice 17: and then just ended there beautiful okay

[3:48:38] Voice 17: so seconded by kate louise thank you um all right i'm just going to call the vote all those in

[3:48:48] Voice 17: favor and that carries okay great um and so we did uh have a motion to table it so that's done

[3:49:00] Voice 17: we're now asked for a pin uh determination of the consequences of those motions and um

[3:49:08] Voice 17: i think we're done everybody concur yeah

[3:49:12] Voice 4: then let's go

[3:49:14] Voice 17: to major project gambier island official

[3:49:16] Voice 17: Official Committee Plan and Land Use Targeted Review.

[3:49:20] Voice 17: We have a staff report on page 67.

[3:49:22] Voice 17: And Sonja, I think this is what you're here for today.

[3:49:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): That's correct.

[3:49:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): Thank you.

[3:49:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): Everybody's ready to keep going

[3:49:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): because this is not a small piece of work.

[3:49:33] Voice 17: Everybody ready?

[3:49:34] Voice 17: We just came off a lunch break.

[3:49:35] Voice 17: So I think if I keel over halfway,

[3:49:40] Voice 17: you just continue on without me.

[3:49:41] Voice 17: You're still-

[3:49:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I have absolutely no right to complain about anything.

[3:49:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): thing so yes i will go in whatever way you believe super

[3:49:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): i'll just do a short summary

[3:49:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): and leave the remainder of the bulk of the time for questions and discussion

[3:49:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): so i just wanted to start by acknowledging i'm very honored to present the staff report the

[3:50:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommendations and the draft primer on heritage conservation areas for the island stressed on

[3:50:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): the heel of the truth and reconciliation day yesterday it dovetailed well with rafael shay's

[3:50:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): insightful presentation this morning

[3:50:13] Voice 3: um

[3:50:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): it has been difficult as your project planager to

[3:50:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): follow the keats island shoreline project and the delay in the implementation of that because

[3:50:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): the scope of the gambier island potential changes are much more progressive and involved than what

[3:50:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): it is you're considering for keats and i am concerned that this ltc is going to struggle

[3:50:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): With the responsibility of weighing the diverse interests that are represented in the recommendations in this report, with land use planning decisions for Gambier, that reflect not just the Western evidence-based approach to decision making, but also the Indigenous ways of knowing.

[3:50:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): So I hope to receive very clear direction today on whether or not you intend to implement the recommendations listed in the attachment.

[3:51:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): attachment. I'll focus your attention on the staff recommendations one by one, and I'm happy

[3:51:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): to answer any questions that you have about each of these. So the first recommendation on the staff

[3:51:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): report, page 67 of the agenda package, stems from the LTC's previous discussion at

[3:51:22] Voice 17: your July meeting.

[3:51:23] Voice 17: This isn't an addendum, right, to our package, and so the page numbers might be different.

[3:51:28] Voice 17: The

[3:51:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): staff report is page 67 of the main agenda, correct?

[3:51:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): The addendum will get to that.

[3:51:34] Voice 4: So

[3:51:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommendation one of the staff report speaks to your discussions at your July meeting

[3:51:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): for the Squamish Nation recommendations and preparation of necessary draft bylaw language.

[3:51:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): So page 73 of the agenda package, which is attachment number one, I've updated the LTC

[3:51:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): direction column in table one to reflect what I heard as confirmation of direction from the local

[3:52:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): trust committee in terms of whether or not you endorse that particular recommendation moving

[3:52:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): forward to either draft bylaw language or advocacy work. So recommendation number one in the staff

[3:52:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): report highlights the 15 high priority recommendations that the LTC informally approved

[3:52:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): approved in July to move forward to the draft by-law language stage.

[3:52:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): After this meeting today, I intend to update this table with a resolution number, if

[3:52:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): appropriate, or other confirmation from the Local Trust Committee, as this will become

[3:52:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): the reference in follow-up with Squamish Nation staff about next steps in this project.

[3:52:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): Recommendation number two supports an Advisory Planning Commission referral, and staff are identifying that we can collaborate with the members to ensure that a meeting takes place with adequate physical presence to support quorum or allow electronic participation as needed, considering the challenges that we're under.

[3:53:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): we just want to make this work as well. So the LTC will receive draft minutes from an advisory

[3:53:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): planning commission meeting and that should capture the full scope of comments that each

[3:53:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the members have been made even if it participation to vote is limited based on

[3:53:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): physical presence or not. So staff are supporting referral to the APC and allowing us to work within

[3:53:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): in that scope for now and deciding if you need a working group format in the future should our

[3:53:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): attempt be unsuccessful. Recommendations three, four, and five in the staff report also stem from

[3:53:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): the LTC's previous discussions in July regarding Squamish Nation recommendations for advocacy

[3:53:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): strategies with other levels of government, the House Sound Biosphere Region, and the Trust

[3:53:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): Trust Conservancy. And then finally, recommendation number six highlights the importance of the

[3:54:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): heritage conservation areas that we're presenting you with more detail about today and suggesting

[3:54:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): that you formally amend your project, list future projects, list to create a placeholder for that

[3:54:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): future project to consider implementation of this tool across your local trust area, not just for

[3:54:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): Gambier Island. So I'm available for the remainder of the duration of this agenda item time to

[3:54:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): to answer any questions that you have so that I can report back to Squamish

[3:54:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): Nation and advance next steps.

[3:54:31] Voice 16: Okay. Thank you, Sonia. Kate Louise Stamford.

[3:54:37] Voice 12: Thank you, Sonia.

[3:54:40] Trustee Stamford: I want to acknowledge that this is big and I'm almost glad that the way this

[3:54:48] Trustee Stamford: worked out,

[3:54:48] Trustee Stamford: that in July we discussed this and got to sit on it for a while and then come

[3:54:54] Trustee Stamford: come back and affirm our our agreement to it um i think it is an important starting point but i

[3:55:04] Trustee Stamford: don't want to pretend that things aren't going to change i think what is critical to this project

[3:55:11] Trustee Stamford: is being able to work with our communities um to provide as much context as possible

[3:55:21] Trustee Stamford: Because a lot of what we are dealing with often is backtracking in how communications are misinterpreted or misunderstood.

[3:55:32] Trustee Stamford: understood um and i'm still the the part that i'm most concerned about on this is how is this

[3:55:40] Trustee Stamford: communicated how do we engage our communities um so that there isn't a traditional backlash

[3:55:51] Trustee Stamford: um because there's much more riding on this than just uh changes to bylaws this this is a

[3:56:00] Trustee Stamford: Our relationship with our First Nations people that are actually, their presence here is not as clear to the local people as possibly in other islands because they have lost their cultural presence in the modern context.

[3:56:28] Trustee Stamford: context we don't have anyone living here right now from the Squamish nation or any other first

[3:56:35] Trustee Stamford: nations that I'm aware of so there's a lot more riding on this um I'm looking for advice

[3:56:44] Trustee Stamford: for understanding and recognition this might take longer and it might cost more but right now

[3:56:53] Trustee Stamford: Now, I'm still certainly desired to see this move forward in the direction we discussed in July.

[3:57:09] Voice 16: Okay. Joe, do you have any remarks?

[3:57:16] Voice 10: Yeah, I guess I do have a few remarks, although I'm a little, in a sense, I'm going to,

[3:57:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to some extent, echo what Trustee Sanford said, which is, this is actually pretty big.

[3:57:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and after all the discussion we had today about the keats shoreline project and my you know in

[3:57:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): terms of public consultation to be honest my experience with these things has pretty been

[3:57:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): pretty much been limited to the whole keats island experience so um the public engagement

[3:57:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): consultation has reflected in the comments i made today i've done before uh it is the process that

[3:58:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we have but it uh it hasn't worked out that well you know not anybody's fault but i mean it's just

[3:58:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the nature of the process i guess but it's just like our on the key side the consultation has

[3:58:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): has uh not for whatever reason uh the communication and the dialogue between

[3:58:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the ltc staff and the community just didn't get us to where we should have gotten to which is

[3:58:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): mutual understanding and i uh my general approach with respect to what happens in gambier is

[3:58:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): above all to start with from a position of deference to the judgment

[3:58:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the trustee stanford brings to it because that's her community that doesn't mean i'm not going to

[3:59:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): think for myself but i want to hear what trustee stanford's got got to say first about these issues

[3:59:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And then I, you know, I might, frankly, carp from the sidelines or make some comments or observations from the sidelines.

[3:59:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But I don't know the community particularly.

[3:59:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): particularly, and I have a very generic question, really,

[3:59:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): which is how are we going to do this consultation process

[3:59:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and when with Gambier residents

[3:59:35] Trustee Bernardo (probable): so that we can do everything we can to avoid misunderstandings

[3:59:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and to have fruitful conversations?

[3:59:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): It's very easy.

[3:59:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, my experience at Keats,

[3:59:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's very easy for residents to get alarmed and to sort of and then we've got that issue to deal with

[4:00:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i'm anxious that we proceed in a fashion that uh minimizes the risk of that now what does that mean

[4:00:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i don't know i mean i don't know how to do that uh it's just that i wouldn't want us with this thing

[4:00:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): which represents um a really material and serious shift in direction um i'm anxious that we not

[4:00:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): inadvertently end up proceeding in the same kind of um with the same kind of approach

[4:00:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that led to frankly the agitation egg you know agitation acrimonial kids uh if we can avoid it

[4:00:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we should i don't know how to do that but i i'm sorry to take up so much time just sort of

[4:00:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): wringing my hands but uh that's my principal concern that we engage the public as um i was

[4:00:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): about to say as soon as possible i don't know if that's the right thing to do but at the um at the

[4:01:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): right time so that at the end of the piece the community feels that it was fully consulted and

[4:01:10] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that a real dialogue took place between the community and ourselves thank you uh kate

[4:01:21] Voice 18: louise again i'll chime in here at some point yeah

[4:01:24] Trustee Stamford: just real quick i think you know i continue

[4:01:27] Trustee Stamford: to go through the um the specifics of the um the recommendations and i think there's there

[4:01:36] Trustee Stamford: are opportunities here that um like the first one around signage it it's like if we can move

[4:01:47] Trustee Stamford: into this with the community all along keeping them aware of what's happening using the signage

[4:01:55] Trustee Stamford: for parks and protected areas is a starting point, and to build in the pathway before

[4:02:08] Trustee Stamford: we even get to first reading, before they see a first draft, is using these opportunities

[4:02:15] Trustee Stamford: of the advocacy projects to build that pathway.

[4:02:21] Trustee Stamford: So that is one of the things I'm thinking of, is whenever we agree to an advocacy project here, that where is the opportunity to include community information, community engagement, education.

[4:02:37] Trustee Stamford: And I'm specifically talking on the local islanders at this point, just because I think they're the ones that are going to require that kind of pathway.

[4:02:54] Trustee Stamford: pathway thank

[4:03:01] Voice 18: you um

[4:03:04] Voice 16: you know that this is more than just a big

[4:03:10] Voice 17: project there's an awful lot

[4:03:13] Voice 17: at play here that is above and beyond gambier and that's i guess what my concern is particularly

[4:03:23] Voice 17: the item in that in the table um which i think is at the top of the table where we're committing

[4:03:30] Voice 17: to engage statements in the official community plans of all the associated trust areas outside

[4:03:39] Voice 17: of Gambier. And this isn't on their plate at the moment. And in the recommendations,

[4:03:47] Voice 17: essentially asking executive committee and others to go to provincial agencies to advocate for and

[4:03:54] Voice 17: solicit change in um policy and legislation so there's a lot of elements at play here now um

[4:04:03] Voice 17: of which um we're about to you know initiate this we've done the homework so to speak and

[4:04:11] Voice 17: now we're about to initiate this into the um serious um working phase so i'd like to know

[4:04:20] Voice 17: know, Sonia, what you think, where are the potential stumbling blocks and major points

[4:04:31] Voice 17: that we need to get through and how are we going to orchestrate this throughout the areas

[4:04:35] Voice 17: that within our own jurisdiction need to be consulted, as well as those without and the

[4:04:42] Voice 17: much broader community, because of course, when OCPs start to be opening up to add remarks,

[4:04:48] Voice 17: that's going to expand that community engagement portfolio.

[4:04:54] Voice 17: into a bigger item. And of course, we're running the policy statement over on the other desk

[4:05:00] Voice 17: at the same time. And there's obviously very common threads reaching for this goal

[4:05:07] Voice 17: of reconciliation.

[4:05:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): I'm not sure if I understood your question completely, but I'll address the

[4:05:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): public engagement portion of your work plan, which is in your project charter. If there's any

[4:05:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): Any changes to how you want to do public engagement, it needs to be reflected and adequately resourced in your project charter.

[4:05:32] Voice 4: Right.

[4:05:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): So you endorsed a project charter that had one community information meeting.

[4:05:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): So these meetings and these agenda packages are, and your Advisory Planning Commission meetings, would be the full extent of how we publicly release information about where this project is at at this stage, which has been primarily First Nations engagement.

[4:05:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement. And I'm looking to see some excitement from the local trust committee about

[4:06:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): getting to the point where you feel confident that these recommendations are implementable.

[4:06:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then drafting some of that language so that when we go back to the community,

[4:06:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): through a comprehensive community information meeting of some sort, there is that sense of

[4:06:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): here is what we came up with over the last year and a half working with the nation.

[4:06:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): This is the draft of the language and the way that this tool would work for the official

[4:06:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): community plan and for the land use bylaw.

[4:06:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): And now let's talk about how this actually works from the perspective of the users of

[4:06:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): the residents of the islands, which is one slice of the perspective pie that you have

[4:06:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): to incorporate into your political decision making.

[4:06:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): I understand the importance of public engagement and consultation.

[4:06:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): consultation. Right now, I'm prioritizing getting you to a point where you are able to understand

[4:06:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): and commit to which of these recommendations that the nation has expressly given to you since April

[4:07:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): of this year, are you willing to proceed with? Some of them are, I admit, new to a small local

[4:07:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): government or an island community to tackle. But that doesn't mean that it has to be scary

[4:07:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): and off the table. It does mean that there needs to be a bold, courageous approach to saying to

[4:07:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): your community with full confidence that you are willing to engage them on this versus shut it down

[4:07:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): because you think it's going to be controversial. Yes, we have a work plan and we have no money,

[4:07:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): no budget. That's the reality of what I'm managing this project with. So I've prioritized

[4:07:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): getting as much information from the nation to you as possible in an effort to determine whether

[4:07:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): or not moving forward, which elements of these are actually going to be discussed by your community

[4:07:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): members. And that's for you to decide. And that's what this table is, is to say, here's everything.

[4:08:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): And you could endorse everything, look at the draft language, and then determine that you're

[4:08:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): not willing to proceed with some of these. But it might be premature to do that at this stage.

[4:08:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): However, you might have a very strong sense of politically what you're willing to proceed with, considering the restraints of this project, serious constraints of this project in terms of allocated resources for fulsome community engagement at this stage, when we haven't seen the commitment yet to actually implement any of the nation's engagement pieces.

[4:08:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): pieces. That's where the focus is at this stage. And then the community piece does come after.

[4:08:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): That's why we reversed this whole project, because you needed to hear from the multitude of voices

[4:08:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): at the nation's perspective that you haven't heard and haven't considered in the entire existence of

[4:08:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): the Islands Trust being in the Howe Sound region. So this is the first time that any of the island

[4:08:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): areas for the house sound have received such comprehensive feedback from a nation and it's

[4:09:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): very important today to determine whether or not any of these are considered worthy of your

[4:09:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): attention moving forward in a draft bylaw language format so that your community can digest reflect

[4:09:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): provide you with necessary feedback on next steps moving forward that you then have to balance with

[4:09:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): with your other commitments, which are not just to your constituents, but to the greater

[4:09:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): object of the island's trust, to other levels of government, including the nations. And Squamish

[4:09:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): is just one of, right? We've identified this one to work with, but they represent potentially

[4:09:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): the diverse voices of the other nations that we refer bylaws to as well.

[4:09:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): I

[4:09:58] Voice 17: see two, sorry, I was looking at the text. So two hands ups, Kate Louise and Joe Bernardo,

[4:10:04] Voice 17: but I don't know who has the hand up first.

[4:10:06] Trustee Stamford: I think I had mine up.

[4:10:09] Trustee Stamford: I mean, I am hearing you.

[4:10:13] Trustee Stamford: I think we are trying to express ourselves

[4:10:18] Trustee Stamford: as clearly as possible as well.

[4:10:21] Trustee Stamford: You want excitement?

[4:10:22] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, I'm excited in the bigger picture,

[4:10:24] Trustee Stamford: but I'm trying to be courageous here.

[4:10:29] Trustee Stamford: The same restraints that you are dealing with

[4:10:35] Trustee Stamford: it also impacts us because we still have to carry this whether it's got any money against it or not

[4:10:42] Trustee Stamford: and i have expressed my my real concern that we keep doing this we have a big vision and then we

[4:10:51] Trustee Stamford: don't fund it to the extent that it needs to be funded in order to move through it

[4:10:57] Trustee Stamford: and and this is my ongoing frustration um i want to see this started i want to see this move

[4:11:08] Trustee Stamford: forward i am expecting a certain level of pushback and it's not helping we're right in the middle of

[4:11:13] Trustee Stamford: an election so i'm hoping to see that we get the election done and see what the results are

[4:11:20] Trustee Stamford: it because that will impact how this this moves forward um so i thought we had you know when we

[4:11:28] Trustee Stamford: had our discussion in july we did go through these and did say these are the directions we

[4:11:34] Trustee Stamford: want to go in i recognize maybe having to take every anything out that um curtails ocps of other

[4:11:43] Trustee Stamford: islands that are not specifically directed at this point might be an operational benefit

[4:11:51] Trustee Stamford: if that helps. But I want to move forward in this direction to start with Gambier Island.

[4:12:00] Trustee Stamford: I think of all the islands, this is probably the best one to start with, given that it's

[4:12:10] Trustee Stamford: It's low population.

[4:12:14] Trustee Stamford: It's large amount, generally larger lots, things like that.

[4:12:18] Trustee Stamford: It doesn't have the same kind of pressures that some of the other islands are dealing with, colonial pressures, for instance.

[4:12:24] Trustee Stamford: So this is an opportunity that I want to be a part of.

[4:12:28] Trustee Stamford: So I can't give any more assurance than that, other than I'm going to be working hard to try and get as much informal engagement out there as possible.

[4:12:41] Trustee Stamford: Through

[4:12:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): the Chair, just to confirm, any of the annotated recommendations related to other

[4:12:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): islands within the Howe Sound area are for the Local Trust Committee's information only. I'm

[4:12:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): well aware that the scope of the bylaw changes that you'll see coming from me will be just for

[4:12:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): Gambier Island. However, it is up to the LTC to also request that these things don't get lost,

[4:13:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): so that we're not engaging the nation twice in the future for Thornby or for Keats or for

[4:13:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): something else when we've heard loud and clear hey update these ocps make sure that there's

[4:13:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): adequate acknowledgement and reflective history of the diverse uh perspectives of what's been

[4:13:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): going on on this landscape uh we shouldn't have to be asking them that twice so if we're going

[4:13:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): to do it well for gambier there needs to be a process by which we're flagging that the next

[4:13:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): time another house sound island gets uh its ocp opened up that those things get corrected changed

[4:13:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): changed and updated and referred back to the nation to say, Hey,

[4:13:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): remember we heard you in 2024. Well,

[4:13:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): here's the bylaw now that reflects that that input that you had asked for way

[4:13:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): back then. And sorry, it took so long, but here it is, you know,

[4:13:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): that kind of thing.

[4:13:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): So I'm not presenting bylaws for Thornby or for Keats or for anything else.

[4:13:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): This is just Gambier,

[4:13:51] Voice 4: but

[4:13:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): the recommendations are, of course,

[4:13:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): they don't see that all the islands is separate.

[4:13:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): It is one landscape and a shared history that needs to be adequately captured in the text of these documents.

[4:14:05] Voice 12: Super.

[4:14:06] Voice 12: Yep.

[4:14:10] Voice 17: Okay, Joe.

[4:14:12] Voice 9: Thanks.

[4:14:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I don't have a problem with being bold and courageous.

[4:14:19] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Frankly, I think we could do with more of that in the organization.

[4:14:26] Trustee Bernardo (probable): organization, but it's really important for all the reasons that have already been articulated

[4:14:33] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that we do this right. And what I'm hearing is we need some help, I think, from the staff

[4:14:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to rethink the community engagement. You know, it's kind of like the one point I brought up

[4:14:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): before, and I'm going to harp on it all day, I think, but it's like, because our off-the-shelf

[4:14:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): community engagement as i mentioned uh process as i mentioned before uh isn't great and i don't

[4:15:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): think it's going to be effective if we follow that kind of you know formalistic path with this

[4:15:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): project uh and i'm you know being asked whether or not we're committed to pursuing the recommendations

[4:15:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh you know and i think sonia it's right to point out this is a political choice i'm not sure we can

[4:15:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): make that political choice without substantial community dialogue up front people don't react

[4:15:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): well when they feel the train has left the station when they think that things are being imposed when

[4:15:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we as trustees go to them and say look we kind of have made up our mind already how about you guys

[4:15:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): are you okay with this because this is where we want to go that's very annoying to the average

[4:15:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): person it's like why are you asking and so before we make a commitment i i'm at a loss here before

[4:16:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we make a commitment we have to have some kind of level of community engagement but we also don't

[4:16:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): want to lose the momentum we have here so um i've got some questions here i'm groping here do we

[4:16:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): need to change the project charter to uh to to uh and see greater resources for community engagement

[4:16:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): do we need to rethink it so that we actually have opportunities for a genuine community dialogue

[4:16:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i uh you know i'm inclined to be

[4:16:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): deferential to the staff with respect to what you know

[4:16:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): With respect to managing, you know, the engagement with First Nations and, you know, you've built up this relationship with the Scottish nation.

[4:16:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But, you know, what I've heard since becoming a trustee is that First Nations are not transactional, but relationship oriented.

[4:16:56] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I'm wondering if somehow we can orchestrate a community dialogue where we can facilitate an opportunity to start growing a relationship between Squamish Nation and the community on Gambier.

[4:17:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, I'm being vague here because I don't actually have clear thoughts about this.

[4:17:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): What I have is anxiety about what it takes to succeed.

[4:17:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and i i worry about uh uh the larger community and you know trustee stanford's in a better

[4:17:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): position to opine about this than i am i worry about the larger community on gambier being

[4:17:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): uh the feeling that you know things are being you know put on them from a top down uh a top

[4:17:43] Trustee Bernardo (probable): down basis so uh i'm struggling with this uh because uh the politics here we have to be honest

[4:17:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with ourselves have tremendous potential to go wrong and and and to result in unnecessary and

[4:17:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): unwanted tension that kind of wrecks everything we do need to advance reconciliation thank you

[4:18:06] Voice 12: can i can i respond um yeah um i

[4:18:12] Trustee Stamford: mean yeah there there are these these concerns here but um it's

[4:18:18] Trustee Stamford: It's not like the community hasn't had any engagement on this.

[4:18:21] Trustee Stamford: The only difficulty is it's been a few years since they had the survey.

[4:18:26] Trustee Stamford: They had an ability to come back and say, here's our priorities.

[4:18:31] Trustee Stamford: By and large, their priorities so far align with what we're seeing here from the Squamish nation.

[4:18:40] Trustee Stamford: It's the wording might be a little different and the focus might be different.

[4:18:44] Trustee Stamford: But this, you know, archaeological support and protection was a big part of it.

[4:18:52] Trustee Stamford: Foreshore protection, big part of it.

[4:18:54] Trustee Stamford: Forestry protection, big part of it.

[4:18:57] Trustee Stamford: So the opportunity here, and I see it primarily sitting somewhat with me because of the difficulty with the APC.

[4:19:07] Trustee Stamford: I mean, maybe APC will work, but it's going to be fairly clunky.

[4:19:15] Trustee Stamford: it's never great when you've got a bunch of people online and then a bunch of people sitting in the

[4:19:20] Trustee Stamford: room. It's much better if it's one or the other. So I'm looking at other opportunities of informally

[4:19:30] Trustee Stamford: bringing the community together in different ways and saying, here's what's happening.

[4:19:37] Trustee Stamford: And our meeting, hopefully this fall with Squamish Council, here's what's happening.

[4:19:44] Trustee Stamford: just keep building that awareness it it will come to the point where that first draft comes in and

[4:19:51] Trustee Stamford: yeah all hell will probably break loose it usually does when they see a first draft but as long as

[4:19:58] Trustee Stamford: you keep moving it ahead moving ahead and there's a lot of opportunities right now the house on

[4:20:03] Trustee Stamford: community forum is coming up so building on that will help the conversations through the election

[4:20:12] Trustee Stamford: It'll help. So these are the kinds of things I see. I want more engagement. I always do. But I also know that the funding is just not there for that kind of support. And it tends to be very formal, which doesn't tend to work that well in our location, just because not everybody lives in the same place.

[4:20:37] Trustee Stamford: So we're constantly struggling with the unique geographical nature of this particular LTC.

[4:20:45] Trustee Stamford: But I'm willing to put the work in, and I know there's other people on the island that are also willing to support that.

[4:20:53] Trustee Stamford: And how I coordinate that in a more informal basis will help bring this forward.

[4:21:07] Voice 17: Sonia?

[4:21:07] Voice 17: Can

[4:21:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): I suggest that one of the other recommendations you can consider today of the six that are already on staff report package is a referral to the Advisory Planning Commission to discuss options for community engagement, early community engagement on the scope of endorsed topics that the Local Trust Committee has identified that you wish to move forward with.

[4:21:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): And that way you're able to get some fresh ideas about what might actually work in the community that maybe you haven't thought of that could potentially be funded or budgeted with a small budget or rolled into some other informal opportunities for engagement.

[4:21:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then really the communication is to stress that people follow your agendas and this project's evolution through your business meetings, because that is a legitimate way to do business is to use these business meetings as they're recorded meetings as well as clarification for people to contact the planner with questions, keep track of where things are at in terms of decision making.

[4:22:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): it is your role and your your duty to conduct business in these meetings and advance your

[4:22:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): projects we have a project charter that's been endorsed for quite a while that's laid out the

[4:22:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): timeline that we're working with until march till the end of this fiscal so this is not new

[4:22:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): information this has been deferred since july so here we are it's october 1st

[4:22:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): if you're unwilling to consider the other staff recommendations in the staff report package today

[4:22:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): then I would suggest that the referral to the APC to report back to you on options for public engagement might be the best use of your time.

[4:22:58] Voice 17: How do we make these – you raised a really good point.

[4:23:01] Voice 17: How do we make this work schedule more public?

[4:23:06] Voice 17: We don't see it in our agenda package all the time.

[4:23:11] Voice 17: We know it's out there, and we can look it up on the website and stuff.

[4:23:14] Voice 17: But certainly the public isn't necessarily aware of it on a regular basis.

[4:23:18] Voice 17: Well,

[4:23:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): subscribers would be. So we always encourage everybody to subscribe so that they get notification to check the agenda to see if there's anything of interest. Applications, projects, the locally elected trustees would have their own informal mailing list or opportunity to remind people, hey, this application's on the agenda or hey, this particular project's on the agenda.

[4:23:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): if you've been following along, you might want to read the staff report. It's got a lot of great

[4:23:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): information in it, super relevant to the future of this OCP review. So we're not writing these

[4:23:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): reports and providing all the supplemental information so it can be shelved. This is part

[4:23:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the package and the body of knowledge that everybody needs to keep track of moving forward.

[4:23:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): It is not perfect. We will not achieve consensus at any point in time with this project.

[4:24:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): that is an impossible feat so that's not something as your project manager that I will commit to do

[4:24:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): is to bring everybody on board and find a solution that everybody's happy with I can't do that

[4:24:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): but I can ensure that that this information is clear it's concise and it provides a tracked

[4:24:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): record of LTC decisions every step of the way the dates the meetings and the direction that

[4:24:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): staff received moving forward so i've been doing that on your behalf since the beginning of this

[4:24:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): project and i'll continue to do that um

[4:24:42] Voice 17: kate and joe in that order okay

[4:24:48] Trustee Stamford: super quick uh yes

[4:24:52] Trustee Stamford: this information and a very clear statement please look at this part of this package um

[4:24:59] Trustee Stamford: about direction that we could be going in regarding the ocp and went out unfortunately

[4:25:05] Trustee Stamford: unfortunately, just a couple of days ago. But I will bring it around again. And I each time I've

[4:25:12] Trustee Stamford: been focusing on this, the wording around this and insert more general heads up, this is this

[4:25:21] Trustee Stamford: is coming. This is of interest. Here's where the decisions are or not. So that's happening. I've got

[4:25:30] Trustee Stamford: a huge list 650 people um and it also goes on facebook and and so that part i'm taking care of

[4:25:40] Trustee Stamford: um i like the idea of um i do want to add the motion about the apc

[4:25:46] Trustee Stamford: um and having a look at other engagement opportunities but i don't see this necessarily

[4:25:52] Trustee Stamford: as linear this is multiple opportunities coming forward and making use of them as they come up

[4:26:01] Trustee Stamford: So that's sort of how I'm starting this.

[4:26:05] Trustee Stamford: Joe?

[4:26:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yeah, so I don't really understand

[4:26:12] Trustee Bernardo (probable): your remark about the consensus aspect.

[4:26:19] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm assuming you mean when you refer to consensus,

[4:26:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): you're talking about reaching consensus

[4:26:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): within the community, the larger population of Gambier.

[4:26:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Because I know the local trust committee,

[4:26:32] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we have to reach, well, more than consensus,

[4:26:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): is we have to reach agreement to move things forward.

[4:26:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): No, you don't.

[4:26:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): One way or the other, that'll happen.

[4:26:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But can you explain why you think it's not worth trying?

[4:26:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): If you mean consensus in the community,

[4:26:48] Trustee Bernardo (probable): can you explain why you think it's not worth

[4:26:49] Trustee Bernardo (probable): trying to make that effort?

[4:26:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I'm kind of surprised to hear that.

[4:26:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): I didn't say it's not worth the effort.

[4:26:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): I said that's an impossible feat

[4:26:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): to get consensus in a community

[4:26:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): and the multiple interests that you have

[4:27:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): in the outcomes of these types of projects,

[4:27:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): especially with the complex reconciliation aspect

[4:27:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): to this particular project.

[4:27:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): So you have the decision and the direction.

[4:27:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): I'm going to take your decision and direction.

[4:27:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): I'm just managing your expectations

[4:27:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): that I'm going to run a public engagement process

[4:27:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): that's going to result in consensus.

[4:27:28] Voice 9: Okay, thanks.

[4:27:34] Voice 17: So there's a list of recommendations here

[4:27:39] Voice 17: brought to us with the anticipation we would want to advance some or not all of them but

[4:27:45] Voice 17: certainly some of them i'm you know i'm i'm the kind of person that likes to see draft language

[4:27:53] Voice 17: because when you go into the community to talk about it it's kind of good to know what it's

[4:27:59] Voice 17: actually going to look like um and that's certainly going to get people interested of

[4:28:04] Voice 17: Of course, always the problem is people think it's a bylaw already

[4:28:08] Voice 17: as soon as you start circulating it.

[4:28:10] Voice 17: But we just have to manage that accordingly.

[4:28:14] Voice 17: So what's your pleasure here?

[4:28:16] Voice 17: What do you want to do today?

[4:28:21] Lost my screen.

[4:28:25] Voice 17: There you go.

[4:28:25] Voice 17: Kate Louise.

[4:28:27] Trustee Stamford: Well, I think as we're starting the process,

[4:28:30] Trustee Stamford: and I would like to put the motion on the floor.

[4:28:37] Trustee Stamford: Number one, that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee affirms its support of the implementation of the following OCP LUB project recommendations from Squamish Nation listed in Table 1 attached to the staff report dated October 1, 2024, and requests staff to prepare draft language for the applicable policies and regulations for LTC consideration and its subsequent steps.

[4:29:04] Trustee Stamford: Table 1 recommendations, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, C1, C3, C4, D3, and D5.

[4:29:17] Voice 17: Great.

[4:29:18] Voice 17: Do we have a seconder?

[4:29:21] Voice 17: Thank you, Joe.

[4:29:23] Voice 17: You wish to speak to it.

[4:29:26] Trustee Stamford: I think it's a starting point.

[4:29:27] Trustee Stamford: We did go over this in July.

[4:29:30] Voice 17: Yeah.

[4:29:33] Trustee Stamford: We know there could be bumps along the way, but I am excited.

[4:29:40] Trustee Stamford: I think there's a huge amount of potential here, and I'm willing to put the work in to help everyone move through the process and see where it takes us.

[4:29:56] Voice 17: Okay.

[4:29:58] Voice 17: Joe, any further questions?

[4:30:00] Voice 17: Yeah,

[4:30:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I just want to point out that I'm supporting the motion or seconded it because on this front, I'm prepared to, in terms of organizing our thoughts, basically, I'm prepared on this point to defer to Trustee Sanford about what's going to work best.

[4:30:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I actually agree, Charlock, with your point that it's typically easier to get your hands around a concept if the language is already drafted in something close to what looks like the legislation, because then you actually have the real thing in front of you to deal with.

[4:30:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But as you say, and this, you know, provokes my, you know, goes to my zone of anxiety, you start putting it in that official looking language, official looking format, you know, okay, well, you've just added some more energy in the freak out direction, you know, and you don't know how that's going to shake out.

[4:30:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So, yes, by all means, let's start making this concrete so we know what we're working with.

[4:31:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And actually, we have something to bring to the community for purposes of dialogue.

[4:31:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): But I'm going to have to emphasize again, we really need to think through that dialogue part.

[4:31:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): That's going to be pretty crucial.

[4:31:15] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Thank you.

[4:31:17] Voice 17: Yeah.

[4:31:17] Voice 17: Every step of the communications is important.

[4:31:21] Voice 17: But, you know, what I say every day, and I guess this is a chance for me to believe myself that I'm saying these things.

[4:31:27] Voice 17: is there's no going back from this we have to we have to move forward so that we can reap the

[4:31:35] Voice 17: benefits as society as a whole um by advancing um this work in this direction um it's not going

[4:31:44] Voice 17: to be easy but we need to do it so and i want to say thank you son for the work that you put into

[4:31:53] Voice 17: us i'm going to call the vote on the motions on the floor number one all those in favor

[4:31:59] Voice 17: that carries what

[4:32:03] Voice 16: else would you like to do

[4:32:05] Trustee Stamford: um this darn apc um so well

[4:32:13] Trustee Stamford: i just it doesn't exist

[4:32:15] Trustee Stamford: so that that's in in a form anyway uh one of the things i'm just wondering if um there should be

[4:32:22] Trustee Stamford: a motion before this which um refer the apc for early engagement um suggestions and opportunities

[4:32:31] Trustee Stamford: opportunities. Or can we do that at the end? Does it matter in timing? No. Okay. So I will go with

[4:32:39] Trustee Stamford: number two then. The Gambier Island Local Trust Committee requests that staff refer the following

[4:32:44] Trustee Stamford: project recommendations listed in table two, attach the staff report dated July 30, 2024 to

[4:32:50] Trustee Stamford: the Gambier Island Advisory Planning Commission for review and comment to inform the LTC's

[4:32:56] Trustee Stamford: consideration of some subsequent steps table two recommendation uh oh

[4:33:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): and because this was not

[4:33:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): completed at the july meeting this was the table that we ran out of time oh so yeah the idea was

[4:33:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): that you had more time to determine moving forward what it is that you are willing to

[4:33:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): review.

[4:33:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): I thought that's what we had decided

[4:33:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): in July.

[4:33:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): For table one? Yes.

[4:33:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): But table two, we ran

[4:33:30] Voice 17: out of time.

[4:33:31] Voice 17: That's right.

[4:33:34] Voice 17: So we need to look at table two.

[4:33:38] Voice 17: Oh my gosh.

[4:33:40] Voice 12: So that was never seconded.

[4:33:42] Voice 12: We're just going to

[4:33:44] Voice 12: back up here.

[4:33:46] Voice 4: Okay.

[4:33:56] Voice 19: It's

[4:34:01] Voice 18: on page 79.

[4:34:06] Voice 18: I

[4:34:10] Trustee Stamford: thought we had passed all this.

[4:34:14] Voice 17: We ran out of time.

[4:34:17] Voice 17: In theory, yes.

[4:34:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): You have in terms of direction to staff.

[4:34:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): Now it's

[4:34:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): determining what is it that you actually want the APC to comment on

[4:34:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): because maybe not all of this is what you want to focus volunteer energy on.

[4:34:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): and so the heritage conservation area the shoreline development protection area

[4:34:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): the dock specifications that's and the forest ecosystem protection that's the bulk of it and

[4:34:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): so it could just be that you wanted to focus on 5.2 5.3 5.4 and 5.5 which is

[4:35:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): yeah yeah because 5.1

[4:35:08] Trustee Stamford: is not really we'll

[4:35:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): be doing that with an apc that's right we'll be

[4:35:12] Trustee Stamford: doing that

[4:35:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): with the nation so 5.2 to 5.5 yeah so

[4:35:18] Trustee Stamford: i'm gonna put in um further to my motion

[4:35:22] Trustee Stamford: uh table to 5.2 to 5.5 i think and and before i seconded just the rationale on that i think

[4:35:32] Trustee Stamford: more to the apc or whatever group that tends turns out to be and then they themselves can decide

[4:35:41] Trustee Stamford: backing off on the scope i would rather not curtail them at this point

[4:35:46] Voice 4: okay

[4:35:51] Voice 17: so then that

[4:35:52] Voice 17: is moved do i have a seconder

[4:35:54] Voice 5: um did it make sense joe

[4:35:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): no i i uh i'll be honest i'm a little

[4:36:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): lost here um it shouldn't i don't want to be careful here but but shouldn't um what we have

[4:36:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in table one be something we want the apc to look at so we can start getting thoughts and comments

[4:36:19] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and start getting a feel for things from the community so

[4:36:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): in essence through the chair if

[4:36:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's okay i'll step in to just clarify how this was split up yeah table two

[4:36:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): table two is is the

[4:36:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): public engagement summary and table one is very consistent with that what you've heard back from

[4:36:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): squamish nation is very consistent with the public engagement scope and priorities as trustee

[4:36:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): stamford mentioned so the advisory planning commission at this stage um in terms of looking

[4:36:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): at items 5.2 to 5.5 it dovetails perfectly with the squamish nation recommendations around looking

[4:36:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): at draft heritage conservation area and a draft development permit area for shoreline protection

[4:37:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): protection and any of the other forest-based protection measures that we come up with. So

[4:37:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): those are the three main topic areas. Many of the other Squamish Nation recommendations are highly

[4:37:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): intergovernmental and likely not appropriate at this time for an APC to weigh in on because it's

[4:37:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): political direction that you're endorsing this as a direction of the local trust committee in your

[4:37:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): relationship building with a nation. Not so much of an issue to see do we have permission from our

[4:37:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): our APC, you know, do they think it's a good idea to do this? You know, you either know or you don't

[4:37:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): if it's a good idea. So that the APC volunteers weighing in on those three critical areas is a

[4:37:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): significant amount of work. And I would suggest that that is the bulk of what your community is

[4:37:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): going to be interested in as well, because it applies directly to how titled property can be

[4:37:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): developed in the future. So that's an excellent way to test the interest, the appetite for a new

[4:37:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): regime of possible regulatory changes that could be applied. And is your first sort of public

[4:38:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement is by using these appointed members of your community to look at these in a safe,

[4:38:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): respectful dialogues type situation called an ABC meeting where they can discuss the pith and

[4:38:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): substance of this type of a referral and provide you with some advice before you engage on the

[4:38:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): the broader level.

[4:38:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So are you saying the APC ought not to be commenting on our proposed approach to

[4:38:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): sort of advance our relationship with Squamish Nation?

[4:38:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): If you need advice from your community,

[4:38:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): that is up to you to determine that. I'm suggesting as a professional planner that

[4:38:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): you as an elected body have a duty to build that relation with the nation based on your

[4:38:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): your federation-wide obligations, perspectives,

[4:38:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): and commitments to reconciliation.

[4:39:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): And that's above and beyond what your constituents

[4:39:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): and your voters would be possibly weighing in on.

[4:39:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): This is your appointment as a trustee to the Islands Trust

[4:39:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): to undertake that work.

[4:39:14] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I guess it depends on one's conception of reconciliation.

[4:39:18] Trustee Bernardo (probable): For me, it's got to include bringing people together.

[4:39:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Yeah, I remain uncertain.

[4:39:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And I confess I'm uneasy about the idea of just us as trustees, as local trust community, arrogating entirely to ourselves the idea that this is a pure political decision and only we get to decide it.

[4:39:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, in reality, every political decision that we make, there's an accountability aspect to the community.

[4:39:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): You know, we're not appointed commissioners.

[4:39:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): We're elected.

[4:39:54] Trustee Bernardo (probable): elected we have an accountability function here and making decisions say well you can hire or

[4:40:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): fire me it's up to you i mean that's not quite how it's supposed to work in a democracy it's

[4:40:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): supposed to be kind of a dialogue between the people get elected in their community so

[4:40:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i guess what i'm saying is i i'd like to see if not this round you know um maybe in a subsequent

[4:40:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): going around some um more formal engagement of like like i keep coming back to this of trying

[4:40:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to bring uh involve the community in the discussion about reconciliation uh it's really a matter

[4:40:38] Trustee Bernardo (probable): fundamentally deep down it's like if you're going to do really uh important and new things

[4:40:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): it's important to build up the political support for it um and i confess i'm you know

[4:40:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): know you know i'm very much my thinking is very much colored by the experience on keats island

[4:40:58] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i mean it's just i don't want this to blow up so uh anyhow i would have thought that we wanted we

[4:41:06] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we'd want the apc to sort of start getting its oar in at least in some respect you know maybe

[4:41:11] Trustee Bernardo (probable): narrow at this point but you know in some respect you know to start hearing voices about the

[4:41:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): approach we're taking to reconciliation uh with this ocp not that we're going to shut them out

[4:41:21] Trustee Bernardo (probable): And Sonia, maybe that's not what you meant, but I'm a little anxious that that's kind of where we're headed.

[4:41:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Can I

[4:41:29] Trustee Stamford: respond? We have a certain role here, and it's not necessarily to bring the community in with our discussions with First Nations, because I would suggest at this point, it's potentially not a safe space.

[4:41:54] Trustee Stamford: And there wouldn't be interest in that combined approach, although there may be opportunities for it. But we do have a responsibility. If my APC came and said, we don't want to engage with the First Nations, I can't take that as direction. That's not acceptable.

[4:42:19] Trustee Stamford: So I am taking a certain point where I represent the community, and I'm willing to come back and say, here's where we're at, what do you think?

[4:42:34] Trustee Stamford: But to bring them along at this point, I'm not sure that's the right – I know it's not.

[4:42:43] Trustee Stamford: I need to step into my role and be there as representative to the Squamish Nation.

[4:42:54] Trustee Stamford: So, you know, in that respect, I see this working.

[4:42:59] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Okay.

[4:43:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Well, you're in a better position to make that assessment than I am.

[4:43:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): So thank you.

[4:43:03] Trustee Bernardo (probable): yeah

[4:43:06] Voice 17: you know i'll just chime in a little bit from my point of view um the trc calls to action

[4:43:16] Voice 17: called from the highest level in the country called us all as citizens to inquire about the

[4:43:25] Voice 17: truth and reconcile that in each or in our own way um but more specifically it called on

[4:43:34] Voice 17: government leadership elected members and governments to pursue opportunities for learning

[4:43:42] Voice 17: and awareness and understanding um in our in our communities and you know the other thing that in

[4:43:52] Voice 17: this conversation that comes to mind is you know to some extent we're siloed in our colonial

[4:43:58] Voice 17: ceremonial government construct and APCs, Advisory Planning Commissions. It's a formal body

[4:44:06] Voice 17: of a land use authority. And we advise things to them because we want advice on planning things.

[4:44:12] Voice 17: We're not going to them to ask them for advice on political direction. And probably there should be

[4:44:21] Voice 17: advisory political direction commission. But there's not because that actually happens on

[4:44:28] Voice 17: an election day. You campaign, you tell them what you want to do, what you don't want to do,

[4:44:31] Voice 17: and people elect you. And so that's our leadership role, to pursue the right thing,

[4:44:38] Voice 17: follow the recommendations of the TRC. And it's a big job. It's challenging, for sure.

[4:44:50] Voice 17: I guess it's less ambiguous to me. And I don't think I'm wrong. But so I think,

[4:45:01] Voice 17: Did we make a motion to send this?

[4:45:03] Voice 17: We decided on the five items that we want to send to the APC.

[4:45:07] Voice 17: This may be the pot of gold that the APC wants to tackle in order to actually gel and do some good solid work.

[4:45:18] Voice 17: And that would be fabulous.

[4:45:19] Voice 17: And then we can all celebrate that success together and put the political.

[4:45:24] Voice 17: I

[4:45:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): don't think trustee has trustee Stanford's motion on that point.

[4:45:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Has it been seconded?

[4:45:28] Voice 17: No, I don't think it has.

[4:45:30] Voice 17: so it's now it's now been seconded so the motion was as provided in the in the um in the briefing

[4:45:38] Voice 17: with um items 5.2 through 5.5 if i'm not mistaken

[4:45:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that's why you're standing the motion

[4:45:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and i that's what i'm seconding

[4:45:47] Voice 17: perfect thank you joe i'll just go to the vote that's okay

[4:45:52] Voice 17: all those in favor that carries there you go um what else stands out

[4:46:03] Voice 17: Sonia that you know you can assist us here this is these are your recommendations so it's really

[4:46:08] Voice 17: critically important to advance this project in a meaningful way all of them

[4:46:12] Voice 17: there you go okay

[4:46:15] Voice 17: trustees i see state trustee stanford has her hand up

[4:46:19] Trustee Stamford: so recommendation number three i just have

[4:46:22] Trustee Stamford: um a little bit of concern about um a draft advocacy letter to the house and biosphere

[4:46:30] Trustee Stamford: region um for support for funding specifically that organization um as far as i understand they

[4:46:39] Trustee Stamford: don't have any funding um i wonder if we can make it a little bit more vague to local um

[4:46:52] Trustee Stamford: um to local funding organizations because the reason i'm saying that is there may be more

[4:46:59] Trustee Stamford: potential for this going through the community association with their regional economic

[4:47:05] Trustee Stamford: diversification funds some of which is being set aside and a direct request gone to squamish nation

[4:47:13] Trustee Stamford: for their priorities and if it doesn't come back there's possibility for an option to ask

[4:47:21] Trustee Stamford: ask the community association but that would be based on a non-response of other priorities from

[4:47:30] Trustee Stamford: squamish nation yeah however you wish okay so i'm just going to amend the motion it'll be the

[4:47:43] Trustee Stamford: The second bullet, and rather than saying, so delete Howe Sound Biosphere, it can be to local funding organizations, and that leaves it open in the heritage branch.

[4:48:07] Voice 17: I guess the only question I have is, Sonia, you crafted this recommendation.

[4:48:13] Voice 17: Is there some particular reason that you thought that was an agency that would be reasonable to approach?

[4:48:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): They were identified in our engagement with the nation as potentially having access to some of these possible other funding organizations and efficiencies.

[4:48:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): However, if that's not the case, that's our staff-to-staff misunderstanding.

[4:48:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): And we appreciate the local area knowledge about a better advocacy direction.

[4:48:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): So that's no problem.

[4:48:43] Trustee Stamford: It might include the house sound.

[4:48:46] Trustee Stamford: I just don't want

[4:48:47] Trustee Stamford: to limit it to that, because there might be other opportunities and other funding organizations to do the same thing.

[4:48:55] Trustee Stamford: No problem.

[4:48:56] Voice 17: Yeah, I agree.

[4:48:58] Voice 17: Okay.

[4:48:59] Voice 17: So you're going to...

[4:49:01] Trustee Stamford: So that went in.

[4:49:05] Trustee Stamford: So I just want to make sure that was changed and that's clear with the minute taker.

[4:49:10] Voice 7: Trustee Stanford, I got that.

[4:49:11] Voice 7: Yes.

[4:49:12] Voice 7: Great.

[4:49:12] Trustee Stamford: Thanks.

[4:49:13] Trustee Stamford: Thanks. So I'd like to move motion recommendation three, that the Gambria Island Local Trust Committee affirm its support of the implementation of Squamish Nation Recommendations A6

[4:49:26] Trustee Stamford: and requests the Board of the Islands Trust Conservative to prioritize the allocation of necessary resources to seek approval for a translation request from Squamish Nation

[4:49:37] Trustee Stamford: for the installation and maintenance of Squamish language signages on ITC nature reserves on

[4:49:43] Trustee Stamford: Gambier Island, and staff to prepare a draft advocacy letter under the signature of the LTC

[4:49:48] Trustee Stamford: chair to other local funding organizations, and the heritage branch of the Ministry of Tourism

[4:49:56] Trustee Stamford: requesting support for funding for the approval, installation, and maintenance of Squamish language

[4:50:01] Trustee Stamford: signage on trails and areas deemed important by the nation in the Gambier local trust area,

[4:50:06] Trustee Stamford: And the staff to add the following agenda item to the next Sunshine Coast Regional District Protocol meeting agenda for discussion.

[4:50:13] Trustee Stamford: Joint funding opportunities for the approval, installation, maintenance of Squamish language signage on trails and in areas deemed important by the nation in the SCRD area.

[4:50:26] Voice 17: Okay, that's moved to seconded by Joe. Thank you.

[4:50:30] Voice 17: Any further discussion?

[4:50:32] Voice 17: I'll call the vote. All those in favor?

[4:50:35] Voice 17: That carries.

[4:50:36] Voice 17: Thank you.

[4:50:42] Trustee Stamford: What else?

[4:50:44] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, I'm happy to move. The next one is just it's kind of a conflict because I'm I am the SCRD.

[4:50:52] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Can I speak? Can I ask a question about that

[4:50:54] Voice 9: before I proceed with it?

[4:50:59] Voice 9: my reading of it of of item four

[4:51:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): there is it's essentially uh committing to kind of a

[4:51:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): specific advocacy role with respect to this because what it's really talking about is you

[4:51:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): know building code type things which we don't i don't believe we have any jurisdiction over that

[4:51:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and um is that right sonia that's

[4:51:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): correct so this is uh again the nation reaching out to

[4:51:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): local government to say what are the opportunities for you to help support advocate the nation's

[4:51:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): priorities and interests in the house sound area this is the one that was identified in the

[4:51:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement summary that your ability to meet annually with the sunshine coast regional district

[4:51:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): and advocate for these types of changes is absolutely appropriate and within your authority

[4:51:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): as a local government so this is an advocacy piece for your upcoming annual protocol meeting

[4:51:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): to determine if there's any interest, explore that, report back to the nation,

[4:52:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): determine whether the SCRD's relationship with Squamish and their reporting back

[4:52:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): could also dovetail into saying we've heard this and this is how we've decided to approach this

[4:52:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): or this is what we can do or can't do.

[4:52:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): It's part of that intergovernmental communication and collaboration piece.

[4:52:17] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Well, I'm happy to move this one on the condition that the screen be arranged so I can actually read it.

[4:52:23] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and then uh okay i moved that the gambler island local trust committee affirm uh its support for

[4:52:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the implementation of squamish nation recommendation b4 and b10 and request staff uh to uh add the

[4:52:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): following agenda items to the next sunshine coast regional district protocol meeting agenda for

[4:52:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): discussion advocacy to scrd to adopt the zero carbon step code requirements for new construction

[4:52:53] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in the Gambier Local Trust Area prior to provincial mandate by 2030 and opportunities

[4:53:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for rebates and energy efficiency upgrades for home in the Gambier Local Trust Area.

[4:53:07] Trustee Stamford: And I just want to comment briefly. It's really nice to have agenda items, specific agenda items

[4:53:14] Trustee Stamford: to take to the SCRD because sometimes there's crickets out there. And this is a good

[4:53:23] Trustee Stamford: um starting point for us to because there's other issues around building permits that will

[4:53:29] Trustee Stamford: naturally evolve from this so thanks and

[4:53:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): mr chair will you be seconding that as the

[4:53:36] Trustee Bernardo (probable): oh i seconded it we have a sensitivity no it's fine okay all right i

[4:53:43] Voice 15: don't see a conflict she's

[4:53:44] Voice 15: wearing a different hat today um so moved and seconded any further discussion all those in favor

[4:53:51] Voice 15: so an an obvious um action following that particular motion up is that we need to

[4:54:02] Voice 15: obviously write a letter of advocacy or advocate or some mechanism of advocacy in order to fulfill

[4:54:09] Voice 15: that motion that we've just made so how can we best implement that can

[4:54:16] Trustee Stamford: we just bring it up at

[4:54:18] Trustee Stamford: the meeting the the

[4:54:19] Trustee Stamford: scrd meeting we

[4:54:20] Voice 15: could put it on the agenda so then i

[4:54:22] Trustee Stamford: think that was the intent

[4:54:23] Voice 15: let's let's put this particular motion onto the future scrd agenda well

[4:54:28] Trustee Bernardo (probable): that's actually what the

[4:54:29] Trustee Bernardo (probable): motion says so i think yeah well

[4:54:32] Voice 15: it sort of says that okay well that's fine if everybody's happy

[4:54:37] Voice 15: then that's great let's just make sure we get it up okay what's next here so

[4:54:42] Voice 12: number five um

[4:54:46] Voice 12: I don't

[4:54:50] Trustee Stamford: have a problem with this, although I think it requires more input from other parts of the Islands Trust.

[4:55:00] Trustee Stamford: The only thing I just wanted to discuss briefly, I did send an email to Planners of Pennock about other ways of providing that diversity protection.

[4:55:14] Trustee Stamford: And that was around the possibility of providing a different kind of zoning option on Gambier.

[4:55:23] Trustee Stamford: We don't have anything that implies a conservation zone.

[4:55:28] Trustee Stamford: I recognize there's some background to that, and it's around First Nations sensitivities.

[4:55:36] Trustee Stamford: I'm just wondering, given that the Howe Sound Biosphere in particular is really supporting the 30 by 30 concept from the federal government, and that it does have support through the Squamish Nation for that in principle, I'm wondering if there's any opportunity to include that or bring that up next meeting.

[4:55:57] Trustee Stamford: is the idea of looking at a zone specifically for park or conservation on Gambier to recognize the

[4:56:10] Trustee Stamford: current reserves and regional parks that are currently on the island, but are zoned things

[4:56:17] Trustee Stamford: like settlement residential or stuff like that.

[4:56:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): So through the chair, this could be part of the

[4:56:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): The executive committee, I understand, is the appropriate body to meet with the provincial minister of environment and climate change strategy.

[4:56:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): So this could be the background information that's provided to EC for site specific or house sound specific or just Gambier Island specific issues based on the engagement with First Nations.

[4:56:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): This is what we've heard, and I understand the ministries are very keen to understand local government's need for advocacy once they've explored all the options that they have jurisdiction over, and then see an avenue for working with the province to further First Nations interests being addressed adequately.

[4:57:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): So that could be part of their meeting agenda.

[4:57:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): agenda so

[4:57:22] Trustee Stamford: does that have anything to do with that sorry i i don't understand the answer because

[4:57:27] Trustee Stamford: it's specific to um our zoning on gambier so

[4:57:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): the first bullet that's what this relates to

[4:57:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): predominantly right for just five the first bullet for number the recommendation number five

[4:57:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): um it could either be background information that's provided to ec as part of their meeting

[4:57:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): with the minister if this is the how this gets advanced around those zoning options

[4:57:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): or it's okay specifically addressed

[4:57:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): yeah or it's specifically uh addressed in the resolution

[4:58:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): that you wish for ec to either seek clarification on or explore this with the minister yeah this is

[4:58:13] Voice 15: a bit of a big it's a big advocacy topic yeah have

[4:58:17] Voice 15: to do some research and be prepared and have all

[4:58:20] Voice 15: the right ask um in order to be able to be successful joe yeah

[4:58:32] Voice 8: um i don't have a problem

[4:58:35] Voice 8: with it make it's like it's

[4:58:41] Voice 10: very straightforward my only

[4:58:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): point is um you know it's kind of a picky

[4:58:46] Trustee Bernardo (probable): lawyerly point but if the second bullet point it talks about respect requesting changes to

[4:58:51] Trustee Bernardo (probable): provincial doc tenure applications in the how sound so that all new doc applications are required

[4:58:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): to submit etc etc um shouldn't that be limited to uh changes to provincial doctrine or applications

[4:59:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in the gambier local trust area in that that's our jurisdiction you know the where the islands trust

[4:59:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): so to the extent that you know it seems to me that our advocacy is relevant and appropriate

[4:59:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with respect to what happens in the trust area yeah you could absolutely replace how sound

[4:59:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): with local trust area yeah

[4:59:30] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i i it's a very picky point but i'm kind of like that

[4:59:34] Voice 17: you are

[4:59:37] Voice 15: you haven't noted so why why don't you make that motion yeah with your picky part in it and we'll

[4:59:44] Voice 15: get that done

[4:59:44] Trustee Bernardo (probable): okey-doke i move that the gambler island local trust committee affirms its support

[4:59:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): for the implementation of squamish nation recommendation d2 and d4 and request the

[4:59:55] Trustee Bernardo (probable): the executive committee, meet with or send correspondence to the Burmese.

[5:00:00] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy and advocate for a significant investment

[5:00:04] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in biodiversity protection in the Gambier Local Trust Area, including monitoring and coordination

[5:00:09] Trustee Bernardo (probable): with First Nations, the House on Biosphere Region, and local governments, and meet with or send

[5:00:16] Trustee Bernardo (probable): correspondence to the Provincial Minister of Forests requesting changes to provincial

[5:00:20] Trustee Bernardo (probable): DOC tenure applications in the Gambier Local Trust Area so that all new DOC applications

[5:00:27] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in the area be required to submit a preliminary field reconnaissance, archaeological overview

[5:00:34] Trustee Bernardo (probable): assessment, or archaeological impact assessment, depending on the significance of the marine

[5:00:39] Trustee Bernardo (probable): and

[5:00:40] Voice 10: adjacent upland area to First Nations and the extent of the infrastructure proposed.

[5:00:50] Voice 15: Moved and seconded by Kate Louise Stanford.

[5:00:53] Voice 12: And I do have a comment.

[5:00:56] Trustee Stamford: Okay. Parts of this

[5:00:59] Trustee Stamford: around the diversity protection um around uh forest protection um we're looking at um

[5:01:13] Trustee Stamford: diversity this is this is the supporting this is where i'm sort of jumping off to the community

[5:01:20] Trustee Stamford: for support it's been a long long time advocated through the gambier island

[5:01:27] Trustee Stamford: islanders they want more diversity protection on this island um and i i think this is a perfect

[5:01:37] Trustee Stamford: starting point i i know that there's alert already to the the additional uh advocacy for

[5:01:45] Trustee Stamford: doc um regulation um but you know that again is is how we communicate and i don't think there's

[5:01:54] Trustee Stamford: any surprises here it's certainly been um there there's ongoing conversation with the impact

[5:02:01] Trustee Stamford: of the dock management plan on the sunshine coast and how that could impact um the house sound area

[5:02:10] Trustee Stamford: so that's all coming um and so the awareness is building for the impacts of that so okay

[5:02:19] Voice 15: i think we've got one more item here no

[5:02:25] Voice 12: we have to

[5:02:25] Voice 15: vote we actually have to vote

[5:02:29] Voice 15: All those in favor?

[5:02:33] Voice 15: Because of my health, I'm quickly ready.

[5:02:36] Voice 12: That's okay.

[5:02:38] Voice 15: So let's keep rolling.

[5:02:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): Through the chair, this last one is specific to your general current

[5:02:46] Voice 3: future project list,

[5:02:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): not current, future project list that's on your agenda package, just so that it doesn't

[5:02:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): get lost.

[5:02:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then there's also one more related to the advisory planning commission that you

[5:02:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): might want to consider.

[5:02:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): um

[5:02:58] Trustee Stamford: so this one is is this based on the addendum that we are assumption we've read it and understood

[5:03:07] Trustee Stamford: it or is that going to be another topic well you

[5:03:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): you already have in your projects future projects

[5:03:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): list an item regarding heritage conservation areas for

[5:03:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): thormanby right and so this is just

[5:03:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): expanding and elaborating that you've heard and understand that the nation's interests are

[5:03:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): across your entire local trust area, not just island by island, that there be a comprehensive

[5:03:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): approach to protecting heritage across the local trust area versus each individual island.

[5:03:37] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier on Local Trust Committee request staff to amend the future projects list

[5:03:42] Trustee Stamford: section. Oh, yeah, I see where it is now. Okay. Number two, OCP LUB, by replacing the text with

[5:03:50] Trustee Stamford: the following, explore the implementation of heritage conservation areas and shoreline

[5:03:54] Trustee Stamford: development permit areas across the local trust area to address first nations interests and

[5:03:59] Trustee Stamford: concerns and develop advocacy policies for oh that's related okay develop advocacy policies

[5:04:07] Trustee Stamford: for pump out stations across the local trust area that's already there it's just yeah i thought it

[5:04:13] Trustee Stamford: was

[5:04:13] Voice 15: so do we need that so do we need to include that last statement just

[5:04:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): so it doesn't get lost

[5:04:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): lost accidentally okay

[5:04:24] Voice 15: moved and seconded then any discussion all those in favor that two carries that

[5:04:32] Voice 15: and

[5:04:34] Voice 12: then there's a final one um are you ready um oh

[5:04:43] Trustee Stamford: lisa um i move that the gambiro local trust

[5:04:49] Trustee Stamford: committee, refer a question of early engagement options to the Gambier Island community regarding

[5:05:06] Trustee Stamford: endorsed topics in motion, and the number would be connected to the first recommendation.

[5:05:15] Trustee Stamford: Does that make sense? Because our first recommendation is around the A1 to D5.

[5:05:27] Voice 15: yeah

[5:05:39] Voice 12: yeah okay i just don't have the motion number

[5:05:45] Trustee Stamford: for that one so

[5:05:49] Voice 15: so is that number it's recommendation

[5:05:54] Trustee Stamford: number one but i don't know what the motion number is

[5:05:56] Trustee Stamford: oh

[5:05:57] Voice 15: i oh i see what you're saying because we've done that already yeah yeah i got it so that's

[5:06:06] Voice 15: your motion then do you have that up on the screen for us i'll

[5:06:17] Voice 6: put it up now yeah

[5:06:18] Voice 15: just want to be

[5:06:19] Voice 15: 100 sure here okay and and lisa you'll fill in the motion number very good sorry that should

[5:06:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): be the gambier island advisory planning commission regarding endorsed topics yes

[5:06:58] Voice 19: in

[5:06:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): motion number

[5:07:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): yeah so

[5:07:09] Voice 15: you don't need the word community then all right perfect okay so um moved and seconded

[5:07:23] Voice 15: trustee bernardo uh

[5:07:25] Trustee Bernardo (probable): just and motion number don't we need a number there what

[5:07:31] Voice 15: was the motion that

[5:07:32] Voice 15: was made earlier and so once it's got a number allocated to it that can be filled in through

[5:07:39] Voice 6: the chair that is correct yeah

[5:07:41] Trustee Bernardo (probable): we don't need some clarity but what motion referring to

[5:07:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): i mean it could be any motion right

[5:07:49] Voice 15: well it could be and you could spell it out or we can just

[5:07:52] Voice 15: that's sort of how we've done things historically if it

[5:07:56] Voice 10: works it works yeah second okay

[5:08:00] Voice 15: so all those

[5:08:00] Voice 15: in favor please raise your hands are you hesitating there i

[5:08:06] Trustee Stamford: i just want to make sure

[5:08:08] Trustee Stamford: we're we're stating what we intend to say because a lot of this work in number one is work that the

[5:08:15] Trustee Stamford: the local trust committee is doing itself.

[5:08:18] Trustee Stamford: So what we're agreeing to is that results of that work,

[5:08:26] Trustee Stamford: it's how that is communicated out to the community.

[5:08:31] Trustee Stamford: That's my understanding of this.

[5:08:33] Voice 15: So we could say, if we need to have that clarity,

[5:08:37] Voice 15: then we could just say regarding recommendations A1

[5:08:45] Voice 15: through d5 um since

[5:08:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): i'm the one doing the referral to the advisory planning commission i think you

[5:08:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): can trust me to make sure this is crystal clear for your volunteers because there's nothing worse

[5:09:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): than a referral that's ambiguous so i will make sure that's the case no problem

[5:09:04] Voice 15: you're so absolutely

[5:09:06] Voice 15: right sonja thank you thank you okay um does that conclude that project today it

[5:09:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): does thank you so

[5:09:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): so much for your help today well

[5:09:17] Voice 15: thank you sonia thank

[5:09:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): you for this body

[5:09:21] Trustee Stamford: of work um i'm trying to

[5:09:23] Trustee Stamford: be excited i am excited i'm trying to be a courageous that's okay we

[5:09:28] Voice 15: are we are excited

[5:09:31] Voice 15: okay

[5:09:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): thank you so much bye-bye okay

[5:09:33] Voice 15: thank you um new piece of business here then uh at 11.1 dark

[5:09:40] Voice 15: skies principles i think you might both be aware of this it came to us at council to be distributed

[5:09:45] Voice 15: it to local trust committees to determine our interest in it um and i don't know um

[5:09:55] Voice 15: marlis do you have anything to add on this i can speak to it i

[5:10:01] Planner McCargar: don't have anything to add i believe

[5:10:02] Planner McCargar: uh trustee morrison would be the one to yeah answer any particular questions yeah

[5:10:12] Voice 15: so some islands have lots of lights other islands don't and i think your islands don't have a lot

[5:10:18] Voice 15: of lights but certainly there's good guidelines in some of those other islands for proper lighting

[5:10:23] Voice 15: installation to reduce the light pollution so it's whether or not you want to be on the list

[5:10:29] Voice 15: of this dark skies principles we need to advise um deb morrison page 82 of our agenda today

[5:10:45] Voice 17: and otherwise we'll receive it for information um so

[5:10:55] Trustee Stamford: there's two parts to this right yes

[5:10:57] Voice 15: Yeah.

[5:10:58] Trustee Stamford: So it's the information and then the request for decision. I'm just wondering, is it within our jurisdiction, this particular responsibility? Because it is coming up at the regional district, and I am interested, but I'm not sure if the committee as a whole, if it's applicable to the committee as a whole.

[5:11:23] Trustee Stamford: Well,

[5:11:24] Voice 15: probably more applicable to the regional district than Hale's Trust, but advocacy is essentially what we can do around this.

[5:11:41] Voice 10: Yeah, I mean,

[5:11:42] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Dark Skies is a sensible and wise direction to go in, but there's two elements I think here. One is, it's all fine. I'm not a big fan of meaningless gestures.

[5:12:01] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, if we have a concrete advocacy plan that we're being asked to jump in on, or it doesn't even have to be that concrete, a plan, you know, that says what the advocacy is going to be.

[5:12:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): I mean, we just went through a bunch of resolutions with respect to Gambier that have specific advocacy points.

[5:12:22] Trustee Bernardo (probable): Here, it's just a generic thing.

[5:12:24] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um so i don't know what you know so i would support advocacy but i'd like to know what the

[5:12:31] Trustee Bernardo (probable): framework for that is uh there's a secondary or there's another let's see what's that point that's

[5:12:37] Trustee Bernardo (probable): in there it talks about um uh you know trust counsel clarifying its jurisdiction control

[5:12:45] Trustee Bernardo (probable): nighttime elimination all that kind of stuff yeah i do think that's a really a jurisdictional

[5:12:50] Trustee Bernardo (probable): question so i would want to steer clear of that until it gets clarified by trust counsel whether

[5:12:57] Trustee Bernardo (probable): or not we have that jurisdiction and i would like to keep us limited to the idea of endorsing

[5:13:02] Trustee Bernardo (probable): um advocacy but actually where i'm at right now is i think i'd rather just table this until such

[5:13:07] Trustee Bernardo (probable): time as we actually have a a proposal otherwise you know it goes into the bin with all the other

[5:13:13] Trustee Bernardo (probable): kind of nice gestures that we never act on and i i don't like doing that kate

[5:13:25] Voice 15: louise um

[5:13:27] Voice 12: i

[5:13:27] Trustee Stamford: i'm

[5:13:29] Trustee Stamford: I'm fine with what it's looking at.

[5:13:33] Trustee Stamford: I don't really see where a specific decision for the local trust committee is, especially our local trust committee, given that it's not a big issue on our island.

[5:13:44] Trustee Stamford: But I am, what I will do is just contact Trustee Morrison myself and say I'm interested in it and let me know and we'll go from there, if that's okay.

[5:13:56] Trustee Stamford: So I don't think it requires a motion.

[5:13:58] Trustee Stamford: I'm just gonna let her know I'm interested okay

[5:14:01] Voice 15: so we'll receive it for

[5:14:04] Voice 15: information then so next item trust consumer to report there's nothing on

[5:14:09] Voice 15: our agenda today trust conservancy the heron summer edition it's in your

[5:14:13] Voice 15: package great read I think we'll just receive that for information

[5:14:20] Voice 15: applications none trustee expense report received information adopted policies

[5:14:27] Voice 15: season standing election resolutions as the a reminder first nations relationship building

[5:14:32] Voice 15: update um anybody have anything to offer there okay um local trust committee web page

[5:14:42] Voice 15: um it seems to be operational unless there's anything specific you want to have changed out

[5:14:47] Voice 15: of the ordinary we'll just pass on that that brings us to active projects and that's followed

[5:14:52] Voice 15: by future projects is there any changes for the active projects at this time i know you were hoping

[5:14:58] Voice 15: hoping to get that Keats Island bylaw through today and move on.

[5:15:02] Voice 15: But there we go.

[5:15:02] Voice 15: It never happened.

[5:15:04] Voice 15: So I'll just receive that for information,

[5:15:07] Voice 15: seeing as everybody's grinning.

[5:15:08] Voice 15: And future projects, is there anything to add to future projects?

[5:15:13] Voice 15: The same thing.

[5:15:14] Voice 15: Okay, we'll receive that for information.

[5:15:16] Voice 15: Our next meeting is Thursday, November the 26th at 10 a.m.

[5:15:21] Voice 15: and will be held electronically.

[5:15:24] Voice 3: Hey, Thursday?

[5:15:25] Voice 17: which quite honestly i think electronic meetings are the downfall of our local government there we

[5:15:31] Voice 17: go okay

[5:15:35] Voice 15: so let us um adjourn all those in favor yep hey thanks for uh oh hang on i just wanted

[5:15:46] Voice 15: to

[5:15:47] Planner McCargar: add just a quick clarification it says thursday november 26th but it should be tuesday november

[5:15:52] Planner McCargar: 26th i was getting

[5:15:53] Planner McCargar: worried the public knows yep

[5:15:55] Voice 15: i don't know how i would know that but there we go

[5:15:57] Voice 15: Oh, because what day is it today?

[5:15:58] Voice 15: It's Tuesday.

[5:15:59] Voice 3: Yeah.

[5:16:01] Voice 15: All right.

[5:16:02] Voice 15: Okay.

[5:16:03] Voice 15: Thursday.

[5:16:05] Voice 15: All right.

[5:16:05] Voice 17: Thanks, everybody.

[5:16:06] Voice 17: Yeah, it'll be a month.

[5:16:07] Voice 17: It'll be a month to Christmas.

[5:16:09] Voice 12: Thank you, Marlis.