Islands Trust Conservancy Board regular meeting, October 21, 2024

[0:00:05] Voice 17: Is

[0:00:35] Voice 19: it live

[0:00:38] Voice 18: streaming on, Lisa?

[0:00:39] Voice 19: It is.

[0:00:40] Voice 19: I'm just checking it.

[0:00:45] Voice 19: Okay.

[0:00:51] Voice 19: Hey, Sarah.

[0:01:10] Voice 19: Hey, then.

[0:01:11] Voice 19: Good morning, everyone.

[0:01:16] Voice 18: Check, check.

[0:01:17] Voice 18: I don't hear any sound.

[0:01:19] Voice 18: Do you want to maybe tweak the...

[0:01:44] Voice 18: all right good morning everyone um and thank you for coming to this important meeting

[0:01:50] Voice 18: the regular business meeting of the losquiti local trust committee for october 21st 2024

[0:01:57] Voice 18: So we'd like to begin by acknowledging that the land on which we gather and work and play

[0:02:02] Voice 18: and sail and fish and celebrate is within the traditional territory of the Coast Salish

[0:02:09] Voice 18: peoples.

[0:02:10] Voice 18: Specifically, Sana'a, First Nation, Wollongong First Nation, and the Tla'aman peoples on

[0:02:17] Voice 18: whose lands and waters the Islands Trust and Hoyet Bay, Liskiti Island, is located.

[0:02:23] Voice 18: The Luskeetee Island Local Trust Committee is committed to reconciliation and the acknowledgement

[0:02:28] Voice 18: of Indigenous place and history.

[0:02:31] Voice 18: So we want to acknowledge the historical relationship and continued relationship of Indigenous peoples

[0:02:39] Voice 18: and First Nations who continue to steward these lands and waters.

[0:02:45] Voice 18: So thank you.

[0:02:46] Voice 18: I am your chair, Toby Elliott, elected on Gabriela Island, and with me today are your local trustees, Kyla Laroni and Tim Peterson.

[0:02:59] Voice 18: We are joined also by Island Planner, Stephen Ball. Hello, thank you, good morning.

[0:03:04] Voice 18: And for the first time, our minute taker and meeting facilitator in person, Lisa Millard.

[0:03:09] Voice 18: Thanks for being with us, and thank you for all the work in the last year to put these meetings together.

[0:03:15] Voice 18: and grateful to have you with us. So just to let everyone know, as usual, the meeting is being recorded and live-streamed and can be viewed about five days after.

[0:03:25] Voice 18: Thank you to those who've come, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven members of the public here today.

[0:03:31] Voice 18: And so let's get right into it. We'll approve the agenda. Are there any amendments or changes to the agenda?

[0:03:39] Voice 18: all right so we'll take it by general consent that the agenda be approved

[0:03:48] Voice 18: and move into trustees reports um and we'll go to uh just you're going right now the tons report

[0:03:58] Voice 18: but everybody saw but our beach cleanup that's been going on annually i think for the last four

[0:04:04] Voice 18: years cleaned up almost five tons of trash and they also cleaned up a bunch last year so hopefully

[0:04:11] Voice 18: this is something that can continue because it seems like Leskeetee is a bit of a catchment for

[0:04:15] Voice 18: all the trash that comes from the Georgia Strait. Also I just wanted to say that the JFC here is

[0:04:25] Voice 18: hosting high schoolers so they don't have to go over for school and it's been really awesome that

[0:04:32] Voice 18: the community is able to make it happen so we're not losing all of our young people. Awesome.

[0:04:37] Voice 18: Awesome. Yeah, that's, that's about me. Let's see here. Yeah, that's about it. We had a really

[0:04:43] Voice 18: intense test council meeting that I'm all recovered from. And yeah, that's about it.

[0:04:52] Voice 18: All right. Thank you. I'm

[0:04:58] Voice 3: trying not to steal too much of the chair's thunder here. I just

[0:05:02] Voice 3: mentioned that executive committee and staff and some other trustees attended the UBCM

[0:05:09] Voice 3: convention in September. There was a province-wide community community event

[0:05:15] Voice 3: co-hosted by UPCM and the First Nations Leadership Council. Speakers included

[0:05:22] Voice 3: Grand Chief Stuart Phillip, Kimberly Murray, the special interlocutor for

[0:05:28] Voice 3: missing children Mark Graves at burial sites associated with Indian residential

[0:05:31] Voice 3: schools and an address from the keynote speaker Judy Wilson-Raybould. We met with

[0:05:39] Voice 3: municipal affairs staff regarding engagement first nations and the request of province to

[0:05:45] Voice 3: review the violence trust act with the ministry of housing to request the world and islands

[0:05:51] Voice 3: communities housing stream support to support housing projects smaller coastal communities

[0:05:57] Voice 3: and with the ministry of forest staff with regard to wildfire planning in the context of island

[0:06:03] Voice 3: and communities living in the forest interface i also attended sessions on strengthening

[0:06:09] Voice 3: responsible conduct addressing systemic racism and mental health and elected leaders

[0:06:18] Voice 3: discussed rainwater catchment with jason and ken clog from the csa and they've promised to follow

[0:06:25] Voice 3: up on new technologies and approaches to achieving bc health approval for rainwater catchment for

[0:06:30] Voice 3: multi-family dwellings um trust council in the nine month september passed resolution

[0:06:39] Voice 3: to request a provincial review of the islands trust act uh we worked on the draft policy

[0:06:45] Voice 3: statement and a number of items were deferred to the december meeting and thanks to the invite from

[0:06:55] Voice 3: toby elliott i attended a talk on galiano island september 26th

[0:07:00] Voice 3: sorry gabriel island why i get those confused sometimes uh with doug white the third who's

[0:07:07] Voice 3: a former counselor chief of cinnamon and a lawyer who worked with mattel pinder and was

[0:07:12] Voice 3: most recently special counsel to the premier pc very interesting talk

[0:07:17] Voice 17: um

[0:07:18] Voice 3: the cao hiring committee

[0:07:23] Voice 3: is nearing an announcement

[0:07:24] Voice 3: and we look forward to having a permanent cao in place soon

[0:07:29] Voice 3: I mentioned that our interim CEO, Julia Mobs, is doing a fantastic job.

[0:07:35] Voice 3: Finally, Thursday, the October 17th, we had a protocol meeting with the Kethat Regional District.

[0:07:42] Voice 3: And I think the main item of interest is that the QRD CEO, Al Radke, told us that he expects to hear back from the Ministry of Transportation

[0:07:53] Voice 3: regarding meetings and options on the barge ramp and a process to legalize the current uses.

[0:08:00] Voice 3: And we've agreed to open another joint meeting once he's received that information.

[0:08:05] Voice 3: That's it for me.

[0:08:06] Voice 3: Thank you.

[0:08:07] Voice 18: I guess it was a very full September, so thanks for covering off a lot of the activities at UBCM.

[0:08:16] Voice 18: it was a very very great time but also right before the election was called or the writ was

[0:08:23] Voice 18: dropped um there's quite a bit of back and forth in between uh the premier premier evie and uh

[0:08:32] Voice 18: john rusted was there and um yeah it's quite an interesting time um yeah so there should be an

[0:08:40] Voice 18: announcement soon about the new cao that hiring process has been going on for a very very long

[0:08:45] Voice 18: long time but i believe staff has been briefed and that will be coming up to the public um i'm

[0:08:51] Voice 18: thinking this week um if folks haven't signed up for the news releases um yeah the islands trust

[0:09:00] Voice 18: the request for the provincial review the islands trust act has been a substantial

[0:09:05] Voice 18: it will be a substantial piece of work if the province chooses to undertake this the last time

[0:09:12] Voice 18: There has been a comprehensive review of the scope that Council is asking for, is what led to the creation of the Islands Trust 50 years ago.

[0:09:24] Voice 18: So the main thrust of the request is to seek alignment with the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act,

[0:09:31] Voice 18: so that we can develop processes that are appropriate and acknowledge the rights and interests of Coast Salish peoples.

[0:09:37] Voice 18: goals um so there's more details on that in the uh press release as well as the letter which went

[0:09:45] Voice 18: to the Honorable Anne Kang who is no longer Minister of Municipal Affairs we're not sure

[0:09:52] Voice 18: who is going to receive that um yes council meeting also ended with um one interesting

[0:10:01] Voice 18: note a project that I've been working on through Regional Planning Committee uh advocacy for tiny

[0:10:06] Voice 18: Tiny Homes on Wheels specifically, a working group had started tackling this in the summertime

[0:10:14] Voice 18: to understand the barriers to creating a legal regulatory framework for tiny homes

[0:10:21] Voice 18: and brought this to council and council unanimously agreed and supported

[0:10:28] Voice 18: adding advocacy for tiny homes to the strategic plan for 2025-26

[0:10:35] Voice 18: and prioritizing that as a potential affordable housing solution

[0:10:40] Voice 18: and dedicating $20,000 from the,

[0:10:45] Voice 18: we had reserved some budget for affordable housing initiatives,

[0:10:49] Voice 18: about $30,000.

[0:10:51] Voice 18: So putting that towards developing technical working groups

[0:10:55] Voice 18: and roundtables to meet with regional districts, planners,

[0:11:01] Voice 18: planners building professionals so that we can work on a framework to legalize these as potential

[0:11:07] Voice 18: dwellings so it'll take a few years it's not been an instant process but it received a lot of

[0:11:14] Voice 18: support at council everyone is very much was very enthusiastic about it we covered off most of what

[0:11:21] Voice 18: I was going to talk about so I'll just add that I was very pleased to attend on Friday on Galleon

[0:11:31] Voice 18: The Salish Sea Conservancy Forum, which mainly was organized by members of the Galliano Conservancy, but networked with just a number of conservancy groups.

[0:11:48] Voice 18: And so it pulled together a lot of the experts, professionals, and some Indigenous peoples were there.

[0:11:56] Voice 18: And so we talked about IPCAs, Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas, how we address the issue of abundant deer, actually hyper-abundant deer, and that's not just fallow deer, but the effects that native deer are having on the ecology and biodiversity of the islands.

[0:12:18] Voice 18: And so there's some really great research coming out of the Conservancy Decisions Lab at UBC, Dr. Tara Martin, who lives on Salt Spring, grew up on Salt Spring Island, is a professor and doing a lot of research on the changing ecologies and what she's calling it is shifting baselines.

[0:12:39] Voice 18: because as each generation changes the baseline

[0:12:43] Voice 18: for what the environment, terrestrial and marine, looks like,

[0:12:47] Voice 18: and then the next generation doesn't even know what was there before.

[0:12:51] Voice 18: So lots of great conversation there.

[0:12:56] Voice 18: So I think that's it for the Chair's report.

[0:13:02] Voice 18: And I do understand that Dr. Fall is online

[0:13:06] Voice 18: and might be able to provide us with our Director report.

[0:13:10] Voice 18: Thank you.

[0:13:11] Voice 2: Yes, I am. Is my audio OK?

[0:13:13] Voice 18: Perfect. That's great.

[0:13:15] Voice 2: Thanks. I'm glad to be able to attend today. It's been a little while. I have some other obligations on Mondays the last few months. And for whatever reason, this week it worked and I can I can join you.

[0:13:28] Voice 2: I'll give a brief update on a few things.

[0:13:31] Voice 2: I think the coverage of UBCM that Tim gave,

[0:13:34] Voice 2: Trustee Peterson gave, is very good.

[0:13:37] Voice 2: My monthly article in Huaytay News goes into a bit of detail

[0:13:41] Voice 2: on what UBCM is, Union of BC Municipalities,

[0:13:44] Voice 2: so members of the public can get a better understanding of that.

[0:13:47] Voice 2: We had a number of side meetings, the regional district,

[0:13:50] Voice 2: with the Ministry of Housing, and in particular to talk about

[0:13:55] Voice 2: residents being able to access the Secondary Suite Incentive Program,

[0:13:58] Voice 2: program, which provides funding to incentivize property owners to build secondary suites,

[0:14:03] Voice 2: but is only available in areas that have building inspections, building permits, which is we're

[0:14:11] Voice 2: not the only place that doesn't that's about half of the regional districts in the province

[0:14:15] Voice 2: do not have that meaning provincial funding isn't available at all in them, which is in

[0:14:19] Voice 2: those areas, which is unfair. So we made a pretty good advocacy for that. We talked with

[0:14:24] Voice 2: with Vancouver Coastal Health about a number of issues,

[0:14:27] Voice 2: but one issue that came up is the helicopter landing site on Leskete,

[0:14:31] Voice 2: which is on the school field.

[0:14:33] Voice 2: And, you know, depending on what happens with the construction of the new school,

[0:14:37] Voice 2: trying to make sure that we can maintain ongoing helicopter landing sites.

[0:14:43] Voice 2: We had a long meeting, an hour-long meeting with BC Ferries,

[0:14:45] Voice 2: which allowed extensive discussion about our Leskete Island Ferry.

[0:14:49] Voice 2: And next Saturday, we'll have a Western Pacific meeting.

[0:14:52] Voice 2: We'll be holding a public session at the school.

[0:14:54] Voice 2: And we've invited one of the contacts from BC Ferries, who is the other signatory of the contract for our ferry service.

[0:15:02] Voice 2: So hopefully they'll show up virtually or in person.

[0:15:05] Voice 2: And we also met with the Ministry of Environment about industrial, commercial and institutional recycling.

[0:15:12] Voice 2: That's a problem. It doesn't fall under Recycle BC. It tends to go to landfill and it's a huge amount.

[0:15:17] Voice 2: That's basically all the paper and recycling from industrial, commercial and institutional sites.

[0:15:22] Voice 2: It would overwhelm normal residential recycling.

[0:15:26] Voice 2: And so the residential recycling can't handle it.

[0:15:29] Voice 2: Recycle BC doesn't cover it, but it's a huge amount.

[0:15:32] Voice 2: And it seems silly that we're not recycling everything we can.

[0:15:37] Voice 2: So we're trying to advocate for solutions for that.

[0:15:39] Voice 2: A couple other little points.

[0:15:41] Voice 2: Some ongoing topics that are actually coming up this week.

[0:15:45] Voice 2: The changes to the Fire Safety Act require us to appoint fire inspectors.

[0:15:51] Voice 2: And so we haven't decided yet, but one of the recommendations is to appoint our fire chief, the Mesquite Island volunteer fire department fire chief as the fire inspector for Mesquite Island.

[0:16:02] Voice 2: So that would be probably supported, but we'll see.

[0:16:05] Voice 2: Shoreline cleanup, that was mentioned by the chair, which is great.

[0:16:08] Voice 2: The regional district has approved $10,000 a year for shoreline cleanup.

[0:16:14] Voice 2: It's not a lot, but the province is changing some of their support for Ocean Legacy and the depot.

[0:16:20] Voice 2: I understand the depot in Powell River that Ocean Legacy has been running will no longer be operating.

[0:16:27] Voice 2: They'll probably keep running their Richmond plant, which is great.

[0:16:29] Voice 2: So we want to make sure we continue being able to support some efforts to do shoreline cleanup.

[0:16:35] Voice 2: And I guess that was Trustee Laroni that mentioned that.

[0:16:40] Voice 2: So that's actually a good thing.

[0:16:41] Voice 2: Resource Recovery Centre, we've been struggling with this big landfill conversion to a transfer station, which we call the Resource Recovery Centre.

[0:16:48] Voice 2: the costs have really skyrocketed due in large part to the scale of the project the scale of

[0:16:55] Voice 2: the old debris and fly ash and kind of toxic material that was on the site but also because

[0:17:00] Voice 2: of inflation and in particular construction inflation has gone up a lot more than other

[0:17:05] Voice 2: inflation so we've been wrestling and that's a sort of source of contention of how to come up

[0:17:10] Voice 2: with another couple million dollars to help finalize it we're dealing with that this week

[0:17:14] Voice 2: it'll be a fun discussion uh and on a related note our landfill you know we had a waste management

[0:17:20] Voice 2: committee local waste management committee meeting and one of the items we received is the most

[0:17:25] Voice 2: recent monitoring report so we have our our landfill which is closed it's covered with a

[0:17:30] Voice 2: geofabric and every twice a year i believe there's a monitoring of this of the wells there's two

[0:17:36] Voice 2: wells downstream from the landfill and one well upstream the good news is that the you know the

[0:17:42] Voice 2: The levels haven't changed.

[0:17:44] Voice 2: There's nothing in violation.

[0:17:46] Voice 2: We're fine.

[0:17:47] Voice 2: The less good news is that there is actually a fair number of metals and other things in the water.

[0:17:53] Voice 2: But that seems to be a natural background primarily.

[0:17:56] Voice 2: And in fact, for a lot of the metals, the level in the wells upstream is higher than the well downstream.

[0:18:04] Voice 2: So in fact, the landfill is filtering out some of the aluminum and some of the other metals and so on in that.

[0:18:12] Voice 2: So it's kind of unusual, but the fabric, the geofabric is working well and it's going to be monitored for a total of 25 years.

[0:18:19] Voice 2: So we're probably got 20 more years of doing this. So it's a long term project.

[0:18:24] Voice 2: And finally, I'll wrap up by saying we're about to head into budget season.

[0:18:28] Voice 2: So it's starting in November. We'll be looking at our first version of the budget, which is always a big process.

[0:18:34] Voice 2: Usually we go through four rounds and extensive discussions.

[0:18:38] Voice 2: And with that, I will conclude. Thank you, Chair.

[0:18:42] Voice 18: Thank you, Director Fall. I just had a question about the shoreline cleanup. If Ocean Legacy isn't operating, is there another contractor or non-profit that's going to be doing it, or is it just having the reserve money for...

[0:18:55] Voice 2: So mostly that's to provide groups who do the shoreline cleanup, as like we have on Laskiti or, you know, the group that does it here.

[0:19:04] Voice 2: It's to provide funding for transport to Richmond.

[0:19:07] Voice 2: So in the past, at least in the Powell River area, the groups that cleaned up shorelines could bring their stuff to the Ocean Legacy Depot and then they would take care of transporting it to Richmond.

[0:19:20] Voice 2: And so if that closes down, then this is to cover costs to get it to Richmond with the hope and assumption that that operation in Richmond will continue, which I believe it will be, but hopefully that'll continue.

[0:19:33] Voice 2: So there'll be a main depot to process it. So it's really to cover that gap.

[0:19:37] Voice 18: Okay. Thanks so much. And thank you for your report. I did neglect to mention the one thing, and I don't think you did as well, about UBCM Islands Trust resolution that passed.

[0:19:49] Voice 18: So the Islands Trust had advanced a resolution through AVICC and supported, thank you Director Fall for always enthusiastically supporting it, to request that the Ministry of Health review and amend the guidelines and the manual around composting toilets and greywater practice because it's quite conservative.

[0:20:09] Voice 18: It was developed in 2016 and so for those who aren't serviced by septic or are looking

[0:20:15] Voice 18: at composting toilets or grey water dispersal as a method of dealing with human waste, practitioners

[0:20:21] Voice 18: are saying the manual is far too conservative, there's better ways of doing it and it needs

[0:20:26] Voice 18: an update.

[0:20:27] Voice 18: So that passed and so I'm looking forward to the conversation with the Ministry of Health,

[0:20:32] Voice 18: hopefully they'll get back to us and say yes we want to change that to make it easier.

[0:20:37] Voice 18: year so that would be a positive for rural and remote communities um thank you for those reports

[0:20:44] Voice 18: everyone lots going on which is fantastic so we'll move into our town hall session we've got um

[0:20:52] Voice 18: you know if we can keep it to about 15 minutes uh two to three minutes per speaker would be great

[0:20:57] Voice 18: um of course if there's as there's applications on the on our agenda you'll have a chance to speak

[0:21:05] Voice 18: at the time of your application you don't have to speak during town hall

[0:21:10] Voice 18: anybody who wants to address the local trust committee we ask that you direct

[0:21:14] Voice 18: your comments to the LTC not to the audience and not to staff we'll ask

[0:21:18] Voice 18: staff if there is a question speak to the issue at hand and not other

[0:21:22] Voice 18: individuals this is not a forum to vent community other issues be clear concise

[0:21:31] Voice 18: concise and respectful and this is a workplace for everyone so keep your comments very respectful

[0:21:37] Voice 18: thank you just

[0:21:38] Voice 3: a point of clarification uh the applicant can speak at the time of application

[0:21:44] Voice 18: that's right anybody who wants to speak to the applications on the agenda your opportunity is

[0:21:51] Voice 18: during Town Hall and so there's two applications the Connected Coast and the Cary dot and so any

[0:21:59] Voice 18: members of the public can speak to that and also as well we have the um members of the public who

[0:22:09] Voice 18: are wishing to record public meetings we ask that you inform the chair so that we can inform

[0:22:16] Voice 18: everybody present if it's being personally recorded and so that is so that if anybody

[0:22:21] Voice 18: present is uncomfortable having their views recorded by another member of the public we

[0:22:27] Voice 18: can ask that person to temporarily stop it so if anybody is recording would you please let me know

[0:22:32] Voice 18: thank you with that i'll open the floor sir you want to come and use the mic

[0:22:41] Voice 18: um

[0:22:50] Voice 12: a couple of things have come up i'm curious on your on your um tiny homes project tiny homes have

[0:22:57] Voice 12: been around forever they're called trailers fifth wheels and mobile homes you can leave the wheels

[0:23:01] Voice 12: under them all right they're ready made they're all over the place so passing laws for them i

[0:23:08] Voice 12: don't understand the uh the concept i just it doesn't make sense to me

[0:23:13] Voice 19: i can explain it to you

[0:23:14] Voice 19: later

[0:23:14] Voice 12: okay okay i mean if you make custom made and whatnot that's fine um i would like to go again on

[0:23:22] Voice 12: record to say that i would like to see as well dot procedure come through i'm in favor of that

[0:23:29] Voice 12: um tim mentioned something about the ramp and what was that so

[0:23:36] Voice 3: briefly

[0:23:37] Voice 3: um the way the rules work is that um our ramp is for unloading it's what what we're doing on

[0:23:47] Voice 3: a regular basis that's not technically legal is placing stuff on the roadway which is everything

[0:23:54] Voice 3: thing off the concrete apron so what we're having in conversation we've been in conversation with

[0:24:00] Voice 3: the qrd is how do we make that part which we do all the time every time when i load freight

[0:24:05] Voice 3: goes on the ground then we load it in trucks right that part is technically illegal we need

[0:24:10] Voice 3: to find a way to make that legal if

[0:24:12] Voice 12: it gets busy i tried to do this when i built the ramp years ago

[0:24:16] Voice 12: i wanted highways to designate it as a terminal that's all you have to do get it designated as

[0:24:22] Voice 12: the terminal and then it's legal it's that simple um anyway the

[0:24:27] Voice 3: other option i'll just briefly say

[0:24:29] Voice 3: the other option is that the qrd um may be able to get uh because they have a license for occupation

[0:24:36] Voice 3: that ends at the concrete if they were to get say another 50 to 100 feet of license for occupation

[0:24:42] Voice 3: there then that would also work so we're just trying to find a way to make it so i mean yeah

[0:24:50] Voice 12: Yeah, to tick a box, to tick a box.

[0:24:53] Voice 12: Thanks for that.

[0:24:54] Voice 12: And I was totally unaware that deer are a problem on Luskeetee.

[0:24:59] Voice 12: They're pretty few and far between.

[0:25:01] Voice 12: You know, I understand that on the other Gulf Islands

[0:25:04] Voice 12: where hunting is quite restricted, that there's venison everywhere,

[0:25:09] Voice 12: but it's hardly a problem here.

[0:25:11] Voice 12: This

[0:25:12] Voice 18: was a regional forum, so it was about deer on all the islands.

[0:25:17] Voice 12: it's a broad brush but it doesn't the paint don't stick here so it doesn't apply to the skeezy

[0:25:24] Voice 12: yeah um yeah and uh i'm unsure about what's going on with connected coast so i can't speak to it

[0:25:33] Voice 12: right now okay but thank you and i'll pick your notice up so everybody forget who you are

[0:25:39] Voice 14: oh

[0:25:50] Voice 7: my

[0:25:51] Voice 7: i agree with carl that there's really no difference between a tiny home and a house trailer tiny home

[0:25:57] Voice 7: on wheels and the trailer hitch that's just a house trip i also have a question why our agenda

[0:26:05] Voice 7: package is so difficult to get has the local trust committee made a decision to limit their

[0:26:10] Voice 7: distribution the

[0:26:17] Voice 18: agenda is published uh and it's available online as it is for all of us

[0:26:22] Voice 7: some of us don't have connectivity i

[0:26:25] Voice 18: understand and that's why we bring printed copies but we

[0:26:29] Voice 18: can't mail them to every resident no

[0:26:31] Voice 7: you could bring five of them here and then people who want

[0:26:35] Voice 7: to look at the agenda they can look at the agenda we

[0:26:37] Voice 19: can certainly look at printing more thank you

[0:26:40] Voice 19: i

[0:26:41] Voice 7: have questions about the minutes at the last meeting i uh raised the question that

[0:26:51] Voice 7: the chair had asked me to leave and ejected me from the previous meeting and she denied it

[0:26:59] Voice 7: and i thought that this issue had been resolved and that it would be in the minutes but it isn't

[0:27:05] Voice 7: so i would like to nail it down on the may 6th meeting the chair asked me twice to leave the

[0:27:19] Voice 7: meeting at 3405 and the 3450 according to the island's trust recording of the meeting

[0:27:27] Voice 7: but for some reason the minutes just don't reflect that and i would like to ask that that be in the

[0:27:38] Voice 7: minutes that was a pretty critical thing that happened i got rejected from the meeting by the

[0:27:44] Voice 7: chair and that should be in the minutes and it happened at 3405 and 3450 and then i have another

[0:27:59] Voice 7: chair also said that the criminal code does not override any bylaws or meeting procedures

[0:28:05] Voice 7: established for the safe and orderly operation of the meeting that was in reference to my

[0:28:11] Voice 7: having this little miniature tape recorder and recording things but i've looked as conscientiously

[0:28:18] Voice 7: as i could and i have found no bylaws or meeting procedures that relate to the public's inability

[0:28:27] Voice 7: to record this public medium at will could you please refer me to the bylaw or reading procedures

[0:28:37] Voice 7: use that reference there madam chair the

[0:28:51] Voice 17: policy

[0:28:59] Voice 18: on our website is regarding public meetings

[0:29:04] Voice 18: recordings a member of the public can record public meetings but the chair of the meeting

[0:29:10] Voice 18: must be informed before you begin recording the chair will inform everyone present at the meeting

[0:29:16] Voice 18: that it will be personally recorded if a member of the public is uncomfortable being recorded

[0:29:22] Voice 18: while they are speaking, the chair may require that the person recording temporarily stop the recording.

[0:29:29] Voice 18: All meetings are recorded by Islands Trust and can be viewed on the meeting page here.

[0:29:34] Voice 18: That is the policy.

[0:29:37] Voice 7: That's an established policy? Yes.

[0:29:40] Voice 7: It was voted on and it has a number?

[0:29:44] Voice 18: It is a policy and it's available on our website.

[0:29:48] Voice 18: And

[0:29:48] Voice 7: it was a policy made by whom?

[0:29:50] Voice 7: Is the executive committee or the trust council vote on that policy?

[0:30:01] Voice 7: If not, it's not a policy.

[0:30:03] Voice 7: It's just an opinion from the administration.

[0:30:05] Voice 7: We

[0:30:06] Voice 18: will take your opinion into account.

[0:30:07] Voice 7: And it certainly doesn't override the criminal code of Canada.

[0:30:11] Voice 19: Thank you for your comment, sir.

[0:30:23] Voice 7: So I guess that's it other than the fact that I've got an impression

[0:30:27] Voice 7: that there's going to be some towers associated with the fiber optic cable.

[0:30:32] Voice 7: And I'd really like to know what those are.

[0:30:36] Voice 7: That's a trigger on the ski island.

[0:30:38] Voice 7: we don't want these microwave towers so could you tell me what the purpose of them will be

[0:30:50] Voice 18: thank you for your views we're about to discuss the application uh for connected

[0:30:55] Voice 18: coast which i assume is what you're talking about i don't believe there's any towers included in

[0:30:59] Voice 18: that application yes ma'am i would like to register support for the dog in spotty bay

[0:31:07] Voice 19: I don't think I need a mic. I'll speak loudly. Is it true that more people have, as public record, written letters of

[0:31:18] Voice 14: support for the Scotty Bay Dock belonging to Asma and Tracy?

[0:31:23] Voice 14: Tracy, is it also true that people attending trust meetings in person and expressing support

[0:31:31] Voice 14: for the doc have outnumbered those in opposition?

[0:31:35] Voice 19: Is there an allowance within the bylaw for decisions to be made on a case-by-case basis

[0:31:42] Voice 19: rather than just having to adhere to

[0:31:47] Voice 18: what the bylaw states?

[0:31:48] Voice 18: I do believe there is a clause.

[0:31:50] Voice 18: us and as our elected representatives is it not incumbent upon the trustees to represent the

[0:31:59] Voice 18: majority wish of the community instead of allowing their own personal agendas or the trust's staff's

[0:32:09] Voice 18: agenda to influence the vote their vote that's all i have to say thank you so there was a question

[0:32:17] Voice 18: question about the letters and the correspondence um so yes all correspondence on this application

[0:32:24] Voice 18: is posted to the website I think there was 56 pieces at last count it could be wrong

[0:32:31] Voice 18: um and I have been reviewing them in advance of this meeting and I'm sure the other trustees

[0:32:37] Voice 18: have as well so and all of that is taken into account the majority the majority rules here

[0:32:45] Voice 18: as far as the numbers for and against?

[0:32:50] Voice 18: I would say that when the LTC is making a decision,

[0:32:53] Voice 18: there are many factors that are taken into account.

[0:32:57] Voice 18: The technical reports, the planner's expertise,

[0:33:00] Voice 18: public views, neighbours, the OCP, the land use bylaw,

[0:33:06] Voice 18: and any other relevant information,

[0:33:09] Voice 18: such as if the Ministry of Lands and Waters

[0:33:14] Voice 18: has given a view on it so all of that is taken into account and weighted how a trustee arrives

[0:33:21] Voice 18: at their own personal decision is part of the art of decision making but it's all equally important

[0:33:27] Voice 18: but no it does not come down to a democratic uh yes or no how many people write in support

[0:33:39] Voice 17: Yeah,

[0:33:46] Voice 10: in April, we made a formal request to the trust to change, to apply change the bylaw

[0:33:54] Voice 10: regarding the construction of private docks on properties which have access to public

[0:34:05] Voice 10: ago. I was just wondering if you had addressed the situation in any way, or could you explain

[0:34:14] Voice 10: what the procedure is for you to address the question? And if there's some way of, this

[0:34:23] Voice 10: is me, a formal request to apply to change the bylaw, is there some way you can make

[0:34:34] Voice 10: a formal uh response

[0:34:36] Voice 18: so just to clarify sir um we had a meeting on march 20th is that the one

[0:34:43] Voice 18: you're talking about this

[0:34:44] Voice 10: is the maple i don't know who i didn't mean the application um

[0:34:50] Voice 18: so

[0:34:52] Voice 18: yeah i i believe that the applicant the current application for the um the carry dock is before

[0:35:00] Voice 10: I'm sorry.

[0:35:03] Voice 10: We're talking about.

[0:35:04] Voice 10: Thank you.

[0:35:05] Voice 10: I'll read it off to you then.

[0:35:07] Voice 10: Thanks.

[0:35:09] Voice 10: We put out a flyer on the question in the community.

[0:35:13] Voice 10: There was a delegation.

[0:35:14] Voice 10: Yes.

[0:35:15] Voice 18: December.

[0:35:16] Voice 18: It was the electronic dating.

[0:35:19] Voice 18: No.

[0:35:20] Voice 18: No?

[0:35:21] Voice 18: I'm so sorry.

[0:35:22] Voice 18: This was March.

[0:35:23] Voice 10: Okay.

[0:35:24] Voice 10: Anyway, it was, we applied to advocate a change.

[0:35:28] Voice 10: change, the two specific by-laws that prohibit the construction of private dogs on properties

[0:35:33] Voice 10: which have access to public roads. And the local trust committee indicated that they

[0:35:41] Voice 10: would like to see a significant public input into the decision-making procedure. And to

[0:35:52] Voice 10: be sure that in any way, you can proceed from there. Have you done anything about it? Or

[0:36:00] Voice 10: Or if you haven't done anything about it, what is the procedure for you to do something about it?

[0:36:04] Voice 10: So

[0:36:04] Voice 18: to amend the bylaw,

[0:36:07] Voice 10: address the

[0:36:09] Voice 18: question of how to determine where an appropriate location for a site-specific dock is?

[0:36:18] Voice 18: It was

[0:36:19] Voice 10: basically to change the bylaw. The bylaw is bylaw 4.13 .

[0:36:27] Voice 10: Okay, and I wish I could read that out to you if you'd like.

[0:36:33] Voice 19: Sure.

[0:36:34] Voice 19: Despite

[0:36:34] Voice 10: any other provision of this by-law, one dock or

[0:36:38] Voice 10: contiguous upland parcel that abuts the foreshore on the Skete

[0:36:42] Voice 10: Island is permitted where the dock is providing access to a

[0:36:47] Voice 10: parcel abutting the foreshore, which parcel is not accessible

[0:36:51] Voice 10: by a dedicated right-of-way or a registered easement.

[0:36:54] Voice 10: And what we are proposing is that you should be able to apply for a private dock to a partial

[0:37:06] Voice 10: which abuts this foreshore, which partial is accessible by a dedicated right-of-way

[0:37:13] Voice 10: already in Eastman.

[0:37:14] Voice 18: So what you're suggesting, at the time you suggest the LTC should have a process of application

[0:37:21] Voice 18: and...

[0:37:22] Voice 18: Yeah,

[0:37:22] Voice 10: we have applied to change the bylaws.

[0:37:29] Voice 17: Yes.

[0:37:29] Voice 10: And what's next?

[0:37:33] Voice 10: The next step is up to you.

[0:37:36] Voice 10: Well, we can't

[0:37:39] Voice 18: amend bylaws until we finish amending the OCP project.

[0:37:44] Voice 18: The LTC cannot undertake two concurrent projects.

[0:37:48] Voice 18: And right now we're still at an OCP review and we're set to do another OCP review next

[0:37:54] Voice 18: year that's approved.

[0:37:55] Voice 18: And so the scope of that project may well include reviewing bylaw 4.14 about the process

[0:38:08] Voice 18: for allowing docks that are connected to an upland residential property.

[0:38:15] Voice 18: I don't think at

[0:38:18] Voice 18: this time the LTC is contemplating amending that by-law specifically.

[0:38:25] Voice 18: But I'm wondering if it potentially could be added to the scope of review next year.

[0:38:31] Voice 18: And I'll turn to you, Connor-Bob.

[0:38:37] Voice 7: Well, one clarification is the by-law that you're citing is the land use by-law.

[0:38:43] Voice 7: and really if there is an interest on behalf of any property owner to have a dog they could seek

[0:38:52] Voice 7: an OCP and land use bylaw and then through an application and in some cases it may be only a

[0:39:00] Voice 7: land use bylaw and an application but but that is there's that option currently where a property

[0:39:07] Voice 7: owner can apply uh to rezone the waterfront in front of their parcel um if the land use bylaw

[0:39:15] Voice 7: was amended in a way that you've suggested there then um anybody could have any waterfront parcel

[0:39:24] Voice 7: could have a dock as an outright permission um within the land use bylaw so then the permission

[0:39:31] Voice 7: would then just be through the provincial process in terms of the general permission.

[0:39:39] Voice 10: So while waiting for the OCP review, in which this issue should be included, in fact,

[0:39:48] Voice 10: if you could commit yourself to including it in the OCP review, that would be appreciated.

[0:39:54] Voice 10: And in the meantime, if an individual wanted to apply for a dock on a piece of foreshore, which is connected to a public road, which is prohibited under the present bylaw,

[0:40:17] Voice 10: uh could he as an individual apply and have that by law amended on an individual basis

[0:40:29] Voice 7: yes yeah maybe there's a even on the agenda today there's two land use bylaw management applications

[0:40:36] Voice 7: um that are considered by the ltc so and

[0:40:42] Voice 17: okay

[0:40:45] Voice 10: so i guess that's it so there is

[0:40:47] Voice 18: yeah the process

[0:40:52] Voice 7: OCP and rural land use by-law has to be changed.

[0:41:01] Voice 10: We

[0:41:01] Voice 18: will take it into consideration.

[0:41:04] Voice 18: Well,

[0:41:04] Voice 10: I don't know why you can't consider it now.

[0:41:09] Voice 10: Because we're

[0:41:09] Voice 18: not discussing the OCP project today, unfortunately.

[0:41:13] Voice 18: We'll definitely take that and it's in the minutes.

[0:41:16] Voice 18: It would be added to the scope of the project.

[0:41:24] Voice 9: It's

[0:41:24] Voice 18: already gone forward as a business case to get approved, so it goes through a process

[0:41:30] Voice 18: of yes, Trust Council has to approve and dedicate money so that Leskeedy can have another OCP

[0:41:37] Voice 18: review and that will be decided in March and at that point you look at the scope of the

[0:41:42] Voice 18: project which I believe already includes stock access, if I'm not mistaken I'll look it up,

[0:41:47] Voice 18: but um those are the broad strokes of what is in the ocp review and then we get into the

[0:41:53] Voice 18: yeah i

[0:41:58] Voice 3: just want a clarification as as chair elliott mentioned uh we essentially are constrained

[0:42:04] Voice 3: at how many things we get to do at once um and so to amend the land use bylaw now means we have to

[0:42:13] Voice 3: set aside the work that we're currently doing and given the time constraints i mean i don't speak

[0:42:20] Voice 3: for the whole committee but i think we'd like to get done what we're doing and the plan is to once

[0:42:26] Voice 3: we've done the ocp work to then review the land use bylaw so nothing's fast but currently the

[0:42:36] Voice 18: process does exist to amend the ledb to allow a dock that is what the application process is for

[0:42:44] Voice 18: so anyone else who has not yet spoken thank you thank

[0:42:59] Voice 14: you um

[0:43:00] Voice 18: i am concerned that we don't have

[0:43:03] Voice 18: any agendas available to us except online which only some people have on the ski

[0:43:10] Voice 18: you have to have the electricity and the access um when in 1975 when we picked our land

[0:43:19] Voice 18: And we didn't think about our connectivity to the internet.

[0:43:25] Voice 18: So it used to be that there were a number of printed copies that were here on the island ahead of the meeting and were available various places like the post office and provisions so that one could go and pick up the agenda and look at it before coming to the meeting.

[0:43:43] Voice 18: I feel a little bit like I'm here without having done my homework.

[0:43:46] Voice 17: and

[0:43:47] Voice 18: I would like to see us go back to that

[0:43:51] Voice 18: and to have several copies of the agenda

[0:43:54] Voice 18: available to us at the meeting also.

[0:43:59] Voice 18: I think that to be effective

[0:44:02] Voice 18: as an Islands Trust,

[0:44:04] Voice 18: public participation is important.

[0:44:07] Voice 1: And I also wish to address public participation

[0:44:11] Voice 1: participation in another sense in that as things come up during

[0:44:16] Voice 18: the meeting it used to be that the

[0:44:19] Voice 18: public was allowed

[0:44:20] Voice 18: to comment so that like for example the

[0:44:24] Voice 1: carry doc um

[0:44:25] Voice 18: aslan and tracy could

[0:44:27] Voice 18: speak to it but so could everybody else and that was a positive thing and and my experience um

[0:44:35] Voice 18: in attending meetings is that members of the public at that time tend to make suggestions

[0:44:42] Voice 18: that help carry everything forward so these are these are both issues about democracy thank you

[0:44:51] Voice 18: um so

[0:45:16] Voice 15: yeah thank you for allowing me to ask a question the first one is

[0:45:22] Voice 15: As to each of the trustees, I'm wondering why nobody let us know that the DOC application was on the agenda today.

[0:45:32] Voice 15: And I have the trustees' written reports from the other paper in front of me.

[0:45:41] Voice 15: And Trustee Larone doesn't mention anything about this meeting.

[0:45:45] Voice 15: And Trustee Peterson says that the Connected Coast project is going to be on this agenda.

[0:45:52] Voice 15: the ocp project but we just found out that the ocp project is not going to be on this agenda

[0:45:59] Voice 15: but nobody mentions the dunk and i'm sure that we all remember that i think both sides of the issue

[0:46:08] Voice 15: wanted to have a public meeting about this and in your agenda package it also says

[0:46:15] Voice 15: that the APC strongly suggests to have a public meeting about this issue.

[0:46:21] Voice 15: So I'm wondering why we didn't know, and who put it on the agenda?

[0:46:26] Voice 15: Two questions.

[0:46:28] Voice 3: I can address the first part.

[0:46:31] Voice 3: When we submit for the paper was in advance of when we got the draft of the agenda.

[0:46:38] Voice 3: So it was my best guess at what would be on the agenda.

[0:46:53] Voice 3: So

[0:46:53] Voice 15: just the supplementary, since you have the mic in your hands, there is an email list on this island, and one of the moderators of that email list is a trustee, and I am blocked from posting on that email list 90% of the time, so I'm not going to be able to do that.

[0:47:11] Voice 15: of the time so i'm wondering why one of the trustees isn't able to put the agenda items

[0:47:17] Voice 15: on that email list before the meeting because i understand you get the agenda a week in advance is

[0:47:25] Voice 15: that true yeah

[0:47:26] Voice 3: fair enough and uh i will i will take that into consideration and do my best to try

[0:47:31] Voice 3: and keep on top of that i just had a crazy week of grandkids which we still have um so slightly

[0:47:40] Voice 3: I'm distinctly distracted. I do apologize. It's not super hard to just list the agenda items. I apologize for that. I'll try to do that better.

[0:47:50] Voice 15: Would any of the other trustees like to answer the question?

[0:47:54] Voice 15: So the other question is, maybe the chair, you can answer this one. Who put that item on the agenda today?

[0:48:02] Voice 18: The staff.

[0:48:02] Voice 15: The staff put that on? Okay.

[0:48:04] Voice 18: so as information becomes available when there's enough information to make a complete report so

[0:48:11] Voice 18: that the ltc can make a decision that's when the item arrives on the agenda there's no other reason

[0:48:16] Voice 18: than that and we generally get information about 10 days ahead of time is there anything else we'd

[0:48:22] Voice 18: like to add and um yeah at that time if local trustees want to make it known to the public that

[0:48:29] Voice 18: a particular application is on the agenda they can do that that's entirely at their discretion

[0:48:34] Voice 18: everybody has the right to access the agenda at the same time which is five days before five

[0:48:40] Voice 18: business days before the meeting thank you so

[0:48:44] Voice 15: um a supplementary question to that is

[0:48:47] Voice 15: the apc just spent nine hundred dollars of our money on meetings to discuss a referral that

[0:48:57] Voice 15: but this committee sent to them about docs.

[0:49:02] Voice 15: And so I'm wondering if anybody can answer the question

[0:49:06] Voice 15: why we would spend $900 and then shut down the process

[0:49:12] Voice 15: right after without this committee having any time

[0:49:18] Voice 15: to discuss what the APC came up with.

[0:49:21] Voice 15: That doesn't make any sense to me.

[0:49:24] Voice 15: so this so let me summarize because i see the chair rolling her eyes i'm saying that the staff

[0:49:31] Voice 15: are asking it's in the agenda package for this committee to stop the application in its tracks

[0:49:39] Voice 15: right now today to proceed no further is the exact words the there are two sets of minutes

[0:49:47] Voice 15: in this agenda package from the apc that talk about the issues that you sent to them that are

[0:49:55] Voice 15: related to this application so you haven't had a chance to discuss them you haven't had a chance

[0:50:00] Voice 15: as a committee to discuss what the apc has recommended but yet the staff feel empowered to

[0:50:08] Voice 15: shut down that process right now before you have a chance to sir

[0:50:12] Voice 18: i'll ask you to change your

[0:50:14] Voice 18: language that is extremely disrespectful could

[0:50:16] Voice 15: you identify what is disrespectful please saying

[0:50:19] Voice 18: that staff shut ours to suggest

[0:50:23] Voice 18: that staff would shut down a process is disrespectful to their

[0:50:28] Voice 18: professional capabilities and their and making illusions about their intent staff present

[0:50:34] Voice 18: information which is provided in this agenda including apc meeting minutes for our information

[0:50:41] Voice 18: so that we the ltc can make a decision staff do not make decisions they make recommendations and

[0:50:48] Voice 18: so i'd ask you to apologize and retract the the allegation that they would shut down the process

[0:50:56] Voice 15: i will change my wording um they are requesting that you decide to proceed no further with this

[0:51:03] Voice 15: application that is in the agenda package in front of you so i'm not going to apologize for

[0:51:10] Voice 15: what they wrote i did change the wording to shut down and i'm retracting that wording because

[0:51:16] Voice 15: luckily they don't have that power you have that power though and they are recommending that you

[0:51:22] Voice 15: shut down this application today without having any discussion about what the apc has recommended

[0:51:29] Voice 15: so i don't see this moving forward um so my next question is about the connected coast

[0:51:35] Voice 15: And I have a question. Why are in the agenda package, there's many OCP policies listed with a yes or a to be decided beside them regarding the Connected Coast project, as in whether the Connected Coast project meets that OCP policy requirement or not.

[0:51:59] Voice 15: but there are many ocp policies not listed in this agenda package so i'm wondering why

[0:52:06] Voice 15: not all of them are listed so that we can see whether they are

[0:52:13] Voice 15: met by this project or not so

[0:52:23] Voice 18: i believe we'll be able to answer that question when we get to

[0:52:26] Voice 18: the application um as to which ocp policies um are included and whether the list is

[0:52:33] Voice 18: is exhaustive. Do you feel you can answer that or do you want

[0:52:40] Voice 7: me to respond to the relevant the policies that are relevant

[0:52:45] Voice 7: to the application or the ones that are?

[0:52:52] Voice 15: Yes. So just the relevant policies are listed. I've looked

[0:52:59] Voice 15: through the OC key. And there's a few policies that I just, in

[0:53:04] Voice 15: in my opinion are relevant under section 3.2 policy 6 that's omitted and it's regarding

[0:53:15] Voice 15: rezoning procedures for commercial and industrial applications i do believe this is a commercial and

[0:53:21] Voice 15: industrial application and it says that those applications should be referred to the apc for

[0:53:28] Voice 15: for review prior to this LTC considering this application.

[0:53:33] Voice 15: So that's an OCP policy that has been omitted

[0:53:37] Voice 15: from the staff report.

[0:53:39] Voice 15: Then there is under section 3.2 policy 10,

[0:53:43] Voice 15: which is also omitted.

[0:53:45] Voice 15: It says, how will this application

[0:53:49] Voice 15: maintain the role character?

[0:53:55] Voice 15: Sorry, I have to, yeah, okay.

[0:53:58] Voice 15: Okay, that's how we'll maintain the role of character.

[0:54:02] Voice 15: That's omitted.

[0:54:04] Voice 15: Under section 3.3 policy five is omitted as well.

[0:54:08] Voice 15: And that policy says the LTC will assist when possible,

[0:54:16] Voice 15: the responsible ministry and their efforts to establish

[0:54:21] Voice 15: and protect sites of archeological interest.

[0:54:26] Voice 15: And I believe it is listed in your staff report that Policy 4, just before that, is included, and the staff states that there is a known archaeological site within 200 meters of this landing of the Connected Coast fiber optic cable.

[0:54:51] Voice 15: and that there is a probability, at least it exists, that this site could have archaeological

[0:54:59] Voice 15: remains on it. So clearly that's a relevant policy. A very similar policy is regarding

[0:55:07] Voice 15: the environmental impact or ecological impact of the site. That's omitted.

[0:55:15] Voice 6: Let's see what else is

[0:55:17] Voice 6: omitted is there anything else um yes

[0:55:22] Voice 15: um under section 3.8 policy 4 upon receipt of crown land

[0:55:29] Voice 15: referrals correct me if i'm wrong but i believe this is a crown land referral the ltc should hold

[0:55:35] Voice 15: community discussions to to allow for comment on the referral that was omitted by the staff now

[0:55:45] Voice 15: Now, one thing that the staff report does say

[0:55:49] Voice 15: is that currently there are zero zones

[0:55:53] Voice 15: that allow any type of public utility on the ski.

[0:55:59] Voice 15: So for our entire existence in the Islands Trust,

[0:56:03] Voice 15: we have not allowed any public utilities

[0:56:05] Voice 15: anywhere on this Island.

[0:56:08] Voice 15: So this application is to,

[0:56:11] Voice 15: it was made by Connected Coast

[0:56:14] Voice 15: to allow for fiber optic cables to land at the barge ramp.

[0:56:22] Voice 15: So what the staff are recommending

[0:56:25] Voice 15: are that all zones on Laskete Island

[0:56:29] Voice 15: allow not just fiber optic cables,

[0:56:33] Voice 15: but all public utilities

[0:56:36] Voice 15: so that in the future, no zoning bylaw need be done.

[0:56:43] Voice 15: and the staff are recommending that there be no public hearing i recall trustee peterson when this

[0:56:52] Voice 15: came up at the last meeting saying very distinctly that he was opposed to having this bylaw pushed

[0:56:59] Voice 15: through without a public hearing so the staff are recommending that we go from zero to a hundred

[0:57:09] Voice 15: for all public utilities without a public hearing so i'm just pointing that out i also pointed out

[0:57:15] Voice 15: all the admitted policies that don't support their position so um i don't think there's a question

[0:57:23] Voice 15: um the major project budget i discovered is fifteen thousand five hundred dollars

[0:57:31] Voice 15: the minimum is five thousand for a major project if i'm not mistaken eight thousand of that is

[0:57:38] Voice 15: for first nations consultation so my question is why is more than half of the major project

[0:57:44] Voice 15: budget that you've applied for solely for first nations consultation

[0:57:57] Voice 18: any ideas on that one as we draw up the budgets that um that go forward as business cases

[0:58:05] Voice 7: the insurance one clarification is that it's phase one so that is the the budget for projects

[0:58:11] Voice 7: are done on an annual basis and that budget is for the first year um so i i can't recall the details

[0:58:19] Voice 7: of the business space right now but it certainly is supposed to be a project that um would be

[0:58:26] Voice 7: multi-year so yeah

[0:58:28] Voice 18: so because i i understand the leskeedy community association and and many um

[0:58:37] Voice 18: Community members have been involved extensively with giving input towards the OCP, you know, a renewed OCP for the future, and all of that public input has been captured and will continue rolling forward.

[0:58:55] Voice 18: What has been lacking is First Nations engagement, and that is a significant piece for the Islands Trust to be able to move forward with community planning.

[0:59:06] Voice 18: planning, we do need to reach out and hear from First Nations and those with treaty and

[0:59:14] Voice 18: territorial interest here, and so that's become the early stage of any project.

[0:59:19] Voice 18: So anything to do with land, water, OCB reviews, we consider early engagement with First Nations

[0:59:27] Voice 18: is a best practice, and then as the planner said, it rolls out in multi-year format, bringing

[0:59:33] Voice 18: and forward the community input that's already been collected over the years and continuing

[0:59:38] Voice 18: that process will be the focus i imagine for the next two to three years if it gets approved so um

[0:59:46] Voice 15: so it's eight thousand dollars to send the package the ocp review packages by mail to the various

[1:00:00] Voice 15: um first nations for them to read that's where eight thousand dollars comes in is it in person

[1:00:07] Voice 15: consultations where how does it get up to eight thousand dollars it doesn't even cost that much

[1:00:13] Voice 15: to do it here um

[1:00:16] Voice 18: so the we've been working with um with advisors in the province and other

[1:00:27] Voice 18: intergovernmental advisors who say if you want good results with engagement, supplying, resourcing

[1:00:37] Voice 18: First Nations to be able to respond in a meaningful way to your referral is the best course of action

[1:00:45] Voice 18: and that sometimes means capacity funding so that they can have a professional look at your

[1:00:53] Voice 18: documentation many First Nations do not have that capacity and so it is becoming a practice we're

[1:01:01] Voice 18: still refining what that looks like and how much it costs it's not exact at this point it's different

[1:01:08] Voice 18: for every nation that we engage with but there is good signs that providing some capacity funding

[1:01:16] Voice 18: and some ability for them to really set aside time from their own community priorities to look at

[1:01:23] Voice 18: what we are asking for, rather than just a tick the box referral where the referral period elapses

[1:01:31] Voice 18: and they don't have time to respond. So we're trying to make sure that the response is meaningful

[1:01:37] Voice 18: and that may be the number that's needed and might be less.

[1:01:43] Voice 15: Thank you. So just so I understand

[1:01:46] Voice 15: well, you're basically saying that we are funding First Nations to be able to look at our OCP

[1:01:53] Voice 15: review so we send them a check with the ocp review to be reviewed sorry something like that

[1:02:01] Voice 19: but we're

[1:02:03] Voice 15: sending money okay thank you um i've noticed in this agenda package that open

[1:02:09] Voice 15: application reports is included there's a whole section on that and there's five open applications

[1:02:16] Voice 15: since 2019, but I've also noticed that that hasn't appeared in a agenda package prior to this meeting.

[1:02:26] Voice 15: So I'm just wondering, is this a new practice, I hope, or is this a one-off?

[1:02:33] Voice 7: That is not a new practice, but it has been missing for the last, I don't know how many

[1:02:40] Voice 7: meetings number of meetings as we transition to a different software um so if you look back a year

[1:02:47] Voice 7: or so there was application reports in for open applications in those agendas as well but um they

[1:02:54] Voice 7: looked a little bit different um and now the new software um they've been they just back on their

[1:03:02] Voice 7: agenda is something that would would come on regularly on every day okay well thank you

[1:03:10] Voice 6: that's good to hear those coming

[1:03:12] Voice 15: back together because it's important to see those

[1:03:15] Voice 15: and then the policy statement um report staff report uh under public consultation options

[1:03:23] Voice 15: there's seven different options um but i'm surprised that there is no trustee-led

[1:03:29] Voice 15: led info booth option at a popular community hub.

[1:03:34] Voice 15: There are trustee led public information meetings

[1:03:37] Voice 15: before these meetings,

[1:03:39] Voice 15: as well as staff led public information meetings

[1:03:45] Voice 15: before these meetings.

[1:03:47] Voice 15: But obviously not everybody can make these meetings

[1:03:50] Voice 15: as you've seen,

[1:03:51] Voice 15: and it would be nice to have them at times

[1:03:54] Voice 15: where more people can engage,

[1:03:55] Voice 15: age, especially on such an important issue. And I'd also like to recommend that instead of paying

[1:04:05] Voice 15: staff to run these information booths, that trustees run them and that they're at places like

[1:04:13] Voice 15: the Saturday market rather than at private locations, because not everybody can access

[1:04:19] Voice 15: access private locations.

[1:04:21] Voice 15: And that's the last time it was at a private location.

[1:04:25] Voice 15: And then the last thing I'd like to bring it up

[1:04:30] Voice 15: is the APC minutes identify others present in only one

[1:04:36] Voice 15: of three meetings.

[1:04:37] Voice 15: And I'm just questioning why that is the case,

[1:04:41] Voice 6: why it's not consistently identified in the minutes.

[1:04:48] Voice 6: So thank you.

[1:04:49] Voice 6: I don't know if anybody can answer that question.

[1:04:57] Voice 18: Minute speaker Millard, have you been doing the minutes for the last three BC meetings

[1:05:03] Voice 18: or do you know if they do their own minutes?

[1:05:06] Voice 18: Okay, so that practice may just not be consistent because the minute taker is sometimes not consistent.

[1:05:14] Voice 7: It's a paid

[1:05:15] Voice 6: minute taker, is it not?

[1:05:18] Voice 8: I don't know, actually.

[1:05:28] Voice 6: Okay.

[1:05:34] Voice 18: Well, thank you for pointing out all the valuable info there, Mr. Olson. And anyone

[1:05:42] Voice 18: else who has not yet spoken? Yes, ma'am.

[1:05:46] Voice 19: Good morning. I would like to speak against the application for the care doc. I believe

[1:05:51] Voice 19: that developing a project

[1:05:52] Voice 18: contrary to the community plan and then asking forgiveness

[1:05:55] Voice 18: is a very dangerous slippery slope um if we allow the extension then how do we curtail others who

[1:06:03] Voice 18: may decide that their needs supersede others their neighbors and community communities do change and

[1:06:11] Voice 18: i think we have best perceived in ways that will reflect our future and keep that in mind that we

[1:06:16] Voice 19: do if everything does grow that's it thank

[1:06:21] Voice 14: you yes ma'am

[1:06:24] Voice 14: i'd like to say i thoroughly agree with you

[1:06:28] Voice 14: there's many different ways of looking at this

[1:06:32] Voice 14: thank you

[1:06:34] Voice 17: and

[1:06:37] Voice 18: okay so anyone else first time speaking and then we'll go to second speakers

[1:06:43] Voice 7: I'll make a brief share. It's my understanding that the Rural Land Use By-law is going to

[1:06:49] Voice 7: be amended fairly significantly in order to allow the fiber outlets to be landed and distributed.

[1:06:56] Voice 7: Is that not the case? Are you guys not amending our Rural Land Use By-law?

[1:07:05] Voice 18: The application before us contemplates an amendment to the Land Use By-law, which

[1:07:10] Voice 18: which the LTC may choose to do today or not.

[1:07:14] Voice 7: So when you said you can't make amendments to the bylaw

[1:07:17] Voice 7: without lab lab lab, that's not the case here.

[1:07:22] Voice 18: I believe the speaker before you was talking

[1:07:24] Voice 18: about changing a general land use policy

[1:07:27] Voice 18: about how applications proceed.

[1:07:30] Voice 18: And the planner answered that saying,

[1:07:32] Voice 18: if we were to amend that land use bylaw,

[1:07:38] Voice 18: I can't remember the number,

[1:07:39] Voice 18: that would allow permission for anybody with lands connected to the water to have a dog and so we're

[1:07:47] Voice 7: not about just your statement was that you can't amend the bylaw without these other procedures

[1:07:54] Voice 7: but in this case you are amending the violence without

[1:07:56] Voice 18: without even public

[1:07:57] Voice 7: hearings or anything

[1:07:58] Voice 7: there

[1:07:58] Voice 18: is an application to amend the bylaw and that is the correct process to do it yes

[1:08:03] Voice 18: Yes,

[1:08:03] Voice 7: if the

[1:08:05] Voice 18: LTC initiates an LUB amendment project to amend a set of bylaws, that is on the LTC because it is decided that this is an application to amend the bylaw and that is the correct process.

[1:08:21] Voice 7: And if you approve the application, will you then amend the bylaw?

[1:08:24] Voice 7: Yes.

[1:08:26] Voice 7: Okay, and will there be public engagement before you get into that?

[1:08:31] Voice 7: i'm sorry

[1:08:31] Voice 18: we're here to hear your input we can't tell

[1:08:35] Voice 7: you how

[1:08:35] Voice 18: we're going to

[1:08:36] Voice 7: decide that i'll go

[1:08:38] Voice 7: to my final point thank you uh

[1:08:39] Voice 7: vis-a-vis the doc issue the community has uh it's not my one mind

[1:08:47] Voice 7: about these docs and the community's opinion has changed over the last 40 years so i i see a lot

[1:08:56] Voice 7: of stuff about public information meetings etc where you or the staff tells the public

[1:09:03] Voice 7: but i see nothing about the town hall meeting where the public can interact and ask questions

[1:09:10] Voice 7: and get answers what is that it seems to me that the town hall meeting is the proper way of getting

[1:09:16] Voice 7: the public's opinion on this issue i personally believe there should be two or three of these

[1:09:23] Voice 7: these things so people who don't attend the first one can attend the second one and their

[1:09:27] Voice 7: opinions can be heard and they can ask questions of the trustees is there a reason why you're

[1:09:33] Voice 7: avoiding town hall meetings i mean public information meetings um

[1:09:40] Voice 19: well

[1:09:42] Voice 3: i just say uh

[1:09:43] Voice 3: we actually um in our island trust speak we refer to what you're talking about as community

[1:09:50] Voice 3: the information meetings no they're entirely different

[1:09:54] Voice 7: i i went through this community

[1:09:56] Voice 7: information meeting you guys give us information you don't ask

[1:10:00] Voice 7: questions a town hall and you can

[1:10:03] Voice 7: ask questions i was told you can't ask questions by luck and and and so he clearly defined he said

[1:10:11] Voice 7: what a town hall meeting is he said what a public information meeting is and the town hall meeting

[1:10:17] Voice 7: is not the same as a public information meeting according to what he told us are you saying that

[1:10:22] Voice 7: they are the same there

[1:10:26] Voice 18: are only three types of meetings that the islands trust typically would

[1:10:29] Voice 18: hold a regular business meeting which we are having today a special meeting which may be to

[1:10:35] Voice 18: consider a special piece of business and a single application might be a special business meeting

[1:10:43] Voice 18: and a community information meeting at which there can be an exchange of views.

[1:10:48] Voice 18: Information is presented, questions are asked,

[1:10:51] Voice 18: everybody goes through multiple, many, many, many iterations of a town hall,

[1:10:57] Voice 18: if that is wished.

[1:10:58] Voice 18: In my experience, and I could be wrong,

[1:11:01] Voice 18: I don't think the Islands Trust has ever struck just a town hall meeting

[1:11:05] Voice 18: to hear from people.

[1:11:06] Voice 18: That might be considered a workshop.

[1:11:09] Voice 18: But the community can organize itself to have a town hall, absolutely.

[1:11:14] Voice 18: in reviewing what we

[1:11:16] Voice 7: have had many town hall meetings concerning the sheep and other issues

[1:11:22] Voice 7: it's not it's not an unusual thing was

[1:11:24] Voice 18: that led by the list ed

[1:11:26] Voice 7: trustee yes okay

[1:11:31] Voice 18: that's not my

[1:11:31] Voice 18: experience and i'll just

[1:11:32] Voice 7: say if there was a community

[1:11:34] Voice 18: information experience sir i'll ask

[1:11:37] Voice 18: you to just respect the fact that we are trying to work together okay and i'm trying to answer

[1:11:43] Voice 18: your question if there was a community working together sir if

[1:11:48] Voice 18: there was a community information

[1:11:50] Voice 18: meeting or a public hearing about this application the opportunity to ask questions would absolutely

[1:11:58] Voice 18: be afforded to the public as long as

[1:12:00] Voice 7: that's not true in the past that has not been true i will

[1:12:04] Voice 18: just i'm going to close this because i've answered to the best of my ability unless anybody else has

[1:12:09] Voice 18: anything to add any other questions yes sir it's

[1:12:13] Voice 12: not a question it's just an observation

[1:12:15] Voice 12: that somebody who's been here on this island for 80 years there are only about 10 places

[1:12:22] Voice 12: on this island where it's physically possible to put a dock and the federal fisheries regulations

[1:12:29] Voice 12: cancel out at least five of them there are very few locations that the dock could be physically

[1:12:37] Voice 12: put in that the Georgia Strait wouldn't take out in the winter.

[1:12:43] Voice 12: There are very few places, and making a big deal about this is a mountain,

[1:12:50] Voice 12: you're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

[1:12:54] Voice 12: But there aren't any places to physically put them that don't have

[1:13:00] Voice 12: four to five foot seas coming in in the winter.

[1:13:03] Voice 12: all right that's it you can't put them everywhere like the fisheries cancel out half of them

[1:13:14] Voice 12: half of the possibilities and

[1:13:20] Voice 18: i just want to recognize that you did provide an excellent

[1:13:24] Voice 18: delegation to the ltc on that topic and we were thankful to hear that information in your

[1:13:30] Voice 18: local expertise

[1:13:31] Voice 17: thank

[1:13:32] Voice 18: you okay any other speakers uh

[1:13:36] Voice 18: let's

[1:13:40] Voice 14: move

[1:13:42] Voice 19: on so we

[1:13:48] Voice 18: have minutes for adoption

[1:13:49] Voice 18: uh 5.1 local trust committee minutes due july 15th on pages four of your agenda

[1:13:56] Voice 18: and that's okay for everyone okay i'll take it by general consent for the next

[1:14:28] Voice 18: of April 4th, sorry, July 15th, 2024, be adopted.

[1:14:37] Voice 8: That's new now?

[1:14:38] Voice 8: Yeah.

[1:14:39] Voice 19: Oh my gosh.

[1:14:41] Voice 18: That's so long ago.

[1:14:44] Voice 18: So we've got three sets of minutes from the APC meetings for information.

[1:14:51] Voice 18: And thank you, MinuteTaker and the APC for providing those.

[1:14:56] Voice 18: Are we going to have an update from the other partners?

[1:15:02] Voice 18: I

[1:15:05] Voice 4: don't think we requested one for this meeting.

[1:15:07] Voice 4: We did for July 15th.

[1:15:11] Voice 19: Was there seven minutes missing, though?

[1:15:13] Voice 19: I don't think so.

[1:15:16] Voice 19: They're all there.

[1:15:17] Voice 19: All right.

[1:15:25] Voice 18: So we are a little bit behind schedule,

[1:15:27] Voice 18: so I'm just going to suggest we move into our applications and referrals.

[1:15:32] Voice 18: Unless anyone needs a break, you want to keep going or do you want to go?

[1:15:38] Voice 18: Keep going?

[1:15:38] Voice 8: All right.

[1:15:40] Voice 18: so page 23 um plr and then 2024 0104 connective coast was the first application pages 23 of your

[1:15:54] Voice 18: agenda i do know we've got um christina owen uh available online thank you so much

[1:16:04] Voice 18: so planervon would you like to introduce this sure

[1:16:07] Voice 7: um so this is an application to

[1:16:10] Voice 7: the Skidi Island land use by-law to facilitate the fiber optic cable connection to the Skidi

[1:16:16] Voice 7: Island. The cable routing is proposed to travel from Vancouver Island and land at the bar

[1:16:21] Voice 7: track at the end of Weldon Road on the ski. The cable will travel through three different

[1:16:27] Voice 7: marine zones and the land lease zone and currently no zone on Skidi Island permits public utilities

[1:16:33] Voice 7: as of use. So staff have looked at the OCP and determined the automation is consistent

[1:16:39] Voice 7: with the relevant OCD policies. As a result, staff are recommending the LTC request staff

[1:16:45] Voice 7: to prepare a draft amendment by-law to permit public utility use in all zones, that the

[1:16:52] Voice 7: LTC direct staff to proceed with public notification of first reading prior to LTC consideration

[1:16:58] Voice 7: of the by-law, and staff are also recommending that the LTC request staff to refer the by-law

[1:17:05] Voice 7: First Nations, agencies, and organizations.

[1:17:08] Voice 7: Those are listed on the First Nations staff report.

[1:17:11] Voice 17: Okay.

[1:17:17] Voice 18: So, hello, Christina.

[1:17:20] Voice 18: Did you wish to address the Local Trust Committee

[1:17:23] Voice 18: or just here to answer questions?

[1:17:25] Voice 16: I'm just here to answer questions

[1:17:27] Voice 16: or provide any clarification where needed.

[1:17:32] Voice 18: I do have a question that I prefer to use.

[1:17:34] Voice 16: Anybody else?

[1:17:39] Voice 3: Yeah, I had a question around the first recommendation

[1:17:43] Voice 3: recommendation permitting the public utility use in all zones and maybe staff could explain that

[1:17:48] Voice 3: that that's specific to this application and not a general permission is that correct

[1:17:53] Voice 3: i

[1:17:54] Voice 7: know that is proposed to be or recommended as a um a general permission for public utilities

[1:18:01] Voice 7: not just a fiber optic but in all zones so the lgc could direct staff to

[1:18:07] Voice 7: drafted by law differently to only permit the fiber optic um the reason is the report given

[1:18:13] Voice 7: for that is that there is

[1:18:15] Voice 7: a last mile connection and this application here would would bring the

[1:18:20] Voice 7: fiber optic cable to this media but it would not distribute it throughout and so um utilities are

[1:18:29] Voice 7: not permitted elsewhere then there would be nowhere else it would require an additional

[1:18:34] Voice 7: application in the future to actually make use of that okay

[1:18:39] Voice 3: thanks for the clarity so it would just

[1:18:43] Voice 3: mean that and at this point we don't have we have zero clarity around last mile so that the idea

[1:18:50] Voice 3: being that this this would automatically allow last mile all right and then just a comment

[1:18:59] Voice 3: I want to remember to the public, I mentioned OCP policy 3.2 number 6, and I just note that

[1:19:13] Voice 3: the wording says that such proposals should be referred to the APC for review prior to

[1:19:22] Voice 3: final consideration, which is obviously not what we're at today.

[1:19:24] Voice 3: day um so just in terms of the of the recommendation that's here i just want to

[1:19:32] Voice 3: state that i'm actually not comfortable with uh putting a general permission for public utility

[1:19:38] Voice 3: use in all zones at this time i'm perfectly happy to consider this application um and so thank you

[1:19:46] Voice 3: for your your clarification on that so

[1:19:51] Voice 18: on that topic um i was thankful for uh you trustee

[1:19:57] Voice 18: Laroni having forwarded the um information from the Muskegee Islands um or internet

[1:20:04] Voice 18: society and so reading through that um there has been a lot of conversation about what would the

[1:20:12] Voice 18: last mile uh specifically look like and I just wanted to note that um page 11 of that report

[1:20:24] Voice 18: that a similar a hybrid internet scenario might be the most feasible option for liskiti

[1:20:30] Voice 18: with some form of on-ground build and a fiber connection that would increase the existing

[1:20:37] Voice 18: radio signal bandwidth along liskiti's east texas side and that um so i'm wondering was the

[1:20:45] Voice 18: rationale to approve utilities in all zones because there isn't certainty on how the connection is

[1:20:54] Voice 18: going to happen to to connect residences to that fiber optic cable it might be fiber optic or it

[1:21:00] Voice 18: might be something else i

[1:21:03] Voice 7: i don't know the details of the how it would be dispersed through the

[1:21:07] Voice 7: island um the other thing that i had to note is there's really the majority of the city island is

[1:21:16] Voice 7: within the land-based zone and this will already pass through the land-based zone and so it was

[1:21:24] Voice 7: just an opportunity to um there is an opportunity to allow public utilities um you know for the

[1:21:32] Voice 7: public's benefit everywhere um so i

[1:21:41] Voice 18: guess i could ask what's the flip side what is the risk of

[1:21:44] Voice 18: allowing public utilities everywhere is what kind of utility would be allowed that would not be in

[1:21:49] Voice 18: the public's interest and i'm trying to imagine what that scenario would be

[1:21:53] Voice 18: um yeah

[1:21:57] Voice 7: i don't know

[1:21:59] Voice 7: that many islands within the trust area do permit public utilities in all zones that's that's

[1:22:06] Voice 7: quick comment on other islands and so any things that you you see you know what we can imagine

[1:22:17] Voice 7: that what other public utilities are you know power connection internet telephone

[1:22:23] Voice 7: home.

[1:22:29] Voice 18: So if we're to approve the application, public hearing or not, but just the application

[1:22:35] Voice 18: in principle, but not public utilities in all zones. And Christina, I guess this is maybe to

[1:22:43] Voice 18: you because you have more information about how this is rolling out in rural communities.

[1:22:50] Voice 18: If this land use bylaw does not allow public utilities, say in residential zones,

[1:22:57] Voice 18: would that prohibit the last mile connectivity yeah

[1:23:02] Voice 16: um specifically the connected coast application

[1:23:05] Voice 16: and project is just to provide backbone infrastructure um so that where we only

[1:23:11] Voice 16: requested uh for allowance of that infrastructure at this time like there's been applications made

[1:23:18] Voice 16: for funding um but there's nothing confirmed for lesquite at this time so i can't speak to

[1:23:23] Voice 16: what would happen but typically in rural areas we have funding and resources for the connected coast

[1:23:30] Voice 16: to permit for or proceed with the permitting for the project at hand if the land uses would need

[1:23:38] Voice 16: to be changed for other zones for the last mile we would proceed to do permitting for it at that

[1:23:43] Voice 16: that stage. For example, our rezoning request for Valdez Island for the Laiacson First Station,

[1:23:53] Voice 16: we're only requesting to rezone just that one marine conservation zone we're going through.

[1:24:03] Voice 18: And so just regarding the funding at our July 15th meeting, we did talk about the Northern

[1:24:09] Voice 18: Development Application, which had closed and had discussed that if there is community support from

[1:24:17] Voice 18: Liskety to apply and look for that funding we could reopen the northern development application

[1:24:25] Voice 18: um do you know from your conversations um what the status of that would be is that still a

[1:24:31] Voice 18: possibility Christina

[1:24:34] Voice 16: um I would have to check in with NDIT on that I'm not sure of the current

[1:24:40] Voice 16: status okay do

[1:24:47] Voice 3: you yeah further question um so the first recommendation there i'm just thinking about

[1:24:57] Voice 3: uh um this is for you i bought um if we were to end the recommendation the word of the

[1:25:05] Voice 3: recommendation after connected coast would that then make the recommendation specific to this

[1:25:11] Voice 3: application and then could you proceed or do we need to do other work to help you proceed with

[1:25:18] Voice 3: this specific application so

[1:25:34] Voice 18: how many zones does the application propose to run through

[1:25:38] Voice 3: well no actually my question is because i'm in favor of proceeding with this application um

[1:25:45] Voice 3: but i'm not in favor of permitting public utility use in all zones so if we ended the resolution

[1:25:51] Voice 3: after the words connected coast would that be the effect yeah I'm just just trying to look through

[1:25:58] Voice 7: and suggest some clearer wording okay I think I understand your intent but yeah um to um that the

[1:26:15] Voice 7: the CDIS and local trust committee request staff to prepare a draft by the law to amend the CDIS

[1:26:22] Voice 7: a nice bylaw to um for a site-specific zone to permit public utilities associated with application

[1:26:42] if

[1:26:49] Voice 16: i may um for this application we're requesting to go through zones m1 m9 and the land-based zone

[1:26:59] Voice 16: if there was last mile i think it would be largely like if funding became available i think it would

[1:27:06] Voice 16: largely be centered in that um land-based zone just

[1:27:16] Voice 7: if you're wondering which zones is this

[1:27:19] Voice 7: going through it it is um just one was missed there so i believe it's the um m2 zone as well

[1:27:26] Voice 7: Yeah. So

[1:27:34] Voice 18: that's a good consideration. I did have a question about the archaeological site and the fact that this is potentially within 200 meters, but noting that the proposed site is, you know, an already significantly disturbed area with a barge ramp.

[1:27:54] Voice 18: So is there any concern that there'd be additional impacts to archaeological materials and I guess planar bog to use?

[1:28:16] Voice 18: Are you confident that our chance finds protocol covers any eventuality?

[1:28:25] Voice 18: well it's on the applicant to stop work if there's if they discover that there's archaeological

[1:28:36] Voice 18: materials and they will proceed according to the bc heritage conservation act with what to do with

[1:28:44] Voice 18: that and that's our protocol just covers you know what the provincial regulation states right yes

[1:28:51] Voice 18: so it's really the onus is on the applicant to make sure that they do due diligence if they

[1:28:56] Voice 18: they run into archeological sites.

[1:28:58] Voice 18: Yes.

[1:29:00] Voice 7: And the other, just another related item is that

[1:29:03] Voice 7: there are several recommend these bylaws

[1:29:06] Voice 7: referred to First Nations.

[1:29:09] So that's an opportunity for them to,

[1:29:11] if they're aware of sensitive

[1:29:14] Voice 19: sites in that area

[1:29:16] Voice 19: that they're concerned about that

[1:29:17] Voice 19: that could be identified through those referrals.

[1:29:21] Voice 16: Okay.

[1:29:24] Voice 16: If I may, the original landing,

[1:29:27] Voice 16: we were actually looking at was beside the hotel there at the ferry ramp we moved away from that

[1:29:33] Voice 16: landing specifically to stay away from the archaeology our archaeologist has reviewed

[1:29:39] Voice 16: the current barge ramp landing has no recorded sites if there was any recorded sites right at

[1:29:46] Voice 16: the landing there our archaeologist believes that it would have been recorded at the time of the

[1:29:53] Voice 16: the building of the barge ramp,

[1:29:56] Voice 16: but we do have trans-fiant protocols in place.

[1:30:00] Voice 16: We do extensive First Nation engagement and invite anybody that is wanting to, any nation that's wanting to come monitor, to be monitors at that site.

[1:30:11] Voice 16: So we do have that in place.

[1:30:13] Voice 16: If the archaeologist deems that it's too close to another recorded site, we will just bring the archaeologist on site as well.

[1:30:22] Voice 16: So we have all methods in place.

[1:30:24] Voice 16: For this site he didn't believe an archaeologist during installation was necessary just due to the

[1:30:31] Voice 16: distance to the other site but all our construction teams and environmental monitors are trained with

[1:30:37] Voice 16: our chance find procedure.

[1:30:42] Voice 18: Excellent thank you that

[1:30:43] Voice 18: answers my question. So for the matter of

[1:30:48] Voice 18: public hearing I don't want us to move anything, well I guess we could we could address them one

[1:30:57] Voice 18: at a time do you have any more questions on um the draft bylaw do we be ready to

[1:31:05] Voice 18: well move the first recommendation and then vote or discuss it good

[1:31:16] Voice 6: can i just point out that

[1:31:19] Voice 6: their application shows

[1:31:21] Voice 6: that there are two

[1:31:22] Voice 6: towers to be built no and

[1:31:24] Voice 7: earlier to somebody else you

[1:31:33] Voice 16: There's not going to be an installation of any towers as part of this project, so there

[1:31:39] Voice 16: will be no towers.

[1:31:42] Voice 16: We are proposing to install a vault, a cabinet with a pole, and a solar panel, which is required

[1:31:50] Voice 16: required to power the data, but there will be no powers for request to install a tower.

[1:31:58] Voice 16: One

[1:32:00] Voice 6: tower is 35 feet, the other one is 12 feet of solar panels, 8 feet off of the ground,

[1:32:06] Voice 6: so that's 20 feet.

[1:32:08] Voice 7: So maybe you don't call that a tower, but that's a significant size

[1:32:13] Voice 7: off of the ground.

[1:32:15] Voice 16: I don't know if you're looking at the correct dimensions there, those aren't in seat.

[1:32:21] Voice 16: the the drawing state the dimensions are in millimeters unless stated otherwise

[1:32:26] Voice 16: so it's not 20 feet we're proposing i believe it's eight feet yeah

[1:32:35] Voice 7: there's an eight foot pole

[1:32:37] Voice 15: with 12 feet of solar panels on top of it and then the other tower is 11 meters i believe

[1:32:47] Voice 15: according to your drawings

[1:32:48] Voice 6: 35 feet not insignificant so

[1:32:58] Voice 18: we have heard your comments

[1:33:00] Voice 18: but i'm going to really close it to members of the public right now thank

[1:33:04] Voice 18: you for articulating

[1:33:05] Voice 18: that we will discuss that with the applicant um so turning to page 41 uh thanking the member of

[1:33:15] Voice 18: the public for bringing up the height of the pole mounted cabinet um we are looking at poles

[1:33:22] Voice 18: holes of 10.5 meters.

[1:33:35] Voice 18: This is part of the technology that would power high-speed internet.

[1:33:40] Voice 18: So I guess it's up to the trustees to decide whether you want to proceed with that or not.

[1:33:45] Voice 18: I

[1:33:49] Voice 19: don't think there's any negotiating down the size of the hole.

[1:34:13] Voice 18: I guess a question to you, Christina.

[1:34:17] Voice 18: If the local trust committee decides not to rezone

[1:34:21] Voice 18: and not provide a spot for the connected coast backbone drop what happens then um

[1:34:31] Voice 16: yep i can

[1:34:32] Voice 16: answer that and i just wanted to say i apologize um chair i did i missed asking you if i could

[1:34:39] Voice 16: answer the question earlier so i apologize for that um in terms of uh your current question

[1:34:45] Voice 16: if we're not able to rezone um uh for the connected coast backbone we're really not

[1:34:54] Voice 16: able to proceed with any last mile if that comes into place connection to the to the network would

[1:35:00] Voice 16: need to be connected to the connected coast backbone um the the project funding ends in

[1:35:07] Voice 16: march 2025 for the installation of the connected coast backbone infrastructure

[1:35:16] Voice 16: so i'm not sure if we would be able to extend or find another pathway for installation

[1:35:24] Voice 16: just because that's the time frame and budgeting we've been given so i'm not sure what would happen

[1:35:32] Voice 18: thank you for that um so page 26 if we're going to look at process uh issues and opportunities

[1:35:39] Voice 18: uh the application proposes to amend one bylaw to facilitate fiber optic cable installation on

[1:35:45] Voice 18: whiskey island and then there is a timeline so landing on march 2025 to be able to adopt

[1:35:53] Voice 18: out the proposed bylaw, we essentially need to draft bylaw amendments and send referrals

[1:36:05] Voice 18: by November 2024 for that to happen. So the decision point is today, if

[1:36:13] Voice 18: Leskete and the local trust committee wants to see internet provided to the island,

[1:36:23] Voice 18: which I will note seems to be an issue as everyone has repeatedly suggested and if it's not a desire

[1:36:32] Voice 18: then we could turn down the application and not have this opportunity so just wanted to point out

[1:36:39] Voice 18: that in order to meet the deadline which is for a grant so that this can be done for free

[1:36:45] Voice 18: um it's on page 26 if you want to see so

[1:36:53] Voice 3: i do support uh requesting staff to prepare a draft

[1:36:56] Voice 3: bylaw that would be specific to this application looking at the timeline um i'm also i also don't

[1:37:04] Voice 3: think that uh um i don't think it's a good idea to um avoid having the public hearing so just a

[1:37:13] Voice 3: question for staff um if we go ahead and request you to prepare the draft bylaws uh as suggested

[1:37:22] Voice 3: um and then we could conceivably have um readings at the november meeting and then can you kind of

[1:37:35] Voice 3: help us think through how we might fit in a um a cim and public hearing

[1:37:42] Voice 3: and and within the granting timeline because i don't think we want to my perception is we don't

[1:37:50] Voice 3: want to miss this opportunity but we also don't want to um skip over any of the public engagement

[1:37:56] Voice 3: that's important to that so

[1:38:00] Voice 7: i don't think i can give you a detailed timeline on the spot

[1:38:04] Voice 7: but I can tell you that so if you were to direct that to your question is about the public hearing

[1:38:13] Voice 7: so that if you do a public hearing then you would consider and you wanted to proceed with

[1:38:19] Voice 7: the applications during today you consider first reading at your next meeting into full process and

[1:38:25] Voice 7: then send referrals at that point and then it could come back for your second reading and

[1:38:33] Voice 7: public community information meeting public hearing at the meeting following referrals so

[1:38:38] Voice 7: that referral period is recommended in 90 days um so that would be your next meeting you could

[1:38:45] Voice 7: potentially do first reading um and then request the referrals to be sent out there would be a 90

[1:38:52] Voice 7: day period there and then your um opportunity for public hearing uh at that point um and then

[1:39:03] Voice 7: would be referring it to executive committee for approval and then it would come back for adoption

[1:39:08] Voice 7: and you could do adoption by um a resolution without meeting um so that that could be one

[1:39:16] Voice 7: way where you're not waiting for your next meeting um to to adopt the bylaw um yeah

[1:39:24] Voice 7: yeah

[1:39:24] Voice 18: so question on the 90-day referral period and i guess this is to you um christina as well

[1:39:35] Voice 18: have you done preliminary um engagements with the nations in the the ski trust area and

[1:39:43] Voice 18: is there uh any concern if the referral window was shortened to meet the timeline um do you think

[1:39:54] Voice 18: that i mean this is our referral process so it's it's we're recommending 90 days but my understanding

[1:40:00] Voice 18: from the work connective coast has done with other communities is that engagement with first nations

[1:40:06] Voice 18: has been early and ongoing so i'm just trying to get a sense from you um we might see a faster

[1:40:14] Voice 18: response just because you've already done some of the preliminary work

[1:40:19] Voice 16: um we have done extensive

[1:40:22] Voice 16: engagement prior to any of our applications going in. Our provincial Indigenous consultation is

[1:40:29] Voice 16: complete so they're required to put out a consultation package for all of the nations

[1:40:36] Voice 16: that would be affected by the not just the landing but also the cable line connecting to Comox so

[1:40:43] Voice 16: that consultation's been complete and at the same time as the First Nations consultation the province

[1:40:50] Voice 16: also did a public comment period which is complete now so I don't think that there would be too many

[1:40:57] Voice 16: questions or delays with an additional consultation since they've already been all the nations have

[1:41:04] Voice 16: been heavily consulted on from the province from specifically the lands office thanks for that

[1:41:12] Voice 18: um renee jamra I just see your hand up there if you want to jump in here thank

[1:41:20] Voice 11: you if I may

[1:41:21] Voice 11: through the chair um in terms of the timeline considerations that the ltc is asking about

[1:41:28] Voice 11: i just wanted to clarify if a public hearing is desired and to be added in

[1:41:35] Voice 11: that to confirm with planner about i believe that would push the date of march 2025 out additional

[1:41:43] Voice 11: additional um an additional month or more so I just wanted to to make sure that was confirmed

[1:41:50] Voice 11: and clarified in terms of the the timing yeah

[1:41:59] Voice 3: I'm wondering about um the potential for

[1:42:02] Voice 3: assuming we advance this today uh potential and this is for staff because of course you are

[1:42:08] Voice 3: I know you are busy but I'm wondering about the potential for a uh a special meeting um prior to

[1:42:16] Voice 3: our december ltc meeting to consider first reading uh i see our next meeting is until december 16th

[1:42:25] Voice 3: is there do you think there's any possibility we could have a special meeting in november

[1:42:30] Voice 11: through the chair i think that would be timing wise difficult for staff to put together

[1:42:35] Voice 3: okay difficult yeah yeah because of course you have to put the bylaws together okay well

[1:42:42] Voice 18: Well, I'm still wondering if this is possible, so just bear with me to walk through this.

[1:42:50] Voice 18: Would draft bylaws be ready for consideration at the December 16th meeting?

[1:42:55] Voice 18: Is that reasonable?

[1:42:58] Voice 18: That's reasonable.

[1:42:58] Voice 18: So if draft bylaws are considered then and first reading is given and the referrals are sent out December 16th,

[1:43:06] Voice 18: um and the 90-day referral period could be honestly our typical referral period is 30 days

[1:43:14] Voice 18: so we're suggesting 90 because the islands trust has been engaging with nations and part of that

[1:43:21] Voice 18: feedback is we need a longer referral period and so that's why but it is at the lt it is at

[1:43:27] Voice 18: the local trust committee's discretion how long that referral period is and what i'm hearing from

[1:43:33] Voice 18: the applicant and what i have seen from other applications is that there has been extensive

[1:43:39] Voice 18: first nations engagement they most well the feedback is they're supportive of

[1:43:47] Voice 18: connectivity and internet in rural and remote communities so it's really about

[1:43:53] Voice 18: to my mind engagement with the leskeety community um and to consider

[1:44:00] Voice 18: consider to have a public hearing after first reading. So could we shorten, should we give

[1:44:09] Voice 18: notice of first reading at the December 16th meeting? Or sorry, not notice, but set the

[1:44:19] Voice 18: date for a public hearing and issue the referrals at the December 16th meeting. And in the new

[1:44:28] Voice 18: year we have a public hearing sometime january february and then we can continue to have second

[1:44:38] Voice 18: and third readings if there's no significant amendments and refer to executive committee

[1:44:45] Voice 7: so through the chair yes you can you can have a shorter referral period

[1:44:52] and i don't

[1:44:55] Voice 7: know i don't know if you had any other question after that was but but yeah that's

[1:44:59] Voice 7: just one one other thing i just wanted to clarify is if you get first reading on december 16th

[1:45:03] Voice 7: we would send the referral as soon as we're able it wouldn't be that day okay um

[1:45:16] Voice 3: so again this is

[1:45:18] Voice 3: trying to figure out the logistics here would it be helpful um from a staff perspective if we

[1:45:25] Voice 3: uh in in light of this this timeline and uh if we requested this uh special meeting be scheduled in

[1:45:32] Voice 3: january um because we don't know what the we don't know what our schedule for next year looks like i

[1:45:38] Voice 3: assume we're going to get that in november but we also don't want to let this we don't want to let

[1:45:43] Voice 3: the grant funding deadline pass by either so the staff feel it would be is it helpful i'm thinking

[1:45:51] Voice 3: you know maybe the 27th of January or something around there but if we if we

[1:45:56] Voice 3: make that decision early rather than later than that I was just saying for

[1:46:03] Voice 3: staff schedule that might be helpful is that comment

[1:46:07] Voice 7: on that you know I think I

[1:46:10] Voice 7: can write some comments and maybe our PM Jack might not as well but I think that

[1:46:16] Voice 7: it is helpful if there's earlier action on the special meetings and at your next

[1:46:20] Voice 7: meeting hopefully there will be the 2025 LTC meeting schedule so that can help map out

[1:46:27] Voice 7: you know a potential timeline and if there's a desire for for special meetings to kind of

[1:46:35] Voice 7: accommodate the evidence timeline then the LTC could consider that at the December meeting as well

[1:46:41] Voice 7: And just note that that is extra staff time to expedite that application, and so other projects need to be kind of chipped in

[1:46:58] Voice 17: as a result of the timelines.

[1:47:02] Voice 18: um i will note that the thetis local trust committee um was asked by layoffs and first

[1:47:09] Voice 18: nation to expedite the process um because balded island um they've been working on this for a long

[1:47:16] Voice 18: time and so we're having a meeting tomorrow to consider um draft bylaws so this project

[1:47:24] Voice 18: has been noted in other places has been felt rushed with the rezoning pieces however what

[1:47:33] Voice 18: we have learned is connected coast has done a lot of the groundwork and including talking to lias

[1:47:39] Voice 18: for a long period of time before proceeding with the rezoning application so

[1:47:45] Voice 18: in a way a lot of the work seems to have been done with first nations with

[1:47:51] Voice 18: uh in potential internet um partnership provider but we need to have a public hearing

[1:48:00] Voice 18: to consider the um amending the bylaw i think so that's what i think the ltc is leaning towards

[1:48:08] Voice 7: yeah um i'm hearing the ltc wants it's interested in a public hearing and is interested in having

[1:48:16] Voice 7: having this application move forward very quickly.

[1:48:20] Voice 7: And so you could make a resolution

[1:48:23] Voice 7: and restart the report back in December

[1:48:25] Voice 7: on options for expediting this application.

[1:48:39] Voice 18: Really? Expediting?

[1:48:42] Voice 18: Because I was thinking, this is just from what I'm hearing,

[1:48:45] Voice 18: is that actually the referral time

[1:48:47] Voice 18: or the timeline that you've provided

[1:48:50] Voice 18: looks like it would still work,

[1:48:52] Voice 18: even with a special meeting for a public hearing.

[1:49:09] Voice 7: But

[1:49:10] Voice 18: instead of notice of first reading, could we not have a public hearing in January 2025?

[1:49:19] Voice 7: The timeline will be extended if there is a public hearing.

[1:49:30] Voice 7: It just, there's more steps required in the by-law to come back to the LTC than otherwise.

[1:49:42] Voice 19: Sure, yep.

[1:49:45] Voice 18: Oh, staff, Deborah, Rene?

[1:49:49] Voice 11: Through the chair, thank you.

[1:49:51] Voice 11: I just wanted to also, for the LTC's consideration, what Planner Bell suggests to bring back a

[1:50:00] Voice 11: timeline in december is good because that can allow staff the adequate time to confirm what

[1:50:08] Voice 11: the required processes process steps are for this including the public hearing my concern would be

[1:50:16] Voice 11: in trying to talk it through now there might be some required steps missed and a misunderstanding

[1:50:23] Voice 11: of the timeline as a result so i think having planner bow come back to you in december with that

[1:50:30] Voice 11: revised timeline including the public hearing um is a good one thank you okay

[1:50:39] Voice 18: great so something like that staff report back in december with a revised timeline to expedite

[1:50:44] Voice 18: the process and include a public hearing for the connected coast application that would be a

[1:50:50] Voice 18: reasonable rest

[1:50:52] Voice 19: okay good

[1:51:01] Voice 17: uh

[1:51:03] Voice 3: one further question it was that's pointed out uh ocp policy uh 3.2

[1:51:12] Voice 3: number six um i would like the the aeroplane commission to be added to our

[1:51:19] Voice 3: uh list of referrals i think that's appropriate given that policy um and other than that i think

[1:51:32] just short of some wording around the

[1:51:35] Voice 3: um the first recommendation i feel like we're just

[1:51:39] Voice 3: about ready to proceed here

[1:51:40] Voice 8: yep

[1:51:45] Voice 18: good do you want to um

[1:51:48] Voice 3: there was some suggested language i didn't

[1:51:52] Voice 3: capture it all but i think it was something around the first recommendation

[1:52:01] Voice 3: proceeding with application the numbers connected coast on a site-specific basis

[1:52:10] Voice 3: was that the language oh sorry um

[1:52:13] Voice 19: through the chair uh the language was

[1:52:17] Voice 19: was that the Muskegee Island Local Trust Committee

[1:52:20] Voice 19: requests staff to prepare a draft by-law

[1:52:23] Voice 19: to amend the Muskegee Island Land Use By-law number 78,

[1:52:27] Voice 19: cited as Muskegee Island Land Use By-law number 78, 2005,

[1:52:31] Voice 19: for a site-specific zone to prevent public utilities

[1:52:35] Voice 19: associated with the application.

[1:52:38] Voice 19: Okay, thanks.

[1:52:39] Voice 7: With the application, and then PLRs at 2024-01-04.

[1:52:44] Voice 7: Yeah.

[1:52:46] Voice 7: so

[1:52:47] Voice 3: the site specific zone to was it to permit to

[1:52:52] Voice 18: permit application to

[1:52:54] Voice 19: permit public utilities

[1:52:55] Voice 19: associated with the application

[1:52:57] Voice 14: PLRRZ2-2401 okay

[1:53:08] Voice 3: I think I'm ready to proceed uh I move that

[1:53:12] Voice 3: Liskety Island Local Trust Committee request staff to prepare a draft bylaw to amend the Liskety

[1:53:17] Voice 3: Island land use bylaw number 78 cited as Laskini Island land use bylaw number 78 2005 for a site

[1:53:29] Voice 3: specific zone to permit public utilities associated with application PLRRZ20240104

[1:53:42] Voice 3: connected coast well

[1:53:48] Voice 18: do I have a seconder seconded by trustee Aroni that's the discussion on the

[1:53:53] Voice 18: motion i do believe we have it that supports public utilities associated with the application

[1:54:02] Voice 18: so that would include the three zones that it needs to cross or no transmit um sorry i just

[1:54:12] Voice 18: want to in

[1:54:13] Voice 3: site specific i think that's the crux the wording here it's not general permission for

[1:54:17] Voice 3: the whole island

[1:54:18] Voice 7: yeah i

[1:54:21] Voice 7: should cover it any other

[1:54:28] Voice 18: discussion yes chair

[1:54:30] Voice 7: just one um question about

[1:54:32] Voice 7: the wording too is that is the resolution is a public utility and is the obvious you want that

[1:54:39] Voice 7: to be any utility or specific to

[1:54:42] Voice 3: good point good point let's change public utilities to fiber optic

[1:54:49] Voice 18: Just

[1:54:51] Voice 3: so we're being really specific, we're not opening the door to anything else, we're

[1:54:55] Voice 3: just talking about the fiber optic, then when we go to any kind of public consultation we're

[1:55:00] Voice 3: not talking about anything else, we're just talking about this.

[1:55:03] Voice 18: Well you're not just allowing a fiber optic cable, there's also the power for it and everything.

[1:55:08] Voice 18: So utilities to allow fiber optic installation?

[1:55:13] Voice 17: Sure.

[1:55:14] Voice 18: Are utilities specific to fiber optic

[1:55:17] Voice 3: cable installation?

[1:55:19] Voice 3: it's associated with the application right so

[1:55:22] Voice 7: pretty sure

[1:55:24] Voice 7: if

[1:55:25] Voice 3: staff is comfortable understands our intent then i'm fine with that to

[1:55:34] Voice 18: permit public utilities

[1:55:35] Voice 18: yeah it's yeah public

[1:55:38] Voice 18: utilities associated with this application you're not going to allow public

[1:55:43] Voice 18: utilities associated with anything else correct i

[1:55:46] Voice 18: think that's reasonable thank you thanks for that

[1:55:50] Voice 18: good we're ready to vote all those in favor that is carried okay so number two we had

[1:55:59] Voice 18: some wording around requesting staff to come back with a timeline okay so that staff report back

[1:56:07] Voice 18: at the december 16th local trust committee meeting with a revised timeline to expedite the process

[1:56:14] Voice 18: and include a public hearing for the connected coast application so

[1:56:28] Voice 17: moved sure

[1:56:29] Voice 18: i know okay

[1:56:32] Voice 18: moved by trustee peterson seconded by trustee laroni any discussion on the motion

[1:56:39] Voice 9: again i think we're there

[1:56:40] Voice 18: okay all those in favor and that is carried so

[1:56:49] So

[1:56:51] Voice 18: we can't refer the bylaw until it's drafted, am I correct?

[1:56:56] Voice 18: We'll see this come back, and we will then refer bylaw number 104

[1:57:03] Voice 18: to the following First Nations agencies and organizations?

[1:57:06] Voice 17: Yeah.

[1:57:07] Voice 3: Okay.

[1:57:08] Voice 3: I would like to move that LISKEA and local trust committee request staff

[1:57:14] Voice 3: to include the LISKEA APC in the referrals for proposed bylaw number 104.

[1:57:21] Voice 18: Great. So moved. Seconded. Seconded by Trustee Limoni. All in favor of the

[1:57:27] Voice 18: discussion? All those in favor?

[1:57:29] Voice 18: That is carried. Excellent. We'll look for further information at December 16th.

[1:57:37] Voice 18: Okay. It's 1 p.m. I'm going to propose our lunch break now before we go to the next application from the agenda.

[1:57:45] Voice 18: Is everyone good for that?

[1:57:48] Voice 18: 30 minutes?

[1:57:49] Voice 17: Yep.

[2:29:07] Voice 17: Second portion

[2:29:07] Voice 18: of our regular business meeting with the LN Local Trust Committee.

[2:29:12] Voice 18: We are at 8.2, L.A. rezoning 2023.1, and it's on page 69 of the agenda here.

[2:29:28] Voice 18: So, Stephen, would you like to introduce your report?

[2:29:32] Voice 7: So, this application is for a bylaw amendment in the M2 zone in Scotty Bay.

[2:29:38] Voice 7: The LTC first considered this application in March of this year and requested additional

[2:29:43] Voice 7: information from the applicant about an offer for the dock to be used by emergency services.

[2:29:49] Voice 7: Specifically, the LTC requested information on how the dock and its access would be legally

[2:29:55] Voice 7: secured, confirmation that the dock permits under the General Information Guidelines.

[2:30:00] Voice 7: would be allowed to serve as an emergency dock.

[2:30:02] Voice 7: In confirmation from emergency service providers,

[2:30:05] Voice 7: the dock was sufficient for their needs.

[2:30:08] Voice 7: Staff confirmed that the provincial general

[2:30:12] Voice 7: permission guidelines would not prohibit the dock

[2:30:15] Voice 7: from being used as an emergency dock.

[2:30:17] Voice 7: The applicant also provided a draft statutory right of way,

[2:30:20] Voice 7: which if registered on a pay bill would secure access

[2:30:25] Voice 7: to the dock for emergency services.

[2:30:26] Voice 7: services. However, the argument is not being able to provide automation from an emergency

[2:30:32] service provider that the doctor be sufficient for their needs. And

[2:30:37] Voice 7: so this means that there

[2:30:38] Voice 7: is no one who would hold this statutory right of way since I trust does not provide emergency

[2:30:44] Voice 7: services. And no one uses statutory right of way because no emergency services have

[2:30:50] Voice 7: been identified this time and yeah he does not address environmental or social effects

[2:30:58] Voice 7: staff are recommending that the application proceed no further okay so

[2:31:05] Voice 18: uh we'll provide

[2:31:07] Voice 18: opportunity for the applicant to speak to your application and answer any questions and so

[2:31:13] Voice 18: i think we'll go to to you now if you've got any anything you wish to share well

[2:31:18] Voice 5: mainly if you're

[2:31:20] Voice 5: field any questions or not um i wasn't totally sure about that was going to be the final

[2:31:25] Voice 5: recommendation i didn't catch that um all of the session right away and all of that was easy

[2:31:33] Voice 5: to obtain ourselves without cooperation with the trust and just how that right away would go to

[2:31:41] Voice 5: somebody it still could be in play i just don't quite understand how we were able to do that

[2:31:48] Voice 5: all by ourselves um though i still maintain that there's so many scenarios not in the short term

[2:31:57] Voice 5: necessarily but the long term where that presents the gauges for the community and it's there and

[2:32:03] Voice 5: the legwork's there the author's there um so i'm not too sure exactly who would step up to that

[2:32:12] Voice 5: right away if the island's trust can't i didn't even realize that this number the island's trust

[2:32:16] Voice 5: can't hold that um so well sorry

[2:32:19] Voice 18: to clarify i believe the honest trust can hold a section 219

[2:32:24] Voice 18: covenant um the question is whether it that stress is the appropriate covenant holder if

[2:32:34] Voice 18: the honest trust is not equipped to provide the services um and the expertise and the

[2:32:45] Voice 18: the oversight that would be needed so in the instance of um like on gabriela island the

[2:32:52] Voice 18: commons uh is a specially zoned area and they've they've asked the island's trust local trust

[2:32:58] Voice 18: committee to be a covenant holder um but it's more appropriate because the island's trust does

[2:33:04] Voice 18: land use zoning does and could help uphold the management aspects of that covenant and so i think

[2:33:10] Voice 18: what staff is

[2:33:12] Voice 18: pointing out is because the Adams Trust

[2:33:14] Voice 18: does not oversee emergency

[2:33:16] Voice 18: services or

[2:33:19] Voice 18: really has

[2:33:20] Voice 18: any relationship to emergency providers

[2:33:22] Voice 18: it may not be the appropriate

[2:33:26] Voice 18: body

[2:33:26] Voice 18: to hold the covenant

[2:33:28] Voice 18: and so

[2:33:31] Voice 18: we're still in that question of how

[2:33:33] Voice 18: would emergency access be legally

[2:33:35] Voice 18: secured if this is not the

[2:33:37] Voice 5: appropriate body. My hope is that you

[2:33:39] Voice 5: could hold it until

[2:33:40] Voice 5: tell because then you own it and so you could pass it on in the time of need to another identity

[2:33:47] Voice 5: that decides how to handle it but once it's been given to the trust then i think that you guys

[2:33:53] Voice 5: would have complete control over it and could uh you know there could be a first responder group

[2:34:01] Voice 5: or anybody that gets together it makes sense anytime in the future from here on out but you

[2:34:07] Voice 5: would have it wouldn't be up to me to stop that you would have i assume full control over that

[2:34:14] Voice 5: for whatever would be in the best interest of the public

[2:34:21] Voice 8: yeah

[2:34:23] Voice 3: thank you uh i was looking at that and that mentions that this uh century right away should

[2:34:29] Voice 3: not be granted solely in favor of the island's trust for the reasons the chair mentioned so

[2:34:35] Voice 3: i'm just wondering um locally our emergency services are administered um through the catholic

[2:34:43] Voice 3: regional district um and so that would seem to be an appropriate uh either co-holder of a strategic

[2:34:53] Voice 3: right or a statutory right away um and then of course the other um certain agencies that might

[2:35:05] Voice 3: be

[2:35:06] Voice 4: applicable in terms of emergency might be postcard or bc ambulance those would be the other

[2:35:11] Voice 4: um more emergency based um agencies that i

[2:35:17] Voice 3: would think that would be worthy of uh of

[2:35:23] Voice 3: todd i don't know that specific specifically would be um to be applicable to have them

[2:35:31] Voice 3: as a as a grantee of the of the of the right-of-way but certainly it seems to me that

[2:35:36] Voice 3: the regional district would be the one that would be the linchpin there as far as as emergency

[2:35:44] Voice 3: services and the things um so uh i don't know if you've talked to them at all through the

[2:35:54] Voice 3: regional district or not

[2:35:55] Voice 5: i wasn't totally clear on how the whole process exactly worked whether

[2:36:00] Voice 5: whether these two biographies now spoke to each other or it was totally up to myself

[2:36:06] Voice 5: or how I'm happy to go anywhere that's best.

[2:36:13] Voice 5: I don't know that I have the capacity within my pay grade to decide exactly where it goes.

[2:36:18] Voice 5: If it's decided that it goes to the regional district, I wouldn't get in the way of that.

[2:36:24] Voice 5: I'll prepare the paperwork wherever it should be, whatever's best for the community.

[2:36:28] Voice 5: yeah

[2:36:28] Voice 3: just uh it just occurs to me in terms of uh it'd be good to know whether the regional district

[2:36:35] Voice 3: has any interest in pulling the right away and also whether regional district and um

[2:36:42] Voice 3: through them the ski volunteer fire department and first responders

[2:36:46] Voice 4: services would

[2:36:48] Voice 5: have a um

[2:36:50] Voice 5: interest in using the dock i checked with them and it was difficult i checked with a couple members

[2:36:55] Voice 5: And it seemed to me that it seemed, since it's been political over the last few years,

[2:37:00] Voice 5: I didn't get a no or a yes.

[2:37:02] Voice 5: It's just nobody really kind of seemed like a hot potato.

[2:37:04] Voice 5: Nobody really wanted to go after it.

[2:37:06] Voice 5: So I thought, well, if it goes to the island's trust and it's not political, then you guys

[2:37:10] Voice 5: can do what you want with it, as far as where it's most beneficial.

[2:37:14] Voice 5: Because I can't see any rationale to say it's not beneficial.

[2:37:18] Voice 5: I mean, let's face it.

[2:37:19] Voice 5: it's there's really nothing that this side of the island from where we sit now except for the

[2:37:25] Voice 5: shipyard um that my dock and the sugar that's it from this point on the road any way that that road

[2:37:33] Voice 5: has ever cut off it might be 50 years down the road but the sugar is in no way stable uh or

[2:37:39] Voice 5: anybody should assume that it's there for the long run if anybody

[2:37:43] Voice 5: knows how that works

[2:37:44] Voice 5: works and the insurance and the environment that dog should not be considered it may be there for

[2:37:52] Voice 5: 100 years or it could be gone next week and so any sort of circumstance if we think about it

[2:38:00] Voice 17: like

[2:38:01] Voice 5: there's no work around there's no logging roads or farms to get around the main road that's

[2:38:05] Voice 5: the main road would be cut off yeah it

[2:38:07] Voice 5: would come in handy um i don't i'm happy to let it go to any

[2:38:11] Voice 5: department that makes the most sense okay

[2:38:14] Voice 18: so we have a point or a question on is

[2:38:17] Voice 5: it on this topic

[2:38:18] Voice 18: sounds specifically what he's just saying okay

[2:38:23] Voice 18: i've been a first responder emergency response coordinator for the last four years with our

[2:38:28] Voice 18: department and one of the big problems i see is that it's the emu the emergency medical unit we

[2:38:35] Voice 18: have is not provided for it struggles to make it to most places on the island another concern

[2:38:41] Voice 18: i'm having is that all of our services that we're talking about here come from bank of ireland not

[2:38:47] Voice 18: the sunshine coast so it's a lot further for them to get to scotty bay than it is for them to get to

[2:38:55] Voice 18: false bay etc

[2:38:57] Voice 8: um

[2:39:00] Voice 5: i would say i agree totally but there is reasons why that rock could be

[2:39:06] be

[2:39:06] Voice 5: not usable. I think that if you if we looked at the road

[2:39:11] Voice 5: properly, the EMS vehicle drive up and down with these loaded

[2:39:15] Voice 5: gravel trucks have been up and down that every vehicle in the

[2:39:18] Voice 5: islands that like numerous vehicles far less capable than

[2:39:23] Voice 5: that thing drive up and down over the last few years with

[2:39:26] Voice 7: ease. And so

[2:39:30] Voice 7: they got up to win the title.

[2:39:32] Voice 7: Sir, please.

[2:39:37] Voice 18: The question that I'm having here is that we're talking about a lot of maybes and coulds

[2:39:41] Voice 18: and it would work out, but there's, I'm looking for some,

[2:39:47] Voice 19: but

[2:39:50] Voice 18: not actually any concrete support

[2:39:56] Voice 18: for that.

[2:39:58] Voice 18: That's what this inquiry was trying to find out, is it appropriate, is it desirable, is

[2:40:05] Voice 18: Is it possible for the LTC to hold a statutory right-of-way or a statutory right-of-way be secured so that that public good or public benefit could be enshrined, you know, on title?

[2:40:18] Voice 18: And so that was one avenue to explore. So it's, we're kind of at this point of, it's possible, it's probably not appropriate with the Islands Trust, maybe a potential with that regional district, as you stated.

[2:40:35] Voice 18: um but leaving that question aside we were trying to answer to my mind we're trying to answer

[2:40:44] Voice 18: does this address social effects is this you know if this application had come in

[2:40:52] Voice 18: before the dock was built and and we're asking ourselves does it address environmental effects

[2:40:58] Voice 18: and social effects would that be one of the ways that we could secure what you have given

[2:41:05] Voice 18: given permission for people to use the dock that's a informal you're the landowner you

[2:41:11] Voice 18: you know there's there's lots of letters of support and i want to get to that in a minute

[2:41:15] Voice 18: of um what we have heard from the community for and um against but it's a trying to make a

[2:41:25] Voice 18: kind of formalize the intent which is that it could be you know able to be provided for

[2:41:33] Voice 18: community benefit yeah so um one of the things that i realized in reading the public correspondence

[2:41:42] Voice 18: that's on the website's application page and in talking with people and having you know sort of

[2:41:48] Voice 18: second third hand information come back to us is that um there's a lot of support for the doc and

[2:41:55] Voice 18: there's a lot of people that aren't supporting the doc and fair enough that's great there's

[2:41:59] Voice 18: there's the main reason that we find is that people are not supporting the doc because we put

[2:42:06] Voice 18: the doc in and then we need an application people are very upset about that

[2:42:13] Voice 17: understandable that's

[2:42:14] Voice 18: fine however does that mean that those folks would have supported the doc we don't know

[2:42:20] Voice 17: so

[2:42:21] Voice 18: a couple things come to mind with those letters with the unknown as to whether or not those people

[2:42:28] Voice 18: do support the doc or not and this you know what are you going to give up what's your benefit to

[2:42:36] Voice 18: the community should you be allowed the doc i don't see us getting to that place here i see

[2:42:41] Voice 18: us getting to that place in a place where we can have people ask us questions ask you questions

[2:42:48] Voice 18: brainstorm what is our benefit to the community why ask us why don't we ask the community doesn't

[2:42:54] Voice 18: make any sense what we're doing right now and thank you that was something i was going to offer

[2:43:01] Voice 18: as as a way forward is is we've heard several times from the community we want to have this

[2:43:08] Voice 18: conversation we want to have a discussion about whether the net benefit of the doc as it is right

[2:43:17] Voice 18: now outweighs the all the other concerns that it was built before there was an appropriate

[2:43:23] Voice 18: application, that it goes against OCP policies about protecting the environment, all of these

[2:43:28] Voice 18: things should be weighed against one another. And so now we've reached this point of, do we have

[2:43:36] Voice 18: enough information to make a decision? I actually was personally, and not speaking as the chair,

[2:43:42] Voice 18: coming to this meeting today, I do not feel confident that I can make a decision on this

[2:43:47] Voice 18: application precisely because community views are so divided um and the reason this is and again i'm

[2:43:56] Voice 18: i don't want to take up the time with my perspective um but your ocp is in the process

[2:44:03] Voice 18: of being amended and that's been a long-standing conversation how do we ensure the values of the

[2:44:09] Voice 18: community in a document that is even now changing and is going to take a long time to reach

[2:44:16] Voice 18: a final state. And we have a situation right in the middle, yes, that was built

[2:44:24] Voice 18: against the specific OCP policies and it's listed in this report. Policy 16

[2:44:34] Voice 18: notwithstanding, contrary to policies 3, 9, 10 and 12, potentially could meet

[2:44:40] Voice 18: policies 15 and 16 if it's rezoned and the environmental and social effects are

[2:44:45] Voice 18: considered but we're not there and so I see this as a an opportunity to really

[2:44:55] Voice 18: could turn this to the community and say what is more important to you at this

[2:45:00] Voice 18: stage is it upholding those policies and saying no this doesn't meet our

[2:45:09] Voice 18: community vision or is it somewhere in the middle or is it it's already done

[2:45:17] Voice 18: they've already said they're going to provide this benefit and there's other considerations

[2:45:22] Voice 18: why it should remain and then we take that feedback in and make the decision so i am

[2:45:30] Voice 18: struggling with this application there's many letters written 29 signatories and letters signed

[2:45:36] Voice 18: against it that i could find and about 32 for it i could be wrong on the numbers

[2:45:45] Voice 18: but it's clear that public opinion is not one way or the other yeah

[2:45:56] Voice 3: i think you agree i think

[2:45:58] Voice 3: there's some outstanding um questions as i sort of outlined in terms of whether the

[2:46:04] Voice 3: whether the regional district um has any interest in the steps for right way that would be good to

[2:46:10] Voice 3: know. Also, when we look at the OCP policies, to my mind, there's a bit of a conflict. This

[2:46:19] Voice 3: report states that the application doesn't apply to policy 3, policy 9, policy 10, policy

[2:46:29] Voice 3: However, the OCP also says that the LTC may approve DOC applications on an application basis.

[2:46:44] Voice 3: Looking at the policy checklist report, it's really unclear to me, based on this interpretation, whether any DOC ever would be in compliance.

[2:47:01] Voice 3: something like rural marine landscape and scenic to you should be maintained and protected.

[2:47:08] Voice 3: There's a certain amount of subjectivity there.

[2:47:13] Voice 3: This report is suggesting it doesn't comply, but can anyone envision a dock based on this interpretation that would comply?

[2:47:24] Voice 3: So there's a bit of, again, there's a bit of gray area, and I agree that I think there should be more of a public discussion.

[2:47:36] Voice 3: I'm not really set on what the format should be at this point.

[2:47:41] Voice 3: I think that's worth further consideration.

[2:47:46] Voice 3: But, yeah, I just wanted to address that in terms of the way that the checklist is filled out.

[2:47:53] Voice 3: there's a number of things that are listed as non-compliant and i and so there does seem to

[2:48:00] Voice 3: be a conflict with the ability to permit a doc and and and all these policies um being listed

[2:48:09] Voice 3: as non-compliant and i don't understand i i'm failing to see how any doc would be compliant if

[2:48:15] Voice 3: if this one is listed as not so that is again that's uh that's uh worthy of wider consideration

[2:48:24] Voice 3: for the public discussion and we

[2:48:28] Voice 18: just suggest that under and i'll get to you in a minute under

[2:48:31] Voice 18: the alternatives it is provided if the ltc wants to proceed with the like drafting a bylaw amendment

[2:48:40] Voice 18: and then going to public hearing after first reading that would be the process i think and

[2:48:50] Voice 5: well one thing i wanted to clarify too is this whole thing has been unfortunately

[2:48:54] Voice 5: of polarizing and we tried to stay really even though we've had a ton of personal attacks and

[2:49:00] Voice 5: untrue stuff coming our way tried to stay really not to fuel that because it doesn't help and

[2:49:06] Voice 5: from what tim just said from day one one of the biggest concerns that people have is that i put

[2:49:13] Voice 5: it in without permission i never claimed to be perfect

[2:49:16] Voice 17: but

[2:49:17] Voice 5: um the bylaw this entire binder except

[2:49:22] Voice 5: for this back thing is done with work before we put it in delegations going over to gabriel talking

[2:49:29] Voice 5: to the local trust environmental and i was always confident when we got to the point where i was

[2:49:37] Voice 5: running out of time with my paperwork for the feds i had so much work with trying to get a fair

[2:49:43] Voice 5: application and i really felt that i was going to get through and it wasn't to bully it through

[2:49:50] Voice 5: I thought all we needed to do, and I still feel with Craig's delegation, the whole doc issue, is to find policy 15, social and environmental effects.

[2:50:01] Voice 5: I never felt I could do an application or anybody could rule on one if we don't know.

[2:50:07] Voice 5: I think environmental is pretty clear.

[2:50:10] Voice 5: You do this big biologist report that everybody else does on the coast that I did, but social.

[2:50:15] Voice 5: And I had reached out in so many ways to be like, how do we promote public talks?

[2:50:20] Voice 5: What do we do for our compromise?

[2:50:21] Voice 5: But it wasn't defined.

[2:50:23] Voice 5: And we're still kind of here.

[2:50:25] Voice 5: So I think that that's a really important part of this whole thing.

[2:50:29] Voice 5: It's really hard to apply if it's not,

[2:50:31] Voice 5: or rule on

[2:50:32] Voice 17: it if it's not defined.

[2:50:33] Voice 17: And

[2:50:33] Voice 5: that was my plan.

[2:50:34] Voice 5: I always thought that this was going to, eventually, we were going to move forward.

[2:50:41] Voice 5: I never wanted to not get an amendment to the bylaw, just there really isn't a clear

[2:50:47] Voice 5: path for somebody to take, and we need to figure that out, I think.

[2:50:54] Voice 5: The fact that it's polarizing, it's not a friend thing, who gets on whose side, it's

[2:51:02] Voice 5: that people sit down and give me their time and they look at this binder, and they see

[2:51:07] Voice 5: the work we do and all of what we've really worked to do, a lot of the concerns get addressed.

[2:51:16] Voice 5: A lot of people's concerns that they haven't sat down with me, I've got it in black and

[2:51:21] Voice 5: white here.

[2:51:21] Voice 5: I mean, I encourage everybody to reach out, come look at my docs, see the work I've done.

[2:51:27] Voice 5: And that's why some people are pretty passionate and mad about it because they know they've

[2:51:33] Voice 5: read this all.

[2:51:33] Voice 5: They've sat down and they know, and they're not all my friends.

[2:51:36] Voice 5: they they know the truth of what i've been going through and unfortunately the folks that

[2:51:42] Voice 5: don't see it

[2:51:43] Voice 5: please come my way yeah

[2:51:45] Voice 18: it's we're trying to stay away from that i am too

[2:51:48] Voice 5: like

[2:51:49] Voice 18: otherwise othering others so i just yeah i'm

[2:51:52] Voice 5: trying to reach out though

[2:51:54] Voice 18: i'm not trying to i'm

[2:51:55] Voice 18: trying

[2:51:55] Voice 5: to stop people

[2:51:55] Voice 18: have different perspectives of how important the process is and and they're

[2:52:01] Voice 18: they will have their views about um how how you undertook the process so thank you for explaining

[2:52:08] Voice 14: your

[2:52:08] Voice 18: intention and what you sought to do to um try to clarify the um environmental and social effects

[2:52:20] Voice 18: and maybe so so just to note the apc wrestled with this question as well and trustee laroni

[2:52:26] Voice 18: you were at that meeting meetings meetings um is there anything you want to speak to like did the

[2:52:33] Voice 18: apc feel they could give a um they could uh define environmental social effects or

[2:52:44] Voice 18: we can see from the minutes here things were discussed but it they they certainly didn't

[2:52:51] Voice 18: reach a conclusion um they did with environmental considerations but wrestled with a lot and i'm

[2:53:03] Voice 18: looking at page 16 here equity and shared use how can the use of someone's private dock be categorized

[2:53:19] Voice 18: automatically allowing a boat dock if the applicant can show compelling needs such as

[2:53:23] Voice 18: of boat access only property could be considered equity access issue it feels like they began to

[2:53:30] Voice 18: explore the conversation what is the social effect that yeah i mean it's it's also i mean

[2:53:36] Voice 18: if you go into the community benefits which is another part of what they were trying to define

[2:53:40] Voice 18: in regards

[2:53:41] Voice 18: to the dock process they do talk about social effects being part of its i mean it's kind

[2:53:46] Voice 18: kind of a broad

[2:53:48] Voice 14: so

[2:53:56] Voice 18: yeah trustee baroni what are your thoughts on on anything the application

[2:54:05] Voice 18: existentially am i using this or not it doesn't matter okay from what i've heard in the community

[2:54:18] Voice 18: and i mean yes there's definitely some people who have been upset about not going to the

[2:54:22] Voice 18: appropriate channels but i think that what they're really trying to get at is that the precedent it

[2:54:28] Voice 18: sets that if we if one chooses to ignore or doesn't do the proper process to follow the OCP

[2:54:37] Voice 18: and the LUBs then why do we have them and like is that the precedence that you can like you can just

[2:54:44] Voice 18: do anything you want I mean that's taking very broadly but I think that is a big concern about

[2:54:49] Voice 18: community members and I mean I'm not saying that this was you guys or anything but there have been

[2:54:53] Voice 18: i know at least four committee members who felt intimidated and threatened by if they told that

[2:54:59] Voice 18: they don't behave they don't agree with the doc then it'll have there'll be social ramifications

[2:55:03] Voice 18: for them

[2:55:04] Voice 5: hopefully not for myself no

[2:55:06] Voice 18: not just i was trying i was prefacing that i'm not i don't

[2:55:08] Voice 18: believe for you guys but i definitely um heard people talk speak to me and just not be very

[2:55:13] Voice 18: happy about that and i know it's not your intention for it to be divisive but this is where we're at

[2:55:17] Voice 18: have unfortunately so i mean this is not i mean it's not easy right there's i understand i can

[2:55:24] Voice 18: see that there's both sides and i know that there's also people who i mean this the letters

[2:55:29] Voice 18: are great but they're also not really a full representation of the community right when we

[2:55:33] Voice 18: actually have public forum and i know some people haven't written because they do feel like it's

[2:55:38] Voice 18: a super political issue and they're going to be chastised by other community members for it so

[2:55:43] Voice 18: i think there is going to be a public forum we need to find some way to do that where people

[2:55:48] Voice 18: feel they can speak without no censorship it's a small it's a small community you know that we all

[2:55:52] Voice 18: know that

[2:55:53] Voice 19: so

[2:55:54] Voice 18: it's hard to be anonymous or well

[2:55:57] Voice 19: we agree with that

[2:55:57] Voice 18: yeah i i agree with you but i

[2:56:06] Voice 18: reviewed most of the correspondence and there's a there's many thoughtful letters and i do want

[2:56:12] Voice 18: to thank people who didn't just say i support or i don't support but really dug into what does

[2:56:18] Voice 18: this actually mean if the dock is approved precedent setting and the privatization of

[2:56:24] Voice 18: public space that is a significant concern um docs do take up public spaces and so

[2:56:31] Voice 18: you're giving something away and so that's what the application process is for is are we agreeing

[2:56:38] Voice 18: that that is a good use of that public space well the landowners are saying we want to

[2:56:45] Voice 18: make sure that that's offset by the dock is used for for emergency but we can't legally

[2:56:53] Voice 18: structure that at this point in time so that's a bit of an unknown how that's secured and so

[2:56:58] Voice 5: and we're still open to other suggestions yeah we don't know but we if they got the time

[2:57:03] Voice 5: we could say yeah sure we'll do it because

[2:57:06] Voice 18: the piece that i wanted to to bring forward

[2:57:10] Voice 18: is actually looking forward into the future so we have bylaws policies OCPs

[2:57:17] Voice 18: that are there for a reason and they set your vision there is an element that if

[2:57:24] Voice 18: that if those policies are set aside just for someone who deemed it better to

[2:57:31] Voice 18: go ahead then then to follow the process it doesn't undermine that community

[2:57:37] Voice 18: community vision. And this is a really strong community that I know holds very tightly to

[2:57:44] Voice 18: its vision of how it's going to carry forward into the future. The challenge that I'm coming

[2:57:52] Voice 18: up against is when you set policy or vision or, you know, all these words like precedence

[2:58:02] Voice 18: ahead of the what's going to actually practically happen, you can kind of lose sight sometimes of

[2:58:09] Voice 18: of the reality and so I just wanted us to think about if we proceed no further with this

[2:58:18] Voice 18: application the reality is court it's in litigation that begins again we'll be spending taxpayer

[2:58:25] Voice 18: dollars and fighting it out in court and the applicant may have or the carries may have to

[2:58:33] Voice 18: take down the dock which will have environmental consequences so we've been talking about the past

[2:58:40] Voice 18: the process that got us here and the fact that community ocps policies were pushed aside you know

[2:58:49] Voice 18: and how do we go forward well the reality is there is going to be environmental and social effects

[2:58:54] Voice 18: there will be um a cost to the taxpayer so i want us to also consider that in the future

[2:59:03] Voice 18: not proceeding has impacts and I'm not suggesting which should be favored or prioritized but it's

[2:59:12] Voice 18: not it didn't come up in the letters very often except only once one person said um the impact

[2:59:19] Voice 18: of taking down the dock would cause to remove that dock would cause a greater environmental

[2:59:24] Voice 18: impact than leaving it alone so that is there and I just wanted to put it out there

[2:59:30] Voice 18: i personally believe this community needs to have this conversation how do where do you land

[2:59:37] Voice 18: on the value of this doc your ocp policies and then the potential if it's not approved

[2:59:47] Voice 18: just a couple things just going back to what michaela had said

[2:59:54] Voice 18: um and a point that i wanted to make is that um we keep going back to the

[3:00:00] Voice 18: did it first and then ask permission and that's bad and it sets the precedent however i'm not

[3:00:06] Voice 18: saying it's good but there is a means and an avenue to make an application which we've done

[3:00:13] Voice 17: after

[3:00:13] Voice 18: the fact which is what situation we're in right now yeah so

[3:00:18] Voice 18: that has happened in the past

[3:00:20] Voice 18: so they think precedent thing is too late i don't stress has an avenue for that we paid a 20

[3:00:27] Voice 18: percent surcharge on our application fee right because of it so i think we really need to move

[3:00:34] Voice 18: past that and look at the situation at hand right now i

[3:00:37] Voice 18: think it's extremely important that you bring

[3:00:40] Voice 18: up and you're reading the letters as to you know what does this do for the community what does it

[3:00:45] Voice 18: do for the environment socially what what are the benefits i think all those things need to be

[3:00:50] Voice 18: explored and what this nice lady is passing me she said the lca's community forum could hold a

[3:00:56] Voice 18: public meeting to discuss the issue and report back to the trust committee as an option and we're

[3:01:02] Voice 5: not sitting here looking for a fight to the death like we're looking the best idea we had was this

[3:01:07] Voice 5: public right away but bring us something else like we're we're here looking for a compromise

[3:01:14] Voice 18: and i think some of the letters suggested you know compromises some of the people were pretty

[3:01:19] Voice 18: passionate about no they can't have a doc

[3:01:21] Voice 17: but

[3:01:23] Voice 18: if they can have a doc then we want this how can we

[3:01:25] Voice 5: support a public dog there i mean maybe we do a donation so there's a bank account coming together

[3:01:30] Voice 5: and if it's ever thought of how it could go there

[3:01:34] Voice 17: we're

[3:01:35] Voice 5: we're moving there and if we let two or

[3:01:37] Voice 5: three more of the four or five total dots that we could put on this whole island if everybody had to

[3:01:43] Voice 5: put in 10 grand say next thing you know we have enough money if we ever get together and

[3:01:47] Voice 5: figure out how to do it and you know and that shouldn't be considered ours instead of one like

[3:01:54] Voice 5: that's not my intent at all let's put the public being out there i

[3:01:59] Voice 18: think important consideration

[3:02:00] Voice 5: is that

[3:02:01] Voice 18: um the apc had a challenging time as you know they really had a challenging time with the

[3:02:07] Voice 18: tasks that they were given as how do they define you know social and environmental effects how do

[3:02:13] Voice 18: they what does that mean what does that mean and they look to okay you know is there a benefit to

[3:02:19] Voice 18: society is there a benefit to the people in the community how is that what they're asking is that

[3:02:25] Voice 18: what the policy is asking and it was made unfortunately so long ago that nobody remembers

[3:02:29] Voice 18: the intent behind it so you have to come to places to okay well what do we think it means yeah um

[3:02:48] Voice 3: so i'm looking at the application page on the website and one of the things is standing out

[3:02:55] Voice 3: to be at this point this is what it says community consultation none um so other than the the meeting

[3:03:05] Voice 3: that we had in march when we first looked at this application and today we haven't had that broader

[3:03:12] Voice 3: community conversation and i think it's important i think i think especially because there are some

[3:03:18] Voice 3: passionate uh opinions both for and against i think if we look at social effects the social

[3:03:25] Voice 3: effect we want to avoid is is is social um conflict and so how how can how can we find

[3:03:34] Voice 3: ways to mitigate this um in terms of community benefit um as i suggested earlier there's there's

[3:03:44] Voice 3: ways that maybe the step story right away can be explored you know as i mentioned through other

[3:03:49] Voice 3: other ways but maybe that isn't the maybe that isn't the community benefit um that's desired

[3:03:56] Voice 3: i don't

[3:03:59] Voice 3: really know what is um my reading of uh one of the uh abc minutes around community benefit

[3:04:09] Voice 3: there's a suggestion by the abc that that applicants should make proposals and you have

[3:04:17] Voice 3: made a proposal um whether it's the one that's broadly supported or not is i think that's still

[3:04:24] Voice 3: pretty up in the air but i would encourage assuming for a moment that we don't um decide

[3:04:30] Voice 3: to go with the staff recommendation today i'd encourage you to consider you did mention

[3:04:35] Voice 3: something about uh putting together something in support of a public doc i think that that might be

[3:04:42] Voice 3: a proposal worth um exploring and expanding on um and indeed maybe out there in the community with

[3:04:51] Voice 3: with some form of uh whether it's through the forum invitation or some other way maybe there's

[3:04:58] Voice 3: other members of the community that have ideas about ways that a community benefit could be

[3:05:04] Voice 3: provided that haven't occurred to you or for us sitting here at the table um so that's that's

[3:05:12] Voice 3: That's part of why I personally am not in a hurry to turn this application down today.

[3:05:20] Voice 3: I would encourage, while we can get there, whether we want to formally ask you to look

[3:05:26] Voice 3: at the QRD or what other social benefits might be achievable and desirable.

[3:05:37] Voice 3: So anyway, just comments.

[3:05:40] Voice 5: it feels like if we put them forward if someone's opposed and it could be like that's of no benefit

[3:05:46] Voice 5: if there was any way the apc could have done it or somebody out in the rest of the broader

[3:05:50] Voice 5: community could define that social effect it would be so much easier or more i think it would

[3:05:57] Voice 5: be more accepted too because i

[3:05:59] Voice 5: don't feel like it's it's easy for an applicant to propose it

[3:06:04] Voice 5: because it it never really seems like it's an olive branch does it like i

[3:06:08] Voice 5: feel like without

[3:06:11] Voice 5: being disrespectful isn't it up to you guys to help with the farting that or the apc or somebody

[3:06:17] Voice 5: like well it's super awkward for us to throw these

[3:06:21] Voice 5: ideas out and then somebody said we don't need it

[3:06:24] Voice 5: i honestly say

[3:06:25] Voice 18: i i do think it's actually up to the community and it should be done through the

[3:06:29] Voice 18: OCP review process right the OCP review is the appropriate place to for this community to say

[3:06:37] Voice 18: does that policy work oh we're struggling with what does social effect actually mean let's

[3:06:45] Voice 18: revise it or define it or give it some criteria you know that is the appropriate place to do that

[3:06:52] Voice 18: we're not unfortunately there we've given it to the APC and they struggled with it

[3:06:56] Voice 18: So I think what Trustee Peterson is contemplating and I as well would suggest is use this application as the opportunity to ask the community, do you define social effects in certain specific ways?

[3:07:14] Voice 18: and then can they be applied to this doc and are the owners willing to then satisfy that and the

[3:07:24] Voice 18: community defines what those social effects and the environmental considerations are and then we

[3:07:31] Voice 18: revisit the application it's the only way i can think to get through it because that policy exists

[3:07:36] Voice 18: for a reason i do not feel as the ltc well as a person in the ltc but who's not of this community

[3:07:44] Voice 18: that I can define what the social effects would be and should be.

[3:07:49] Voice 5: You also maybe handle this whole larger doc issue

[3:07:52] Voice 5: when you get into the social effects,

[3:07:55] Voice 18: because

[3:07:55] Voice 5: that's the big deal around here.

[3:07:57] Voice 5: People are bringing it up and they have this delegation,

[3:07:59] Voice 5: and that might satisfy that.

[3:08:01] Voice 18: I did actually suggest that.

[3:08:03] Voice 18: So back in March, I had thought, you know what, this is an opportunity.

[3:08:08] Voice 18: If the OCP process is moving along on certain topics

[3:08:12] Voice 18: and we're stalled on others,

[3:08:14] Voice 18: can this application be the opportunity

[3:08:16] Voice 18: to have the conversation at your expense

[3:08:19] Voice 18: and we'll have to hold some public meetings

[3:08:21] Voice 18: and maybe the Schiedi community

[3:08:24] Voice 18: could convene a forum.

[3:08:26] Voice 11: That might be a more

[3:08:27] Voice 18: appropriate forum.

[3:08:30] Voice 18: Exactly.

[3:08:31] Voice 18: And so circling back,

[3:08:35] Voice 18: this is a very imperfect process.

[3:08:37] Voice 18: Let's just admit the process was not followed.

[3:08:40] Voice 18: we're in the middle of kind of a messy place what is the best good we can pull out of this

[3:08:47] Voice 18: for the for the mosquito community to define for itself is this an appropriate

[3:08:54] Voice 18: doc if it is what are the community benefits how should they be applied and what environmental

[3:09:00] Voice 18: considerations need to be upheld and you're going to get great information for your ocp review that

[3:09:06] Voice 5: might even be part of the community benefit the years of grief that we've gone through the expense

[3:09:11] Voice 5: i mean if we help them get through this whole greater doc discussion yeah well that's something

[3:09:20] Voice 5: it hasn't been fun well

[3:09:22] Voice 18: in any process in general i mean it's it's you guys are in a

[3:09:26] Voice 18: challenging position when you're given language to go with yeah and when it's only addressed

[3:09:33] Voice 18: you know every five years or more i mean it's very old what's the year that the original one

[3:09:38] Voice 18: that we were working on

[3:09:39] Voice 3: 2005. yeah

[3:09:40] Voice 18: so that's ancient although it wasn't

[3:09:42] Voice 18: right it was

[3:09:43] Voice 18: amended in 2019 was it on it but

[3:09:46] Voice 17: not the doc section

[3:09:47] Voice 18: not the doc section so but our language

[3:09:49] Voice 18: yeah are these people alive still we don't even know so it there may be other areas that

[3:09:56] Voice 18: weren't addressed that have the same problem so it's it's a challenging situation

[3:10:01] Voice 5: we haven't green

[3:10:01] Voice 5: related people just to go ahead and do what they want if anybody thinks this is fun

[3:10:05] Voice 5: the people

[3:10:10] Voice 18: of local knowledge you've said there's only a few spots that can't that a

[3:10:14] Voice 18: doc can be put in right so we're talking about the reality is maybe only five places a doc could be

[3:10:21] Voice 18: put in and i'm

[3:10:21] Voice 18: not going to push down that question to future we need to clarify where

[3:10:26] Voice 18: where those spots are, and what would be the application process for a private doc,

[3:10:31] Voice 18: if that's what is wanted.

[3:10:33] Voice 18: I don't know if we want to keep discussing in a very roundabout way.

[3:10:42] Voice 18: Do we have any questions specifically on the report and the application?

[3:10:47] Voice 18: My sense is, but I don't want to conclude for anybody before we finish discussing.

[3:10:53] Voice 18: Any thoughts?

[3:11:00] Voice 18: and what i've been struggling with is that my person you know any person will decide that as

[3:11:06] Voice 18: a

[3:11:06] Voice 11: trustee if i'm going by the ocp and i really feel like this is theirs it's very clear but i

[3:11:14] Voice 11: know that

[3:11:14] Voice 18: as

[3:11:15] Voice 11: the community is so divided that

[3:11:17] Voice 18: regardless which way let's say we decide one way

[3:11:19] Voice 18: or the other today there's going to be people who are going to be very upset about it and i think

[3:11:23] Voice 18: that the only way for that to be mitigated is for people to feel like they've had a say

[3:11:29] Voice 18: in making the decision because they feel like they haven't had a say and that's a part why

[3:11:35] Voice 18: they're so upset is it like yeah it's exactly that and when we've had advice about process

[3:11:42] Voice 18: if your process if you're going to make a difficult decision in local government

[3:11:48] Voice 18: and everybody's going to be divided if you do it in a rushed way that just leaves everyone with

[3:11:56] Voice 18: what I had this to say or I wanted to contribute my input nobody's satisfied with the decision

[3:12:03] Voice 18: if everyone actually participates in the discussion and at least feels they're heard

[3:12:08] Voice 18: and the way that you reach that decision is transparent and evidence-based then people

[3:12:15] Voice 18: can live with it even if they disagree because at least they participated and that's that's what

[3:12:21] Voice 18: the respect is about is you get to participate in the process we don't have a good process right now

[3:12:28] Voice 18: i don't think for deciding on this application because it is going to polarize and it's going to

[3:12:34] Voice 18: cause half the community to say my values were disregarded you know i

[3:12:40] Voice 18: don't think we want that

[3:12:42] Voice 18: so thank you for articulating that i think you said it really well

[3:12:46] Voice 18: If we proceed with the application and the question of the planner, or we ask you to draw up draft bylaws so that public hearings can be held, a community group may be able to convene a forum to discuss at their discretion and bring back information and input.

[3:13:14] Voice 18: I will note that in the October 5th 2020 when this first came forward with the previous

[3:13:23] Voice 18: trust committee there is a draft they drafted a bylaw it's not a difficult it's just a text

[3:13:32] Voice 18: amendment really I think it wouldn't take a lot of work to draft do a first draft of the bylaw

[3:13:39] Voice 18: amendment and then

[3:13:40] Voice 7: there's identifying the alternative okay

[3:13:44] Voice 18: so that is an option that exists

[3:13:49] Voice 18: um go through a process and it could take another year um spend public money hold volunteers

[3:13:59] Voice 18: facilitate forums and uh the community gets to discuss at its fullest extent what it knows that

[3:14:10] Voice 18: we are not hearing from the public i'm

[3:14:13] Voice 7: sorry can you have a public information town hall meeting

[3:14:18] Voice 18: we will have a town hall section where the public can speak at length in a town hall fashion

[3:14:29] Voice 18: okay um is there are we all landing in the same place or

[3:14:35] Voice 18: are there other things to consider here

[3:14:37] Voice 3: Um, I like where you're going. Also, I'm looking at the alternatives. I do think it is appropriate for us to request additional information.

[3:14:51] Voice 3: I think the information would be asking the applicant to look into the interest of the

[3:15:00] Voice 3: QRB in terms of Stats, George and Redway and use the doc by either LBFD, Coast Guard, BC

[3:15:09] Voice 3: ambulance, whoever, and maybe that is best done through the QRB.

[3:15:13] Voice 3: if we don't know whether that that's a value to those services it's hard to it's hard to make the

[3:15:21] Voice 3: call on whether that's good and then i would also add to that additional suggestions uh ways that

[3:15:30] Voice 3: social effects can be addressed and and that could be results of the forum you mentioned

[3:15:36] Voice 3: um certainly if if a forum like that is going to take place i don't do my darmest to be there

[3:15:43] Voice 3: and ears wide open and probably taking notes um but that's that's where i'm at today i don't know

[3:15:53] Voice 3: that proceeding to draft bylaws today is necessarily the way to go but i would definitely

[3:16:01] Voice 3: like to request that additional information well

[3:16:03] Voice 18: okay so i take your point but i'm also hesitant

[3:16:10] Voice 18: about going down a exploratory route if the public hasn't actually defined what is a social good

[3:16:21] Voice 18: there was discussion about public dock and a different site i

[3:16:26] Voice 18: believe in scotty bay did we not

[3:16:27] Voice 18: we

[3:16:28] Voice 5: tried to get another site through i couldn't get it going it still might still might uh it's

[3:16:34] Voice 5: private property i was almost there yeah and she changed her mind at the 11th hour

[3:16:40] Voice 5: it might happen again yeah especially she feels like the community's healing she was

[3:16:44] Voice 5: all in it and then she just decided i'm not going to reward all this negativity and she

[3:16:48] Voice 5: backed out after she gave me the green light actually talked to one of the trust each

[3:16:54] Voice 5: it was done i had a pretty much and she just decided no everyone's too nasty i don't want

[3:16:59] Voice 5: any part of this so that fell apart and

[3:17:02] Voice 18: so that is my caution about asking the applicant to go

[3:17:07] Voice 18: forward and figure out what is the public good or what is it so hard for us so because

[3:17:14] Voice 18: you're i don't actually think it's fair if it's not defined by the community who has

[3:17:22] Voice 18: this policy for a reason uh i don't think it's actually fair to guess and do a little

[3:17:29] Voice 18: work i i see if you're trying to beat me i

[3:17:31] Voice 5: don't try it for four years i know they're

[3:17:33] Voice 5: going to these other little meetings like at the hall and people kick it around but

[3:17:36] Voice 5: now we do come to it i

[3:17:42] Voice 18: don't think the lcc can decide for this community at this stage

[3:17:46] Voice 18: i just don't i feel it would be it would put too many people in a bad position and not feeling good

[3:17:57] Voice 18: about it is not what government is supposed to be about we're supposed to be helping people

[3:18:02] Voice 18: we're supposed to be figuring out what is the best public the best use of public funds

[3:18:08] Voice 18: best use of public space and negotiating these very tricky difficult questions nobody said it

[3:18:14] Voice 18: was easy why they elected three crazy people right

[3:18:19] Voice 5: you're also defining it you're either

[3:18:23] Voice 5: making it so onerous it can't happen or you're green lighting so i think there's a lot of

[3:18:28] Voice 5: hesitation for ltc or anybody to do that and i understand that's difficult but at some point

[3:18:34] Voice 5: it's out of our hands whether it's so brutal that nobody can actually do it and it's just a

[3:18:39] Voice 5: passive way of not allowing anybody to do it or it's doable and this is how we do it

[3:18:48] Voice 5: difficult

[3:18:49] Voice 18: um i would be comfortable proceeding at a slow pace with the application

[3:19:02] Voice 18: with the understanding that the community wants to have this conversation

[3:19:07] Voice 18: and if the ltc can help by we request staff to draft a bylaw amendment and we hold a public

[3:19:19] Voice 18: hearing and there's a concurrent volunteer public hearing or forum and these things take six to

[3:19:30] Voice 18: eight months and people have their say and then when we feel ready this comes back and we can

[3:19:36] Voice 18: have a decision is that fair that we're not pushing something if we're not ready for it

[3:19:43] Voice 18: today yes

[3:19:46] Voice 7: that's true let's

[3:19:50] Voice 18: hear from the public but go ahead

[3:19:52] Voice 18: um if there was a was a possible

[3:19:55] Voice 18: draft bylaw that we could have to be at the forum maybe that would

[3:20:01] Voice 18: be march 5th 2020 oh october 5th

[3:20:05] Voice 17: 2020

[3:20:06] Voice 18: there is a drafted uh and and i believe the draft amended bylaw would be somewhat similar

[3:20:15] Voice 5: well what would it look like if we got it marty yeah

[3:20:18] Voice 18: so if we have a community forum that we can

[3:20:21] Voice 18: say this is an alternative draft bylaw that has been drawn up so what

[3:20:26] Voice 18: would could be

[3:20:26] Voice 5: what it looks

[3:20:27] Voice 5: like is when they find the dots on the screen there's a bunch of existence no

[3:20:30] Voice 18: no no i'm just

[3:20:31] Voice 18: just saying if we had that to read out at this community yeah it

[3:20:35] Voice 19: just adds yeah so

[3:20:37] Voice 18: page 47

[3:20:38] Voice 18: of the october 5th 2020 agenda has a draft by law i'm not saying that's exactly what would come out

[3:20:46] Voice 18: but it just zone provisions it would amend the schedule such that that location is added to the

[3:20:54] Voice 18: list of permitted docs so yeah so it's it's a very simple text amendment uh a previous planner

[3:21:02] Voice 18: drafted it it's pretty fake but that's all the amendment would be is just adding that location

[3:21:09] Voice 18: is what i understand so

[3:21:12] Voice 19: i'm kyla leaving make

[3:21:19] Voice 8: one excuse okay yeah i'll

[3:21:29] Voice 14: be able to say i've

[3:21:29] Voice 14: He's done some great work with public forums

[3:21:32] Voice 18: and discussions.

[3:21:34] Voice 18: I have confidence in this community to be able to have a debate.

[3:21:40] Voice 18: When you're finished debating, let us know.

[3:21:46] Voice 7: Hey, you got a lot of time.

[3:21:50] Voice 18: Please be respectful in your debating with one another.

[3:21:55] Voice 18: All right.

[3:21:56] Voice 18: does somebody want to go to the alternatives and make that resolution to proceed with the

[3:22:02] Voice 18: application with the understanding that a public hearing would be included

[3:22:08] Voice 18: and that we are not rushing to draft amendments but that is seems to be the direction of the ltc

[3:22:17] Voice 18: i don't want to at your leisure i'm not going to make the resolution it's not my

[3:22:27] Voice 3: yeah i'll make

[3:22:28] Voice 3: i'll make a motion and then we can discuss it i move that let's get out of the local trust

[3:22:33] Voice 3: committee request staff to draft amendments to the skiddy island land use bylaw for consideration of

[3:22:37] Voice 3: first reading to permit a private dock at the adjacent marine area of lot 62 section 29

[3:22:43] Voice 3: the ski island and animal district plan two five four nine five moved

[3:22:51] Voice 19: do you have a seconder

[3:22:55] Voice 18: seconded and discussion on the motion um

[3:23:00] Voice 3: yeah i'll just say i i think

[3:23:06] Voice 3: you know my intent here and stated this at the earlier meeting is that um having a draft bylaw

[3:23:13] Voice 3: to look at um consideration of first reading the potential of moving to a public hearing

[3:23:23] Voice 3: especially if that is concurrent with it sounds like there's some intent or to do a

[3:23:30] Voice 3: a parallel process public process that's not an islands trust official process um the community

[3:23:38] Voice 3: the community um discussion is is vitally important and that's that's what i said in march

[3:23:43] Voice 3: that that's what we heard loud and clear that's what i heard loud and clear um that people want

[3:23:50] Voice 3: to people want to be able to discuss this i really i like the idea of having um maybe at least one of

[3:24:01] Voice 3: those forum sessions be around what what could it what could a community benefit look like

[3:24:10] Voice 3: if that was a brainstorming session that was wide open it might come up with ideas that are

[3:24:16] Voice 3: completely unrealistic and there's no way the applicants could achieve them um but i think if

[3:24:21] Voice 3: it was done in a way that was wide open that there might be some there might be good ideas that kind

[3:24:26] Voice 3: that are achievable that might address some of the concerns and yeah it's an imperfect process

[3:24:35] Voice 3: i i have no illusions that no matter what we do and how careful and deliberative and thoughtful

[3:24:41] Voice 3: we are we're never going to make everybody happy that's a given um but i would like to take what

[3:24:49] Voice 3: steps we can to give the public the opportunity in in not a rushed manner to weigh in to consider

[3:25:00] Voice 3: alternatives and to do that in the most respectful

[3:25:06] Voice 19: way possible i

[3:25:12] Voice 18: agree um 100 further i do think

[3:25:18] Voice 18: that policy 16 uh which is i think the one you're referring to uh should be discussed at a community

[3:25:28] Voice 18: community meeting and that that information can help inform the ocp review can you read

[3:25:35] Voice 18: that one for

[3:25:36] Voice 8: us don't be which one

[3:25:36] Voice 18: 16 sorry oh that's in order to reduce the overall number of

[3:25:41] Voice 18: docks located along the foreshore um and therefore and thereby alleviate the ecological damage that

[3:25:50] Voice 18: can be caused by the proliferation of Doc's private boat ramps may be considered on the

[3:25:54] Voice 18: site-specific basis in the marine general and two zone in considering an application for a

[3:25:58] Voice 18: boat ramp environmental and social effects must be addressed the environmental effects of both

[3:26:02] Voice 18: private docks and boat ramps should be considered and the alternative with the least environmental

[3:26:06] Voice 18: impact chosen oh

[3:26:08] Voice 5: so that's actually 15 i think so i think you wanted to read 15 right is that

[3:26:13] Voice 5: some more am i wrong there's

[3:26:15] Voice 3: 15 and 16 oh sorry 15 is docks 16 is docks and okay

[3:26:21] Voice 18: so this kind of

[3:26:22] Voice 18: like

[3:26:22] Voice 3: 15

[3:26:24] Voice 18: is yeah private docs may be considered on a site-specific basis so pretty much the same

[3:26:30] Voice 18: language but because

[3:26:32] Voice 5: it's only docs that one that one seems

[3:26:35] Voice 18: 15 is docs and

[3:26:36] Voice 5: then it goes on to

[3:26:37] Voice 5: a

[3:26:37] Voice 19: number of docs they're saying how low the vote rank right

[3:26:46] Voice 5: i feel like 15 is okay so

[3:26:51] Voice 5: pertains directly and okay if we could ever get there on that we'd have a real so

[3:26:58] Voice 18: on the motion

[3:27:02] Voice 18: to request staff to draft amendments in no way is this application decided today it is not a

[3:27:14] Voice 18: foreign against it is not a vote of support it is a recognition that the community needs a good

[3:27:22] Voice 18: amount of time to have some discussion about social environmental effects what does that mean

[3:27:29] Voice 18: today what did it mean bring in previous people who wrote the ocp what did that policy intend

[3:27:38] Voice 18: what should it intend what do we want the ocp to read and have that inform your next

[3:27:46] Voice 18: edition and then we can so

[3:27:50] Voice 3: just on that note uh one of my colleagues sent me this a while back

[3:27:54] Voice 3: and i i think it's good it says consideration of first reading for an ocp amendment or bylaw

[3:27:59] Voice 3: amendment proposal in local government first reading is used to introduce an idea that

[3:28:04] Voice 3: activates the legislative process for further review including public hearing information

[3:28:09] Voice 3: meeting or advising planning commission referral it does not mean a decision favorable or unfavorable

[3:28:15] Voice 3: about the proposal has been made so it's first you guys

[3:28:19] Voice 7: just made some really good sense

[3:28:21] Voice 7: so if

[3:28:24] Voice 18: we move to first reading um there is work to be done and the ltc is ready to support the

[3:28:33] Voice 18: community in that work and you can let us know um how to support i think staff will be given

[3:28:39] Voice 18: in direction if we vote on this we'll have a draft lub by lot to look at and that will be going to

[3:28:49] Voice 18: public hearing we promise okay we're ready to open any

[3:28:55] Voice 7: excuse me it'll come to the first meeting

[3:28:57] Voice 18: okay

[3:28:58] Voice 7: great

[3:29:04] Voice 18: and we recognize this is an imperfect process but we're here

[3:29:13] Voice 5: we're

[3:29:13] Voice 18: here now are we do we have all our information to vote everybody feeling comfortable

[3:29:18] Voice 18: all right all those in favor raise your hand say aye that is carried and at this point we're not

[3:29:26] Voice 18: going to refer anything to the apc we don't need to refer policy 15 further work to the apc

[3:29:39] Voice 3: i don't i

[3:29:40] Voice 18: don't think they want to talk about it anymore

[3:29:46] Voice 18: actually reading the minutes they did the best they could thank you

[3:29:49] Voice 18: thank you to the apc well let's wait for the uh draft bylaw to come back and then we'll

[3:29:55] Voice 18: figure out next steps is that all right anything for

[3:30:00] Voice 18: i

[3:30:00] Voice 7: was just going to add if you do wish to refer this out to the abc that could be done

[3:30:05] Voice 7: um when you send your other referrals out as well right

[3:30:08] Voice 19: okay okay yeah

[3:30:11] Voice 3: thank you for that because i

[3:30:12] Voice 3: we did just send them referral on the other application that

[3:30:18] Voice 3: that one more time sensitive so we can wait on this that's better so

[3:30:23] Voice 18: over to you community

[3:30:25] Voice 18: any is that it for this piece of business no i

[3:30:31] Voice 3: wasn't going to say in a more general

[3:30:36] Voice 3: opportunity

[3:30:41] Voice 18: all right all righty then so um yeah it's

[3:30:48] Voice 7: your planner oh if you're are you finished with this

[3:30:52] Voice 7: application or i

[3:30:54] Voice 18: once

[3:30:55] Voice 7: you're done i don't

[3:30:56] Voice 18: believe so we're not moving to wait yeah that's it

[3:31:01] Voice 7: there's

[3:31:02] Voice 7: a if it's possible to move the item 12.1 um okay for

[3:31:07] Voice 7: director to clarify your creators here to

[3:31:09] Voice 7: present that report so wonderful awesome okay

[3:31:15] Voice 18: well we'll just take a break moment i think we

[3:31:18] Voice 18: We have concluded our business with the application RZ 2023.1, and we'll move to, sorry, where

[3:31:30] Voice 18: am I?

[3:31:32] Voice 18: Yes, LARZ 2023.1, and so pending bylaw amendments and further action.

[3:31:41] Voice 18: If anybody wants to leave, you guys can go.

[3:31:45] Voice 18: and we'll move into uh item 12.1 and if we can have that next hello director

[3:31:53] Voice 18: thanks everyone if

[3:31:55] Voice 14: you need to go feel free

[3:31:56] Voice 14: thanks for coming today

[3:32:02] Voice 1: hello cherry are you ready for me to present yes

[3:32:05] Voice 18: we are okay

[3:32:06] Voice 1: um so i'm here today i'm presenting

[3:32:10] Voice 1: this is the first of many that we'll be giving to local trust committee presentations we'll be

[3:32:14] Voice 1: giving to local trust committees around the region to ask you to consider what you might

[3:32:19] Voice 1: like in terms of engagement options to talk about the policy statement draft that's being developed

[3:32:25] Voice 1: by trust council through the committee of the whole process essentially what will happen is

[3:32:30] Voice 1: after approval in principle each local trust committee will receive the draft document as a

[3:32:36] Voice 1: referral and they can provide comments back to trust council the local trust committee has the

[3:32:41] Voice 1: the option of undertaking public engagement to inform their comments back to trust council

[3:32:46] Voice 1: and through this briefing we've provided you with some options to consider okay sorry claire can you

[3:32:51] Voice 1: just

[3:32:52] Voice 18: pause for a second

[3:32:52] Voice 17: folks

[3:32:54] Voice 18: if you could take your conversation outside we're just having

[3:32:57] Voice 18: difficulty hearing thank you okay please carry

[3:33:01] Voice 1: on director brader were

[3:33:03] Voice 1: you were you able to hear

[3:33:03] Voice 1: would you like me to recap could you just repeat the last two

[3:33:07] Voice 18: or three sentences i missed a little

[3:33:08] Voice 18: little bit.

[3:33:09] Voice 1: Sure. I was mentioning that this briefing will go to all local trust committees

[3:33:14] Voice 1: to select the public engagement options that they may wish in order to inform their comments on the

[3:33:19] Voice 1: draft policy statement back to Trust Council. The public will have an opportunity to comment

[3:33:24] Voice 1: through trust area-wide engagements, which includes a survey and a planned online workshop.

[3:33:30] Voice 1: On the page 93 of your agenda, we've included a table which lists a number of options available

[3:33:35] Voice 1: to the local trust committee.

[3:33:37] Voice 1: You'll note option one

[3:33:38] Voice 1: is that you have no formal engagement.

[3:33:40] Voice 1: It could be that the three local trust committee members

[3:33:43] Voice 1: simply develop their comments.

[3:33:44] Voice 1: They can receive it and develop it

[3:33:46] Voice 1: based on their own perspectives

[3:33:47] Voice 1: or information gathered informally.

[3:33:49] Voice 1: The next is to have a town hall

[3:33:51] Voice 1: at a regularly scheduled local trust committee meeting.

[3:33:55] Voice 1: The next would be to hold a community information meeting.

[3:33:59] Voice 1: You could have it prior to a regular LTC meeting.

[3:34:03] Voice 1: And this would be led by the local trust committee

[3:34:06] Voice 1: itself. Option four is to have the same thing but led by staff. And finally, is to have a standalone

[3:34:13] Voice 1: community information meeting. I will note, this is not the entire suite of possibilities. You could

[3:34:18] Voice 1: come up with any requests that you like. Oh yeah, sorry, it does continue down. We also mentioned

[3:34:24] Voice 1: we could run an information booth. You might remember we held a number of these last time

[3:34:28] Voice 1: through Islands. And we could also potentially, it might be harder for Liskiti, but we could have

[3:34:33] Voice 1: have an information booth or have staff with branded items be available on the ferry to take

[3:34:39] Voice 1: feedback from passengers. I would ask you to consider if you undertook this engagement

[3:34:46] Voice 1: to consider how you might use it in your referral response and finally we're noting for all local

[3:34:52] Voice 1: trust committees that the budget for the project is not sufficient to have staff support and

[3:34:57] Voice 1: engagement for every community. So should all communities want this we'll have to go back to

[3:35:02] Voice 1: trust council for a change in the budget

[3:35:03] Voice 17: so

[3:35:05] Voice 1: i'm here to answer any questions and to support your

[3:35:07] Voice 1: discussion as needed thank you

[3:35:13] Voice 3: director freighter um i think what i'm leaning towards is uh is

[3:35:20] Voice 3: probably option three uh combined you know with a regular local trust committee meeting one of

[3:35:29] Voice 3: the things that a member of public in our town hall session uh identified though is is the

[3:35:34] Voice 3: the availability of a variety of folks

[3:35:38] Voice 3: to come to daytime LTC meetings.

[3:35:41] Voice 3: And their suggestion was a trustee run info booth.

[3:35:46] Voice 3: So I think it's an interesting idea,

[3:35:48] Voice 3: but my question is about assuming for a moment

[3:35:55] Voice 3: that one or more trustees is willing to do that,

[3:36:00] Voice 3: just around what sort of informational resources,

[3:36:06] uh uh that a trustee could be provided

[3:36:08] Voice 3: with to to you know make such a such an engagement

[3:36:13] Voice 3: opportunity you know valuable useful

[3:36:16] Voice 17: do

[3:36:17] Voice 3: you have um in other words you have materials or can you

[3:36:21] Voice 3: have materials you can supply for an initiative like that yes

[3:36:27] Voice 1: certainly and we're happy to take

[3:36:28] Voice 1: suggestions as to what might be most useful certainly as we understand what local trust

[3:36:33] Voice 1: committees want will produce a suite of materials for an information booth for example but i can

[3:36:37] Voice 1: imagine for a trustee hosting an information booth you might want to frequently ask questions

[3:36:42] Voice 1: sheet that you could refer to that might be helpful we'd likely have some general poster

[3:36:47] Voice 1: boards with basic information about the policy statement with some diagrams about how it functions

[3:36:52] Voice 1: and around the timeline for the project so people could understand where we're at

[3:36:56] Voice 1: but if there's additional or further information you might like it would be great if you could

[3:37:00] Voice 1: request it of us and we can capture that with your resolution about how you'd like to proceed

[3:37:05] Voice 19: great thank you so

[3:37:10] Voice 18: there is a note at the bottom of that just trustees are welcome to convene in

[3:37:15] Voice 18: formal gatherings at their own cost but use of project funds requires a more formal structure

[3:37:21] Voice 18: so are you were you thinking um tim your own sort of booth and setup are you imagining

[3:37:34] Voice 18: like is there a public space where there could be information available and then there's certain

[3:37:38] Voice 18: hours that a trustee could be there to have a drop-in sort of workshop rather than a formal

[3:37:47] Voice 18: event with a minute taker and recorder like how let's talk a little bit about the trustee-led

[3:37:55] Voice 18: sort of engagement

[3:37:56] Voice 3: yeah i would think i mean the reason i asked about supporting materials is that

[3:38:01] Voice 3: that I don't think much as I've been steeped in the process,

[3:38:07] Voice 3: I certainly don't know the answer to every question.

[3:38:09] Voice 3: I think that those materials would be useful

[3:38:14] Voice 3: for a trustee-led booth, whether that's at a specific place

[3:38:19] Voice 3: that I think would be useful if we pursue that idea

[3:38:23] Voice 3: to have the materials available.

[3:38:26] Voice 3: Some of the poster boards and stuff obviously can be reused

[3:38:30] Voice 3: so we wouldn't have to necessarily produce one-off poster boards that you know we could

[3:38:37] Voice 3: we could have them here do a session or two possibly and then pass them along to other islands

[3:38:44] Voice 3: um the nice thing about the poster boards is they kind of catch your eye and maybe you could

[3:38:52] Voice 3: draw someone in for the conversation for a bit um but

[3:38:56] Voice 18: the question is is how do you capture

[3:38:59] Voice 18: sure the perspectives of the people who are coming to look at the draft policy like well having a

[3:39:05] Voice 18: recorder a minute taker or a way for their perspectives to be so it's not just about

[3:39:09] Voice 18: conveying information oh here's the draft you want public input well

[3:39:14] Voice 3: i would hope that we might

[3:39:15] Voice 3: have some sort some form of uh whether it's a survey or some some something for members of the

[3:39:29] Voice 3: public to be able to to fill out uh certainly i'm not a minute taker there

[3:39:34] Voice 18: is going to be a survey

[3:39:37] Voice 3: oh there is going to be so yeah no i don't think we would need minutes necessarily

[3:39:41] Voice 3: there

[3:39:41] Voice 18: is a survey both online and in hard copy which we will make sure is available

[3:39:49] Voice 18: to people physically here there will be an online workshop that is open for all but this is asking

[3:39:57] Voice 18: asking about specific online engagement options how do we want this to look what's going to work

[3:40:05] Voice 18: but we do need a way of collecting people's opinions and perspectives that is a little

[3:40:10] Voice 18: bit objective that's the the challenge of being a trustee-led workshop or group is is people will

[3:40:18] Voice 18: talk to you about their ideas but will you be able to capture them and give that input back

[3:40:25] Voice 3: right yeah i wasn't thinking of a workshop i was thinking more of the info booth

[3:40:30] Voice 3: idea where the materials including surveys could be there it's just a way of basically

[3:40:39] Voice 3: being in a public space

[3:40:40] Voice 17: where

[3:40:42] Voice 3: you again the post awards be useful for catching people's eyes what

[3:40:46] Voice 3: are you doing here and then you can have the copies of the surveys you can have the faqs there

[3:40:52] Voice 3: i wasn't thinking of anything quite as formal as a workshop uh but i think doing some something

[3:40:59] Voice 3: like that in conjunction with a session that's you know part of an existing ltc meeting would

[3:41:09] Voice 3: be maybe a good way to go kind of like that idea

[3:41:12] Voice 18: i just yeah i want to point to issues and

[3:41:16] Voice 18: opportunities so the ltc is being asked to consider the nature of the in of the information

[3:41:23] Voice 18: that we hope to receive to inform their referral response so director freighter to your um to you

[3:41:32] Voice 18: here does the ltc have to give a referral response on the policy statement draft and we are collecting

[3:41:43] Voice 18: public input from this community to inform that response in addition to all the survey going out

[3:41:49] Voice 18: and and people being able to participate as individuals so

[3:41:55] Voice 1: yes chair um certainly it is at

[3:41:57] Voice 1: the ltc's discretion if they'd like to undertake public engagement um certainly it notes in option

[3:42:02] Voice 1: one in the option description at the top of page 93 you could simply develop a referral response

[3:42:08] Voice 1: based on your own judgment um that does this actually does the draft accurately reflect what

[3:42:12] Voice 1: you think is best for LISC-ED. Are there comments you as an LTC wish to make? Whether you choose to

[3:42:19] Voice 1: seek the public's views on your comments is up to the LTC. Certainly, Trust Council will hear

[3:42:24] Voice 1: directly from the public through the survey and the community workshop methods. Any public

[3:42:30] Voice 1: engagement that's undertaken locally will be to inform the local comments that go into Trust

[3:42:35] Voice 1: Council. And what I would suggest is when you're doing engagement, this is intended to be

[3:42:41] Voice 1: engagement so it's a two-way dialogue so it's essentially a data gathering exercise right you

[3:42:45] Voice 1: want to gather information from the public to bring back to this table you're at today

[3:42:50] Voice 1: rather than information out because we'll provide information right through them we're going to be

[3:42:54] Voice 1: doing mailings and we'll have lots on the website and we'll have these other methods

[3:42:59] Voice 1: so it's simply yeah it's how do you how do you tend to collect the information to bring back

[3:43:04] Voice 1: to your table

[3:43:05] Voice 17: yeah if

[3:43:06] Voice 1: you feel the need to so so

[3:43:12] Voice 18: in my community of gabriella for instance we have

[3:43:14] Voice 18: a fall fair or apple fest and that's a great place to have a booth but you also have to have a place

[3:43:21] Voice 18: for people's input and so does so to my mind the question is what's the appropriate venue for

[3:43:29] Voice 18: whiskey is there a way how do you want to to do that and then do you want to collect information

[3:43:36] Voice 18: from the ski shins listening kitty community to give sort of a more formal referral response from

[3:43:44] Voice 18: the ltc or just let people participate as they wish as islanders the ski shins but not give

[3:43:54] Voice 18: that formal response it's a lot to consider do we need to give an answer today uh director frader

[3:43:59] Voice 1: is this um i don't know when your next meeting is we do need to hear um by the end of the year

[3:44:07] Voice 1: I think I could pull up our work plan because we need to move to procurement and figure out,

[3:44:10] Voice 1: and I also need to develop a budget for next year and let trust council know if we need to add in

[3:44:14] Voice 1: additional monies. I would, I don't have the deadline at hand, but I would suggest it's

[3:44:20] Voice 1: probably by November sometime.

[3:44:33] Voice 19: The timeline. So this is looking like, so

[3:44:39] Voice 18: on page 96 here,

[3:44:41] Voice 18: we've got the work plan overview. The six month public engagement is what we're talking about,

[3:44:49] Voice 18: but which is May to October, 2025.

[3:44:53] Voice 18: That's right.

[3:44:56] Voice 18: So we are putting in a preference

[3:44:59] Voice 18: for how do we want that public engagement

[3:45:01] Voice 18: to happen on Mesquitee.

[3:45:05] Voice 18: So Tim, you were leaning towards three.

[3:45:11] Voice 3: I was thinking three,

[3:45:12] Voice 3: and then the idea of the trustee led booth

[3:45:16] Voice 3: would essentially be to sort of bring more public awareness

[3:45:23] Voice 3: to the reality of it not necessarily i mean it could be somewhat of an information gathering but

[3:45:28] Voice 3: be more sort of discussion starters what i was kind of considering

[3:45:33] Voice 18: that's what i find finding

[3:45:35] Voice 18: people that just don't know about it they'll say oh

[3:45:37] Voice 18: i know that it happens happening it's like well

[3:45:39] Voice 18: we thought we'll let you know but obviously we need to work harder to make it so people

[3:45:47] Voice 18: actually so some feedback director freighter um in my experience so there's a large number

[3:45:54] Voice 18: or people who attend Loschitti Local Trust Committee meetings

[3:45:56] Voice 18: and are interested, would there be a potential to have information here

[3:46:02] Voice 18: that people could just take home with them from, you know,

[3:46:08] Voice 18: to just during the public engagement process, this is happening,

[3:46:11] Voice 18: we want to hear from you, here's some data sheets,

[3:46:14] Voice 18: here's where you can find the latest policy statement draft.

[3:46:20] Voice 18: I think that would be helpful is just have materials available

[3:46:22] Voice 18: will add regular LTC meetings so that people are informed that there's a public input process

[3:46:31] Voice 18: and then could we do on a schedule so what I'm thinking is after a regular LTC meeting

[3:46:43] Voice 18: have another special meeting staff could go home the extra special trustees who don't live here

[3:46:53] Voice 18: could stay and we could have you know a regular meeting ends at three and have a special meeting

[3:47:01] Voice 18: at like six to eight somewhere so that's after hours to answer questions collect perspectives

[3:47:10] Voice 18: yeah we just need to change the meeting day because there's no ferry tomorrow

[3:47:14] Voice 18: okay this would be in may it's still not

[3:47:17] Voice 18: very long there's never a ferry on a tuesday oh right

[3:47:21] Voice 18: but yeah we

[3:47:23] Voice 3: could schedule a meeting on a thursday or friday next year what

[3:47:28] Voice 18: about a sunday

[3:47:29] Voice 18: like the name there's

[3:47:31] Voice 3: no morning yeah if you want to get here saturday night so

[3:47:36] Voice 18: why did we

[3:47:37] Voice 18: choose monday for these lgc meetings

[3:47:38] Voice 3: i

[3:47:40] Voice 18: have no idea we didn't choose at all meeting facilitator

[3:47:46] Voice 3: oh no it goes way farther up way farther up the ladder than

[3:47:50] Voice 3: that's not lisa's fault

[3:47:52] Voice 18: so actually it may be something to consider is do you want to change the regular ltc date

[3:48:05] Voice 18: for the next year so the meetings have already been drafted and will be presented

[3:48:12] Voice 18: and I'm going to request your decision shortly.

[3:48:16] Voice 18: Not all on Mondays, right?

[3:48:18] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:48:20] Voice 18: I look

[3:48:20] Voice 3: on the bright side.

[3:48:22] Voice 3: So far, every time we've had one,

[3:48:26] Voice 3: everyone's gotten home on Monday.

[3:48:28] Voice 3: So far.

[3:48:33] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:48:34] Voice 18: Or so long ago.

[3:48:35] Voice 18: Yeah.

[3:48:36] Voice 18: Ideas.

[3:48:37] Voice 18: Come on, people.

[3:48:38] Voice 3: Okay.

[3:48:39] Voice 3: Well, I think number three,

[3:48:42] Voice 3: and then we could supplement that with,

[3:48:46] Voice 3: we can supplement that with a trustee booth it sounds like there's materials that are already

[3:48:52] Voice 3: going to be on hand so we don't have to produce you know island whiskey specific materials just

[3:48:58] Voice 3: borrow some poster boards for a week or two set that up i don't think uh in terms of

[3:49:07] Voice 3: i don't think we'd have to spend a lot on advertising i think we could just

[3:49:11] Voice 3: plan that ahead and then put that in like in our regular trustee notes in the local

[3:49:18] Voice 8: Do

[3:49:18] Voice 18: you want staff-led? I think the most important thing for budget...

[3:49:22] Voice 18: Do we

[3:49:22] Voice 3: want staff-led?

[3:49:23] Voice 18: Yes. That's the important thing for budget consideration that I believe Director Fraser needs feedback on.

[3:49:31] Voice 18: I

[3:49:35] Voice 19: don't think staff-led is viable.

[3:49:42] Voice 3: A couple of different opportunities on island is the important part. I don't think having the

[3:49:50] Voice 19: staff components is necessary.

[3:49:54] Voice 19: So

[3:49:55] Voice 18: the LTC is looking at option three. However, it doesn't look possible to do that prior

[3:50:06] Voice 18: to the regular LTC meeting just because of where they fall. You can't get here any earlier.

[3:50:13] Voice 18: And you can't have it after or people are staying overnight.

[3:50:16] Voice 6: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

[3:50:18] Voice 6: You

[3:50:18] Voice 18: can have it Sunday anytime.

[3:50:20] Voice 18: Yeah, but you can't get here on Sunday.

[3:50:22] Voice 18: You can, but not until 3.30 or 4 o'clock.

[3:50:26] Voice 18: it could be

[3:50:27] Voice 3: sunday it could be like a sunday six to eight or uh okay five

[3:50:32] Voice 3: to seven or something

[3:50:34] Voice 3: so

[3:50:34] Voice 18: director frederick i see your hand up are you hearing this feedback is it helpful

[3:50:39] Voice 1: um certainly yes i will say staff there are going to be islands for which staff have to have an

[3:50:42] Voice 1: overnight so that's just part of it that's what we need to know in order to do the budgeting

[3:50:46] Voice 1: certainly you can request to have that happen um it is for you to decide do you need do you need

[3:50:52] Voice 1: the engagement feedback to make these comments i think is what you need to determine first

[3:50:55] Voice 1: and then if you feel you want engagement feedback do you feel it's appropriate to have a trustee

[3:51:00] Voice 1: bringing it into your table or would you like it to have its staff collected and how formal

[3:51:04] Voice 1: on engagement do you think your community wants those are the key questions i'm hearing trustee

[3:51:14] Voice 18: led is uh preferred over having staff come and present the information and it looks like sunday

[3:51:22] Voice 18: evening would be a great option before the monday let's get a trust committee meeting because

[3:51:28] Voice 18: because off-island trustees could attend a Sunday six to eight,

[3:51:35] Voice 18: whatever, evening info session, stay overnight,

[3:51:39] Voice 18: and then have the Monday regular business meeting.

[3:51:43] Voice 18: And we'd probably want to still highlight this for town halls,

[3:51:49] Voice 18: maybe option two during our regular LTC meetings.

[3:51:56] Voice 18: So option two and three, looking at Sunday nights.

[3:52:01] Voice 18: of pre-engagement does that sound good okay somebody were allowed to make a resolution

[3:52:08] Voice 18: there's a recommendation there that musketeer island local dress committee selects engagement

[3:52:13] Voice 18: options two and three for phase four community engagement about the new draft trust policy

[3:52:23] Voice 18: statement i'll

[3:52:26] Voice 3: second so move

[3:52:28] Voice 18: second discussion on the motion just

[3:52:30] Voice 3: just a question for director

[3:52:32] Voice 3: Director Frater, the concept of the trustee-led booth,

[3:52:39] Voice 3: do you need that in the motion

[3:52:41] Voice 3: or can we just hash that out later?

[3:52:44] Voice 1: No, as elected officials,

[3:52:46] Voice 1: you can engage your communities and have conversations.

[3:52:48] Voice 1: What we need in the motion,

[3:52:49] Voice 1: what I understand from number three

[3:52:51] Voice 1: is a staff supported engagement

[3:52:53] Voice 1: or we'll help you advertise and record the comments

[3:52:57] Voice 1: made at a community information meeting.

[3:52:59] Voice 1: If you select number one, you don't need,

[3:53:01] Voice 1: you could just advise that you're doing that,

[3:53:02] Voice 1: but it's not anything you need resources for

[3:53:04] Voice 17: okay

[3:53:06] Voice 3: thanks yeah so i can just get in touch

[3:53:09] Voice 3: and borrow the poster boards at a convenient time do that kind of thing yes excellent wonderful

[3:53:15] Voice 3: thanks great

[3:53:16] Voice 18: um so a minute taker could be remote or staff could be on island is that

[3:53:23] Voice 18: we're sort of leading up to you to figure out logistics claire uh

[3:53:31] Voice 1: yes i think i do i can't

[3:53:33] Voice 1: speak to how ltc is typically community information meetings but we i would offer we would do what

[3:53:39] Voice 1: is typically done okay all

[3:53:42] Voice 18: right any further discussion on the motion

[3:53:47] Voice 18: go for the vote all those in favor that is carried you have

[3:53:52] Voice 18: some directions

[3:53:55] Voice 18: thank you so much thank you awesome thanks

[3:54:00] Voice 1: so much okay

[3:54:01] Voice 18: good luck on the rest of them thank you

[3:54:07] Voice 18: Okay, so back to correspondence. We're in section 10, 10.1, page 87. Does anybody want to raise that for action? Or is that just there for information?

[3:54:29] Voice 3: I'm just trying to remember what we talked about at the July 15th meeting.

[3:54:35] Voice 3: We talked a little bit about the ABC procedure.

[3:54:42] Voice 3: I don't think we got clear, concise information out to the community, perhaps, in the way that might.

[3:54:55] Voice 3: I can't. I don't recall. I don't think we did make a resolution, did we?

[3:54:59] Voice 3: we just talked about it so i i forwarded the abc meeting procedure

[3:55:08] Voice 3: um to the abc members and that's as far as i got on that but um i don't know it'd be nice

[3:55:22] Voice 3: to have something that's i don't know what kind of you were talking about putting something in

[3:55:29] Voice 3: the paper i did you did okay

[3:55:31] Voice 18: okay you

[3:55:33] Voice 3: already did okay i was just trying to remember all right so

[3:55:37] Voice 3: something's gone out recently do we want to i don't know if we need to do more at this point

[3:55:43] Voice 18: well just in regards to this specific letter uh writing correspondence so there is an ask at the

[3:55:53] Voice 18: the end of it so um the writer farrah wolf is asking that an acknowledgement of the breaking

[3:56:00] Voice 18: protocol occur at the next meeting this is the apc with clarification that this person's written

[3:56:07] Voice 18: submission was not formally accepted also ask for assurance that this kind of behavior won't

[3:56:12] Voice 18: be allowed to happen again in the future so this is back from july um don't know if there was a

[3:56:22] Voice 18: of there was a subsequent meeting so i don't know if the acknowledgement they were looking for

[3:56:29] Voice 18: happened um and this issue seems to be with the apc protocol protocol and so i would just suggest

[3:56:39] Voice 18: that can the planner or who knows how apc meetings are meant to be held connect with the chair of the

[3:56:49] Voice 18: apc and go through the process do

[3:56:53] Voice 4: we want to forward this letter to the apc or to the chair

[3:56:58] Voice 18: Yeah, that would be a good action.

[3:57:02] Voice 15: Can I just point out that this is under the understanding that public can't address it.

[3:57:08] Voice 18: I'm sorry, sir, you cannot

[3:57:10] Voice 15: interrupt our meeting.

[3:57:13] Voice 15: It's a point of order.

[3:57:14] Voice 15: And the point of order is that your committee, your chair.

[3:57:20] Voice 15: That's actually

[3:57:20] Voice 3: not a point of order.

[3:57:21] Voice 3: No, it's not a point of order.

[3:57:23] Voice 3: We're not having a conversation.

[3:57:25] Voice 18: You

[3:57:25] Voice 3: said that the public

[3:57:26] Voice 6: can't address the APC, but they can.

[3:57:29] Voice 6: You have a standing resolution that allows the public to address the APC.

[3:57:34] Voice 6: Could

[3:57:34] Voice 18: the letter writer, could somebody please suggest what to do with this letter?

[3:57:41] Voice 18: If it's to be forwarded to the chair.

[3:57:43] Voice 3: I think it should be forwarded to the chair of the APC.

[3:57:46] Voice 18: And to request that the chair connect with the planner

[3:57:50] Voice 18: for the legislative clerk to confirm the protocol

[3:57:55] Voice 18: and give the chair any support that they need

[3:57:57] Voice 18: to conduct meetings in accordance with policy.

[3:58:14] Voice 18: So I request that the email date of July 11, 2024

[3:58:17] Voice 18: from F. Wolf regarding the Moschitti Advisory Planning Commission

[3:58:20] Voice 18: June 10th meeting be forwarded to the chair of the APC

[3:58:24] Voice 18: and that the chair be provided with support by staff

[3:58:33] Voice 18: staff, if needed, to confirm APC meeting processes.

[3:58:43] Voice 19: Did you capture that, Lisa?

[3:58:47] Voice 19: I think so, just give me a second.

[3:58:59] Voice 18: And Mr. Olsen, if you are going to continue talking out of turn,

[3:59:03] Voice 18: you are not going to be allowed to participate.

[3:59:07] Voice 18: These meetings have specific times when members of the public can speak,

[3:59:12] Voice 18: and you do have ample time.

[3:59:14] Voice 18: and i recognize that you do have lots of experience but it is not appropriate to

[3:59:21] Voice 18: instruct the ltc when we are having deliberations about the business at hand thank you sure i

[3:59:34] Voice 14: read

[3:59:34] Voice 19: that but i have to um that was getting out on local testimony before the letter from

[3:59:41] Voice 19: affleck dated july 11 2024 shared the apc and request the chair request staff to confirm

[3:59:48] Voice 19: firm protocol to provide information of conduct at meetings in accordance with policy which is

[3:59:55] Voice 18: i think it was to support if needed like to support the chair

[4:00:00] Voice 18: with information about the right process and all that's needed.

[4:00:05] Voice 18: Because the issue may have already been resolved.

[4:00:11] Voice 17: Thank you.

[4:00:51] Voice 7: Are you able to repeat the last part of the motion?

[4:00:56] Voice 7: Well, at least you can make sure it's yet so far.

[4:01:00] Voice 19: Before we let it for FOLS get into line with 2024,

[4:01:04] Voice 19: do you chair the APC and request staff support the chair of information to

[4:01:08] Voice 19: to confirm

[4:01:10] Voice 18: APC meeting procedure protocols.

[4:01:25] Voice 19: Okay,

[4:01:26] Voice 18: moved, no seconder.

[4:01:28] Voice 18: Seconded by Trustee Peterson.

[4:01:31] Voice 18: Clerk Arroni, either way, all those in favor?

[4:01:35] Voice 18: And that is carried, thank you so much.

[4:01:39] Voice 18: We'll be to 11.1 and I realize we're getting short

[4:01:43] Voice 18: on time here.

[4:01:46] Voice 18: So this has been circulated to all local trust committees

[4:01:49] Voice 18: about potential interest in exploring dark sky principles as an advocacy issue and LTCs are

[4:02:05] Voice 18: invited to notify trustee Morrison if they're interested in getting conversations with relevant

[4:02:11] Voice 18: regional districts about adopting dark sky principles if the LTC is not interested you

[4:02:19] Voice 18: don't have to do anything with this

[4:02:22] Voice 8: i'm sensing this

[4:02:32] Voice 3: may not be an issue yeah

[4:02:34] Voice 3: i don't think it's

[4:02:35] Voice 3: a huge issue here uh i mean i wouldn't say there's any harm in expressing interest or notifying

[4:02:42] Voice 3: trustee morrison of interest there's no financial indications no guarantee that there will be

[4:02:50] Voice 3: in the future um i

[4:02:54] Voice 4: think we're fortunate more fortunate than some islands in terms of our

[4:02:58] Voice 4: exposure to light from other jurisdictions to

[4:03:07] Voice 18: be honest i don't know where this is going so

[4:03:10] Voice 18: if you're really interested i would suggest getting yeah

[4:03:13] Voice 5: i'm i'm not i i don't think it's

[4:03:16] Voice 4: out as a viable point for us at this point so

[4:03:22] Voice 8: tc has a lot okay

[4:03:24] Voice 18: so we'll move on to 12.2

[4:03:28] Voice 18: uh apc appointments we have uh the apc's term ends on january 23rd 2025. now if the planner

[4:03:41] Voice 18: body have anything to add the report looks pretty straightforward yeah

[4:03:45] Voice 7: this is no question

[4:03:46] Voice 7: soon that they are there yeah this is the determines that they can we're requesting that

[4:03:51] Voice 7: you invite interest from the members and advertise for your interest

[4:03:56] Voice 7: i

[4:03:58] Voice 3: move back to the mosquito island local trust committee request staff to pay send letters to

[4:04:06] Voice 3: members the advisory planning commission whose terms will expire on january 23rd 2025 thanking

[4:04:12] Voice 3: them for their participation inviting their expressions good test for reappointment for

[4:04:15] Voice 3: another two-year term and be advertised for public expressions of interest for new members

[4:04:20] Voice 4: moved

[4:04:21] Voice 18: second if i just do the roni ready for the discussion all those in favor that is carried

[4:04:30] Voice 18: well done and 12.3 we have the uh conservancy report to local trust committee so um

[4:04:41] Voice 18: fairly brief we've had a couple of reports since our new planning manager or planner

[4:04:50] Voice 18: manager he's been in we've got the heron oh new format for the open applications report

[4:05:00] Voice 18: very interesting expense report that's usual standing resolutions active projects list

[4:05:10] Voice 18: anything we want to amend or address on the active or future projects list should we

[4:05:34] Voice 8: i do

[4:05:38] Voice 18: suggest that we move number three uh in the future projects report up to number one

[4:05:46] Voice 18: because we've already submitted a business case for an ocp review project and it may

[4:05:58] Voice 18: be that number four could be combined with it and then moved up to number one

[4:06:02] Voice 18: tidy that up yeah

[4:06:11] Voice 3: three and four could be combined yeah

[4:06:13] Voice 18: actually and number two isn't lot sizes are

[4:06:17] Voice 18: we are we looking at a lot sizes in this current ocp review no no

[4:06:25] Voice 3: that's going to be an aluv

[4:06:26] Voice 3: review which is going to follow the cpu

[4:06:28] Voice 18: review okay so i move that um future project three

[4:06:32] Voice 18: three and four be combined and move to number one on the Future Projects list.

[4:06:44] Voice 18: Seconded by Josie Laroni. Any discussion? Oh, Plant Ball.

[4:06:49] Voice 18: I

[4:06:50] Voice 7: was just going to ask if you wanted to include two as well.

[4:06:53] Voice 7: That's

[4:06:53] Voice 18: what I was thinking, that two is kind of with the OCP review.

[4:06:58] Voice 7: Yeah, I believe. I can't recall for certain.

[4:07:05] Voice 7: you had asked that some of these be included these numbers be included in your business case

[4:07:11] Voice 7: and i was going to say it was two but actually i can't remember for certain if it was

[4:07:16] Voice 7: two three and four or just three and four i

[4:07:18] Voice 18: think the marine conservation zone is added

[4:07:21] Voice 18: yeah and i know

[4:07:23] Voice 3: lot size proof of water i

[4:07:25] Voice 18: think two three four i think

[4:07:27] Voice 3: all about here right yeah

[4:07:27] Voice 18: Yeah, so that two, three, and four be combined

[4:07:30] Voice 18: and move to number one in the Future Projects list.

[4:07:36] Voice 17: Okay,

[4:07:37] Voice 18: second it again.

[4:07:38] Voice 18: Seconded again by Trustee Laroni.

[4:07:40] Voice 18: Any further discussion?

[4:07:41] Voice 18: All those in favor?

[4:07:43] Voice 18: Let us carry on.

[4:07:45] Voice 18: Excellent.

[4:07:46] Voice 18: So we do come to the end of our agenda.

[4:07:49] Voice 18: Our next meeting is going to be Monday, December 16th, 2024

[4:07:58] Voice 18: 2024 at 11 a.m. here at the Judith Fisher Center, unless we decide to make electronic.

[4:08:07] Voice 18: What happens if we can't get over?

[4:08:11] Voice 18: So to the media facilitator, sometimes the area doesn't run.

[4:08:20] Voice 18: And so if it's looking dicey, we can do an RWM a couple of days before and change it to electronic.

[4:08:28] Voice 18: or should we change it to electronic

[4:08:30] Voice 18: and hybrid now

[4:08:33] Voice 18: that we don't have to issue

[4:08:34] Voice 18: a notice and then will we come to the

[4:08:36] Voice 18: meeting in person anyways?

[4:08:39] Voice 18: If you want to change

[4:08:41] Voice 19: it to an electronic

[4:08:43] Voice 19: meeting, you can take

[4:08:45] Voice 19: motion to do that now.

[4:08:47] Voice 19: If you want to wait

[4:08:50] Voice 19: then we will just wait

[4:08:51] Voice 19: and see if it works.

[4:08:52] Voice 19: And then you just do it.

[4:08:55] Voice 18: What I'm

[4:08:56] Voice 14: saying is we want the

[4:08:57] Voice 18: the meeting to stay in person but i've seen them change to no electronic a little bit

[4:09:04] Voice 18: they're

[4:09:05] Voice 19: still only fully electronic or or in person he's

[4:09:09] Voice 18: been talking about hybrid meetings

[4:09:11] Voice 18: but by that he just means there's some electronic meeting and then people can show up if they want

[4:09:16] Voice 18: to that's not

[4:09:17] Voice 19: yeah okay

[4:09:22] Voice 18: so we'll keep it today is that we're good with that in person yeah

[4:09:28] Voice 17: and um

[4:09:30] Voice 18: if the weather's bad we'll have to change to electronic and try to give good public notice

[4:09:40] Voice 18: and we promise we're going to work on getting agendas

[4:09:44] Voice 18: printed to the public

[4:09:46] Voice 18: and then posted to the public places

[4:09:48] Voice 18: to encourage you

[4:09:50] Voice 18: to hopefully get the printer sorted out.

[4:09:53] Voice 18: But with that,

[4:09:54] Voice 18: call for adjournment. All those in favor?

[4:09:57] Voice 18: Great.