Islands Trust Executive Committee community information meeting, December 9, 2024

[0:02:08] Trustee Luckham: all right so let's uh call ourselves back to order looks like everybody's here and um so for

[0:02:16] Trustee Luckham: members of the public joining us again thank you for waiting um so we've returned from our

[0:02:23] Trustee Luckham: in-camera session where we reviewed uh legal opinion and i have nothing to rise and report

[0:02:28] Trustee Luckham: from that um but we're going to now go back to our main agenda with respect to the uh

[0:02:37] Trustee Luckham: Galeano Island Local Trust Committee

[0:02:41] Trustee Luckham: bylaw number 283 and 284, request for decision.

[0:02:44] Trustee Luckham: And so I'm going to ask the Executive Committee

[0:02:49] Trustee Luckham: what your thoughts are on advancing or not this

[0:02:54] Trustee Luckham: approval of this with respect to the policy statement

[0:02:57] Trustee Luckham: and advancing it or returning it to the Local Trust Committee.

[0:03:02] Trustee Luckham: Please raise your hands if you wish to speak to it.

[0:03:04] Trustee Luckham: Trust Vice Chair Elliott.

[0:03:06] Trustee Luckham: Thank

[0:03:08] Voice 3: you, Chair. This is a really interesting and challenging bylaw to consider, and there is a lot to it. So I did watch the majority of the October 8th meeting, the Galliana Local Trust Committee meeting, and I wanted to understand and hear the words that were said in the room.

[0:03:29] Voice 3: So thankful to technology for that. It's quite a bit different to hear the words from Penelope Chief Pam Jack that were spoken than it is to read and then weigh all these different considerations.

[0:03:46] Voice 3: And I have to say that for me, the word of a chief who speaks on behalf of her community, Penelope tribes, and her elders, and all those who've gone before, that carries a lot of weight, Indy.

[0:04:06] Voice 3: And so I had to dig quite hard because coming into this on the face of it, it did not look like this DPA with the exemption P or Q rather was a fit or an appropriate tool to support and enact reconciliation.

[0:04:31] Voice 3: conciliation. So I made a list of pros and cons, if you'll indulge me, and I'll be brief, but maybe

[0:04:39] Voice 3: it helps to frame some of the complexities of this discussion. It's not a decision that I

[0:04:45] Voice 3: undertake lightly, and I know that my colleagues don't as well either. So on the con side against

[0:04:55] Voice 3: against um deciding to approve this um dpa a dpa on groundwater um we've heard many many times

[0:05:05] Voice 3: should regulate activities on the land and not peoples and so we've been heard many many times

[0:05:14] Voice 3: that's quite clear um in a legal opinion that was released as well so i think that

[0:05:22] Voice 3: that is a definite consideration. If we stray from that, we are straying quite far outside of

[0:05:29] Voice 3: what a DPA regulating groundwater or protecting groundwater should be doing.

[0:05:37] Voice 3: The second is that an exemption with a defined, that an exemption that would have a defined

[0:05:47] Voice 3: land use description that encompasses traditional Indigenous practices would probably be more

[0:05:57] Voice 3: successful. And we might want to consider that, whether exemption queue, rather than exempting

[0:06:05] Voice 3: persons, should potentially exempt on the basis of activities on the land. And this was raised

[0:06:13] Voice 3: by trustee govro in the community information meeting and i believe um she had a some wording

[0:06:24] Voice 3: to the effect that i won't get into it but it you know if activities were to protect

[0:06:33] Voice 3: um indigenous cultural heritage uh preservation restoration archaeological sites

[0:06:43] Voice 3: or habitat restoration or ceremonial uses those activities would be exempt from requiring a

[0:06:50] Voice 3: development permit so something like that that was more appropriate to be an activity on the land

[0:06:57] Voice 3: rather than an exemption for a person um i think is an argument on the sort of con side

[0:07:08] Voice 3: um so the third is there is a danger of of a potential harm if we if this exemption privileges

[0:07:23] Voice 3: some indigenous peoples over others and is there potential for discrimination

[0:07:28] Voice 3: and is that something that a local trust committee should get into

[0:07:34] Voice 3: to where we say people with federally recognized Indigenous status have those exemptions but not

[0:07:42] Voice 3: other Indigenous peoples with ties or connection to the land so I think that's an important

[0:07:46] Voice 3: consideration that was raised. Staff have already raised the point that this could set precedence

[0:07:54] Voice 3: for other bylaws with exemptions and expectations that we just cannot fulfill so I think there is a

[0:08:02] Voice 3: real we're treading into water that um we may not be able to meet everyone's expectations

[0:08:12] Voice 3: um that every bylaw needs to have consideration of indeed of a person's indigenous status

[0:08:22] Voice 3: and thirdly um is the bylaw actually going to be effective um william shulba made the point that

[0:08:37] Voice 3: there are already a lot of exemptions and I am concerned that there are so many exemptions

[0:08:43] Voice 3: already that it might be diluting the effectiveness of this development permit area.

[0:08:49] Voice 3: The purpose of a development permit area is to obtain voluntary compliance and when you look

[0:08:56] Voice 3: at the map he said this was a different piece of work in which he matched the DPA with land use

[0:09:04] Voice 3: planning to include the entire parcel like a zone but that's not how water works of course the entire

[0:09:12] Voice 3: island is likely a critical recharge area and yet we've got these squares that are saying these are

[0:09:19] Voice 3: specific areas that are recharge areas but that's actually maybe not true when it comes to the

[0:09:24] Voice 3: science so we've already got a reduced um effectiveness of the dpa and so one more

[0:09:33] Voice 3: exemption is that is that too many but weighing it on i personally would not want to see the

[0:09:45] Voice 3: exemption p or q now struck it's likely the forest lots exemption that would have the greatest impact

[0:09:52] Voice 3: on the groundwater anyway so if we're going to strike or recommend that exemption p be struck

[0:10:01] Voice 3: we should maybe consider asking if the ltc would consider the exemption to forest lot owners

[0:10:06] Voice 3: because that might have a huge impact on the integrity of the groundwater dpa so those are

[0:10:12] Voice 3: all my cons um and i realize that's a long list but there's only four points in my mind that

[0:10:24] Voice 3: really stand out strongly on the four side approving this dpa as is um advancing reconciliation

[0:10:35] Voice 3: and relationship building the islands trust declaration in my view is not actually strong

[0:10:44] Voice 3: enough but it is something and it's an overriding policy that we must consider in all of our work

[0:10:52] Voice 3: that we are committed to establishing and maintaining mutually respectful relationships

[0:10:59] Voice 3: between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. And because there has been such strong support

[0:11:05] Voice 3: for this in the recognition of this DPA, giving a place to Penelakut tribes in a land use tool,

[0:11:13] Voice 3: which is, I'll say it's inappropriate for this, but I do think it would cause some harm

[0:11:22] Voice 3: and degrade that mutually respectful relationship that is developing between the Galliano LTC

[0:11:30] Voice 3: and Penelakut tribe. So for that reason, I think it's supportable.

[0:11:38] Voice 3: The removal of barriers. If the purpose of this exemption, Q, is to recognize and support the connection of Indigenous peoples and their connection to land, and to remove barriers that we are placing, even if it is for an environmentally strong purpose, then I would say that's something we don't need to put in front of them.

[0:12:11] Voice 3: fair applicability of the law there is an argument to be made i believe that we have an unfair system

[0:12:19] Voice 3: to start with in which indigenous peoples were removed from their homelands and land use for

[0:12:25] Voice 3: settlement and industry and it was mentioned many times that penelakut tribe had not had

[0:12:32] Voice 3: been consulted in the development of bylaws before and this is the first time that they

[0:12:38] Voice 3: They saw themselves in a document, in an instrument that we are giving power to.

[0:12:44] Voice 3: And they felt strongly that that mattered.

[0:12:48] Voice 3: So is this fair?

[0:12:52] Voice 3: I would say maybe no.

[0:12:54] Voice 3: But is the system fair?

[0:12:57] Voice 3: I would also say it isn't.

[0:13:00] Voice 3: And this is the last point.

[0:13:04] Voice 3: People do matter in the development of our bylaws.

[0:13:09] Voice 3: And we have some precedence here with recognizing that some activities on the land, such as housing, we can set aside those protections when we are in a housing crisis.

[0:13:26] Voice 3: So many LTCs, one of which I'm living in, Salt Spring, Gabriola, even the RDN, are waiving enforcement of their own bylaws regulating increases in housing and density because people are suffering and had no housing options, and our bylaws did not allow for enough housing for people.

[0:13:46] Voice 3: So if we can set aside certain bylaws for a time while we develop a more robust OCP, a more rights-based land use planning scheme, recognizing that people have a place in our bylaws, I think that gives some weight to how people can be considered in even the construction of this groundwater development permit scheme.

[0:14:18] Voice 3: It's not perfect. And I've spoken to both trustees and they both say it's not a great tool. But I think it gives a strong signal that we actually do want to advance reconciliation in a way that is meaningful for the people whose lands and territories we have been making land use decisions on for 200 years.

[0:14:43] Voice 3: So for that reason, I do support this bylaw in the end, but it is a very difficult decision.

[0:14:54] Voice 3: So thank you for your patience, listening to all these articulations of thought.

[0:15:17] Voice 6: You're on mute, Mr. Chair.

[0:15:26] Voice 3: Still are, Peter.

[0:15:32] Trustee Luckham: There we go. Sorry about that. Vice Chair Peterson. Thank you, Vice Chair Elliott.

[0:15:37] Trustee Luckham: Yeah,

[0:15:40] Voice 4: thank you. And thank you, Vice Chair Elliott, for your thoughts there. I appreciate you laying out some of your considerations, both pro and con.

[0:15:52] Voice 4: on. Is this the best way for Galliano LTC to advance reconciliation? Maybe, maybe not.

[0:16:13] Voice 4: But it is the piece of legislation that's in front of the LTC that provides an opportunity

[0:16:24] Voice 4: to signal that, the intent.

[0:16:27] Voice 4: And I think that that was,

[0:16:29] Voice 4: I can't speak for the other members of the LTC.

[0:16:33] Voice 4: That wouldn't be appropriate,

[0:16:35] Voice 4: but I will express that my understanding

[0:16:39] Voice 4: of what I felt that I heard

[0:16:43] Voice 4: is that that has a lot to do

[0:16:46] Voice 4: with why this is now in front of executive committee today.

[0:16:49] Voice 4: day um indeed uh we as as elected trustees we are operating within a colonial uh construction

[0:17:00] Voice 4: government that is is the case um this you know it is noticed there is a number of of exemptions

[0:17:16] Voice 4: um to this bylaw most of them are activity specific for sure um and i take uh vice chair

[0:17:24] Voice 4: Elliott's point about which of those exemptions might be most impactful to remove. And it isn't

[0:17:36] Voice 4: the one in question, actually. I think you're right on that. And then just in terms of where we

[0:17:44] Voice 4: are as a part of a colonial governing system, I just also want to remind us that

[0:17:55] Voice 4: that while this may be seen as pushing the envelope here,

[0:18:03] Voice 4: Trust Council recently sent a request off to the province

[0:18:09] Voice 4: concerning the alignment of decision-making processes

[0:18:12] Voice 4: and structures with the Declaration of the Rights

[0:18:14] Voice 4: of Indigenous Peoples Act.

[0:18:17] Voice 4: And to my mind, there is some synergy

[0:18:22] Voice 4: between that request and recognizing the limited scope

[0:18:32] Voice 4: that we have without the province's assistance

[0:18:38] Voice 4: within the structure that we do have.

[0:18:42] Voice 4: And yeah, I'll leave it there for now.

[0:18:48] Voice 4: I'll let others speak.

[0:18:51] Voice 6: Thank you.

[0:18:52] Voice 6: Vice-Chair Maughan.

[0:18:53] Trustee Maude (probable): Thank you, Chair.

[0:18:56] Trustee Maude (probable): Certainly I will note that this is not the first time

[0:18:59] Trustee Maude (probable): that the Galliano LTC has colored slightly outside the lines

[0:19:04] Trustee Maude (probable): and brought new thoughts and new processes to the trust.

[0:19:10] Trustee Maude (probable): I certainly deeply reflect on the various legal opinions

[0:19:14] Trustee Maude (probable): that have been put before us.

[0:19:16] Trustee Maude (probable): They do inform the decision.

[0:19:20] Trustee Maude (probable): To some extent, they do present options.

[0:19:25] Trustee Maude (probable): I do note the staff do recommend supporting these bylaws.

[0:19:34] Trustee Maude (probable): I really appreciate Trustee Elliott for condensing her thoughts and articulate them in a very clear manner because it really is, there are things on both sides in this one.

[0:19:49] Trustee Maude (probable): this is not a black and white issue um but speaking in favor of um approval is i think

[0:19:58] Trustee Maude (probable): this is the time this is a nice tidy small bylaw um i think that if we're going to test the waters

[0:20:08] Trustee Maude (probable): this is that this is an appropriate time um i appreciate the depth of work that the galleon

[0:20:15] Trustee Maude (probable): and local trust committee and staff have put into this bylaw. And I cannot, in my mind,

[0:20:23] Trustee Maude (probable): find a solid reason to vote against it. So thank you.

[0:20:29] Trustee Luckham: Okay, very good. Thank you very much,

[0:20:32] Trustee Luckham: Vice Chairs. So I'll certainly weigh in here. I am going to vote in support of advancing

[0:20:42] Trustee Luckham: advancing these bylaws. And just for the record, there's many elements to these bylaws over and

[0:20:50] Trustee Luckham: above the one area that we've focused on. And I'm asking my colleagues to be sure that we're

[0:20:57] Trustee Luckham: advancing all of the other material and exemptions in the bylaw in the right way as well.

[0:21:08] Trustee Luckham: well. To me, it's about doing the right thing. And Vice Chair Elliott drew our attention to

[0:21:25] Trustee Luckham: water, which is essentially what this is about, and the mapping and understanding of water

[0:21:32] Trustee Luckham: on the land, rainfall and the like. The complexity of water is difficult to define,

[0:21:41] Trustee Luckham: Very difficult to define. We have some science to support us and back us up in doing that. But the spiritual and cultural relationship to the land is undefinable in my mind, except knowing that it exists and it's real and is important.

[0:22:07] Trustee Luckham: Both to me and the Coast Salish people since for time immemorial.

[0:22:19] Trustee Luckham: Um, it's interesting to note that this particular bylaw amendment, this particular development permit area is another layer of an existing set of regulation that has not included, um, Aboriginal peoples, First Nations and tribes.

[0:22:52] Trustee Luckham: And there's an effort here to recognize the importance of above and beyond our legislative understanding, our colonial relationship with the land, which is very much a regulated mechanism, a legal mechanism, a Western legal mechanism, which alienated First Nations people from the land.

[0:23:31] Trustee Luckham: disenfranchised is probably the politest word I could use. And it's important through our

[0:23:39] Trustee Luckham: reconciliation work that we are committed to resolve those inequities and injustices,

[0:23:47] Trustee Luckham: is what I say. And we could not advance this OCP and LUB at all for any number of reasons,

[0:23:57] Trustee Luckham: quite possibly, or simply the LTC could withdraw it and not advance it. And that would be at their

[0:24:05] Trustee Luckham: choosing. The existing level of regulation would continue to exist and continue to oppress

[0:24:12] Trustee Luckham: First Nations engagement and rights. This is a step in changing a bylaw to improve that tiny

[0:24:19] Trustee Luckham: little bit that's going to make very little impact. It's not going to affect a significant

[0:24:23] Trustee Luckham: amount of land or people. And I think it's the right thing to do. I don't want to stand in the

[0:24:31] Trustee Luckham: way of that. And I am prepared to see how that unfolds. And as this bylaw perhaps gets

[0:24:43] Trustee Luckham: moved into law, and as the province moves towards a better place in terms of

[0:24:50] Trustee Luckham: UNDRIP and DRIPA and the Land Act, potentially things will change and some of these things will

[0:24:59] Trustee Luckham: be recognized by others. And maybe the decision that we're going to make today might be less gray

[0:25:06] Trustee Luckham: than it presently is. But I think that there's sufficient rationalization

[0:25:14] Trustee Luckham: of advancing this work under reconciliation and supporting the rights of Indigenous people

[0:25:23] Trustee Luckham: on the land and their relationship with the land, I think we should advance this.

[0:25:31] Trustee Luckham: That's my two cents. I'm going to ask if there's any further remarks. I see Vice Chair Elliott's

[0:25:40] Trustee Luckham: hand up um

[0:25:42] Voice 3: i had a few questions um i don't know if you want to read the bylaw and then get have

[0:25:49] Voice 3: more discussion on it um but there was some thought that perhaps well we asked staff to be

[0:25:55] Voice 3: in the meeting who had engaged with penelope tribes um in conversations that were not

[0:26:02] Voice 3: necessarily in the open meeting and perhaps they have some insight in particular i do have a

[0:26:09] Voice 3: question about this last phrase with proof of indigenous family lineage why was that added

[0:26:17] Voice 3: and how is that proof going to be construed and what sort of burden is it going to put on

[0:26:25] Voice 3: by law enforcement planners and our staff to ascertain

[0:26:32] Voice 3: You know, I understand federal Indigenous status, that's fairly clear, but I'm a little confused about the proof of Indigenous family lineage laws. So I don't know if you've got any clarity on why it's phrased that way.

[0:26:56] Trustee Luckham: Kim Stockdale.

[0:26:59] Voice 2: thank you chair luckham um i'll do my best to answer your two questions there trustee elliott

[0:27:05] Voice 2: so i primarily led the conversations with penelakid over the last year or so

[0:27:11] Voice 2: and they have been from generally by letter or by email so just to give you the give the

[0:27:20] Voice 2: executive committee a bit of a overview in march of 2023 staff did send a referral to first nations

[0:27:28] Voice 2: highlighting the exemption that exemption p which is now exemption q then in november of 2023 uh

[0:27:35] Voice 2: staff were invited to a penelicate council meeting in which staff spoke uh or provided basic

[0:27:44] Voice 2: information on this project the groundwater sustainability project and specifically the

[0:27:50] Voice 2: exemption as well as other rezoning applications unfortunately there we were limited in time so we

[0:27:57] Voice 2: We were only able to provide information.

[0:27:59] Voice 2: We didn't get any response back from Penelope at that time.

[0:28:04] Voice 2: Then in July of this year, we had Chief Jack, who attended a Galliano LTC meeting and introduced herself to the LTC and to the community.

[0:28:17] Voice 2: Staff then sent a letter to First Nations asking for specific feedback on that exemption.

[0:28:24] Voice 2: So, asking if there was support for it, not in support for it, or if it could be reworded in a certain way to be more clear or to better achieve a certain objective.

[0:28:40] Voice 2: That letter was then resent in September of this year, and also the notice of the public hearing was sent.

[0:28:48] Voice 2: um so the communication we have had with a penelaket to them has been generally by letter

[0:28:56] Voice 2: we have not received anything in writing back except for the attendance of chief jack and

[0:29:03] Voice 2: council members at the july meeting and also at the october 8th meeting in which the executive

[0:29:09] Voice 2: executive committee has a summary of Chief Jack's support in the RFD in terms of the wording of the

[0:29:18] Voice 2: exemption that was primarily or that was given to staff from Trustee Maberly who had originally

[0:29:26] Voice 2: drafted that and staff worked to try to provide we might have changed it just a bit but in terms of

[0:29:38] Voice 2: how can or the terms of the wording of let me just get it correctly the

[0:29:45] Voice 2: uh proof of indigenous family lineage so that would be the responsibility of the

[0:29:53] Voice 2: property owner to provide that we'd imagine it would be some type of family tree proving that

[0:30:00] Voice 2: it would be up to the the property owner to provide that information and then staff would be

[0:30:06] Voice 2: reviewing it and um then staff would then issue a exemption letter stating that the property owner

[0:30:15] Voice 2: has provided the uh sufficient information to satisfy that exemption okay

[0:30:27] Voice 6: thank you uh planner

[0:30:29] Voice 6: Senator Stockdale, Vice Chair Elliott, your follow-up question?

[0:30:33] Voice 3: Yeah, so this is a two-piece exemption, essentially.

[0:30:43] Voice 3: You've got land owned by a person with federal Indigenous status

[0:30:47] Voice 3: who is living in their traditional territory

[0:30:50] Voice 3: and provides proof of Indigenous family lineage.

[0:30:54] Voice 3: I think this is the part that's going to be very tricky.

[0:30:59] Voice 3: And if we want to ask the LTC to consider, I mean, I'm not going to say turn it back and reconsider this today. But again, what kind of burden are we putting on staff? We are very much outside of policy direction or, you know, leaving it to staff to qualify who is included in that exemption, I think is going to be very tricky.

[0:31:28] Voice 3: it's much easier to confirm activities on the land and so i guess here um i will float the idea

[0:31:39] Voice 3: do we want to consider returning it and i've heard everybody and i i still am in favor of

[0:31:49] Voice 3: advancing the bylaw as is but if it read something that regulated like if it regulated activities

[0:31:58] Voice 3: activities explicitly undertaken for preservation, restoration, or safeguarding of Indigenous

[0:32:05] Voice 3: cultural heritage or archaeological sites as an exemption rather than persons, that

[0:32:15] Voice 3: is going to be much more in line and may support the intent of reconciliation, I would just

[0:32:26] Voice 3: say except for the fact that chief pam jack spoke so strongly in favor of this in the public meeting

[0:32:32] Voice 3: and if that is the only if that if we're relying on that and her words in that meeting i just want

[0:32:47] Voice 3: to caution us because we are we're leaving it up to a future body of planners and trustees

[0:32:53] Voice 3: to interpret this, and it is going to be tricky.

[0:32:57] Voice 3: Thank

[0:33:05] Trustee Luckham: you, Vice Chair Elliott.

[0:33:08] Trustee Luckham: Certainly, I admire your thoughtfulness here

[0:33:11] Trustee Luckham: and creativity even to trying to find a way

[0:33:16] Trustee Luckham: to make this more supportable.

[0:33:21] Trustee Luckham: One of the things that troubles me with finding some way

[0:33:25] Trustee Luckham: of creating an exemption that fits into the legislative framework

[0:33:29] Trustee Luckham: framework of land use planning. I don't, I don't, in my own belief, right, it's my own belief system,

[0:33:39] Trustee Luckham: and of course I have to speak from the heart and speak from what I know, that, and it may not be

[0:33:46] Trustee Luckham: completely correct, but I don't think that putting it into the context of the land use

[0:33:53] Trustee Luckham: recognizes a spiritual and cultural relationship that a First Nations person may have with the

[0:33:59] Trustee Luckham: land and that the regulations that we're putting in place would interfere with that spiritual

[0:34:05] Trustee Luckham: and cultural relationship with the land. And to me, that is significant. I have my own

[0:34:15] Trustee Luckham: relationship with the land and where I live. That's my home. But that's as a colonist. It's not

[0:34:26] Trustee Luckham: generations of family that have lived here since time immemorial. And I can't divide that.

[0:34:33] Trustee Luckham: So, thank you. I will support the motion as it is written. Anything else? Otherwise, I'd be happy to hear a motion. Tim Peterson, Vice Chair Peterson.

[0:34:49] Trustee Luckham: um

[0:34:50] Voice 4: i'm going to go ahead and make the uh first motion and of course we we can have further

[0:34:56] Voice 4: discussion at that time um so i move that the island's trust executive committee approve

[0:35:01] Voice 4: galliano island local trust committee bylaw number 283 cited as galliano island official

[0:35:09] Voice 4: community plan bylaw number 108 1995 amendment number 1 2022 in accordance with section 27 of

[0:35:18] Voice 4: of the Islands Trust Act.

[0:35:22] Trustee Luckham: Okay, so I have that moved

[0:35:24] Trustee Luckham: and I see that seconded by David Maude

[0:35:26] Trustee Luckham: and Vice Chair Ellionso.

[0:35:28] Trustee Luckham: Thank you, we'll take David Maude.

[0:35:30] Trustee Luckham: I saw his hand first.

[0:35:34] Trustee Luckham: And now, Tim, do you wish to speak to your motion?

[0:35:37] Voice 4: I think that I've summed up

[0:35:42] Voice 4: everything that I had to say at this point.

[0:35:44] Voice 4: Thank you.

[0:35:45] Trustee Luckham: Thank you.

[0:35:46] Trustee Luckham: Is there anybody that does wish to speak

[0:35:49] Trustee Luckham: to the motion at this point?

[0:35:53] Trustee Luckham: Vice Chair Elliott.

[0:35:57] Voice 3: I want to actually thank the community for bearing with what seems to be a very tough process.

[0:36:07] Voice 3: We are asking Galliano community members to adjust their expectations and what we have historically done for 50 years, which is regulate land use planning activities.

[0:36:26] Voice 3: activities and I just want to recognize that there have been over 40 letters every one of them

[0:36:33] Voice 3: has been against this or or suggested that the executive committee should not approve this bylaw

[0:36:45] Voice 3: and we have heard you we I have read all those letters and I just want to go back to

[0:36:52] Voice 3: what Chief

[0:36:54] Voice 3: Pam Jack said in the meeting

[0:36:56] Voice 3: they have heard

[0:36:58] Voice 3: the concerns

[0:36:59] Voice 3: but they want to do

[0:37:02] Voice 3: the work together

[0:37:04] Voice 3: with the local trust committee

[0:37:08] Voice 3: and

[0:37:10] Voice 3: for

[0:37:11] Voice 3: an Indigenous governing body to be

[0:37:15] Voice 3: in a position of

[0:37:18] Voice 3: included in our bylaws

[0:37:20] Voice 3: for maybe the first time

[0:37:21] Voice 3: even if it's not an appropriate

[0:37:23] Voice 3: place

[0:37:24] Voice 3: That recognition alone, I believe, is going to support the Islands Trust as a whole in establishing and maintaining mutually respectful relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples.

[0:37:42] Voice 3: That is not to set aside community members. And I guess I would just ask everyone for patience as we all adjust to new considerations that really should have been considerations 200 years ago. And we'll just see how this works.

[0:38:09] Voice 3: works so yes i support this um bylaw in principle in practice this is going to be a tricky one to

[0:38:18] Voice 3: work out thank you any

[0:38:24] Trustee Luckham: other remarks from vice chairs and i will call the vote all those in

[0:38:37] Trustee Luckham: favor raise your hands digitally or physically and that looks like it's a unanimous so lower your

[0:38:45] Trustee Luckham: hands. And just for clarity, are there any opposed? There are none opposed. So that is

[0:38:54] Trustee Luckham: unanimous. Thank you. There is a second motion there, if you're ready.

[0:38:59] Voice 4: I move that the Islands

[0:39:01] Voice 4: Trust Executive Committee approve Galeano Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw number 284, cited as

[0:39:09] Voice 4: is Galliano Island Land Use Bylaw No. 127, 1999,

[0:39:14] Voice 4: Amendment No. 1, 2022,

[0:39:17] Voice 4: in accordance with Section 26 of the Islands Trust Act.

[0:39:22] Trustee Luckham: Section 27.

[0:39:25] Pardon

[0:39:25] Voice 4: me, 27.

[0:39:27] Trustee Luckham: I'll second that.

[0:39:29] Trustee Luckham: So seconded by Toby Elliott.

[0:39:30] Trustee Luckham: Thank you, Toby.

[0:39:32] Trustee Luckham: And you wish to speak to it?

[0:39:35] Trustee Luckham: Is there any discussion on the bylaw?

[0:39:39] Trustee Luckham: Then I will call the vote.

[0:39:41] Trustee Luckham: All those in favor? Please lower your hands. That looks unanimous. I'm going to call that

[0:39:50] Trustee Luckham: unanimous. So that concludes that business today. Just want to acknowledge in the agenda,

[0:40:02] Trustee Luckham: and we certainly received it for information by being on the agenda, is the 30 pieces of

[0:40:11] Trustee Luckham: correspondence that are here and another 10 that we've received outside of the time slot for this

[0:40:18] Trustee Luckham: at the previous meeting and outside of the deadline of this package being presented to us.

[0:40:27] Trustee Luckham: And just ask if there's anything that any vice chairs would like to do with respect to the

[0:40:35] Trustee Luckham: correspondence. I certainly want to thank each and every one of them for expressing their point of

[0:40:40] Trustee Luckham: view but other than that if there's any if there's any specific direction we'll just receive it for

[0:40:46] Trustee Luckham: information okay so that concludes it on this opportunity for adjournment this is a special

[0:40:57] Trustee Luckham: meeting our regular next regular meeting will be in the not too distant future and so thank you

[0:41:03] Trustee Luckham: and thank staff for being with us today and and the support that you've all provided us

[0:41:08] Trustee Luckham: and let's call the meeting adjourned all those in favor that two carries okay we'll enjoy the

[0:41:15] Trustee Luckham: rest of the day and um we'll see y'all soon thank you

[0:41:20] Voice 4: take care bye everybody

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 
Executive Committee 
Minutes of a Special Electronic Meeting 
December 9, 2024    ADOPTED             Page 1 of 4 
 
 
Executive Committee 
Minutes of a Special Electronic Meeting 
 
Date:  
Time:  
Location:  
December 9, 2024 
2:00 pm 
Electronic Meeting, and a physical location to view the livestream of the 
meeting:   
Islands Trust Victoria Office 
#200 - 1627 Fort Street 
Victoria, BC V8R 1H8 
 
Members Present: Peter Luckham, Chair, Thetis Trustee 
 Tobi Elliott, Vice-chair, Gabriola Trustee 
 David Maude, Vice-chair, Mayne Trustee 
 Timothy Peterson, Vice-chair, Lasqueti Trustee 
  
Staff Present: Rueben Bronee, Chief Administrative Officer 
Julia Mobbs, Director, Administrative Services  
Stefan Cermak, Director, Planning Services 
 Clare Frater, Director, Trust Area Services  
 David Marlor, Director, Legislative and Information Services 
 Joe Elliott, Senior Indigenous Relations Advisor 
 Robert Kojima, Regional Planning Manager 
 Kim Stockdill, Island Planner 
 Brad Smith, Island Planner 
 Lori Foster, Executive Administrative Assistant/Recorder 
  
Members of the public 
present: 
There were approximately 4-5 members of the public present 
electronically 
 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
 
At 2:00 PM Chair Luckham called the meeting to order and acknowledged the meeting was 
being held on Coast Salish territory. 
 
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
 
2.1 Introduction of New Items - None 
 
2.2 Approval of Agenda 
 
By general consent the agenda was approved as presented. 
 
2.2.1 Agenda Context Notes – None 
 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 
Executive Committee 
Minutes of a Special Electronic Meeting 
December 9, 2024    ADOPTED             Page 2 of 4 
 
3. BYLAWS FOR APPROVAL CONSIDERATION 
 
3.1 Galiano Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 283 - Supplemental Briefing 
 
Regional Planning Manager (RPM) Kojima summarized the briefing included in the 
agenda package. 
 
By general consent item 5. Closed Meeting, was addressed next followed by item 6. Rise and Report. 
 
5. CLOSED MEETING 
 
EC-2024-153 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
That the meeting be closed to the public subject to Section 90(1)(i) of the Community 
Charter in order to consider matters related to receipt of advice that is subject to 
solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; and that 
staff be invited to remain in the meeting.  
CARRIED 
 
At 2:10 PM the meeting was closed to the public and was reopened to the public at 2:41 PM.  
 
6. RISE AND REPORT DECISIONS FROM CLOSED MEETING  
 
Chair Luckham noted there was nothing to report. 
 
3.2 Galiano Island Local Trust Committee - Bylaw Nos. 283 and 284 - Request for Decision  
 
Discussion ensued, particularly on proposed Bylaw No. 283 Development Permit Area 
exemption “q”.  
 
EC-2024-154 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
THAT the Islands Trust Executive Committee approve Galiano Island Local 
Trust Committee Bylaw No. 283, cited as “Galiano Island Official Community 
Plan Bylaw 108, 1995, Amendment No. 1, 2022” in accordance with Section 
27 of the Islands Trust Act. 
 
CARRIED 
 
EC-2024-155 
It was MOVED and SECONDED, 
THAT the Islands Trust Executive Committee approve Galiano Island Local Trust 
Committee Bylaw No. 284, cited as “Galiano Island Land Use Bylaw 127, 1999, 
Amendment No. 1, 2022” in accordance with Section 27 of the Islands Trust Act.  
 
CARRIED 
 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 
Executive Committee 
Minutes of a Special Electronic Meeting 
December 9, 2024    ADOPTED             Page 3 of 4 
 
 
4. NEW BUSINESS - None 
4.1 Executive/Trust Council 
4.2 Trust Area Services 
4.3 Planning Services 
4.4 Administrative Services  
4.5 Legislative and Information Services 
 
7. CORRESPONDENCE (for information unless raised for action) 
 
7.1 2024-11-18 S Pottle - Galiano Island Proposed Bylaw 283 
7.2 2024-11-18 J Margison - Letter for Nov.20 EC Mtg re- Galiano Bylaw 283 
7.3 2024-11-18 A Forget - Galiano By Law 283 
7.4 2024-11-18 J Bartley - Protest Bylaw 283 Executive Committee for Approval 
7.5 2024-11-18 M Czuma - re-bylaw 283 
7.6 2024-11-18 S Webster - Letter of concern.Galiano Island bylaw 283 
7.7 2024-11-19 A Moses - Galiano LTC proposed bylaw 283 
7.8 2024-11-19 B Hotte - Protesting Bylaw 283 Galiano Local Trust Committee 
7.9 2024-11-19 D Arber - NB Islands Trust Executive Committee 
7.10 2024-11-19 D Holmes - Proposed Galiano Local Trust Committee Bylaws# 283 284 
7.11 2024-11-19 G Gaylor - Galiano Bylaws 283 and 284 
7.12 2024-11-19 J Buttery - Bylaw 283 Bylaw 284 
7.13 2024-11-19 J Webster - Letter of concern. Galiano Island bylaw 283 
7.14 2024-11-25 B Campbell - Bylaw 283 
7.15 2024-11-25 D Holmes - Letter to Executive Committee Re: Draft Galiano LTC Bylaws 
283 and 284 
7.16 2024-11-25 K Ramsay - Galiano Bylaw 283 
7.17 2024-11-25 P Ramsay - Bylaw 283 Exemption P 
7.18 2024-11-25 S Anderson - Expression of concern re- Galiano Island LTC - Bylaws 283 and 
284 
7.19 2024-11-25 T Rockafella - Bylaw 283, exemption (p) 
7.20 2024-11-26 R Beairsto - Bylaw 282 exemption  
7.21 2024-11-27 K Kyle - Bylaw 238 
7.22 2024-11-27 J Bowers - Implications of exemption P as proposed in Bylaw 283 
7.23 2024-11-27 L Whynot - Galiano LTC by-law 283 
7.24 2024-11-28 M Howell - Bylaw 283 
7.25 2024-11-28 S Rybak - GLTC Bylaw. 283 - exemption "p" 
7.26 2024-11-28 J Bartley - Letter To EC re: Galiano Bylaw #283 
7.27 2024-12-01 H Schofield - Galiano Island proposed bylaw 283, Item P 
7.28 2024-12-01 L Seay - Galiano LTC Bylaw 283 
7.29 2024-12-02 T Flynn - Galiano Bylaw 283 
 
 
 
 
 
 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 
Executive Committee 
Minutes of a Special Electronic Meeting 
December 9, 2024    ADOPTED             Page 4 of 4 
 
8. ADJOURNMENT 
 
By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 3:30 PM. 
 
 
_________________________ 
Peter Luckham, Chair 
 
Certified Correct 
 
_________________________ 
Lori Foster, Executive Administrative Assistant/Recorder