Islands Trust Council public hearing, July 8, 2025

[0:00:05] Voice 9: Okay, well welcome everyone. I'll now call this meeting of the Galeano Island Local Trust Committee to order.

[0:00:13] Voice 9: Please be advised that we're recording this meeting and it will be posted on the Island's Trust website in a few days.

[0:00:21] Voice 9: I want to begin the meeting by acknowledging today that we're fortunate to be able to gather in the territory of the Coast Salish Peoples

[0:00:30] Voice 9: and in particular here on Galeano, the Penelakut Tribe, stewards of these lands and waters since time immemorial.

[0:00:38] Voice 9: I also want to acknowledge that the Galeano Island Local Trust Committee and Penelakut Tribe Chief and Council

[0:00:45] Voice 9: have been really embarked on an important journey of relationship building together,

[0:00:50] Voice 9: and all of those members of Council and the Chief and the Trustees and their staff

[0:00:58] Voice 9: have really taken I think new steps in working together in ways that haven't

[0:01:05] Voice 9: been common in the past both in the Islands Trust and in local government in

[0:01:10] Voice 9: British Columbia in general so just really want to honor the work that all

[0:01:18] Voice 9: of all of you and all of them have been doing together and my name is Tim

[0:01:24] Voice 9: Peterson I'm elected on Mesquite Island I am the chair of the Galliano Island

[0:01:28] Voice 9: local trust committee and uh with us today are our local trustees ben baberly lisa govro and our

[0:01:37] Voice 9: staff we have um planner from stockdale belcher here today and appreciate you all joining us

[0:01:46] Voice 9: today so we do have an agenda before us and i'll look to trustees to see if there are any

[0:01:52] Voice 9: the amendments. Yes,

[0:01:56] Voice 11: thank you. Um, the applicant for the rezoning, um, Palmberg, 2024-0030-003,

[0:02:06] Voice 11: um, the applicant has to leave by 2 o'clock. So, um, I'm not sure if the LTC wanted to

[0:02:12] Voice 11: move that application to after the public hearing or perhaps to the very first 16.1

[0:02:20] Voice 11: under applications and referrals. Because they have to leave at 2 o'clock. If we can get there in time. Sorry, I just realized it's court after 1. Right, yeah. So we can see perhaps where we're at after the public hearing and maybe make an amendment to the agenda.

[0:02:39] Voice 9: Certainly, we can reorder that.

[0:02:41] Voice 9: Yeah.

[0:02:42] Voice 9: I'll do that.

[0:02:43] Voice 9: Okay.

[0:02:44] Voice 9: So I'll take it by general consent, the agenda is approved,

[0:02:48] Voice 9: and I'll look to trustees for any trustee report updates you'd like to give.

[0:02:54] Voice 14: That's a deal.

[0:02:55] Voice 14: I'll go.

[0:02:56] Voice 14: A couple of updates and reflections over the past month.

[0:03:03] Voice 14: First, I'm going to share a little bit about our recent trust council meeting on Salt Spring Island.

[0:03:08] Voice 14: One of the more meaningful moments for me personally was we had a guest speaker, Jared

[0:03:16] Voice 14: Costanahan-Williams, who gave really powerful topics, kind of stayed with me over the, since

[0:03:22] Voice 14: the meeting, I kind of commemorate over and over again what he was saying.

[0:03:28] Voice 14: Yeah, he talked about many things, but what resonated with me was how environmental stewardship

[0:03:36] Voice 14: in the trust area. It's not a new thing. It's been built upon, literally, built upon,

[0:03:48] Voice 14: just like layered with the work that we do is the trust, layered over this

[0:03:56] Voice 14: far-reaching historic stewardship of these lands. What does that really mean to us

[0:04:02] Voice 14: as we move forward into the future.

[0:04:06] Voice 14: Yeah, so his words left me reflecting on my roles,

[0:04:10] Voice 14: not as just a trustee, but also as a community member.

[0:04:15] Voice 14: How do we honor our long histories?

[0:04:18] Voice 14: How do we acknowledge that living presence

[0:04:22] Voice 14: that dishes people and the community?

[0:04:26] Voice 14: How do we help become better allies?

[0:04:29] Voice 14: How do we help plan for the future?

[0:04:32] Voice 14: One of the stories that stood out for me that George shared was around place naming.

[0:04:38] Voice 14: And it kind of reminded us that we often name parks and lands and streets after individuals as a crown through their achievements.

[0:04:47] Voice 14: But often indigenous place names reflect on what happened there.

[0:04:53] Voice 14: What is the relationship with the land?

[0:04:58] Voice 14: Something I learned was that because many nations share and have overlapping interests

[0:05:04] Voice 14: in the land, and share land quite well, that if we consider Ruth, say, what's the Penelican

[0:05:11] Voice 14: name for Galliano?

[0:05:13] Voice 14: That's not really kind of a thing.

[0:05:16] Voice 14: There's nuances like that that I've been learning and respected.

[0:05:21] Voice 14: It would be inappropriate to try to name it one thing, but to name an area where something

[0:05:29] Voice 14: has happened and to remember that and to honor what happened there.

[0:05:33] Voice 14: So it reminded me that I have lots to learn and lots to unlearn.

[0:05:38] Voice 14: In my Island's Trust Conservancy work, I've been visiting several LTCs, Ian Zoon.

[0:05:47] Voice 14: I've been to see Salt Spring, Gabriela, and Marmee to deliver chair reports.

[0:05:54] Voice 14: I look forward to over the next week to join Salt Spring again, Denman Islands, and

[0:05:59] Voice 14: Mesquitee. Yeah, I can give an update, zoom in from my home and talk about what's

[0:06:07] Voice 14: happening at the ITC. These visits have been a real pleasure. I really enjoy

[0:06:12] Voice 14: listening to the updates from the other trustees as well as the chair reports.

[0:06:16] Voice 14: It's learning quite a bit, learning a little bit more about each of those items.

[0:06:22] Voice 14: And I think that these updates, by having me there at the meetings, it's a better opportunity to understand what type of work the ITC does.

[0:06:32] Voice 14: It's that real connection.

[0:06:37] Voice 14: Also at Trust Council, I gave a slideshow presentation to mark the 35th anniversary of the Conservancy.

[0:06:46] Voice 14: It's a great opportunity to reflect on how far we've come and where we're headed.

[0:06:52] Voice 14: Which brings me to some truly exciting news.

[0:06:57] Voice 14: The Alice Trust Conservancy has recently received a $1,015,000,000 anonymous donation.

[0:07:06] Voice 14: It's the largest gift in the industry

[0:07:08] Voice 14: and it's a major vote for confidence of our community.

[0:07:11] Voice 14: The donation is being directed to two different areas, $157,300 is going into a property management fund,

[0:07:21] Voice 14: and that helps us protect lands, ponder grounds, so we're monitoring, removing species at risk,

[0:07:30] Voice 14: restoration projects, working with other conservancies.

[0:07:34] Voice 14: But $1 million of the donation is going to go into the opportunity fund.

[0:07:41] Voice 14: The Opportunity Fund is a grant program offered by the ITC, so it helps cover part of the

[0:07:50] Voice 14: fundraise for items, so like appraisals, mapping, legal work.

[0:07:57] Voice 14: Since 2005, the Opportunity Fund has distributed $135,000 in grants, and that leverages into

[0:08:06] Voice 14: 69 million dollars in conservation equity across the lands. So this donation is

[0:08:14] Voice 14: going to supercharge our impact. Moving on, wildfire season is officially here.

[0:08:24] Voice 14: After our last meeting that weekend, it was June 7th, I think we had the emergency

[0:08:28] Voice 14: preparedness day training. It was a timely reminder

[0:08:32] Voice 14: to remind everyone how we can

[0:08:34] Voice 14: prepare better for any wildfire activity. This year has been lower than that 2023 record-breaking

[0:08:44] Voice 14: season that we saw, the drought conditions and warmer than normal temperatures, but there's

[0:08:51] Voice 14: still many increased risks. Some of the actions that you can take now is to sign up for the

[0:08:56] Voice 14: CRD emergency notification program. You can prepare your own grab-and-go bag with essentials.

[0:09:05] Voice 14: clear any dry brush and ladder fuels from around your home and then check on your neighbors.

[0:09:12] Voice 14: Emergencies are easier to face when we're all working together. In the related thread,

[0:09:19] Voice 14: I've written a letter to the Minister of Health of BC and the Minister of Mental Health and

[0:09:25] Voice 14: Addictions to raise concerns about the loss of funding for Galliano's community-based social

[0:09:31] Voice 14: worker. Rural areas where access to these services are very limited. It's much more

[0:09:39] Voice 14: than just a clerical issue, it's more of a question of our community's well-being,

[0:09:42] Voice 14: a question of safety and equity in our community and I encourage others to

[0:09:49] Voice 14: write or share their views with Minister Osborne or Minister Whiteshield. That's all for me.

[0:09:56] Voice 9: Thank you, Trustee Gilbrow. Before we continue the meeting, I'd like to

[0:10:00] Voice 9: acknowledge that uh jack and members of connecticut council have joined us today and welcome and thank

[0:10:07] Voice 9: you for coming there's more chairs and projects and um and so next up is uh report from trustee

[0:10:16] Voice 9: yeah thank

[0:10:17] Voice 1: you thanks lisa uh just a couple of updates um the parking down at montague i'm sure

[0:10:22] Voice 1: anybody that's driven down here has seen that that's completed now uh thanks to paul brandon

[0:10:27] Voice 1: the crd for their funding of that and and to the local contractors looks good i haven't seen it

[0:10:32] Voice 1: full yet so that's a good sign so hopefully that sort of eases the burden down there for the summer

[0:10:38] Voice 1: another update is on the housing project as everybody can see the the spot has been clear

[0:10:45] Voice 1: i was on a call yesterday with the crd to get an update and the start of phase one will begin

[0:10:51] Voice 1: in a couple of months the reason it's been delayed for a couple of months is

[0:10:56] Voice 1: because, you know, it's typical in the Gulf Islands, trying to house anybody during the summer is near impossible.

[0:11:02] Voice 1: So they're going to start to evolve, and it's a lot easier for them to get accommodations for their workers.

[0:11:07] Voice 1: And then lastly, I'm just going to give a shout-out like I normally do to anybody who's passed.

[0:11:13] Voice 1: Tom Darby was a significant contributor to the North End of Galliana Fire Chief for an awfully long time.

[0:11:20] Voice 1: and by and large Tom was just a great guy and just wanted to make sure that he was

[0:11:26] Voice 1: mentioned and we're all gonna miss him yeah

[0:11:30] Voice 15: thank you

[0:11:31] Voice 9: for that trustee

[0:11:33] Voice 9: Maberly so next for the chair's report just note that I attended the

[0:11:46] Voice 9: Southern Gulf Islands forum last week we got updates from a number of trustees

[0:11:53] Voice 9: the Member of Parliament Elizabeth May, MLA Rob Cotterill and CRD Director Paul Brent were

[0:12:02] Voice 9: all there.

[0:12:02] Voice 9: A bit of a discussion on history of transportation issues focused on some of the concerns on

[0:12:09] Voice 9: Saturna brought by Trustee Bowen and Southern Gulf Islands Forum is partially funded by

[0:12:18] Voice 9: by Islands Trust and I think remains a valuable opportunity for elected folks from the local

[0:12:29] Voice 9: level right up to the federal level to have a dialogue around issues and although there

[0:12:36] Voice 9: hasn't been a lot of First Nations involvement, First Nations are invited to that forum and

[0:12:42] Voice 9: and at times participated and really shared some really insightful um useful reflections

[0:12:49] Voice 9: for the rest of us doing as we do this work uh in cooperation as best we can

[0:12:56] Voice 9: um just briefly um next week the uh trust council committee the whole meets on july 9th

[0:13:04] Voice 9: to review the new draft of the Policy Statement at an electronic meeting.

[0:13:11] Voice 9: Following that, on July 29, Trust Council has scheduled a special meeting

[0:13:17] Voice 9: to consider first reading of the Policy Statement draft.

[0:13:24] Voice 9: First reading, of course, is what triggers the rest of the project,

[0:13:27] Voice 9: including First Nations engagement and public engagement and Trust Council determined to have that engagement period open for a six-month period of time,

[0:13:41] Voice 9: which is longer than would typically be the case for such a review, but the project's been a long time coming.

[0:13:49] Voice 9: There hasn't been a significant update to the policy statement in approximately 30 years

[0:13:57] Voice 9: and a lot of the language there is completely out of date, not least of the fact that the

[0:14:04] Voice 9: current version mentions First Nations not at all whatsoever.

[0:14:10] Voice 9: So we're looking forward to hopefully getting that through first reading and out to First

[0:14:15] Voice 9: nations and the public for some engagement and there will be of course opportunities

[0:14:21] Voice 9: prior to second and third reading for further revisions if that's felt to be desirable and

[0:14:29] Voice 9: a positive step so we're happy that that is I'm happy having been in this this work

[0:14:36] Voice 9: since middle of last term to potentially be reaching the point where we might actually get

[0:14:43] Voice 9: at first reading it and then once this big project is done one thing I've been pushing for

[0:14:50] Voice 9: a lot is to is to have a more iterative to do a review of the policy statement at least once

[0:14:58] Voice 9: per term trust council added to its strategic plan I think a really important item at our

[0:15:04] Voice 9: council meeting which was working in collaboration with First Nations on how we do that kind of a

[0:15:12] Voice 9: more regular review so that it isn't 30 years in between um updates and revisions to what's

[0:15:20] Voice 9: what what is intended to be a living document um it's unfortunate that previous trust councils have

[0:15:26] Voice 9: have left the work to to the present day but this is this is where we are so

[0:15:34] Voice 9: So we're happy to do that work.

[0:15:40] Voice 9: It's important work, and when I say we're happy to do it,

[0:15:43] Voice 9: it doesn't mean it's not hard and a lot of work.

[0:15:45] Voice 9: I've spent a lot of the last six years deeply in this work,

[0:15:52] Voice 9: and it's important work.

[0:15:55] Voice 9: I would be happy if we could get into verse reading

[0:15:57] Voice 9: and back out to the public and First Nations,

[0:16:00] Voice 9: because I think that's that would be a milestone that in just in terms of

[0:16:06] Voice 9: respect that the work has to be done we can't leave it alone for another 30

[0:16:10] Voice 9: years we have to do better and we have to we have to commit to to doing the

[0:16:16] Voice 9: ongoing work so that we don't have this giant policy statement project looming

[0:16:21] Voice 9: in front of us forever that's the best legacy I think that this trust council

[0:16:25] Voice 9: could give to a future trust council is to have smaller bits and then there are

[0:16:30] Voice 9: going to be bits that want to be revised down the road as the the climate changes both politically

[0:16:39] Voice 9: and literally in the environment that we live in so um and i'll leave it there i note that we

[0:16:46] Voice 9: do not have a um electoral area director here today but we do have a first nations

[0:16:54] Voice 9: report section here and i just wonder if anyone from the chief or council if you'd

[0:16:59] Voice 9: like to offer anything for us today if not that's okay too but uh i just want to give you the space

[0:17:04] Voice 9: if you'd like yeah

[0:17:13] Voice 4: i'd just like to once again thank everyone for coming out and helping sort

[0:17:19] Voice 4: out some of the issues that come up in front of us and it's nice to see you remember your faces

[0:17:25] Voice 4: get to know everyone and i'd like to introduce uh some of our team here

[0:17:32] Voice 4: We've got Chief Pam, 15 o'clock, Kurt Irwin, Robert Sands, part of our treaty person and

[0:17:45] Voice 4: cultural person, Robert Charlie, council, Danny Jack, council, Benin over here is part

[0:17:55] Voice 4: of our environmental person, and we've got my cousin here, he's over here assisting

[0:18:02] Voice 4: assistant chief here and Glen's been here a long time so just wanted to let everyone know we're here and this is part of our core territory Galliano and you know according to our elders our history our teaching you know just wanted to bring that aware and hopefully keep things going in a good way and I want to thank the table here the trustees and you know they're

[0:18:31] Voice 4: they're, as far as I know, they're the first ones

[0:18:33] Voice 4: to come to our office and sit and have a chat with us

[0:18:38] Voice 4: during one of our council meetings.

[0:18:40] Voice 4: So, you know, I'd like to really thank you guys

[0:18:44] Voice 4: for coming out and reaching out

[0:18:46] Voice 4: and keeping the communication going.

[0:18:48] Voice 4: You know, and I hope it keeps going in the future.

[0:18:51] Voice 4: You know, we got other things coming up.

[0:18:55] Voice 4: We always have personal things going on.

[0:18:57] Voice 4: We can't always be here, but, you know,

[0:18:59] Voice 4: want to thank you guys for keeping up with communication with our nation

[0:19:07] Voice 9: thank you it's a reciprocal process and it takes willingness and effort on both sides so

[0:19:14] Voice 9: really appreciate it okay so next up we have town hall on questions um as of course most

[0:19:23] Voice 9: of you know we have a community information meeting and the public hearing coming up so

[0:19:29] Voice 9: So there are other items on the agenda, applications and such.

[0:19:35] Voice 9: So I'm going to suggest that if you want to speak on the proposed bylaw 296 to the

[0:19:42] Voice 9: Falberg rezoning, that you hold off and do that.

[0:19:47] Voice 9: So let's focus this town hearing on the other parts of the agenda since we have a

[0:19:51] Voice 9: specific time set aside for that one.

[0:19:54] Voice 9: So go ahead, Carmine.

[0:19:57] Voice 9: Thank you.

[0:19:57] Voice 18: My name is Camila, and it's about the Palmer application.

[0:20:08] Voice 9: Okay, and I just requested that since we're going to have a public hearing and a community

[0:20:15] Voice 9: information.

[0:20:15] Voice 18: Yeah,

[0:20:15] Voice 9: I know the

[0:20:15] Voice 18: 296, then 297.

[0:20:19] Voice 9: Okay, I get you.

[0:20:22] Voice 9: But what I wanted to do is see if there's anything else on the agenda people wanted

[0:20:27] Voice 9: to talk about first and then and then we can come back so anything else steven thank you uh

[0:20:34] Voice 22: chair peterson i note that uh draft line laws 292 293 294 and 295 as they're presently drafted do not

[0:20:48] Voice 22: provide any shoreline access if the reasonable lands in questions are indeed going to be

[0:20:56] Voice 22: be transferred to Penelope. It seems to be a significant oversight.

[0:21:06] Voice 16: Can I answer that?

[0:21:08] Voice 16: Well,

[0:21:08] Voice 9: I know one of them does.

[0:21:11] Voice 9: No,

[0:21:13] Voice 16: there actually is on both. It was requested from the LTC that an amenity lot be provided

[0:21:20] Voice 16: that could be either or park or an amenity lot where the money would go to the LTC and

[0:21:27] Voice 16: i believe from what i understand that they might be moving towards parks so that would be then

[0:21:32] Voice 16: water access and park so but that would that's up to the lcc to make that decision and moki

[0:21:39] Voice 22: that was was not very evident from the draft okay

[0:21:46] Voice 9: anything else on the agenda outside of the

[0:21:50] Voice 9: the the pulver yes yes um

[0:21:54] Voice 4: yeah i wanted to uh speak to the uh item 16.6 and 16.7 which are the

[0:22:03] Voice 4: uh rejoining support proposed is only for district law 86 and 85. um somewhat similar to what uh

[0:22:13] Voice 4: As Steve Ryback said, my concern is about limited, also about a limited shoreline, but in the context of the land that is being transferred to another organization, in terms of the land that's being kept for rural residential, the rural residential, the configuration.

[0:22:39] Voice 4: I've raised this in other previous LTC meetings, and that is that the current lot layout does

[0:22:47] Voice 4: not reflect the original policy upon which this rezoning is based, which was that the

[0:22:58] Voice 4: 7525 heritage forest model required that at least two-thirds of waterfront be part of

[0:23:05] Voice 4: of the land transfer and kept in out of the residential zone and there's nowhere near this

[0:23:14] Voice 4: in the case of district block 79 after zoning a substantial portion of shoreline was transferred

[0:23:27] Voice 4: which is now a CRD park and this is not the

[0:23:31] Voice 4: case in this case I think this is wrong

[0:23:34] Voice 4: wrong for the planner to encourage the applicants to proceed on this basis it's just not doesn't

[0:23:41] Voice 4: reflect the policy that this rezoning is based on another point which is my disappointment

[0:23:50] Voice 4: in reading the package perhaps you could provide some explanation of this but i'm really

[0:23:56] Voice 4: disappointed that there is no specific reference to the lands being transferred

[0:24:02] Voice 4: transferred to the Penelope tribe.

[0:24:06] Voice 4: The Penelope tribe in this staff report

[0:24:10] Voice 4: are listed as one of several alternatives

[0:24:14] Voice 4: to whom the land could be transferred.

[0:24:16] Voice 4: I don't understand why that is.

[0:24:20] Voice 4: The land of the province of British Columbia,

[0:24:22] Voice 4: Capital Regional District, or other transgarees

[0:24:26] Voice 4: designated the land use by law amendment,

[0:24:29] Voice 4: the Penelope tribe is one of them.

[0:24:31] Voice 4: I thought the, my understanding was that this rezoning really is contingent upon transfer

[0:24:39] Voice 4: to the Penelope because of the concerns about access to the Dionysio and the archaeological

[0:24:47] Voice 4: sites and the concern about the road being open and allowing free access to the park.

[0:24:54] Voice 4: the discussion about transferring to the

[0:25:00] Voice 4: tribe came out of the context of those

[0:25:05] Voice 4: concerns that were raised certainly by

[0:25:08] Voice 4: the originally and in parks

[0:25:10] Voice 4: BC Parks indicated that they didn't want

[0:25:15] Voice 4: a transfer of land in this case which they

[0:25:18] Voice 4: had done with previous rezones for that

[0:25:20] Voice 4: very reason. I don't understand why

[0:25:22] Voice 4: why America only one of several alternatives. My other concern about the

[0:25:29] Voice 4: staff report is that there's no mention, when it comes to the issue of a

[0:25:34] Voice 4: sustainable forestry covenant, the staff report makes no mention of the fact this

[0:25:40] Voice 4: must be a third party covenant with a third party. There's no mention of a

[0:25:46] Voice 4: third party in the staff report and I don't understand why that is. Maybe

[0:25:52] Voice 4: Maybe one of the trustees or the chair could provide some clarification on why there's no mention of a food party covenant hold it.

[0:26:06] Voice 6: Thank you

[0:26:07] Voice 4: chair.

[0:26:08] Voice 11: So the applicant, VLTC and staff are aware that the sustainable forestry covenant must be held by a third covenant member.

[0:26:16] Voice 11: That's also stated in the draft OCP bylaws for both of these properties. So that will be addressed and the applicants are aware of it.

[0:26:25] Voice 11: so there will be a third party held. It's up to the

[0:26:28] Voice 11: applicants to determine who that third party is and they're aware of it.

[0:26:32] Voice 11: It's been in the terms of reference letter and a number of our previous staff reports.

[0:26:36] Voice 11: In terms of

[0:26:39] Voice 11: the

[0:26:42] Voice 11: draft OCP

[0:26:44] Voice 11: naming a number of different transferees for land,

[0:26:47] Voice 11: the Connecticut Tribe has been determined that they will be receiving the nature protection for both properties and also

[0:26:54] Voice 11: the reason why the province

[0:26:57] Voice 11: of BC is that they may be receiving the road, it's to be

[0:27:08] Voice 11: determined if Pedelecate will be receiving that or MOTT and the province was also designated

[0:27:15] Voice 11: or listed and the capital regional district to receive the power so that's why those

[0:27:22] Voice 11: transfer ease are in there. I had a question, if

[0:27:28] Voice 14: that's appropriate. I know it's going to be a little bit long, but as far as the third party on the

[0:27:32] Voice 14: government, can that be the penalty?

[0:27:36] Voice 11: I'm taking a look at the, I believe that it

[0:27:40] Voice 11: has to be a non-profit, let me just double check the wording on that. What I'll do is I'll report back when I get to that item on the agenda if that works.

[0:27:56] Voice 11: yeah thank you okay

[0:27:59] Voice 9: thank you anybody else before we go into the community

[0:28:04] Voice 9: of narration meeting

[0:28:05] Voice 9: I have

[0:28:08] Voice 18: a general interest in the ecological area and a very personal

[0:28:18] Voice 18: interest because we live in the subdivision and the hospitalism below

[0:28:24] Voice 18: below this property. And there is there the well, that is the community water system for

[0:28:35] Voice 18: 37 properties. So one of the things I want to ask you is that in one of the reports said

[0:28:42] Voice 18: that before to have the community information meeting and the public hearing, here it is,

[0:28:49] Voice 18: About the 297, you need the water management report, but there is nothing about that you need the ecological report, the septic disposal report, and maybe also a wastewater management report.

[0:29:13] Voice 18: Have you requested the applicant, the ecological report, the septic report? It is mentioned in several of the...

[0:29:34] Voice 11: So the reason why all the items weren't listed, they're included in the terms of reference letter that's sent to the applicant,

[0:29:43] Voice 11: and there should be a link to that in the, not the staff report, the previous staff report.

[0:29:48] Voice 11: and that

[0:29:48] Voice 11: will outline all the documents and information that the LTC is

[0:29:53] Voice 11: requiring before we move forward to a public hearing and that allows the LTC

[0:29:58] Voice 11: staff

[0:30:00] Voice 11: and also community members receive that information and look it over.

[0:30:03] Voice 11: But I would have to take a look at the terms of reference to determine exactly what's included in that.

[0:30:08] Voice 11: I know it's going to be septic, I know it's going to be water, I don't believe we've requested an environmental assessment report

[0:30:16] Voice 11: because there's going to be no disturbance in the RAR, but I'll have to double check the terms of reference.

[0:30:23] Voice 18: Now, if you have there two DPAs, DPA 1 and 5, and from what I know, when you have DPAs, one is riparian and the other is sensitive ecosystem, you should have an ecological report.

[0:30:41] Voice 18: There are three DPAs.

[0:30:43] Voice 18: Yeah,

[0:30:43] Voice 19: there are two.

[0:30:44] Voice 19: I'm sorry.

[0:30:45] Voice 19: Do you need any information?

[0:30:48] Voice 9: No, we're just about together.

[0:30:52] Voice 9: Okay, so anything else before we…

[0:30:56] Voice 9: Yes,

[0:30:56] Voice 18: I have something.

[0:30:57] Voice 9: Okay, go ahead.

[0:30:57] Voice 18: Yesterday I was in the Zoom with Patricia Woodford. She is working as a biologist from the BC Provincial Government,

[0:31:08] Voice 18: now with the Island Trust in a contract, and she said that it should be an ecological review,

[0:31:16] Voice 18: and that ecological review will be seen by her office, because there are development permits, one and two.

[0:31:25] Voice 18: So that's why.

[0:31:28] Voice 18: What was the name?

[0:31:32] Voice 18: Her name is Patricia Guthrow.

[0:31:36] Voice 18: And she is working now with the planning department

[0:31:44] Voice 18: for decisions including developing applications and bylaws

[0:31:50] Voice 18: in respect to business and risk ecosystem.

[0:31:54] Voice 18: ecosystem. Now, the second one

[0:31:57] Voice 18: is also about 297. In the April report, there was the directive

[0:32:07] Voice 18: from the policy statement checklist. And in that one that was carried, the Directive 313

[0:32:16] Voice 18: 3 about sensitive areas, 3.3.2 about riparian areas and water courses, and 4.4.2 about groundwater

[0:32:28] Voice 18: were saying they were not applicable.

[0:32:33] Voice 18: And the first of your staff report, that was done in June, June 27, under analysis, policy

[0:32:49] Voice 18: Regulatory Island Track Policy Statement, it says, the more relevant policies in the

[0:32:55] Voice 18: Island Track Policy Statement relating to this resulting proposal are 313 ,

[0:33:05] Voice 18: 332 , 442 .

[0:33:11] Voice 18: The hard to believe is that in the first report appear like the relevant policies

[0:33:17] Voice 18: is illiterate, and when you have the checklist,

[0:33:21] Voice 18: you accept it and are non-applicable.

[0:33:28] Voice 14: And you're asking me a question?

[0:33:30] Voice 14: Yes.

[0:33:31] Voice 18: We don't need a question, yes.

[0:33:32] Voice 14: And then we covered this at the last meeting, you know?

[0:33:34] Voice 14: It wasn't made clear at all.

[0:33:37] Voice 14: I thought it was pretty clear.

[0:33:39] Voice 14: Yeah, that's what it was pretty clear.

[0:33:42] give

[0:33:42] Voice 14: us an excellent response.

[0:33:44] Voice 14: Why wasn't it?

[0:33:45] Voice 19: What was that then?

[0:33:47] Voice 19: Sorry?

[0:33:47] Voice 19: What was that this time?

[0:33:48] Voice 19: I

[0:33:49] Voice 14: would have to go look it all up again,

[0:33:50] Voice 14: I know that we talked about this many times.

[0:33:54] Voice 14: It

[0:33:55] Voice 18: was not in the summary of the report.

[0:33:57] Voice 9: I'd just like to bring us back into order here.

[0:34:00] Voice 9: Jennifer, if you want to put your hand up and speak, that's fine.

[0:34:03] Voice 8: But this is not okay.

[0:34:05] Voice 18: It was not in the summary of the report.

[0:34:08] Voice 18: It was not in the summary of the minutes.

[0:34:11] Voice 18: The days went on.

[0:34:12] Voice 18: The chick leak was in April.

[0:34:14] Voice 18: And after that, it was nothing.

[0:34:17] Voice 18: And I was sick.

[0:34:18] Voice 18: I wasn't reading anything. But now that I've been reading again, I've noticed that.

[0:34:24] Voice 18: How could it be that in the June 24th, is there relevant ID 3, but when you have the checklist, there are no articles?

[0:34:39] Voice 11: I'm sorry, I can't speak to the policy statement. I would have to go back to really refresh

[0:34:45] Voice 6: my memory on that.

[0:34:46] Voice 11: but in terms of the terms of reference it does include the requirement for an

[0:34:51] Voice 11: ecological overview report so the applicant is aware of that okay

[0:34:57] Voice 8: I'm

[0:34:58] Voice 8: gonna move on

[0:34:59] Voice 9: Jennifer yeah

[0:35:00] Voice 19: I just want to support what

[0:35:03] Voice 19: Kermita has said because I think I initially asked about that when I saw

[0:35:08] Voice 19: the directive checklist attached to the staff report and in those three areas it

[0:35:15] Voice 19: was marked non-applicable and I asked about it at the last meeting response at the time from

[0:35:21] Voice 19: the planner was that the LTC could change that from non-applicable so I actually asked at the

[0:35:29] Voice 19: last LTC meeting if the LTC had given consideration to changing the designation on those areas in the

[0:35:38] Voice 19: the directive policy that, as Carmita has explained, were indicated in the staff report

[0:35:45] Voice 19: as being directly relevant to the application if consideration had been given from changing

[0:35:50] Voice 19: those from non-applicable. And I did not understand the answer to that. I mean, it hasn't been

[0:36:00] Voice 19: change but it's very unclear to those of us in the public how those three policies in the

[0:36:09] Voice 19: directive checklist can be marked as non-applicable to this application yeah

[0:36:17] Voice 14: respectfully like i don't

[0:36:18] Voice 14: we've already ruled on that i have no interest in opening it up again i know you don't like the

[0:36:23] Voice 14: answer but

[0:36:24] Voice 19: i just i just like to understand the reasoning behind it that why they're marked

[0:36:29] Voice 19: not applicable why do i agree

[0:36:32] Voice 14: that they're not applicable i agree that they're not applicable

[0:36:36] Voice 14: like i don't think they are in this area i think 297 we're going to see a water management plan

[0:36:44] Voice 14: it might change that might that's arguable for sure i see your point well

[0:36:48] Voice 19: at this point

[0:36:49] Voice 14: if

[0:36:50] Voice 19: the intensity of

[0:36:52] Voice 14: water use on

[0:36:53] Voice 19: a property is increased there has to be evidence that there's

[0:36:58] Voice 19: a sustainable supply of water for not only

[0:37:01] Voice 19: the property but for the surrounding surrounding

[0:37:04] Voice 19: properties and because this is above a community water system serving 37 tons whole seems pretty

[0:37:10] Voice 19: significant yeah and

[0:37:13] Voice 9: i think i think you've got an answer here and i think we need to

[0:37:16] Voice 9: to move on in the interest of time here stephen uh joe

[0:37:22] Voice 22: peterson um i have some i would like to

[0:37:27] Voice 22: make a comment on the process leading up to the community information meeting on the draft

[0:37:36] bylaw

[0:37:36] Voice 22: 296 as opposed to any of the details contained within that bylaw okay so i can

[0:37:45] Voice 22: hold fire or let go go ahead okay i would strongly urge the ltc not proceed beyond the

[0:37:56] Voice 22: community information meeting on the proposed draft bylaw 296. the cim is desperately needed

[0:38:05] Voice 22: as there is a vacuum of information analysis and discussion on the merits of amending the ocp to

[0:38:14] Voice 22: ease a single rezoning application a year ago a former trustee called for a community dialogue

[0:38:21] Voice 22: based on more information and analysis on the path suggested by staff. The

[0:38:29] Voice 22: silence from staff and trustees has been deafening. We need community awareness

[0:38:36] Voice 22: and dialogue for any changes to the OCP that affect more than one property on

[0:38:42] Voice 22: Galliano and that is to ensure the integrity of transparent governance.

[0:38:48] Voice 22: Staff may never be held accountable for recommending a course of action with unintended or ignored

[0:38:57] Voice 22: consequences, but trustees will eventually be held accountable.

[0:39:05] Voice 22: Please use the CIM to kick-start the process of sharing information and discussion.

[0:39:12] Voice 22: Use your APC for further analysis and possible alternatives.

[0:39:18] Voice 22: Let's listen and discuss before deciding.

[0:39:23] Voice 22: And please let us know where you stand and why on this staff proposal.

[0:39:29] Voice 22: Remember, this is a proposal. It's not written in stone. You can change it.

[0:39:41] Voice 22: considering that there is a black hole at the minister's office as you have uh recognized

[0:39:48] Voice 22: i would not expect that any extension on this bylaw would materially affect the rezoning

[0:39:56] application so please take the time and

[0:40:00] Voice 22: look at what you were about to do thank you

[0:40:03] Voice 22: Thank

[0:40:06] Voice 9: you for that. I would note that it is absolutely possible to make the proposed LHPA amendment site specific. That's certainly within the purview of the LTC.

[0:40:23] Voice 9: Alright, so if there is nothing further, then I think we should move into the community information meeting section.

[0:40:30] Voice 9: And so I'm going to turn it over to Planner Stockville.

[0:40:33] Voice 9: Thank

[0:40:34] Voice 11: you, Chair. I do want to introduce the application and also the reason and the rationale to this community information meeting.

[0:40:44] Voice 11: So this community information meeting is for a rezoning application, PLRZ20240003.

[0:40:52] Voice 11: The applicant is proposing to rezone their property, which is currently zoned for Rural 2, to allow additional uses to that zone.

[0:41:03] Voice 11: So they'll be site-specific uses and those are contractors, workshop and yard, the storage and sale of gravel, soil and aggregates,

[0:41:12] Voice 11: sawmilling, planing and manufacturing of wood products, as well as the production and sales of cider and wine.

[0:41:20] Voice 11: This application, as I mentioned, will amend, if it proceeds, amend the land use by-law to allow those site-specific uses.

[0:41:28] Voice 11: And we'll also amend the official community plan and that's why we're here today to really discuss that portion, which is bylaw number 296.

[0:41:39] Voice 11: The OCP land use designation for this property is currently ruled.

[0:41:46] Voice 11: So the rule designation in the OCP has a number of policies, but I really want to highlight two.

[0:41:52] Voice 11: Those are Policy A, which states that the principal uses shall be residential and agriculture.

[0:42:02] Voice 11: Policy E states that within this designation, a number of different zones may be applied,

[0:42:11] Voice 11: allowing differing levels of use as accessory to residential uses.

[0:42:16] Voice 11: It doesn't mention anything about that principal agriculture use.

[0:42:20] Voice 11: use. So prior to 2011, as I stated, the rural policy A in terms of a principal use, I've

[0:42:31] Voice 11: only referred to it for residential use. After 2011, that changed to include the principal

[0:42:39] Voice 11: use of a cultural policy A. It's staff's opinion at that time that really policy E

[0:42:47] Voice 11: E should have also been amended to reference that new principal use. So staff are proposing

[0:42:55] Voice 11: that principal E should be amended so it references that agriculture use so that it would read

[0:43:02] Voice 11: within this designation a number of different zones may be applied allowing different levels

[0:43:09] Voice 11: of uses accessory to residential and agriculture uses. So the rule 2 zone, it

[0:43:19] Voice 11: permits currently, this is a rule 2 zone in the land use bylaw, it permits

[0:43:26] Voice 11: dwellings and farm use along with other permitted uses. The current use of the

[0:43:31] Voice 11: property is just farm use, there is no dwelling on the property and the property

[0:43:36] Voice 11: The property owner and applicant has expressed that they do not plan at any time to construct

[0:43:42] Voice 11: a dwelling on the property.

[0:43:44] Voice 11: For the proposed uses that are included in the proposed bylaw number 297 that would amend

[0:43:53] Voice 11: the land use bylaw, in order for those to move forward and be adopted they must be compliant

[0:44:01] Voice 11: client with the OCP and that's why we require an amendment to the OCP to include the amendment

[0:44:07] Voice 11: to policy E. So that's why staff are proposing that VLTC move this process with the OCP by

[0:44:15] Voice 11: law forward first because we know that the minister does take time. This would allow

[0:44:21] Voice 11: them, the applicant, to continue to work on their land use portion of the application

[0:44:26] Voice 11: and to provide all those documents as outlined in the terms of reference. When all those

[0:44:33] Voice 11: documents and information are received, at that point the LTC can then schedule a CIM

[0:44:39] Voice 11: and a public hearing for bylaw number 297. So to summarize, today this community information

[0:44:47] Voice 11: and public hearing is for the OCP amending bylaw and another CIM public hearing will

[0:44:53] Voice 11: will be held on bylaw number 297 at a later date.

[0:44:58] Voice 11: And I'll leave it at that.

[0:45:02] Voice 9: Excellent, thank you for that.

[0:45:04] Voice 9: And there's opportunity for questions

[0:45:07] Voice 9: around bylaw number 296.

[0:45:12] Voice 9: Jennifer.

[0:45:14] Voice 19: I would like to echo what Stephen said

[0:45:17] Voice 19: in that I'm not speaking in opposition to this application,

[0:45:21] Voice 19: But I'm speaking out of concern for the process and the lack of discussion about the implications

[0:45:28] Voice 19: of amending the OCP and the LUV in the way it has been presented.

[0:45:33] Voice 19: There may be situations where the simplicity of a change merits having a CIM immediately

[0:45:39] Voice 19: followed by a public hearing, but I really don't think this is one of them, and I think

[0:45:44] Voice 19: it puts the public in a very difficult position because we cannot have any

[0:45:50] Voice 19: input at all once the public hearing has been held so the AC OCP amendment that

[0:45:57] Voice 19: is being presented as an oversight that just requires correction as should have

[0:46:03] Voice 19: happened in 2011 I think is an oversimplification of actually what was

[0:46:11] Voice 19: intended in the OCP. I can see the logic behind the present wording and I think

[0:46:19] Voice 19: the implications of this amendment to add agriculture to E has not been

[0:46:25] Voice 19: discussed in any of the staff reports or in any of the LTC meetings I've attended.

[0:46:31] Voice 19: It's sort of been presented as not having any implications. But our OCP in

[0:46:37] Voice 19: the preamble under community objectives states and this is right at the beginning even seemingly

[0:46:44] Voice 19: small changes can damage or deplete resources compromise self-sufficiency and i think this is

[0:46:51] Voice 19: the key piece distort long-term planning and i think this is the risk in this case a risk that

[0:46:59] Voice 19: needs to be considered in a way that i've not heard yet and maybe it will be determined there

[0:47:04] Voice 19: is no risk but that discussion does not happen the rural 2 zoning is under the residential section of

[0:47:12] Voice 19: the ocp that's where it resides in the residential section and it has been noted in the staff reports

[0:47:19] Voice 19: that this zoning does not permit light industrial which is some of the uses proposed for this

[0:47:26] Voice 19: property or a side route as is also being proposed in fact it states in a as kim stated the principal

[0:47:36] Voice 19: use shall be residential and agriculture and e states within this designation a number of

[0:47:43] Voice 19: different zones may be applied allowing different levels of uses accessory to residential use

[0:47:51] Voice 19: because it's in the residential section. So that really doesn't seem like an

[0:47:56] Voice 19: oversight to me and the District Rural in the OCP also says this area is intended

[0:48:06] Voice 19: to allow for larger lot developments to provide for a variety of rural

[0:48:12] Voice 19: activities without impinging on neighbors. So I think the assumption

[0:48:19] Voice 19: presented in the staff report that the wording is not necessarily correct I

[0:48:26] Voice 19: think there's a deliberate inclusion or a deliberate wording in E that does not

[0:48:33] Voice 19: include agriculture as a sort of separate use that it is intended to be

[0:48:40] Voice 19: be accessory to residential use. And the Rural 2 zoning in the LUB currently says it permits

[0:48:50] Voice 19: dwellings, cottages, home occupations, farming, secondary suites, and then it says all other

[0:48:57] Voice 19: uses are prohibited. So I also believe that this should be referred to the APC. A number

[0:49:05] Voice 19: of people in the community have volunteered to serve on the APC no work has been sent to them

[0:49:11] Voice 19: as yet and I think this would be a really important and good exercise especially with

[0:49:19] Voice 19: the upcoming review of the OCP to go through just to look at the implications and the implications

[0:49:26] Voice 19: have not been discussed so that's my main point. Thank you.

[0:49:32] Voice 9: Okay any other questions?

[0:49:36] Voice 4: I wanted to ask the planner whether this wording change in E, adding and agricultural uses,

[0:49:52] Voice 4: is that necessary to allow, enable the use of a contractor's yard in storage and aggregates?

[0:50:02] Voice 4: That new wording?

[0:50:04] Voice 4: Through the chair, yes.

[0:50:06] Voice 4: It is?

[0:50:09] Voice 4: Because

[0:50:10] Voice 11: currently the property does not have a residential use. It has an agricultural use that's active on the property.

[0:50:21] Voice 4: Yeah, I'm interested in your answer. I thought the answer would be no, but I thought it was primarily for the development of a brewery

[0:50:31] Voice 4: and beer making inside of the operation and the related hospitality business but you're telling

[0:50:41] Voice 4: me it's for the aggregate storage of aggregates and contractor yards which is surprising because

[0:50:47] Voice 4: my understanding is there's already a residential zone property on the island

[0:50:56] Voice 4: that is being used for as a contractor yard and storage of aggregates

[0:51:00] Voice 4: and it also is a residential property that does not have a residence on it, and that's being done under a TEP, temporary use permit.

[0:51:10] Voice 4: So why would you need to amend this for the, to enable a lot of integrates and contract PR?

[0:51:19] Voice 11: Yeah, that's a really good question. So the reason why is because this application is a rezoning application,

[0:51:26] Voice 11: so they're going through the process of legalizing that for closed use.

[0:51:30] Voice 11: they're going to have so if the land use by-law amendment is adopted then they

[0:51:36] Voice 11: will be permitted that use outright and a land use by-law amendment must comply

[0:51:41] Voice 11: with an official community plan whereas a temporary use permit the OCP is certainly a

[0:51:50] Voice 11: guided tool but really the temporary use permit allows you to have that those

[0:51:55] Voice 11: those temporary uses. So it's kind of two different application strings.

[0:52:01] Voice 4: Okay, well the other question is, I thought contractor yards were already a permitted use in residential property.

[0:52:10] Voice 4: Okay, it's a contract, there was a whole initiative by the trust 10 years ago to enable contractor yards to be part of residential property.

[0:52:21] Voice 11: Yeah, I don't have it in front of me, so I'm not sure if it would fit in within the home occupation, but again, a home occupation can only operate if there is residential use or a dwelling unit on the property.

[0:52:33] Voice 11: And because that's not the case here, there is no, a home occupation cannot be permitted because there's not a residence or dwelling.

[0:52:43] Voice 11: You

[0:52:43] Voice 4: see, that's, I mean, we're supposed to be asking questions now, I guess, but why isn't that an issue?

[0:52:54] Voice 4: Having a home occupation, it would be a home occupation if it was a residence.

[0:53:01] Voice 4: It's a residential zone.

[0:53:03] Voice 4: There's no residence.

[0:53:04] Voice 4: There's no intention to build a residence.

[0:53:06] Voice 4: How is it that the trustees are proceeding to enable uses that would only be permitted as a home occupation towards the residents?

[0:53:19] Voice 4: How do you do this on residential property where there's no residents? I don't have that.

[0:53:28] Voice 11: I do not, I have not referred to the home occupation use. I'm not sure the contractor yard would actually be included in that.

[0:53:34] Voice 11: I would have to go through the land use by-law to determine if a contracting yard is actually

[0:53:39] Voice 11: in committed use under home occupation. So I just want to

[0:53:41] Voice 11: note that, that I'm not saying

[0:53:42] Voice 11: it is. I haven't reviewed the land use by-law in terms of the home occupation I think.

[0:53:48] Voice 6: Yeah, fair enough. Jennifer, question.

[0:53:54] Voice 19: Why is the proposal not to rezone into agriculture? It just seems to me that you're trying to

[0:54:04] Voice 19: make a shoe fit a foot that is not appropriate i mean all the different uses in this application

[0:54:15] Voice 19: are fit under light industrial and agriculture not residential this is a residential zone

[0:54:23] Voice 19: so i i don't understand the logic so

[0:54:30] Voice 11: through the chair the rural 2 zone does allow residents or

[0:54:33] Voice 11: a dwelling as a primary use but also a farm use so it's not just residential the r2 zone

[0:54:40] Voice 11: you can have just a farm use outright yes

[0:54:45] Voice 19: accessory to residential use that's incorrect

[0:54:49] Voice 19: well that's what it says

[0:54:50] Voice 11: in the in the oc the rule 2 zone allows farm use as a principal use

[0:54:56] Voice 11: Okay, any more questions? Steven?

[0:55:07] Voice 9: Somebody else? Oh, okay. Carmina?

[0:55:11] Voice 18: To me, when I have been reading this, this is very confused. I don't know how many here in this room really understand about this.

[0:55:23] Voice 18: I feel that what the speaker said, the idea to take this to the advisory committee,

[0:55:32] Voice 18: And I think we will have a report to read and try to understand it.

[0:55:37] Voice 18: It's very confusing.

[0:55:40] Voice 18: So we are very few here.

[0:55:42] Voice 18: I imagine most of the people on the island have no idea of this.

[0:55:47] Voice 18: And it shouldn't be changing the OCP so easily when nobody really knows anything.

[0:55:56] Voice 9: I don't think that I heard a question there.

[0:55:59] Voice 9: Why

[0:56:00] Voice 4: is it that A, on the current bylaw, the principal uses shall be residential and agriculture?

[0:56:11] Voice 4: Why doesn't it not say, if agriculture is on the same plane as residential, as the planner

[0:56:18] Voice 4: is suggesting, why would it not say residential or agriculture?

[0:56:26] Voice 11: Because they're both included in the Rural T-Zoning.

[0:56:28] Voice 11: But

[0:56:30] Voice 4: if you can have an agricultural use without residential, which you're saying you can,

[0:56:36] Voice 4: why wouldn't it say residential or agricultural?

[0:56:40] Voice 11: Again, the OCP is a guiding document, right?

[0:56:43] Voice 11: It doesn't state exactly what you're permitted to do in that zone.

[0:56:48] Voice 11: They're stating that these are the principal uses that can be, right, in the zone.

[0:56:58] Voice 11: Yeah.

[0:57:01] Voice 22: Steven.

[0:57:03] Voice 22: Chair Peterson, I was somewhat taken aback

[0:57:06] Voice 22: by staff's adoption of the infallibility principle

[0:57:10] Voice 22: in deciding that what happened 14 years ago was an oversight.

[0:57:18] Voice 22: And from the discussion that has occurred, my question is,

[0:57:22] Voice 22: should this not be sent to the APC

[0:57:26] Voice 22: to take a look at some of the issues that have been raised

[0:57:29] Voice 22: and to determine whether or not this was a potential oversight, or is there, oh, yeah, yes, I'm rather skeptical of staff ability to discern the past so precisely.

[0:57:58] Voice 1: No, we're in the

[0:57:59] Voice 9: community information section here.

[0:58:01] Voice 9: Jennifer, and please, questions?

[0:58:03] Voice 9: Yes, I have a question.

[0:58:04] Voice 19: and if they're specific that's

[0:58:06] Voice 5: helpful yeah

[0:58:07] Voice 19: the question would be on what basis is the planner

[0:58:12] Voice 19: drawing that conclusion that this was an oversight in 2011 what is the evidence for that

[0:58:20] Voice 19: planners

[0:58:22] Voice 11: talk to us i did have a discussion with robert kojima regional planning manager

[0:58:26] Voice 11: in regards to this and we had a discussion around this specifically and he agreed that he believes

[0:58:33] Voice 11: that this was an oversight by this time so that was from a planner who wasn't part of the process

[0:58:38] Voice 11: back in 2011.

[0:58:42] Voice 8: okay uh art

[0:58:43] Voice 4: did did you speak to any of the trustees at the time to see whether

[0:58:48] Voice 4: they thought it was an oversight no did you speak to any of the members of the uh advisory committee

[0:58:58] Voice 4: on uh on agriculture part of the ocp review determine whether that was their thinking

[0:59:05] Voice 11: No. Those members, no.

[0:59:14] Voice 4: Don't you think it would have been helpful to do that and ask the legislators?

[0:59:22] Voice 4: It seems to me that in Parliament when there's an issue of what is intended by this law,

[0:59:29] Voice 4: you go back to the legislation and you go back to the debate at the time

[0:59:34] Voice 4: to determine whether this was as you're suggesting it was.

[0:59:39] Voice 4: And that would be something that could be done in a different way.

[0:59:46] Voice 4: Well, I would

[0:59:47] Voice 9: just state that unless there's extremely detailed minutes,

[0:59:52] Voice 9: which are very unlikely that that's going to be captured in those minutes,

[0:59:56] Voice 9: that then you're just going to get into, you know,

[1:00:00] Voice 9: know, memories. So, you know,

[1:00:02] Voice 8: in our modern era,

[1:00:04] Voice 9: we're recording meetings. We now have

[1:00:07] Voice 9: verbatim in a way that, you know, perhaps the Hansard is more robust than our minute

[1:00:15] Voice 9: taking standards of 10 or 14 years ago, but I'd suggest that that's a little bit speculative

[1:00:24] Voice 9: speculative there. Okay. I'm going to go to Steven and questions. Jermaine to the application, please.

[1:00:35] Voice 22: As this is a proposed change, Chair Peterson, to the OCP, has staff done any sort of an analysis of how many other R2 properties

[1:00:49] Voice 22: would be affected and what potential consequences might arise with this change in designation

[1:00:56] to opening up these

[1:00:59] Voice 22: other parcels of land to rezoning applications. Has there been an

[1:01:08] Voice 22: assessment?

[1:01:09] Voice 11: Would you like me to answer that question?

[1:01:11] Voice 11: So there are approximately 107 properties designated as rural in the official community

[1:01:19] Voice 11: a new plan and in terms of any consequence of the LTC adopting this any future rezoning

[1:01:29] Voice 11: applications so any future amendments to the land use bylaw any future site specific rezoning

[1:01:35] Voice 11: applications we'd be referring to this new or the addition to this policy so that would be the

[1:01:43] Voice 11: consequence. Again, this is to the OCP, it's not to the land use by-law.

[1:01:53] Voice 8: Carmina?

[1:01:54] Voice 18: Yes, I just want to ask the trustees, if you don't have doubts about this, about this information, about changing the OCP just for one application,

[1:02:11] Voice 18: You don't feel, yourself, that we need better, to have more information, maybe more work

[1:02:20] Voice 18: done by the advisory committee to have more clarity about this issue.

[1:02:28] Voice 18: I

[1:02:35] Voice 1: mean, we're not discussing the applicant, we're in the middle of the process of finding

[1:02:39] Voice 1: information.

[1:02:40] Voice 1: Could I make a suggestion?

[1:02:43] Voice 1: Seriously.

[1:02:44] Voice 1: The applicant is left.

[1:02:48] Voice 1: Yes.

[1:02:49] Voice 1: Right, so there's no person seen to get to this application at the end.

[1:02:54] Voice 1: I respect that Chief Jack and Council have arrived here today to look at two other applications.

[1:03:06] Voice 1: My suggestion would be that we wrap up the community information portion of this meeting,

[1:03:14] Voice 1: move to those two by-laws and then get through the rest of the agenda

[1:03:20] Voice 1: and then come back to this and then again go until dark that's okay that's what the room wants to do

[1:03:29] Voice 9: well we may if that's what the room wants to do we'll be adjourning because uh some some of us

[1:03:34] Voice 9: have to go elsewhere today um and

[1:03:37] Voice 11: i'm happy to provide the ltc with options on how to proceed

[1:03:41] Voice 11: after this public hearing if you want to go back and you know look at the ocp amendment by law

[1:03:46] Voice 11: in more detail I'll provide that option at that time right

[1:03:50] Voice 9: certainly yeah I mean as mentioned

[1:03:52] Voice 9: you know it could be a site-specific amendment as well so um given that and uh so really

[1:04:01] Voice 9: short pertinent questions that haven't been asked before please if there are any more and otherwise

[1:04:08] Voice 9: we're going to move on so any final questions pertinent to this bylaw Jennifer just one last

[1:04:15] Voice 19: last question um you made reference to people's memories but it seems that the same could be

[1:04:23] Voice 19: applied to um mr kojima who is the only other person who's been consulted about what happened

[1:04:31] Voice 19: in 2011. so okay

[1:04:34] Voice 9: i just i'm not finding this really focused on the bylaw

[1:04:38] Voice 19: and i think we're

[1:04:39] Voice 19: really

[1:04:39] Voice 9: straying here so if you have anything on the bylaw that'd be great my

[1:04:46] Voice 19: question is why would

[1:04:47] Voice 19: other people who were involved in the hard work putting the ocp together at the time

[1:04:54] Voice 19: okay is there

[1:04:55] Voice 19: a specific question about the

[1:04:57] Voice 9: bylaw jennifer yes yes

[1:04:59] Voice 9: what is this question about the

[1:05:01] Voice 9: bylaw not about consulting other people and memories and for let's what's in the meat of

[1:05:07] Voice 9: here what that you need to answer that's what i'm wanting that's what the point of this is

[1:05:12] Voice 19: it's it's

[1:05:13] Voice 19: the assumption that the planner has presented and that apparently has been backed up by mr kojima

[1:05:19] Voice 19: that there was um an error or a neglect of actually including agriculture in eve when in

[1:05:30] Voice 19: fact that wording could be quite deliberate yeah

[1:05:35] Voice 9: well now we're in it's speculative but i think

[1:05:38] Voice 9: we're spinning our wheels here so let's move on that's that's not helpful and i don't think

[1:05:42] Voice 9: we're getting anywhere at this point uh anything new that hasn't been raised that's not about

[1:05:48] Voice 9: speculation or people's memories today yes

[1:05:53] Voice 5: why would we not want to amend such a rule

[1:05:57] Voice 5: whether it's not working today is there

[1:06:00] Voice 22: any good reason not to move ahead with this

[1:06:02] Voice 22: from my perspective

[1:06:07] Voice 11: no because it doesn't necessarily greenlight anything it's a change

[1:06:12] Voice 11: of policy that guides future applications. Thanks. Okay,

[1:06:19] Voice 9: appreciate that. Yes?

[1:06:21] Voice 4: With this kind of change, would this be something that would be appropriate to examine as far as OCP review?

[1:06:34] Voice 4: Which is what you're contemplating later on in the agenda?

[1:06:43] Voice 9: well we're you know that that's that's really not true I mean we're

[1:06:50] Voice 9: contemplating it as part of this application that how we get there as I

[1:06:57] Voice 9: mentioned before there's there's there's more than one way to do this when we get

[1:07:02] Voice 9: to the the final wording which we're not at and including as I said I mentioned a

[1:07:11] Voice 9: couple times of site specific there's it could also be it could also be part of a

[1:07:18] Voice 9: larger look at it and more generally and certainly I mean there's there's when we

[1:07:26] Voice 9: come to doing the review

[1:07:27] Voice 6: the scope is is what the local trust committee decides

[1:07:31] Voice 6: is the scope so obviously with public consultation but so there's no reason it

[1:07:38] Voice 6: couldn't be okay

[1:07:46] Voice 9: I'm gonna suggest we move along then and I'll just check in

[1:07:52] Voice 9: is Trustee Gavreau are you amenable to the suggestion of moving to item 16.6

[1:08:02] Voice 9: and 16.7 yes and then we'll come back I

[1:08:06] Voice 14: think that's a great plan okay

[1:08:08] Voice 9: okay so

[1:08:15] Voice 9: let's do that let's uh let's pause and page 85 rezoning with district law 86 and i'll turn it

[1:08:39] Voice 9: over to planner's problem thank

[1:08:40] Voice 11: you chair peterson uh so this staff report is written regards to

[1:08:44] Voice 11: district law 86 rezoning uh file gl rz 21.2 and it presents two draft bylaws for the ltc's

[1:08:54] Voice 11: consideration which one which would amend the land use bylaw and the second which would amend

[1:09:00] Voice 11: the official community plan and staff are providing a motion to the LTC to give both

[1:09:06] Voice 11: draft bylaws first reading staff have also included a review of the item's trust policy

[1:09:14] Voice 11: statement for both draft bylaws and consistency with that and also includes requirement of

[1:09:22] Voice 11: of covenants as a condition prior to bylaw adoption consideration and also to schedule

[1:09:30] Voice 11: a community information meeting and a public hearing upon receipt of those draft covenants

[1:09:37] Voice 11: and a groundwater assessment report. So the draft bylaw 293 would amend the land use bylaw

[1:09:46] Voice 11: which would rezone the property which is currently Forest 1 to Forest 3, one Forest 3 lot, a

[1:09:55] Voice 11: rural residential site specific E, nature protection and park and the intention is that

[1:10:02] Voice 11: the nature protection zone portion would be transferred to Connecticut and the park would

[1:10:08] Voice 11: be transferred to the CRD and those those requirements will be included in

[1:10:15] Voice 11: the draft covenant ensuring that the transfer will happen at time of

[1:10:21] Voice 11: subdivision so if this transfer doesn't happen once the bylaws are

[1:10:26] Voice 11: adopted actually happens at the subdivision stage and that's why we

[1:10:30] Voice 11: require those covenants to ensure the property owner does do that transfer in

[1:10:36] Voice 11: In terms of the terms of reference, the applicants are working really hard on providing the requested information.

[1:10:44] Voice 11: They provided a great updated site plan, which is what we needed to draft the by-law.

[1:10:50] Voice 11: Staff need to overlay the steep slopes to determine if a development permit area is required,

[1:10:57] Voice 11: although I'm pretty sure that it's not, but that's something that we will report back on.

[1:11:04] Voice 11: They are also working on groundwater reports and I believe the separate disposal report as well, but they have completed the baseline ecological overview report and that will be attached to the Sustainable Forestry Covenant.

[1:11:25] Voice 11: So that report, that draft report is attached, when you click on it, it's attached to the site or on the staff report but it's also found on the Galeano application webpage.

[1:11:39] Voice 11: So staff, so Schedule C of the Official Community Plan in terms of the road network plan as we know, identifies the existing easement access that bisects district blocks 85 and 86.

[1:11:54] Voice 11: and staff will refer these draft phone laws to the capital and regional district

[1:12:00] Voice 11: in terms of a requirement for a statutory right of way for emergency access

[1:12:06] Voice 11: so staff have drafted the referral form and after this meeting

[1:12:14] Voice 11: pardon me this meeting the referrals will be sent to first nations and also to the agencies

[1:12:19] Voice 11: listed in the staff report and if there are any agencies that the LTC should be on the list please let me know and I will include that.

[1:12:28] Voice 11: So staff's rationale for the motions that are on page 1 are that the applicant has been really working hard on providing the required documents

[1:12:39] Voice 11: and the next step in the process is to give first reading to the draft bylaws in order to get them out for referral

[1:12:47] Voice 11: roll so we can receive those comments back from agencies and First Nations and

[1:12:52] Voice 11: staff will continue to work with the applicant to also draft the covenants so

[1:12:58] Voice 11: on page 85 the agenda there are five recommendations for the LTC to consider

[1:13:04] Voice 11: okay

[1:13:09] Voice 9: and anything additions from the applicant today? no?

[1:13:16] Voice 9: actually

[1:13:17] Voice 16: sorry yeah one thing I just wanted to confirm that the

[1:13:20] Voice 16: amenity lot is going you want it to go to park is that that's correct it

[1:13:24] Voice 11: would uh we are going to

[1:13:26] Voice 11: refer it to the capital regional district so we have the parks and rec gallery parks and rec to

[1:13:30] Voice 11: see if that's something that they would want to receive yeah

[1:13:33] Voice 11: and once we hear back from them then

[1:13:35] Voice 11: the ltc can make that determination yep okay so

[1:13:40] Voice 9: trustees any questions for either planner or

[1:13:44] Voice 9: applicants?

[1:13:46] Voice 14: Any questions, comments?

[1:13:48] Voice 14: I have lots. Yes, I'll put a few questions here.

[1:13:52] Voice 14: All right, where do I start? All right, yeah, first question, I'm just going to jump right in.

[1:14:04] Voice 14: Marine protection zoning, despite that it's pretty common and nearby adjacent

[1:14:11] Voice 14: adjacent properties, could this be added?

[1:14:17] Voice 11: Absolutely, so the LTC can give direction to staff

[1:14:22] Voice 11: to rezone the foreshore portion in front of this property

[1:14:28] Voice 11: to earn that protection.

[1:14:30] Voice 11: Yeah, so you would, the LTC wishes to do that,

[1:14:33] Voice 11: you would give direction to staff to amend the draft model

[1:14:35] Voice 11: and then give first reading as amended.

[1:14:40] Voice 14: Because my thinking is, if you look up towards the tip of the island, there's marine protection

[1:14:46] Voice 14: that wraps the entire top of the island, and then as it comes down to the seaside, it stops

[1:14:52] Voice 14: at 86, 87, there's a little bit on 79, and there's not much there.

[1:15:00] Voice 15: But

[1:15:00] Voice 14: these are, I think this area is culturally significant, ecologically significant, and

[1:15:07] Voice 14: And I think that would be a really good fit for this application.

[1:15:12] Voice 16: I have no problem with that, going into marine protection.

[1:15:14] Voice 16: The only thing is, how do we keep all the fishermen away, like the boats coming in and fish?

[1:15:18] Voice 16: Could you define marine

[1:15:22] Voice 10: protection?

[1:15:27] Voice 10: Like, I'm not quite understanding.

[1:15:30] Voice 10: I mean, I'm a part of the group, but I don't understand what marine protection actually does.

[1:15:36] Voice 14: Is it building

[1:15:37] Voice 10: docks or, like, obviously you're not going to build a dock.

[1:15:40] Voice 14: Oh, it's a little bit complicated.

[1:15:42] Voice 14: I think to explain the gist of it would be that it's an actual zoning tied to that area.

[1:15:48] Voice 14: Meaning that

[1:15:49] Voice 14: there are certain things that can happen.

[1:15:51] Voice 14: Rather than, say, like a development permit area, like a steep

[1:15:54] Voice 14: slope where only at the

[1:15:56] Voice 14: time of development something can happen, right?

[1:15:59] Voice 14: Right.

[1:15:59] Voice 14: Right there.

[1:16:00] Voice 14: And do you have marine protection?

[1:16:02] Voice 14: Yeah.

[1:16:02] Voice 14: Can you

[1:16:04] Voice 10: be clear on what that means? I can

[1:16:06] Voice 10: understand it on a smaller body of water, it's just really hard on Georgia Strait to actually

[1:16:11] Voice 10: understand what that means.

[1:16:13] Voice 11: So currently the foreshore area is zoned marine, and that currently allows docks, private floats, wharves, piers, so forth, and merchant boats accessory to the planned residential use.

[1:16:26] Voice 11: but if the LTC decides to rezone that to marine protection, the only permitted use is marine navigation.

[1:16:39] Voice 11: So the

[1:16:40] Voice 3: whales are allowed?

[1:16:42] Voice 11: Yes, absolutely.

[1:16:43] Voice 11: And the LTC can also request staff to come back with further analysis on this if you want,

[1:16:49] Voice 11: and you can amend the by-law after first reading if that's something you want to do as well.

[1:16:54] Voice 11: Okay. I

[1:16:55] Voice 10: thought that's kind

[1:16:57] Voice 3: of what it meant, but I wanted to think.

[1:16:59] Voice 3: I'm not sure if this, and I don't even know if I want to do this,

[1:17:03] Voice 3: but I wanted to have, for a long time, been thinking of having a, not a dock,

[1:17:08] Voice 3: but a removable ramp that you go down to put a boat into the water

[1:17:13] Voice 3: so that there would be no infrastructure left on the foreshore.

[1:17:18] Voice 3: What would that mean?

[1:17:20] Voice 3: Have you built it yet?

[1:17:21] Voice 3: No.

[1:17:21] Voice 14: No, no, of course not.

[1:17:22] Voice 14: I don't, yeah.

[1:17:23] Voice 14: I

[1:17:23] Voice 3: don't even know that I want to go

[1:17:24] Voice 14: to the other one.

[1:17:24] Voice 3: That's what we're

[1:17:24] Voice 3: ready to go at

[1:17:25] Voice 14: this point, right?

[1:17:26] Voice 14: I'm not sure there would be a concrete answer for that at this point.

[1:17:31] Voice 9: It sounds like what you're talking about is often referred to as a slipway,

[1:17:39] Voice 9: which are treated different than docks legislatively and somewhat more permissively

[1:17:46] Voice 9: because their environmental impact is markedly different than a dock.

[1:17:53] Voice 15: um

[1:17:53] Voice 9: it's essentially a a way to somewhat easily or launch and pull in a boat as opposed to like

[1:18:02] Voice 9: a structure that's anchored in itself i think i think slipway is the is the term that's sort of

[1:18:07] Voice 9: more common in this point and we can

[1:18:10] Voice 6: i mean we can certainly investigate that a bit uh

[1:18:13] Voice 6: uh thank

[1:18:14] Voice 11: you and out of respect for the applicants what i can do the ltc can give direction for staff

[1:18:21] Voice 11: staff to contact the applicants on how they feel about re-zoning and also re-designating

[1:18:28] Voice 11: that portion as marine protection just so they have time to think it over with other

[1:18:33] Voice 11: property owners and then they can always get back to the LTC with their response as well.

[1:18:39] Voice 11: Thank you.

[1:18:39] Voice 8: Sure.

[1:18:40] Voice 14: And

[1:18:40] Voice 8: fully understanding what that means.

[1:18:42] Voice 8: Yeah, exactly.

[1:18:43] Voice 14: Yeah, I mean marine protection is, you know, maybe a zoning that was kind of, it means

[1:18:52] Voice 14: a lot maybe 30 years ago and as we move forward through climate change and

[1:18:56] Voice 14: through better relationship building perhaps there's opportunity for that

[1:19:00] Voice 14: marine protection to be more into the future that's why I think it's zoning

[1:19:04] Voice 14: itself is quite quite important rather than it even things to a DPA I did craft

[1:19:11] Voice 14: a motion around that if you wanted to hear it first and if it were maybe

[1:19:19] Voice 14: be second hand or does that appropriate time uh

[1:19:22] Voice 9: well i mean it's it what i'm also hearing from

[1:19:26] Voice 9: planners doctor is that uh we could uh direct staff to do some analysis and sort of bring and

[1:19:34] Voice 9: and speak to the applicants and sort of so that we're all fairly aware of what what it means what

[1:19:41] Voice 9: but any potential effects that would have,

[1:19:46] Voice 9: so both the LTC and the applicants are...

[1:19:49] Voice 14: Yes.

[1:19:49] Voice 9: I mean, that's sort of the more incremental approach,

[1:19:53] Voice 9: but that doesn't...

[1:19:54] Voice 9: We could do that and still be a first reading

[1:19:56] Voice 9: and still amend what we have...

[1:19:58] Voice 14: Keep moving the...

[1:20:00] Voice 14: Keep

[1:20:00] Voice 9: moving the...

[1:20:01] Voice 9: Do

[1:20:02] Voice 14: we need to give a motion to staff to do that work?

[1:20:05] Voice 9: Yeah.

[1:20:05] Voice 9: Do

[1:20:06] Voice 1: we need a motion to do that?

[1:20:07] Voice 1: I

[1:20:07] Voice 11: don't think you need a motion,

[1:20:08] Voice 11: but just for the so the records states that LTC is asking our staff will report back with comments from the applicants and I can report back on a draft map of what those amendments would look like as well and that's something that I'll add to the follow-up action list so it's included.

[1:20:29] Voice 11: Okay,

[1:20:30] Voice 5: so you don't require them? No, I don't.

[1:20:32] Voice 5: That's fine. I'd just like the

[1:20:33] Voice 5: Penelican Council to be attached. Absolutely. Ken?

[1:20:42] Voice 4: Yeah, thank you for your time again.

[1:20:45] Voice 4: We have a team here that needs a part of the kind of environmental studies and things like that.

[1:20:54] Voice 4: We have teamed up with a biological rights group, so we'd be willing to help out.

[1:21:04] Voice 4: I like the idea of leaving no footprint for a boat to go in and out because in a lot of our territory we lose clam beaches.

[1:21:14] Voice 4: You know, a lot of these things, Robert here makes a lot of referrals, somebody wants to build a dock,

[1:21:21] Voice 4: And it's on a clam beach that, you know, if there's a dock built there, the rule of thumb is you can't harvest anything 125 metres on this side.

[1:21:35] Voice 4: And generally that takes a big chunk out of each.

[1:21:39] Voice 4: So I was just talking to Anthony here, and she was saying that they're getting ready to do some ROE training to look at some of that.

[1:21:52] Voice 4: Those are some of the concerns, but I've been, I grew up around, I've been by there a lot, so it'll be interesting to see what's there and what's not there.

[1:22:03] Voice 4: And again, that's a part, you know, in the past of meetings here where I say that being good neighbors and working together is key.

[1:22:13] Voice 4: Having that communication is key, and we are just starting to do that.

[1:22:18] So you don't get, like, art coming together and saying,

[1:22:24] Voice 4: we've been looking after the area forever.

[1:22:27] We're

[1:22:28] Voice 4: looking after our ancestors, their art sites.

[1:22:32] Voice 4: And here we've got to jump through all these hoops to get a little tiny chunk of our territory back.

[1:22:37] Voice 4: Really? How long did it take for it to go?

[1:22:43] Voice 4: Anyone can answer that, but, you know, these are some of the realities that go through my mind.

[1:22:51] Voice 4: And to have somebody to come in and offer part of our own land back is priceless for my leadership, priceless for the future.

[1:23:01] Voice 4: So, you know, I want to keep the good working relationship going, keep the good neighbor type attitude up.

[1:23:09] Voice 4: You know, I appreciate everybody that comes forward with concerns.

[1:23:15] Voice 4: But, you know, the reality of it is getting a little chunk of our own back is priceless.

[1:23:21] Voice 4: You know, it's really priceless. And I haven't shared that part. So we're offering our team here to go out and do some, help out with some assessment.

[1:23:32] Voice 4: So, you know, again, I thank you all. Thanks, Kevin.

[1:23:36] Voice 4: I

[1:23:40] Voice 1: think that team's up for it. What you were saying is just to let staff work and we'll flesh that out.

[1:23:48] Voice 1: Yeah,

[1:23:49] Voice 16: I'm satisfied with that.

[1:23:49] Voice 16: And

[1:23:50] Voice 1: something afterwards, right?

[1:23:51] Voice 1: Do

[1:23:51] Voice 9: you have other answers?

[1:23:55] Voice 15: If

[1:24:09] Voice 11: I may share with the Chair, well,

[1:24:10] Voice 11: Trustee Gavro finds his questions,

[1:24:13] Voice 11: I'll extend this to

[1:24:14] Voice 11: District Law 85 as well.

[1:24:17] Voice 11: Yeah, okay.

[1:24:18] Voice 15: Thank you.

[1:24:22] Voice 14: Waste the notes.

[1:24:26] Voice 14: Let's see.

[1:24:31] Voice 14: Yeah, at this point I think I'm okay.

[1:24:33] Voice 14: Okay, good.

[1:24:34] Voice 20: Anything at all from you sir?

[1:24:36] Voice 1: Just comments. We're out of stage in a very long process.

[1:24:42] Voice 1: I think you get a bonnet at the beginning of the meeting when you talk.

[1:24:50] Voice 1: This is something that's never been done before.

[1:24:52] Voice 1: You know, I get a little emotional.

[1:25:03] Voice 1: Yeah, I just, you know, I just want to make sure everybody understands

[1:25:07] Voice 1: the work that's gone into committing to the Penelope tribe,

[1:25:13] Voice 1: on committing to moving forward with the process.

[1:25:18] Voice 1: It's never been done before, so I appreciate that.

[1:25:21] Voice 15: Thank

[1:25:25] Voice 7: you for that.

[1:25:26] Voice 7: And certainly this is groundbreaking work that we're all doing together here,

[1:25:36] Voice 7: so I appreciate that.

[1:25:38] Sorry,

[1:25:39] Voice 14: I did have something else.

[1:25:40] Voice 14: Yes.

[1:25:40] Voice 14: I have a bunch of little pieces here too.

[1:25:43] Voice 14: I mean, that here, it was really hard to read,

[1:25:47] Voice 14: read, but I did notice that it says over here in the legend that lot 4 is 2.2 hectares,

[1:25:56] Voice 14: and on the map itself it says 2.4.

[1:25:59] Voice 14: Oh.

[1:25:59] Voice 16: It's just that.

[1:26:00] Voice 14: So it'll be such a small amount.

[1:26:02] Voice 16: Those are the corrections.

[1:26:03] Voice 5: We'll re-check

[1:26:04] Voice 14: the configuration.

[1:26:07] Voice 14: Okay.

[1:26:08] Voice 5: Thanks for catching that.

[1:26:10] Voice 5: Yeah, thank you.

[1:26:10] Voice 14: And Dr. Magnum, my glass.

[1:26:12] Voice 14: You've got good eyes.

[1:26:14] Voice 14: Thank you.

[1:26:14] Voice 14: And there's, I can see with the map, I see the areas where the home plate would be and where the proposed development would be.

[1:26:22] Voice 14: Yeah.

[1:26:24] Voice 14: That's very clear.

[1:26:26] Voice 8: Chief Jack, do you have something for us?

[1:26:28] Voice 8: Thank you.

[1:26:30] Voice 14: Thanks everybody.

[1:26:32] Voice 14: I have listened to these meetings a few times and I hear the concerns of the Galliano people.

[1:26:46] Voice 14: hope i hear carmela's concerns i hear terry's concerns i hear steve's concern i hear your

[1:26:53] Voice 14: concerns we have similar concerns our council is here because i don't do work without my council

[1:27:07] Voice 14: i get my direction from my council from my elders from our youth you see our youth here

[1:27:14] Voice 14: And as my council member and Ben so eloquently put it, it's a new venture that we're going on.

[1:27:26] Voice 14: And we've got a younger generation that is coming up.

[1:27:31] Voice 14: And my grandparents, I've said this before here, that they taught me to walk in two worlds.

[1:27:40] Voice 14: They taught me to walk in a cultural world.

[1:27:43] Voice 14: They taught me and told me, get your education and help the people.

[1:27:49] Voice 14: So I did that and by the knowledge of my grandparents, the partnerships with our counterparts as

[1:28:01] Voice 14: yourselves are what's going to create success for our younger generations, yours and mine.

[1:28:08] Voice 14: The partnerships that we create and the paths that we forge moving forward are what's going

[1:28:17] Voice 14: to sustain our ecosystem moving forward, our lands, our waters.

[1:28:24] Voice 14: We can't do this by ourselves.

[1:28:26] Voice 14: You can't do this by yourselves.

[1:28:29] Voice 14: We need to be able to do it together.

[1:28:32] Voice 14: We need to be able to walk together, side by side.

[1:28:36] Voice 14: so we show our next generation to not be fearful of accepting one another's help and working together.

[1:28:47] Voice 14: And the challenges that you guys face, we face for millennia.

[1:28:53] Voice 14: We have begged for our land. We have fought for our land.

[1:28:58] Voice 14: We have had people encroach on our land, and we're in oversight.

[1:29:03] Voice 14: oversight. We have done that and watched that occur for many, many years. And I've seen

[1:29:11] Voice 14: the heartache and my great-grandma, I've seen the heartache and my great-grandfather, those

[1:29:17] Voice 14: leaders that have since passed. So this is a day and a time that I'm ever so grateful

[1:29:26] Voice 14: for you guys to be able to walk with us and provide this opportunity, to be able to

[1:29:35] Voice 14: work with us and we're always willing to do that our motto at council is when we do things

[1:29:45] Voice 14: is it elder approved is it youth sanctioned and is it language based because we want to be able

[1:29:52] Voice 14: able to sustain the future of our younger ones and our great-grandchildren coming before us.

[1:30:00] Voice 14: I want to be able to look not only in your eyes but my grandchildren, my great-grandchildren to say I've done the best with your intention and not make excuses for the decisions that I've made but be able to look at everyone in the eye and be able to say we did the best that we could from the place of our hearts moving forward.

[1:30:26] Voice 14: So I just couldn't leave without saying how grateful I am for the trustees, how grateful

[1:30:34] Voice 14: I am for the landowners, how grateful I am for even the challenges that we face, because

[1:30:41] Voice 14: we don't learn unless there are those challenges, as long as we're willing to make the commitment

[1:30:47] Voice 14: to move forward and work together.

[1:30:50] Voice 14: and I'm really grateful that my council is here to be able to see some of what's

[1:30:58] Voice 14: occurred and the allies that we've been able to create within Galliano within

[1:31:05] Voice 14: the trust with the people I'm so grateful that my council is able to be

[1:31:10] Voice 14: here and for that that message it shows that we work together not separately and

[1:31:19] Voice 14: we've been able to accomplish this council a lot and a year and a bit the amount of time that

[1:31:28] Voice 14: we've been on council chief of council we've been able to accomplish a lot by working together

[1:31:34] Voice 14: where i've been on council where we have have been stagnant and not been able to because we're not

[1:31:40] Voice 14: working together so i just wanted to say that and say my hands are up to you from the bottom of my

[1:31:47] Voice 14: heart and I just got to you guys I just got to my council for being here I just

[1:31:54] Voice 14: couldn't leave without saying that thank you

[1:32:04] Voice 9: to Jack for sharing those words okay

[1:32:12] Voice 9: did you have one more thing or did where we are we good to approach these

[1:32:18] Voice 14: recommendations okay I

[1:32:21] Voice 14: think it's a good place to say more than that would you

[1:32:24] Voice 1: like to would you like to begin i move that to galliano island local trust committee bylaw number

[1:32:31] Voice 1: 292 cited as galliano island official community plan bylaw number 108 1995 amendment number one

[1:32:39] Voice 1: 2024 be ready for the first time any discussion

[1:32:45] Voice 14: yes yes i want to be very clear that this is first

[1:32:49] Voice 14: reading. It doesn't mean that this application is approved. This allows the

[1:32:54] Voice 14: draft bylaws to be made public, which is a very important step in transparency.

[1:33:01] Voice 14: It also triggers the formal referral process with agencies and the community

[1:33:06] Voice 14: and with First Nations. There's still going to be lots of plenty of

[1:33:11] Voice 14: opportunities for input, but well before the public hearing or any community

[1:33:16] Voice 14: information meeting there'll be a lot of discussion before we get further into

[1:33:24] Voice 14: the process of this this application but this is an important step for us to take

[1:33:30] Voice 14: today I'll be voting favor yeah

[1:33:34] Voice 9: thank you thank you for that reflection

[1:33:36] Voice 9: certainly first reading is it's not the end of the story by a long shot as we

[1:33:42] Voice 9: we just mentioned with the potential of marine protection zoning on the water there.

[1:33:48] Voice 9: But it is still a step forward, and I'm also very pleased that we're at the point of voting on this.

[1:34:02] Voice 1: I agree, you know, this has been a long process, and this is a very important step.

[1:34:10] Voice 1: and you know I'm looking forward to you know I'm generally looking forward to

[1:34:18] Voice 1: the public hearing because then everybody can speak freely and and we

[1:34:22] Voice 1: can we can see where this path leads and I think Chief Jack spoke well and I think

[1:34:28] Voice 1: we're walking down the same path together on this one and yeah I'm

[1:34:32] Voice 1: enjoying it.

[1:34:35] Voice 9: Thank you for that so if there's nothing further I'll call the

[1:34:38] Voice 9: question all those in favor and that carries unanimously i gotta use the second motion

[1:34:43] Voice 9: i'll

[1:34:43] Voice 14: make it i'm at the galliano local trust committee um hang on bylaw uh yeah sorry 293

[1:34:52] Voice 14: site is galliano land use bylaw number two 127 1999 amendment number one 2024 be read the first

[1:35:03] Voice 14: time.

[1:35:03] Voice 9: I'll second it. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion?

[1:35:07] Voice 14: Just to say same things first.

[1:35:08] Voice 9: All those in favor? And

[1:35:13] Voice 1: that carries unanimously as well. I move that the Galliano Island Local

[1:35:17] Voice 1: Trust Committee has reviewed the Islands Trust Policy Statement Directives Only Checklist

[1:35:22] Voice 1: and determined that bylaws number 292 and 293 are not contrary to or at variance with the Islands

[1:35:30] Voice 1: trust policy statement

[1:35:31] Voice 14: discussion yes because of the marine protection element

[1:35:42] Voice 14: that I brought in what does this say about directives 344 and 345 through

[1:35:53] Voice 11: the chair the LTC is going to be

[1:35:58] Voice 11: stating that the draft bylaws are in compliance with the trust policy statement there as the bylaws are

[1:36:05] Voice 11: drafted right now um if those amendments are changed or added you could ask staff to bring

[1:36:11] Voice 11: back the policy statement to state that instead of non

[1:36:14] Voice 11: -applicable that they are in compliance

[1:36:17] Voice 11: thank you great

[1:36:19] Voice 9: thank you for that anything further on the motion no seeing that i'll call

[1:36:25] Voice 9: the question all those in favor carries unanimously uh number four okay

[1:36:37] Voice 14: i move the

[1:36:38] Voice 14: The Galleon Local Trust Committee requests governance

[1:36:40] Voice 14: under section 219 of the Local Title Act

[1:36:45] Voice 14: from the applicant for GLRZ 2021.2

[1:36:49] Voice 14: for sustainable forestry and development control

[1:36:52] Voice 14: and designate the chair of the Local Trust Committee

[1:36:56] Voice 14: to sign a covenant for the rezoning application

[1:36:59] Voice 14: prior to final adoption consideration.

[1:37:02] Voice 9: I'll just note that's the Land Title Act.

[1:37:05] Voice 9: So moved.

[1:37:08] Voice 9: Yes, I

[1:37:09] Voice 14: have a question. I'm trying

[1:37:10] Voice 14: to understand the wording of it. It's the wording of the motion

[1:37:15] Voice 14: You're going to be signing something. We haven't seen yet. I guess that's what I want to make sure that we're trying

[1:37:20] Voice 9: We haven't right the

[1:37:21] Voice 9: Covenant is is not before us, but we will have a chance to look at it before

[1:37:28] Voice 9: Before before I sign it and then that will happen

[1:37:32] Voice 9: prior to

[1:37:34] Voice 9: consideration of final adoption

[1:37:35] Voice 9: in other words once

[1:37:37] Voice 9: assuming everything keeps going

[1:37:40] Voice 9: in stream, that would be

[1:37:42] Voice 9: executive committee would sign

[1:37:44] Voice 9: off, then it would come back to us

[1:37:46] Voice 9: for adoption. So

[1:37:49] Voice 9: the covenant would need

[1:37:50] Voice 9: to be signed before we consider

[1:37:52] Voice 9: it for final adoption.

[1:37:54] Voice 9: Does that make sense?

[1:37:55] Voice 14: Yes, it does.

[1:37:56] Voice 14: Does it sound a little

[1:37:57] Voice 14: funny? We haven't seen this thing yet.

[1:38:00] Voice 14: Yeah, it's an

[1:38:01] Voice 9: eternal record.

[1:38:02] Voice 9: We

[1:38:02] Voice 14: know what it's going

[1:38:04] Voice 9: to

[1:38:04] Voice 14: say. That's what it's going to say.

[1:38:06] Voice 9: yeah yeah yeah

[1:38:06] Voice 14: that's just the clearest

[1:38:08] Voice 9: we just have it

[1:38:08] Voice 14: yeah

[1:38:10] Voice 9: okay we appreciate that um so that

[1:38:12] Voice 9: was moved and seconded no more comments and i'll call the question all those in favor

[1:38:18] Voice 9: that carries unanimously and

[1:38:20] Voice 1: then uh number five i move that the galleon trust committee

[1:38:24] Voice 1: request staff to schedule a community information meeting and public hearing for bylaws number

[1:38:29] Voice 1: 292 and 293 upon receipt of draft covenants and a groundwater assessment report

[1:38:37] Voice 14: second second yeah

[1:38:37] Voice 9: any discussion looking

[1:38:40] Voice 14: forward to that public hearing yeah

[1:38:41] Voice 9: don't have to as

[1:38:42] Voice 9: as to your last comment that we'll have the draft um comments at that time yeah so i'll call the

[1:38:50] Voice 9: question all those in favor and that carries unanimously as well yes uh so anything further

[1:38:56] Voice 9: on this or can we move on to uh district cloud 85. let's move on on

[1:39:01] Voice 9: page 101 this will look a

[1:39:06] Voice 9: little familiar

[1:39:07] Voice 11: but there's some echoing here but a slight difference so again the purpose of this

[1:39:12] Voice 11: staff report is to present the ltc with two draft bylaws to amend the one to amend the land use bylaw

[1:39:19] Voice 11: a second to amend the official community plan for district law 85. um the property is currently

[1:39:27] Voice 11: zoned forest one and if this land use bylaw is adopted it would rezone a portion of the

[1:39:33] Voice 11: the property to Forest 3, one forestry lot, to rural residential D, to a forest and industrial C and that's to allow the foray and use there or the extraction of aggregate.

[1:39:47] Voice 11: Nature protection and also park. In terms of the terms of reference, again these applicants are working very hard on providing the documents required.

[1:39:58] Voice 11: required they've included that site plan which is in the draft law and they've also completed

[1:40:04] Voice 11: a groundwater report it is available for the LTC and community members to review it's attached to

[1:40:11] Voice 11: this report by link and also on the Galliano applications webpage and the applicants are

[1:40:17] Voice 11: working towards completing the other items on the list I should mention that this groundwater

[1:40:23] Voice 11: water report has not been fully reviewed by the Islands Trust groundwater specialist but they will

[1:40:28] Voice 11: be reviewing that over the summer so if there's any concerns I'll present that back to the LTC

[1:40:34] Voice 11: but I haven't highlighted or seen any to date. We have a list of referral agencies and First Nations

[1:40:43] Voice 11: that if these bylaws do proceed today that we will be sending out that formal referral

[1:40:48] Voice 11: referral to those identified. The LTC can take a look at that to see if there's anything

[1:40:53] Voice 11: missing. There's also further, you know, if there is something down the road that the

[1:40:57] Voice 11: LTC wants to refer to another agency, we can do that as well. So again, these are very

[1:41:03] Voice 11: similar to the motions put before you for District Law 85. The first one is to give

[1:41:09] Voice 11: first reading to the Amendment By-law 294 to the Initial Community Plan, 295 to the

[1:41:16] Voice 11: land use bylaw to ensure or stating that bylaws 294 and 295 are in compliance with the Island's

[1:41:24] Voice 11: Trust Policy Statement for the applicants to provide a sustainable forestry covenant

[1:41:30] Voice 11: and development control covenant prior to giving direction for the community information

[1:41:37] Voice 11: and public hearing.

[1:41:39] Voice 11: And again, as part of that development control, that's where the language resides in terms

[1:41:45] Voice 11: of ensuring that this this land is transferred back to the penelope tribe and also to other

[1:41:51] Voice 11: agencies such as the capital regional district i'm happy to answer any questions the ltc may have

[1:41:58] Voice 1: justin i assume we'll do the same process with a marine protected area yes absolutely yeah okay

[1:42:05] Voice 9: anything else well

[1:42:07] Voice 14: i think my comment my comments would be very similar to

[1:42:09] Voice 14: The comments that I had to get to, however, I do think we've heard enough from the community about the ask for waterfront.

[1:42:20] Voice 14: And I think it would be a good idea that we refer this application to the APC.

[1:42:32] Voice 1: Here's the problem I have.

[1:42:35] Voice 1: We've put an awful lot of work into this application with the Penelope Drive, with the Chief and Council.

[1:42:42] Voice 1: We brought this application along. That was brought up a number of meetings ago, probably about a year ago, and there's a lot of discussion.

[1:42:55] Voice 1: There was a discussion at our meeting with Chief of Council on Penelakut Island.

[1:43:01] Voice 1: My feeling is that the Penelakut Tribe have a right to this application moving along.

[1:43:13] Voice 1: And so I'm not in favour of that. I think on applications going forward, certainly, but we've worked really hard.

[1:43:25] Voice 1: They've worked really hard. Staff's worked really hard to get this application to this point.

[1:43:30] Voice 1: And I think it would be a shame to not follow through at this point.

[1:43:40] Voice 1: I think we'll have that opportunity on other applications and and I think we've

[1:43:46] Voice 1: heard from we've heard that they are satisfied with this application going

[1:43:54] Voice 1: forward in the end the state in the way that it is right so I would not be a

[1:43:59] Voice 1: favor no yep

[1:44:01] Voice 14: yes I hear you and I understand that too we are at first

[1:44:05] Voice 14: reading in this application we're still very beginning this process that has to

[1:44:10] Voice 14: to happen here we're not even at first reading yet really but um i don't see why why could we

[1:44:17] Voice 14: not give first reading today and then refer this application to the apc for comment on the

[1:44:25] Voice 14: waterfront specifically well

[1:44:30] Voice 1: i mean the reality is is if the apc comes back and said this application

[1:44:34] Voice 1: needs to be completely changed we're back to round one again we're back to zero direction and we've

[1:44:40] Voice 16: We've,

[1:44:40] Voice 1: you know, we've, this is not the same process as a, you know, a fee-simple rezoning application.

[1:44:48] Voice 1: This is not the same process.

[1:44:49] Voice 1: This is clearly a different process.

[1:44:52] Voice 1: And, you know, we've spent, well, I think we made the motion on day one to look at these applications.

[1:45:01] Voice 1: And we've worked with chief and council of the Noliket tribe, and we've worked hard with staff,

[1:45:06] Voice 1: and we've had meetings you know to move this application along. So I think it's

[1:45:13] Voice 1: not just us at this point sitting in the room with this application right and so

[1:45:18] Voice 1: I think we'll have opportunities in the future to do that but I'd be interested to see what Kim says.

[1:45:25] Voice 1: Let us talk to her.

[1:45:26] Voice 11: Thank you. So as the LTC knows staff will be contacting or be

[1:45:32] Voice 11: working with the applicants and also sending a letter to

[1:45:34] Voice 11: Penelakian about the comment or their comments of if they support the rezoning and OCP change

[1:45:41] Voice 11: or designation change to from marine to marine protection so the LTC will be receiving those

[1:45:48] Voice 11: comments back hopefully within the next few months I did want to highlight that staff have already

[1:45:55] Voice 11: been authorized to send a document or a referral to the APC in terms of the OC

[1:46:04] Voice 11: yeah and staff are putting a motion on the table later on to send also the

[1:46:13] Voice 11: other project the APC for comment so the APC is going to be working very hard

[1:46:18] Voice 11: over the next few months and they may not have the capacity to comment back

[1:46:23] that

[1:46:23] Voice 11: right away. So staff's recommendation is to receive the information back from

[1:46:30] Voice 11: Penelope Drive and also the applicants and if the LTC feels as though he'd like further

[1:46:35] Voice 11: comments from the APC perhaps then do it at that time. I doubt that if we send a third

[1:46:41] Voice 11: referral to the APC they may feel overwhelmed.

[1:46:44] Voice 9: And my comment was going to be that you're

[1:46:47] Voice 9: both right we can do it we can do all of this and and we and and and we can also move this

[1:46:54] Voice 9: along this increment today yeah so um yeah all right

[1:47:00] Voice 9: that was my thought uh so uh yes

[1:47:04] Voice 9: yeah

[1:47:06] Voice 4: um you know july baseball season you know we've been going through all these

[1:47:13] Voice 4: curve balls and sliders. I appreciate your concerns. Our nation is happy with how it is.

[1:47:26] Voice 4: We looked at it a few times. We talked about it a lot. We had a lot of pitches thrown at us.

[1:47:34] Voice 4: You know, like we stated how many times this is groundbreaking, a groundbreaking move here.

[1:47:41] Voice 4: Let's knock it out of the park and show that we're working together and show that we're communicating.

[1:47:49] Voice 4: Prove that we're going to be good neighbors.

[1:47:52] Voice 4: You know, just sitting here, like, you know, we're right here.

[1:47:57] Voice 4: Our chiefs are here. We've got towns over here.

[1:47:59] Voice 4: You know, we're here.

[1:48:02] Voice 4: You know, I think, you know, we're ready.

[1:48:08] Voice 4: You know, it's a first step and we're so close.

[1:48:11] Voice 4: i just had to get up and say that i confirmed with our chief and we're good you know i just

[1:48:22] Voice 4: want to let you know we're good i want to let we're going to be good neighbors with each other

[1:48:29] right communication working i just had to say that just for clarification purposes so there's

[1:48:37] no speculation or anything okay you

[1:48:44] Voice 1: want to begin on that the galliano local trust committee

[1:48:47] Voice 1: By-law number 294 is cited as Galliano Island Fish Community Plan, by-law number 108, 1995, number 2.

[1:48:56] Voice 1: Read for the first time.

[1:48:58] Voice 14: Second.

[1:48:59] Voice 1: Second.

[1:48:59] Voice 9: Any further discussion?

[1:49:01] Voice 9: Just

[1:49:01] Voice 14: to say again, this is only first reading.

[1:49:03] Voice 14: And

[1:49:06] Voice 9: yes, it is first reading, and it is a step forward.

[1:49:10] Voice 9: It's a step forward.

[1:49:11] Voice 9: It is a step forward. So, there's no further discussion. I'll call the question. All those in favour?

[1:49:17] Voice 9: And that carries unanimously.

[1:49:19] Voice 9: out of the state i

[1:49:20] Voice 14: move that the galley local trust committee bylaw number 295 cited as galliano

[1:49:26] Voice 14: land use bylaw number 127 1999 amendment number one 2024 to be read the first time second any

[1:49:38] Voice 9: discussion not saying anything i'll call the question all those in favor and that carries

[1:49:43] Voice 9: unanimously i

[1:49:44] Voice 1: move that the galliano island trust committee has reviewed the island's trust policy

[1:49:48] Voice 1: statement directives only checklist and determined by the number 294 and 295 are

[1:49:53] Voice 1: not contrary to or invariance with the honest trust policy statement keeping in

[1:49:58] Voice 1: mind that we have a previous discussion

[1:49:59] Voice 1: moved

[1:50:00] Voice 9: and seconded any further discussion not seeing any I'll call the

[1:50:06] Voice 9: question all those in favor that motion carries unanimously I

[1:50:10] Voice 14: move that the

[1:50:11] Voice 14: Galleon local trust committee request covenants under section 219 of the land

[1:50:16] Voice 14: title act from the applicant on GLRZ 2023.1 Larson for sustainable forestry development control

[1:50:24] Voice 14: and designate the chair of the local trust committee to sign the covenant for the rezoning

[1:50:29] Voice 14: application prior to final adoption consideration.

[1:50:32] Voice 9: I'll second the motion.

[1:50:34] Voice 9: Lived and seconded. Any further discussion? No. I'll call the question. All those in favor?

[1:50:39] Voice 9: And

[1:50:40] Voice 1: that carries unanimously. I move that the Galliano Island Local Trust Committee request

[1:50:44] Voice 1: staff to schedule a community information meeting and public hearing for bylaws number 294 and 295

[1:50:49] Voice 1: upon receipt of draft covenants and environmental baseline report moved

[1:50:54] Voice 9: seconded any discussion

[1:50:57] Voice 9: i will call the question all those in favor and that carries unanimously i move that we take a

[1:51:04] Voice 9: break you're reading my mind i think that we should take uh let's take a 15-minute recess

[1:51:13] Voice 9: is that sufficient yep

[1:51:15] Voice 14: let's

[1:51:16] Voice 9: shoot for 15.

[1:51:21] Voice 15: okay

[1:51:24] Voice 9: so we are back from our recess recommendation to proceed with the applications

[1:51:36] Voice 9: and and get that work done and then we'll backtrack and unless there's any objections

[1:51:43] Voice 9: Yeah.

[1:51:44] Voice 11: Chair, my only concern is that with the notice for the public hearing, we did say that it would start at one o'clock, which is neat. So I'm just wondering, perhaps we should do that for those who are here rather than waiting through the applications portions, certainly up to the LTC, but just out of respect for the notice that was sent to community members.

[1:52:07] Voice 9: I appreciate that. Trustees? That's true. Yeah.

[1:52:14] Voice 14: Okay,

[1:52:15] Voice 9: well, all right, let's just do that, and we will proceed from there, and we'll

[1:52:27] Voice 9: see if we can't get most of this business done today.

[1:52:34] Voice 9: So, then I will recess the regular meeting for the public hearing.

[1:52:46] Voice 9: Staff, is there anything I need from you to begin, or should I just go ahead and open?

[1:52:51] Voice 11: certainly go ahead and open okay so

[1:52:55] Voice 9: the public hearing for proposed bylaw number 296 is now open

[1:53:01] Voice 9: and i thank everyone um in attendance today and i want to acknowledge that we're meeting

[1:53:06] Voice 9: in the territory of the coast salish first nations and in particular the penelakut tribe

[1:53:12] Voice 9: the stewards of these lands and waters since time immemorial uh again my name is uh tim peterson i

[1:53:20] Voice 9: I am the chair of the Galliano Island Local Trust Committee, and local trustees Lisa Gavreau

[1:53:29] Voice 9: and Ben Maberley are here, and I want to introduce the Island Stress Planning staff again, Kim

[1:53:36] Voice 9: Stockdale is our Island Planner, and John Brooks Belcher here as well.

[1:53:42] Voice 9: Well, so our intent is to give everyone the opportunity to speak and present their comments.

[1:53:55] Voice 9: This public hearing will start today and may be adjourned and reconvened,

[1:54:00] Voice 9: and if so, announcement will be made if that is the case.

[1:54:07] Voice 9: This public hearing is being convened pursuant to Section 465 of the Local Government Act

[1:54:13] Voice 9: in order to consider the following proposed bylaw proposed bylaw number 296

[1:54:20] Voice 9: cited as Galeano Island local Galeano Island official community plan bylaw

[1:54:26] Voice 9: number 108 1995 amendment number 3 2024 all persons who believe that their

[1:54:34] Voice 9: interest in property is affected by the proposed bylaws will be given a

[1:54:38] Voice 9: reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions respecting

[1:54:43] Voice 9: matters contained in the proposed bylaws. Those wishing to speak should commence

[1:54:49] Voice 9: their presentation by clearly stating their name and address. Members of the

[1:54:54] Voice 9: Local Trust Committee may, if they wish, ask you questions. However, the main,

[1:54:58] Voice 9: pardon me, the main function of the Local Trust Committee members is to listen to

[1:55:02] Voice 9: the views of the public. It is not the function of the committee members to debate the

[1:55:07] Voice 9: merits of the proposed bylaw with individual citizens. Everyone will be

[1:55:13] Voice 9: given an opportunity to be heard and none should feel discouraged from presenting their

[1:55:19] Voice 9: views.

[1:55:20] Voice 9: In considering the proposed by-laws, the Local Trust Committee has received documents which

[1:55:26] Voice 9: may influence its decision.

[1:55:27] Voice 9: These documents are available for review during this hearing on our website and as indicated

[1:55:33] Voice 9: in the public hearing notice.

[1:55:38] Voice 9: Any person who wishes to present a written submission may do so and all written submissions

[1:55:44] Voice 9: must be received by the Local Trust Committee before the close of the hearing.

[1:55:49] Voice 9: Your only opportunity to comment on the proposed by-laws is during this hearing, as members

[1:55:55] Voice 9: of the Local Trust Committee may not receive further submissions after the close of the

[1:55:59] Voice 9: hearing.

[1:56:01] Voice 9: After this public hearing has been concluded, the Local Trust Committee may, without further

[1:56:05] Voice 1: notice, make

[1:56:06] Voice 9: whatever decision it deems proper with respect to the by-laws that is the subject

[1:56:11] Voice 9: of the public hearing.

[1:56:12] Voice 9: hearing. Planner Stockdale will now summarize the public hearing notice, key points to by-law

[1:56:21] Voice 9: and referral agency responses.

[1:56:24] Voice 11: Thank you, Chair. A copy of this notice was advertised in two consecutive editions

[1:56:30] Voice 11: of the Drinkwood on June 25th and July 2nd of 2025. All notification requirements under

[1:56:37] Voice 11: the Local Government Act have been completed. There is a copy of the complete public hearing

[1:56:43] Voice 11: binder available during this public hearing that's located up there on the desk and is

[1:56:50] Voice 11: located on the Islands Trust website. The purpose of proposed bylaw number 296 is to

[1:56:57] Voice 11: amend the Galliano Island Official Community Plan bylaw number 108 to include the principal

[1:57:04] Voice 11: use agriculture for rural policy E in order to enable the uses proposed in bylaw number

[1:57:10] Voice 11: 297. The proposed by-law was referred to a number of agencies and prestations to the

[1:57:17] Voice 11: Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship,

[1:57:22] Voice 11: Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, the Liquor Control Licensing

[1:57:27] Voice 11: Branch, BC Assessment Authority, BC Hydro, Capital Regional District, Stix-Allison

[1:57:34] Voice 11: Alison, sorry, Building Inspection and Infrastructure, Water and Services for 6 Allison Water.

[1:57:41] Voice 11: Main, Solespring and Thedas Island Local Trust Committees.

[1:57:44] Voice 11: It was also referred to the Cowichan Tribes, Hayao First Nation, Laiakso First Nation,

[1:57:50] Voice 11: Kwachin First Nation, Penelakut Tribe, Siamu First Nation, Samaymux First Nation,

[1:57:57] Voice 11: Chimaynas First Nation, Supaset First Nation, Sarlat First Nation,

[1:58:03] Voice 11: Stay Out First Nation, Tsawwassen First Nation, Seachem First Nation, Saanich Leadership Council,

[1:58:09] Voice 11: Coast Salish Fugles of Galeano Society, and Jurgensen family member Janine Jurgensen for comment.

[1:58:16] Voice 11: The referral comments are included in the staff report in the agenda. Generally, the First Nation

[1:58:24] Voice 11: referral comments state that they defer to First Nations whose traditional territory

[1:58:30] Voice 11: of France this area and so Boston First Nation states that it has no concerns. The Ministry

[1:58:37] Voice 11: of Transportation and Infrastructure also states that it has no concerns. The Ministry

[1:58:42] Voice 11: of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship includes no comments related to the proposed bylaws

[1:58:50] Voice 11: but recommends the development, riparian development permit area and fact sheet to be updated so

[1:58:55] Voice 11: that would be beyond the scope of this application and proposed bylaw the ministry of housing and

[1:59:02] Voice 11: municipal affairs state that this change reflects a more flexible and inclusive approach to rural

[1:59:08] Voice 11: land use that enables small-scale free production that supports broader provincial objectives

[1:59:13] Voice 11: related to local agriculture sustainability and resilience outside the agricultural land reserve

[1:59:18] Voice 11: and the Island Hill, Salt Spring LTC, Maine LTC, and Thetis LTC are either no objections or interests unaffected.

[1:59:27] Voice 11: In addition, we've received four public hearing submissions,

[1:59:31] Voice 11: and those can be found within the public hearing binder online or also included in the binder up front.

[1:59:41] Voice 11: Pass it back to you, Chair.

[1:59:44] Voice 9: Thank you.

[1:59:45] Voice 9: So, I'll just reiterate that submissions can be made at any time during and until the close of the hearing, written submissions, and I think I misplaced the...

[2:00:00] Voice 9: of the speakers list. Oh,

[2:00:03] Voice 8: sorry, it is up there.

[2:00:04] Voice 8: Okay,

[2:00:04] Voice 9: so there is a speakers list up there. I don't know if anyone's put their name on it.

[2:00:08] Voice 14: I don't like it.

[2:00:09] Voice 9: No? Okay. Well,

[2:00:12] Voice 9: in that case, then, I will invite members of the public who wish to speak

[2:00:15] Voice 9: to raise their hand. Please state your name prior to making comments

[2:00:19] Voice 9: and after your presentation to the Local Trust Committee. The trustees

[2:00:24] Voice 9: may ask you questions, but they are primarily here to listen and

[2:00:28] Voice 9: and will not debate issues with you.

[2:00:29] Voice 9: I will call three times for speakers

[2:00:32] Voice 9: before closing the hearing, at which point

[2:00:34] Voice 9: no further written or oral submissions can be made.

[2:00:38] Voice 9: So, for a show of hands, in the order I saw hands,

[2:00:53] Voice 9: Stephen, please proceed, I will be.

[2:00:56] Voice 9: Thank

[2:00:56] Voice 22: you, Chairman Peterson.

[2:00:58] Voice 22: Stephen Rybak, 289 Linkletter Road.

[2:01:01] Voice 22: vote. I hope that the Island Trust Committee will exercise some sort of second thought

[2:01:11] Voice 22: and not proceed to the closure of a public hearing. There is just too much unease within

[2:01:23] Voice 22: in the community about the proposed solutions that staff is offering former trustees and other

[2:01:32] Voice 22: members of the community have from some of the information that i've seen have suggested that

[2:01:39] Voice 22: there are alternatives to achieve the same end i.e craft a bylaw that is very specific to

[2:01:48] Voice 22: to this particular application as opposed

[2:01:52] Voice 22: to changing the official community plan.

[2:01:56] Voice 22: Yes, I conceded that the legal requirements were

[2:02:00] Voice 22: met of publishing the notification

[2:02:04] Voice 22: for the public hearing, but they are published

[2:02:07] Voice 22: as staff and trustees will know in a publication that does not

[2:02:11] Voice 22: reach Galliano Island.

[2:02:14] Voice 22: The binder has made its first appearance,

[2:02:17] Voice 22: The physical binder has made its first physical appearance on the island today, and yet it

[2:02:26] Voice 22: was theoretically made available two weeks ago on the Opaque Island Trust website, and

[2:02:34] Voice 22: it's stuck in some obscure little corner of it.

[2:02:38] Voice 22: Information on the issues at hand have not been well debated within the community.

[2:02:50] Voice 22: We have heard no debate whatsoever amongst trustees as to is there an alternative or should an alternative be sought.

[2:03:02] Voice 22: Questions that I have is, when was the binder physically put together? Yesterday?

[2:03:09] Voice 22: yesterday? What's wrong with having the physical binder available in the Galliano Public Library

[2:03:16] Voice 22: on the date of notification that the public hearing is coming up? Why is information being,

[2:03:24] Voice 22: the flow of information being, I think, arbitrarily restricted? Because there is such unease within

[2:03:37] Voice 22: in the community.

[2:03:39] Voice 22: Some members of the community could not

[2:03:41] Voice 22: stay until the start of this public hearing

[2:03:45] Voice 22: because of other commitments.

[2:03:46] Voice 22: But I feel that the Island Trust Committee should take,

[2:03:54] Voice 22: as I said, a sober second thought.

[2:03:57] Voice 22: Try to get your APC involved to take another look

[2:04:02] Voice 22: at the proposed solution from staff.

[2:04:05] Voice 22: have and yes indeed either validate that proposed route or perhaps find another one that is

[2:04:15] Voice 22: going to have more acceptability within the community

[2:04:22] Voice 22: you've got an opportunity to engage the community use it thank

[2:04:28] Voice 9: you thank you for that and

[2:04:31] Voice 9: just before I call on the next speaker this is a point of information the

[2:04:36] Voice 9: public hearing binder was open for submission until 4 p.m. yesterday as is

[2:04:44] Voice 9: set out in the information and the scheduling for this so practical

[2:04:52] Voice 9: standpoint that's real. So next up I have Carmita. Yes,

[2:04:58] Voice 18: Carmita de Meneja, 219

[2:05:02] Voice 18: The Sticks Alley Zone Road East, Cali. In a way, as Stephen said, I imagine what you heard during the

[2:05:16] Voice 18: the community information meeting, the people who spoke had doubts at least.

[2:05:27] Voice 18: Not the information is confused. Could it be another way to do it without having to change the OCP just for this application?

[2:05:41] Voice 18: We don't know yet the implications, you know, the others are too.

[2:05:47] Voice 18: Why to risk that? All the other implications when you change the OCP.

[2:05:56] Voice 18: I believe even the process, I always thought that when you have a community information

[2:06:02] Voice 18: and after you have right away the public hearing, there is no way to divide this between residents.

[2:06:11] Voice 18: Because if you have a community information, we go out, the people who were here,

[2:06:17] Voice 18: and they can talk to others, they can talk to neighbours, they can talk to friends, they can say,

[2:06:23] Voice 18: look what is happening, do you know about this? And you know most people don't know.

[2:06:28] Voice 18: You must know that. And there is a way that more people will intervene.

[2:06:35] Voice 18: Because this is just not about you, the three of you, the local trust committee.

[2:06:41] Voice 18: If this public hearing is closed, yes, the planner can give you more information about

[2:06:49] Voice 18: this, as she said to you. But for us, it's finished. We have no more capacity for an

[2:06:56] Voice 18: input. So that's not the way the According to the Island Trust works, like with all the

[2:07:04] Voice 18: words about transparency and communication, etc. No, this is not working this way.

[2:07:13] Voice 18: When we asked questions, the only one who asked answers was the planner.

[2:07:19] Voice 18: You, the elected trustees, didn't answer my question about what we did ask.

[2:07:26] Voice 18: Only Chair Peterson referred about memory.

[2:07:31] Voice 18: But it was important memory because the planner faced a justification in part.

[2:07:38] Voice 18: that it was an oversight, that it wasn't planned well, something like that.

[2:07:46] Voice 18: So it was important, the memory, because there has to be a justification to say that.

[2:07:52] Voice 18: The planner used the planner, Kojima, but there were many others there.

[2:07:59] Voice 18: It's true what Chair Pettersson said, memories differ, but also the plan addition of Kojima

[2:08:09] Voice 18: could have a very different memory because he's a planner.

[2:08:14] Voice 18: Our trustees, our former trustees that were involved are very important, like you are

[2:08:23] Voice 18: very important because we elected you, we didn't elect the planners.

[2:08:28] Voice 18: So the planner should have contacted the common trustee. There is no reason not to.

[2:08:35] Voice 18: Because at that moment they represented the people of the island.

[2:08:40] Voice 18: And that's why it's important about you, the trustees, your opinions.

[2:08:46] Voice 18: So when you ask questions, like in the community information meeting,

[2:08:51] Voice 18: you shouldn't just give it to the planner. You already have to know all that.

[2:08:56] Voice 18: You are the elected ones. You are the ones we can follow.

[2:09:01] Voice 18: In a way you are the leaders.

[2:09:05] Voice 18: So I think, as Stephen said, I hope you don't close this because we need more information.

[2:09:13] Voice 18: I don't see why this couldn't be for the advisory committee, they have nothing to do.

[2:09:20] Voice 18: To understand this, to produce a report that the residents, we can read it.

[2:09:27] Voice 18: a new kind of way.

[2:09:33] Voice 9: Thank you for that.

[2:09:35] Voice 9: Jennifer.

[2:09:37] Voice 19: Thank you. Jennifer

[2:09:40] Voice 19: 14176

[2:09:41] Voice 19: Alison Road.

[2:09:45] Voice 19: Yeah,

[2:09:46] Voice 19: in my mind this

[2:09:48] Voice 19: is very much about public engagement

[2:09:51] Voice 19: and people believing that

[2:09:52] Voice 19: there is a

[2:09:54] Voice 19: transparent and understandable

[2:09:57] Voice 19: process that they can follow

[2:09:59] Voice 19: when it comes to decision making.

[2:10:00] Voice 19: and I have been trying to understand this and doing the deepest dive I possibly could into it

[2:10:10] Voice 19: and initially I thought it was just a very simple consistency piece of work

[2:10:17] Voice 19: but the more I looked into it, the more concerned I became in terms of unforeseen circumstances

[2:10:25] Voice 19: or unforeseen circumstances or effects in the future and I tried to meet with Lisa one

[2:10:33] Voice 19: day but it didn't work for me to be able to get together with her just to ask some questions

[2:10:38] Voice 19: so I could really understand it so I have spent a lot of time looking at it.

[2:10:45] Voice 19: I see nothing in the staff reports that acknowledge the possible ramifications of what you're

[2:10:52] Voice 19: proposing and I believe that it is the responsibility of the planner and the

[2:11:00] Voice 19: LTC as Carmita has just said to present all sides to the public not just to

[2:11:07] Voice 19: advocate for the the applicant or the application to make it possible to

[2:11:13] Voice 19: approve the application we need you folks to also present to us okay if we

[2:11:20] Voice 19: do this, this is a possible consequence or precedent that may occur, that may, as has

[2:11:27] Voice 19: been acknowledged, apply to 107 possible other properties. That's pretty significant. And

[2:11:38] Voice 19: the intention is not to make it difficult for the applicant. Lee Pomberg, I know, is

[2:11:45] Voice 19: a valued member of our community and it's very difficult to to speak up

[2:11:50] Voice 19: against things that people you know want to do but I think we all have a

[2:11:55] Voice 19: responsibility just to ask questions and be sure that we understand the

[2:12:01] Voice 19: implications of what's happening because it isn't just for him he might sell the

[2:12:07] Voice 19: property at some point so you know it won't just be for him and and as I've

[2:12:14] Voice 19: already said it has implications for other properties and I just think we need to make

[2:12:19] Voice 19: sure that there's a really transparent and informed process being followed for any amendments to the

[2:12:27] Voice 19: OCP and the LUB that so many community members way before my time worked so hard to craft and

[2:12:36] Voice 19: to respect the basic principle too that land use decisions should never be about the individual

[2:12:41] Voice 19: It's about what actually happens on the land and the impact on the environment and on the

[2:12:49] Voice 19: neighbouring community.

[2:12:50] Voice 19: And I really think that these amendments that are being presented, both 296 and 297, even

[2:12:58] Voice 19: though I know we're only dealing with 296, I do not think they're innocuous amendments

[2:13:03] Voice 19: and I really think they need a closer look.

[2:13:06] Voice 19: And maybe it'll all be fine.

[2:13:08] Voice 19: but I would really ask you to consider to approve either alternative one to

[2:13:17] Voice 19: request more information and so that there can also be a more robust

[2:13:22] Voice 19: decision or discussion rather during an LTC meeting about possible ramifications

[2:13:30] Voice 19: and in answer to some of our questions or that you send the rezoning to the

[2:13:37] Voice 19: APC so that that discussion and kind of in-depth examination of the ramifications can be done there

[2:13:46] Voice 19: and I just don't I don't understand why that wouldn't be a reasonable thing to do in this case

[2:13:55] Voice 19: thank you okay

[2:13:58] Voice 9: thank you anyone else that wants to address the public hearing that hasn't spoken yet

[2:14:03] Voice 9: Not seeing any. And of course those who have spoken, I'll give you another opportunity.

[2:14:11] Voice 9: If you wish, I just request that you offer new information or comments rather than reiterate previous.

[2:14:19] Voice 9: So any of the previous speakers have anything to add? Stephen.

[2:14:24] Voice 22: Stephen Ryback, 289 Woodletter. I would like to reiterate my support for the generic proposal

[2:14:36] Voice 22: proposal that LEAF has made in this rezoning application,

[2:14:42] Voice 22: I think I would still be tempted, more than just

[2:14:47] tempted, to support it for the benefits

[2:14:50] that it would bring to the community.

[2:14:52] I also would like to acknowledge the fact that, yes, indeed,

[2:14:56] the binder itself is tied to the process

[2:15:02] and requires it to be open for more information

[2:15:06] information until a particular point in time.

[2:15:08] Voice 22: But that just underlines the need for getting

[2:15:14] Voice 22: all of the relevant information out to the community in a manner that the community has

[2:15:22] Voice 22: time to look at it and digest it. So having a public hearing immediately upon CIM may

[2:15:31] Voice 22: may not lead to the best decision making

[2:15:35] Voice 22: or not lead to the best support possible

[2:15:39] Voice 22: from members of the community for your actions as trustees.

[2:15:45] Voice 22: So, yeah, as Jennifer suggested that, yes,

[2:15:50] Voice 22: please ask for more information or send this to the ACB.

[2:15:53] Voice 22: Do not make a final decision on this today, please.

[2:15:59] Voice 8: Okay, thank you.

[2:16:00] Voice 8: Anyone else?

[2:16:01] Voice 8: Jennifer.

[2:16:01] Voice 8: Just

[2:16:02] Voice 19: one more small request that relates to this.

[2:16:06] Voice 19: And I would just ask the LTC to, in the future,

[2:16:12] Voice 19: to really consider how it feels for the public

[2:16:17] Voice 19: to see that there's 15 minutes for a community information

[2:16:22] Voice 19: session followed immediately by a public hearing.

[2:16:26] Voice 19: I said earlier that might be suitable in some situations.

[2:16:31] Voice 19: But it really doesn't give anybody a chance to get new information, to process it, to

[2:16:38] Voice 19: talk to neighbors, as has been said, to sort of confirm whether your understanding is the

[2:16:45] Voice 19: right understanding.

[2:16:46] Voice 19: It really feels like an ambush, a public ambush.

[2:16:51] Voice 19: And I really feel in the interest of engaging the community and really understanding, you know, different situations that are presented to the LTC and making them feel that they have a part to play in that.

[2:17:09] Voice 19: I think it really works against that.

[2:17:12] Voice 19: And it just feels like it's an attempt to get it done and hear as little as possible from anybody who might have questions or concerns. Thank you.

[2:17:29] Voice 8: Okay, thank you. And Paige again? So anyone else? Yes?

[2:17:48] Voice 21: I would just like to say, personally, I support what LEAF is trying to do there.

[2:17:56] Voice 21: And if we're allowed to speak of a community, well, the community of people that I talk with,

[2:18:05] Voice 21: or that i engage with as people that work here and people that have a life have created living here

[2:18:13] Voice 21: and young families that part of the community i have not i've not heard any opposition

[2:18:21] Voice 21: to what is proposed okay

[2:18:26] Voice 8: thank you uh anyone else okay

[2:18:33] Voice 9: and i'll just the final reminder

[2:18:41] Voice 9: to submit any written submissions please do so now and we will now proceed to

[2:18:55] Voice 9: close the public hearing please note after the public hearing closes the

[2:18:59] Voice 9: local trust committee will no longer be able to receive submissions prior to

[2:19:03] Voice 9: making the decision asking once for any more speakers is

[2:19:12] Voice 19: there an alternative to

[2:19:13] Voice 19: closing the public hearing if you close the public hearing does that mean that

[2:19:17] Voice 19: there is no ability to choose another alternative for this particular there

[2:19:28] Voice 9: is um i'll confer with

[2:19:32] Voice 9: trustees uh uh we could choose to uh delay the closure or what is it reconvene at another time

[2:19:43] Voice 9: that's what trustees would like to do and then i would also just chat with the planner

[2:19:47] Voice 9: I believe there are conditions when, if substantial changes are made, there may be the opportunity

[2:19:57] Voice 9: for a second public hearing.

[2:19:58] Voice 9: Could you just outline that briefly?

[2:20:00] Voice 9: Yeah.

[2:20:01] Voice 12: So if the LTC receives any new information, community members need to receive that new

[2:20:06] Voice 12: information as well.

[2:20:07] Voice 12: So if that happens, then the LTC will

[2:20:12] Voice 12: have to hold another public hearing.

[2:20:14] Voice 12: So

[2:20:14] Voice 1: that is an option

[2:20:15] Voice 12: for the LTC to consider when we get to that point in the agenda.

[2:20:19] Voice 12: Okay.

[2:20:20] Voice 1: Yeah, so we're going to deal with this.

[2:20:22] Voice 1: If there are substantial changes, then we'll deal with it at a time when we deal with it.

[2:20:26] Voice 1: Okay. The final answer. Agreed.

[2:20:29] Voice 1: I'm

[2:20:30] Voice 9: not seeing a desire to

[2:20:33] Voice 15: postpone

[2:20:35] Voice 9: and reconvene at this point.

[2:20:36] Voice 9: Okay. No more.

[2:20:38] Voice 9: All right. As long as we're clear on that.

[2:20:42] Voice 9: Yes,

[2:20:43] Voice 18: if you read back what the plan was saying, no, after the public hearing, no one of the residents can present new information.

[2:20:55] Voice 18: That's correct.

[2:20:56] Voice 18: Where are you going to take the information?

[2:20:59] Voice 18: Pardon me?

[2:21:00] Voice 18: Where is going to come the new information?

[2:21:02] Voice 11: Well, the LTC is requesting information from staff, and if we're doing further research,

[2:21:09] Voice 11: then if it goes to the LTC, the community members need to receive that new information as well.

[2:21:15] Voice 11: And that

[2:21:16] Voice 11: would then open up the requirement for a second public hearing.

[2:21:19] Voice 5: And of course the

[2:21:20] Voice 9: LTC could also request more information from the applicant as well.

[2:21:24] Voice 9: Absolutely, yes, of course.

[2:21:26] Voice 9: Okay. Alright, so I'll ask a second time if there's any more speakers.

[2:21:39] Voice 9: And asking a third time if there's any more speakers.

[2:21:43] Voice 9: So this is now the final opportunity for you to hand in a written submission to the Local

[2:21:52] Voice 9: Trust Committee.

[2:21:53] Voice 9: Once the hearing is closed, no additional submissions will be accepted.

[2:22:04] Voice 9: Please be advised, we are now in the post-public hearing stage of the Legislative Review of

[2:22:09] Voice 9: the proposed By-law 296 of the Alley-on-the-Wildland Local Trust Committee can no longer receive

[2:22:15] Voice 9: information pertaining to the proposed By-law from members of the public.

[2:22:19] Voice 9: however you can still submit any outstanding questions or comments

[2:22:23] Voice 9: directly to the planner. The Local Trust Committee may defer the readings to the

[2:22:29] Voice 9: bylaw or defeat the bylaw or make minor amendments that do not affect the use or

[2:22:34] Voice 9: density without further notice or hearing. So with that I will reconvene

[2:22:43] Voice 9: the regular meeting and I just want to check over with staff before we just

[2:22:53] Voice 9: just around the remaining items,

[2:22:55] Voice 9: what needs to be done today from your perspective?

[2:22:58] Voice 9: So

[2:22:59] Voice 11: my advice is that you proceed with the agenda

[2:23:02] Voice 11: as it states, we don't need to launch

[2:23:04] Voice 11: into the Pomberg staff report right now.

[2:23:06] Voice 11: I think it's best to do the minutes, F-U-A-L,

[2:23:10] Voice 11: and then start addressing some of those DBP

[2:23:12] Voice 11: and T-U-P applications.

[2:23:14] Voice 9: Excellent, so acceptable, trustees?

[2:23:16] Voice 9: All right. Yes.

[2:23:17] Voice 9: So we have the local trust committee minutes

[2:23:20] Voice 9: from June 3rd here for adoption. I'll look to see if there's any amendments.

[2:23:25] Voice 9: No amendments.

[2:23:26] Voice 9: Alright, I'll take it by general consent. Those minutes are adopted as presented.

[2:23:31] Voice 9: We have no section 26 resolutions without meeting, nor area planning commission minutes.

[2:23:39] Voice 9: We do have a follow-up action list dated June 20.5 starting on page 12.

[2:23:45] Voice 9: I'll turn it over to the planner to see if there's any updates.

[2:23:48] Voice 11: yes I'll just quickly highlight two the first is on page 12 of the agenda which is page one of three

[2:23:54] Voice 11: of the call of action list it's in regards to the the release of the covenant to be signed by the

[2:24:00] Voice 11: chair I can confirm that we've received this and the chair will be signing it in person so that

[2:24:07] Voice 11: will be completed that's why it says in progress that we check is complete the next is on page 13

[2:24:12] Voice 11: in regards to setting up a meeting with Penelakut I spoke with Chief Jack to see if her preference

[2:24:17] Voice 11: this was to have that meeting staff to staff for ltc's nation she stated it'd be nice to have the

[2:24:22] Voice 11: ltc donation so i'm going to speak with the her administrative staff to determine a date and it

[2:24:29] Voice 11: sounds like perhaps sometime in september so i'll change that on the full of action list as well

[2:24:35] Voice 9: and trustees any questions on the follow-up action list

[2:24:42] Voice 9: Great. Okay, not seeing any, we will move on. All right, so at item 16.1, we have the

[2:24:52] Voice 9: Maine Island Local Trust Committee's referral for proposed bylaws 194 and 195, and I'll

[2:25:01] Voice 9: turn it over to planners.gov.

[2:25:03] Voice 11: Yeah, from what I can gather, this is a rezoning for a portion of land to support

[2:25:09] Voice 11: the crd's park management plan so a portion of this property the land use designation would be

[2:25:15] Voice 11: changed from rural to resource conservation and the land use bylaw or the zoning portion

[2:25:21] Voice 11: of the property would be rezoned from rural or to a resource conservation um so that sounds like

[2:25:30] Voice 11: it's going to be supporting resource conservation which is certainly a benefit also

[2:25:35] Voice 1: trustees any

[2:25:36] Voice 1: I have no questions. I would say that our interests are unaffected.

[2:25:40] Voice 1: I

[2:25:40] Voice 14: agree. I have a motion to make.

[2:25:42] Voice 1: Excellent. Thank you.

[2:25:43] Voice 14: I move that Galliano Local Trust Committee's interests are unaffected by Main Island Local Trust Committee By-law number 194 and 195.

[2:25:52] Voice 9: So moved.

[2:25:53] Voice 9: Seconded. Any further discussion?

[2:25:55] Voice 9: Seeing none, I'll call the question. All those in favour?

[2:25:58] Voice 9: That carries.

[2:25:59] Voice 9: Okay, next, starting on page 18, Development Variance Permit, and this is coming from Planner

[2:26:09] Voice 9: Belcher.

[2:26:09] Voice 2: Thanks.

[2:26:11] Voice 2: Yes, this is a new Development Variance Permit application required for the proposed construction

[2:26:17] Voice 2: of the roofline deck addition within the natural boundary setback to the seat.

[2:26:22] Voice 2: the applicant's rationale is to reduce the harsh weather that the building facing the

[2:26:30] Voice 2: western shoreline faces by increasing the roofline over the existing deck

[2:26:36] Voice 2: the applicant has also offered to include the existing deck hot tub and deck landing

[2:26:44] Voice 2: cabin covered woodshed storage container and water tanks within the variance to legalize

[2:26:52] Voice 2: their existing siting the proposed variances would create minimal new impacts based on their

[2:26:58] Voice 2: siting and the location based on the location in relation to neighbors at this time there's

[2:27:04] Voice 2: been no correspondence received regarding the variance application and staff considered that

[2:27:09] Voice 2: the rationale is reasonable and the anticipated new impacts would be minimal based on this staff

[2:27:16] Voice 2: Staff recommended that the Galliano Local Trust Committee approve issuance of PLDBP 2025-0216.

[2:27:27] Voice 9: Thank you. And applicant with us today? We are.

[2:27:33] Voice 9: Then would you like to add anything? No.

[2:27:36] Voice 9: Alright, then I'll turn to trustees. Any questions

[2:27:38] Voice 5: for staff or the applicant?

[2:27:41] Voice 5: um

[2:27:42] Voice 1: first i i went up and i viewed the property i viewed the um sort of um things that were in

[2:27:49] Voice 1: the variance would be included in the variance i agree with staff that um even after visiting

[2:27:54] Voice 1: if i went by a boat when the work was all done i probably wouldn't notice any difference

[2:27:58] Voice 1: so um i see no reason not to approve this variance as well i agree with staff yeah

[2:28:04] Voice 14: i agree if i went

[2:28:05] Voice 14: why i wouldn't be able to tell the difference and i concur with that so recommendation so i moved

[2:28:10] Voice 1: that to galliano island local trust committee approved issuance of pl ppp dash two zero two

[2:28:16] Voice 1: five guys zero two one six moved

[2:28:20] Voice 9: second second any further discussion i'll call the question

[2:28:24] Voice 9: all those in favor and that carries okay so next we also have a development variance permit

[2:28:32] Voice 9: starting on page 14-3 and back to Planner Belcher. Thank

[2:28:37] Voice 2: you. Yes, this is a new development variance application

[2:28:40] Voice 2: required for the proposed dock addition to the existing dock at Billmore Point. The rationale is to allow the proposed dock

[2:28:50] Voice 2: addition for an accessibility ramp that meets the wheelchair code. Staff have determined that a development permit

[2:28:59] Voice 2: permit would not be required despite it being located in the shoreline development permit

[2:29:04] Voice 2: area since construction would take place on existing concrete foundations and would involve

[2:29:10] Voice 2: no new land alteration no correspondence has been received regarding the subject application

[2:29:18] Voice 2: staff considered that the rationale is reasonable for the water access community and the new

[2:29:24] Voice 2: addition would not create any new impacts on neighboring properties or the shoreline but

[2:29:29] Voice 2: would actually benefit the neighbor the entire community yeah based on this staff recommend

[2:29:37] Voice 2: that for the galley and local trust committee approve issuance of pl ddp 2025-0226

[2:29:45] Voice 9: and are

[2:29:47] Voice 9: the uh is the applicant with us today yes did you have anything wanted to add no other than

[2:29:52] Voice 9: and highlights that it's a wheelchair for us that we're trying to create for our community.

[2:29:57] Voice 9: Appreciate that. Trustees, any questions?

[2:30:00] Voice 9: for the planner or the office?

[2:30:03] Voice 14: I'm not saying no questions. I think the

[2:30:07] Voice 14: development is minor in nature. There's not really going to be much. It does provide

[2:30:12] Voice 14: accessibility, which I think is a real plus.

[2:30:15] Voice 1: Yeah, I went out and viewed the

[2:30:16] Voice 1: location. It's clear, you know, if the site remains as is, that wheelchair

[2:30:22] Voice 1: access would not be available. And so I think there's no reason not to approve

[2:30:27] Voice 1: this variance in. I agree.

[2:30:30] Voice 1: So I move that the Galliano-Iowa Trust Committee approve

[2:30:33] Voice 1: issuance of PLDBP-2025-0226. Second it. Any

[2:30:41] Voice 9: further discussion? No. Seeing

[2:30:44] Voice 9: any I'll call the question. All those in favor? Then carries. Okay and next we have

[2:30:51] Voice 9: a temporary use permit starting on page 60. So I'm going to recuse myself from this one.

[2:30:59] Voice 9: Okay, thank you. So we'll just note that Trustee Mamerly has recused himself. Just give him a moment. And we're going to turn it over to the plan of

[2:31:16] Voice 9: voucher again. Thank you.

[2:31:18] Voice 2: Yes, this is a temporary use permit renewal for a contractor yard to continue operation for an additional three years.

[2:31:26] Voice 2: um since the initial permit was issued in 2022 there have been no changes staff conducted a

[2:31:35] Voice 2: site visit and confirmed that the operation was taking place in compliance with the approved

[2:31:39] Voice 2: permit and they uh within the permit conditions um the office has received uh has not received

[2:31:46] Voice 2: any complaints regarding the operation of the contractor yard since it was originally issued

[2:31:52] Voice 2: issued. And the permit provides conditions, the same conditions from the 2022 permit, which are consistent with the official community plan guidelines to ensure that the use does not have an unreasonable impact on the local area. And in the event that it does, there is the ability to enforce compliance with the temporary use permit. So based on all this staff recommend that the

[2:32:16] Voice 2: Alhambra Island Local Trust in the approved issuance of PLTUP 2025-0206.

[2:32:27] Voice 9: Thank you, and there is the applicant with us today. Do you have anything you wanted to add?

[2:32:32] Voice 21: No.

[2:32:35] Voice 9: Trustee Gavreau, any questions for the planner or the applicant?

[2:32:38] Voice 14: I don't have any questions. There's been no concerns raised by the public.

[2:32:44] Voice 14: This is the final term of the PUP.

[2:32:48] Voice 2: Yes, so this is their first renewal to be for 3 years and then at the end of that they would need to apply for a new permit.

[2:32:58] Voice 14: That would

[2:32:59] Voice 14: be like in 2028?

[2:33:01] Voice 14: Yeah.

[2:33:05] Voice 14: Is there any residential use on the property?

[2:33:09] Voice 2: Yes, that's our next question.

[2:33:10] Voice 2: So

[2:33:11] Voice 17: Stu owns that property, Stu Kellison, and he's put in, he started building just in the

[2:33:20] Voice 17: last few months, six months or so, so he's going through the grooming process, but his

[2:33:25] Voice 17: like the residential piece of that property where he's living and building is quite separate

[2:33:31] Voice 17: from where we are, our access is through like the main runs in Emcon area, is that a great

[2:33:39] Voice 17: question thank

[2:33:40] Voice 14: you that answers my question um then yeah i see no reason to approve the renewal

[2:33:45] Voice 14: to not you know yeah i'll make the motion sure i move that the galliano local trust committee

[2:33:54] Voice 14: um approved issuance of pl tup 2025 0206 and

[2:34:01] Voice 9: i'll second the motion and any further discussion

[2:34:05] Voice 9: In that case I will call the question. All those in favour? And the motion counts.

[2:34:11] Voice 9: And are you going to fetch Trustee Mabry-Lee back? Thank you.

[2:34:35] Voice 11: And chaired by May, in light of timing, due to more pressing or time sensitive items,

[2:34:43] Voice 11: Perhaps we would move 16.5 to after section 18 because we do want to get to 17.1 and 17.2.

[2:34:55] Voice 11: Unless the LTC is going to keep 16.5 as is on the agenda?

[2:35:00] Voice 11: No, I

[2:35:00] Voice 9: think we can move.

[2:35:01] Voice 9: Okay, so you want to move it to at the end of 18?

[2:35:06] Voice 9: Yes.

[2:35:06] Voice 9: All right.

[2:35:09] Voice 9: Okay then.

[2:35:13] Voice 9: Let's do that.

[2:35:13] Voice 9: and so we have the associated islands project and we have a staff

[2:35:21] Voice 9: report and we'll turn it over to Clarence Dockwell.

[2:35:24] Voice 11: Thank you, so this staff report outlines options for

[2:35:28] Voice 11: terminated engagement for property owners and occupants of the

[2:35:33] Voice 11: associated islands and also with boat access only properties and also actually it does not

[2:35:40] Voice 11: a clear updated timeline sorry I would have to remove that so disregard that sentence in the

[2:35:47] Voice 11: report summary so staff are recommending to the LTC to schedule an electronic special meeting

[2:35:56] Voice 11: that would include a community information meeting inviting by letter those property owners

[2:36:04] Voice 11: on the associated islands and the boat access only properties they would get that letter

[2:36:10] Voice 11: although all community members can join this conversation so it doesn't, it includes everybody

[2:36:15] Voice 11: but just those properties will receive that specific letter because it will impact those

[2:36:20] Voice 11: property owners the most. So staff have provided a motion for the LTC to schedule a CIM most

[2:36:28] Voice 11: likely in September of this year and once the date is confirmed staff will then send

[2:36:35] Voice 11: a letter to all associated islands else property owners associated island and boat access only

[2:36:41] Voice 11: properties property owners staff we're also recommending this project to be sent to the

[2:36:47] Voice 11: Galleon Island Advisory Planning Commission the APC to provide comments and concerns

[2:36:53] Voice 11: in terms of the land use bylaw and specific regulations that should be addressed

[2:37:00] Voice 11: If the LTC agrees with this, we're hoping that the APC would submit the response by

[2:37:07] Voice 11: September 30th and that would align with the current project charter.

[2:37:12] Voice 11: staff have also sent an early engagement letter to First Nations to invite participation and

[2:37:19] Voice 11: we have received three

[2:37:22] Voice 12: responses that generally state that they defer to any nations with

[2:37:28] Voice 12: title and general authority is directly affected but this project will also

[2:37:33] Voice 11: be a topic of conversation

[2:37:34] Voice 11: with Penelope tribe in September as well so staff have included three motions for the LTC

[2:37:42] Voice 11: to consider the first is to hold a electronic special meeting

[2:37:49] Voice 11: that would hold a community information meeting to gather comments from associate island and vote

[2:37:54] Voice 11: access only to property owners and occupants but as I mentioned all community members are invited to attend this community information meeting.

[2:38:01] Voice 11: The second is for the to request staff to mail all those property owners and occupants

[2:38:09] Voice 11: notified of this special meeting and the third is to send a referral to the advisory planning

[2:38:16] Voice 11: commission to identify issues and concerns and with a targeted response date of September 30th.

[2:38:22] Voice 11: yeah trustees

[2:38:29] Voice 14: i think it all sounds reasonable to me yeah i

[2:38:32] Voice 14: mean this is a natural process

[2:38:34] Voice 1: this is exactly what we should be doing on this one

[2:38:36] Voice 1: we committed to going now and looking at the

[2:38:40] Voice 1: associated island so uh yeah absolutely let's let's do this yeah i'll

[2:38:45] Voice 14: make some motion i move

[2:38:47] Voice 14: that the galena local trust committee requests staff to schedule an electronic special meeting

[2:38:52] Voice 14: to hold a community information meeting

[2:38:54] Voice 14: to gather comments from the associated islands

[2:38:57] Voice 14: and both access only property owners and occupants.

[2:39:02] Voice 9: Moved.

[2:39:03] Voice 9: I second.

[2:39:04] Voice 9: Seconded by the trustee.

[2:39:05] Voice 9: Any discussion?

[2:39:07] Voice 9: Yeah.

[2:39:07] Voice 9: Seeing any, I'll call the question.

[2:39:09] Voice 9: All those in favor?

[2:39:10] Voice 1: Curious.

[2:39:11] Voice 1: I move that the Galliano Island Local Trust Committee

[2:39:14] Voice 1: request staff to mail all property owners and occupants

[2:39:17] Voice 1: on associated islands and both access only properties,

[2:39:20] Voice 1: notifying them of the associated islands regulations review project and the

[2:39:25] Voice 1: electronic special meeting moved

[2:39:27] Voice 14: seconded

[2:39:29] Voice 9: any discussion seeing any I'll

[2:39:32] Voice 9: call the question all those in favor and that carries

[2:39:35] Voice 9: finally

[2:39:36] Voice 14: I move that Galea local trust committee request staff to send a

[2:39:40] Voice 14: referral to the Galeano Island Advisory Planning Commission to identify issues

[2:39:47] Voice 14: issues and concerns related to current zoning and regulations for associated islands with

[2:39:52] Voice 14: a target response date of September 30th, 2025.

[2:39:56] Voice 9: Second.

[2:39:57] Voice 9: Moved and seconded.

[2:39:58] Voice 9: Any discussion?

[2:40:00] Voice 9: I'm not seeing any.

[2:40:01] Voice 9: I'll call the question.

[2:40:02] Voice 9: All those in favour?

[2:40:04] Voice 9: And that motion carries as well.

[2:40:06] Voice 9: Next, on page 118, a report from Ladder Stockdale, CK Review.

[2:40:15] Voice 9: Yes,

[2:40:15] Voice 11: I'm going to present on behalf of Regional Planning Manager Robert Kojima.

[2:40:19] Voice 11: This report attaches a draft business case allocating funding and staff resources for the proposed OCPE targeted barbecue project.

[2:40:29] Voice 11: So as a major project, the Trust Council must approve a business case, which is attached.

[2:40:36] Voice 11: The LTC may approve this business case as presented and then this business case and then approve it or defer consideration.

[2:40:45] Voice 11: If approved, the next step would be for the business case to be sent to the Regional Planning Committee

[2:40:51] Voice 11: and also the Financial Planning Committee for review and then to be forwarded to Trust Council.

[2:40:58] Voice 11: So if approved, the project would commence at the start of next fiscal, which is April 2026.

[2:41:04] Voice 11: so the business case for year one includes which is from April 2026 to March 2027

[2:41:11] Voice 11: includes a budget of fifteen thousand dollars and the allocation is um five thousand for first

[2:41:20] Voice 11: nation capacity funding support five thousand for legal advice and five thousand for community

[2:41:26] Voice 11: consultation if the LTC wishes to change those those amounts by increasing them we would need

[2:41:32] Voice 11: a motion to change that and then after that approve the business case as amended so staff

[2:41:40] Voice 11: have provided a recommendation that the LTC endorse the attached business case but they're

[2:41:46] Voice 11: all are they there are alternatives for the LTC to consider which is it's not included but you can

[2:41:54] Voice 11: amend it or you can request further information you can proceed no further or you can just receive

[2:42:00] Voice 11: this business case for information. Thank

[2:42:05] Voice 9: you. Trustee Mabry?

[2:42:07] Voice 1: Yeah, so I had a talk with staff at the Trust Council meeting and so the only issue I have here is the amount of money that we're

[2:42:18] Voice 1: allocating for First Nations capacity. So that the reason is everybody else in

[2:42:25] Voice 1: this process of an OCP review are standard but everybody's getting paid

[2:42:29] Voice 1: and then we're taking this massive project and we're giving it to the

[2:42:33] Voice 1: panel again saying hey you guys don't look at this and we're actually

[2:42:36] Voice 1: providing them a very little capacity funding to be able to do that and

[2:42:41] Voice 1: Roberts seemed to indicate there were avenues of getting capacity funding for

[2:42:45] Voice 1: the panel to get to do this project without having to not vote for them the

[2:42:51] Voice 1: process yeah I'm not interested in stopping the process but I'm interested

[2:42:55] Voice 1: that they can make sure that we're being fair to the panellica that when we're doing an ocp review

[2:43:01] Voice 1: and want this ocp review to be engaged with the panellica on a full-time basis that we're providing

[2:43:08] Voice 1: the appropriate capacity funding for them to be able to do that so i'm actually looking to staff

[2:43:15] Voice 1: to see what the alternatives here are because i don't know what that amount would be i think we

[2:43:19] Voice 1: need to have that discussion right

[2:43:21] Voice 11: okay so what we could do is so the

[2:43:30] Voice 11: recommendation there doesn't sound like your forecast is so perhaps if you get

[2:43:34] Voice 11: the LTC doesn't have a number in mind we can state that the LTC requests

[2:43:41] Voice 11: request, sorry let me just think of this, request staff to report back on funding available

[2:43:53] Voice 11: for First Nations capacity funding support and perhaps we can provide that information

[2:44:02] Voice 11: to you and then by RWM you can then adopt the business case as amended so that this

[2:44:10] Voice 11: still proceeds over the summer months i don't want this to hold up the process

[2:44:15] Voice 1: yeah because

[2:44:16] Voice 1: i know we've got a timeline to get it into the finance committee

[2:44:19] Voice 11: absolutely yeah

[2:44:21] Voice 9: and i was just

[2:44:22] Voice 9: going to uh say um being involved in a couple other ocp reviews and looking at the funding

[2:44:30] Voice 9: there i also agree that that the proposed amount of five thousand dollars is not commensurate with

[2:44:37] Voice 9: other projects of this scale and so an alternative that I'm willing to propose

[2:44:45] Voice 9: as a consideration and of course any business case that we send off to

[2:44:51] Voice 9: financial planning committee will be you know processed through that process so I

[2:44:57] Voice 9: would propose that we amend the business case by changing the First Nations

[2:45:00] Voice 9: engagement amount to $15,000 I think that's more in line what I'm seeing in

[2:45:06] Voice 9: and other OCP projects and other LTCs.

[2:45:09] Voice 9: And then whether we get the funding down the road or not is a different question,

[2:45:15] Voice 9: but based on the other numbers that I'm familiar with and other OCP projects,

[2:45:21] Voice 9: I think that's more in line with what other LTCs are asking for that type of funding.

[2:45:28] Voice 9: So I'm seeing some heads nodding there.

[2:45:32] Voice 9: So I

[2:45:34] Voice 9: move that the Galliano Island Local Trust Committee amend the Official Community Plan

[2:45:48] Voice 9: review business case by changing the first engagement to engagement section to $15,000.

[2:45:57] Voice 9: One second on the motion.

[2:46:00] Voice 9: And any discussion?

[2:46:02] Voice 9: No.

[2:46:02] Voice 9: all right then I'll call the question all those in favor and that carries and

[2:46:08] Voice 9: given that are we now happy to go ahead and make the motion as amended

[2:46:18] Voice 14: I'll make the motion okay right yes I move the Galea local trust committee

[2:46:24] Voice 14: endorse the attached business case

[2:46:25] Voice 14: As amended?

[2:46:26] Voice 1: Huh?

[2:46:27] Voice 1: Is it as amended or

[2:46:28] Voice 14: at the end?

[2:46:28] Voice 14: Oh, at the end.

[2:46:29] Voice 14: Yeah.

[2:46:29] Voice 1: Oh, sorry.

[2:46:30] Voice 14: Oh, sorry.

[2:46:31] Voice 14: Yeah.

[2:46:33] Voice 14: Um, or is it amended then?

[2:46:36] Voice 14: It would

[2:46:36] Voice 14: say the attached business case as amended.

[2:46:38] Voice 14: As amended.

[2:46:39] Voice 14: Okay, that's it.

[2:46:40] Voice 14: Uh, thank you.

[2:46:41] Voice 14: I'll start again.

[2:46:42] Voice 14: I move that the Galleon Local Trust Committee endorse the amended attached business case

[2:46:47] Voice 14: for the OCP review project and that staff award the business case to the relevant committees

[2:46:53] Voice 14: and to the Trust Council.

[2:46:55] Voice 14: move

[2:46:57] Voice 9: it sounds good with that yeah okay now it's not going to second it uh any further discussion

[2:47:03] Voice 9: i'll call the question all those in favor and that carries okay so now we're into the report

[2:47:10] Voice 9: section we have the active projects report uh dated june 2025 on page 123 and i'll turn it over

[2:47:18] Voice 9: to planners.gov thank

[2:47:19] Voice 11: you chair i am happy to announce that as of a few hours ago um i was

[2:47:25] Voice 11: notified that the minister has approved by the number 283 which is in regards to the groundwater

[2:47:31] Voice 11: sustainability project so that bylaw will be brought back to the ltc at the september meeting

[2:47:37] Voice 11: for consideration of adoption excellent

[2:47:40] Voice 9: you're kidding for that yeah that's rude

[2:47:44] Voice 9: all right um anything else on the uh reports trustees any questions

[2:47:58] Voice 20: Okay,

[2:47:59] Voice 9: and then the future projects report, anything from anyone on that?

[2:48:05] Voice 9: No.

[2:48:06] Voice 14: No.

[2:48:07] Voice 14: Okay.

[2:48:07] Voice 9: Oh,

[2:48:08] Voice 14: actually you know it.

[2:48:09] Voice 14: No.

[2:48:10] Maybe.

[2:48:13] Voice 14: I did notice that one of the referral packages that are DPA in area number one,

[2:48:20] Voice 14: the area needs to be updated to meet the provincial framework.

[2:48:24] Voice 9: Okay.

[2:48:25] Voice 14: I'm wondering if that's a candidate for future projects, Lewis?

[2:48:29] Voice 9: Yeah, it could be a minor project, right?

[2:48:30] Voice 9: Right.

[2:48:30] Voice 9: That sounds like it.

[2:48:31] Voice 9: Yeah, right.

[2:48:32] Voice 9: Did you want to have a motion to prepare to add that today or do you want to do that

[2:48:36] Voice 9: in a future meeting?

[2:48:36] Voice 14: In a future meeting.

[2:48:37] Voice 14: I just

[2:48:38] Voice 9: want to make sure I got something.

[2:48:39] Voice 9: Perfect.

[2:48:39] Voice 9: Notice of motion.

[2:48:40] Voice 9: Thank you.

[2:48:41] Voice 9: Appreciate that.

[2:48:43] Voice 9: Next we have the applications report dated June 2025.

[2:48:49] Voice 9: I'll turn to staff and see if there's anything we need to hear from you on that.

[2:48:52] Voice 9: no

[2:48:52] Voice 11: updates uh to provide okay

[2:48:55] Voice 9: trustees any questions no we'll receive that for information

[2:49:00] Voice 9: and the trustee local expense report dated april 2025 on page 131 anything from anyone on that

[2:49:08] Voice 15: i don't know

[2:49:09] Voice 9: we'll receive that for information and the adopted policies and standing resolutions

[2:49:14] Voice 9: resolutions uh after page 132 anything from anyone there no no i'm going to receive that for

[2:49:21] Voice 9: information anything on the local trust committee web page today no and we have the island's trust

[2:49:29] Voice 9: conservancy report dated in june 2025 alternative to just conservancy chair lisa gavreau nothing at

[2:49:37] Voice 14: this time okay

[2:49:39] Voice 9: so we will receive that also for information um that has sped us through uh section

[2:49:45] Voice 9: Section 18, so now we can go backtrack up to 16.5, which is the proposed rezoning we were discussing earlier, and staff report starting on page 75, over to Clarence Bogdell.

[2:50:02] Voice 11: Thank you. So this staff report is a post-public hearing report for bylaw number 296. It provides options on how to proceed.

[2:50:14] Voice 11: Generally, after a close of the meeting, the LTC would consider a second reading of the

[2:50:19] Voice 11: by-law that may include amendments. Third reading of the by-law, since it is a, or according

[2:50:26] Voice 11: to the executive committee for approval, and since this is an OCP amendment by-law, it

[2:50:32] Voice 11: would be sent to the minister's office for approval as well. And following the close

[2:50:37] Voice 11: of a hearing, the LTC may not hear any further submissions without holding a new hearing.

[2:50:43] Voice 11: So the LTC staff have provided motions for the LTC to consider, which is to give the

[2:50:52] Voice 11: by-law second or third reading, to forward it to the EC and the Minister of Housing and

[2:50:57] Voice 11: Municipal Affairs. But based

[2:51:00] Voice 1: on what the

[2:51:00] Voice 11: LTC had heard from the community information meeting

[2:51:04] Voice 11: in the public hearing, the LTC may want to consider if you do want further information

[2:51:11] Voice 11: or further analysis on this by-law or if you would like further amending the by-law to

[2:51:18] Voice 11: include an amendment that could affect all rural designated properties, perhaps staff

[2:51:24] Voice 11: could also look into a specific OCP amendment for this property, what that would involve

[2:51:33] Voice 11: if the ltc did want further information staff would i need a motion for stop for

[2:51:40] Voice 11: stop to do this work and it would open up the public process again so this means that a second

[2:51:46] Voice 11: public hearing would be required um but if the ltc does want to go down that route my advice would be

[2:51:56] Voice 11: if you want to hold a second public hearing um make sure the public hearing is also with the

[2:52:02] Voice 11: land use by law public hearing so then you're not holding two separate public hearings and then the

[2:52:08] Voice 11: cost of notification and so forth so the motions are there for the ltc's consideration the ltc

[2:52:16] Voice 11: could request further information from staff you could send the rezoning application to the apc

[2:52:22] Voice 11: or you can deny the application all

[2:52:28] Voice 9: right trustees thoughts

[2:52:32] Voice 14: I've certainly been doing my due diligence on this one, lots of research on it.

[2:52:41] Voice 14: I did look back and got the Wayback Machine and went back to the original SCP review,

[2:52:46] Voice 14: understood all the perspective of that time.

[2:52:50] Voice 14: There's a discussion paper from 2010, lengthy about agriculture, reviewing, you know, the

[2:53:03] Voice 14: the changes from that time till now.

[2:53:04] Voice 14: And it's like, why was agriculture added even?

[2:53:08] Voice 14: It seems like kind of a dangler there a little bit.

[2:53:13] Voice 14: You're saying that the principal uses are agriculture,

[2:53:19] Voice 14: but not adding anything to make it a practical way in a practical sense

[2:53:24] Voice 14: to apply it to the bylaw anymore.

[2:53:29] Voice 14: And I think that by making it agriculture principal use,

[2:53:33] Voice 14: that implies the accessory uses.

[2:53:36] Voice 14: In my mind, it's like giving somebody a hammer to do their work,

[2:53:43] Voice 14: but not any screws or any bolts.

[2:53:47] Voice 14: I am of the mind that it is an oversight.

[2:53:50] Voice 14: I was actually a little bit surprised at the kind of correspondence that I got around it.

[2:53:56] Voice 14: I didn't think it was as major an amendment.

[2:54:01] Voice 14: I think tying farming to the fact whether or not you have a house is a barrier for the community as well.

[2:54:12] Voice 14: I don't think that the OCP amendment automatically gives permission to anything.

[2:54:21] Voice 14: That's what the Lanning's Bylaw does.

[2:54:23] Voice 14: It's specialized.

[2:54:24] Voice 14: And in this case, with this particular application, it's specialized.

[2:54:27] Voice 14: It cites specifically what that's going to be.

[2:54:30] Voice 14: But the bylaw is also there for anything else.

[2:54:33] Voice 14: So I'm in favor with the recommendations, but I guess I said I thought about it quite a bit, too.

[2:54:43] Voice 14: I have motions for adding limits to the OCP amendment to E, basically stating,

[2:54:58] Voice 14: I am restricting agriculture to becoming, oh, sorry, let me find it, yeah, adding, provided

[2:55:15] Voice 14: that accessory agricultural uses are small scale and compatible with the surrounding

[2:55:21] Voice 14: residential uses, but that sounds to me that maybe it doesn't have place in the OCP, but

[2:55:27] Voice 14: it's a lot of options, so I would entertain.

[2:55:33] Voice 1: Yeah, I mean, I did the same thing and tried to figure out why.

[2:55:43] Voice 1: Agriculture hadn't been included. You know, I mean, it's included, but it's not included kind of thing.

[2:55:48] Voice 1: Like you say, there seems to be this misstep of how it was laid out.

[2:55:54] Voice 1: I agree. I agree completely that I think this was an oversight when they were drafting, right?

[2:56:00] Voice 1: I just, you know, I can't see where, you know, you would have, I mean, when people are doing agriculture on residential lots,

[2:56:14] Voice 1: It's not like they're going into commercial, you know, big-time commercial farming.

[2:56:20] Voice 1: The fact of the matter is you need a good chunk of ALRL to do that, right?

[2:56:25] Voice 1: It's exactly, I think, for when you look at this rezoning and you see the orchard,

[2:56:30] Voice 1: and, you know, everything sort of fits in in a sort of a real small community way, right?

[2:56:39] Voice 1: When I was looking at this application, I mean, you sort of look at the community as a whole

[2:56:43] Voice 1: and what this community does and this the ability of this community because i do travel a lot around

[2:56:49] Voice 1: all the other islands i spend a lot of time on sturm and pender and main island and i keep thinking

[2:56:55] Voice 1: trying to figure out what's different about galliano and it's this um willingness to accept

[2:57:03] Voice 1: entrepreneurship right it's this willingness i mean yeah i mean just look at the restaurants

[2:57:12] Voice 1: that we go to on it. Just look at all the little things that happen on this island and

[2:57:15] Voice 1: you know, this is pretty cool. And there's a reason that people come to this island.

[2:57:20] Voice 1: You know, there's a reason it's busy in the summertime because they get to look and be

[2:57:24] Voice 1: a part of all of this pretty cool stuff. And so when I look at this amendment I go, yeah,

[2:57:34] Voice 15: Yeah, it's

[2:57:34] Voice 1: an oversight. We should be encouraging, right?

[2:57:39] Voice 1: And so I'm in favor. I'm in favor. I hope we won't be in favor of it.

[2:57:44] Voice 1: I can sympathize with Stephen as to the information, the flow of information.

[2:57:51] Voice 1: This isn't just the LTC. Go to the CRD. Go to the provincial government. Go to the federal government.

[2:57:57] Voice 1: It is a symptom of government, is why the information flow is awkward, right?

[2:58:06] Voice 1: But that doesn't mean that we don't proceed with things.

[2:58:10] Voice 1: This application has been on the books for several years.

[2:58:14] Voice 1: I can't remember the date it came on, but it was pretty new in our term, so close to three years.

[2:58:20] Voice 1: So there's been an incredible amount of time in three years for the public to get their head around this application.

[2:58:29] Voice 1: I've heard a lot of encouragement from the community about this application because it's got some of the elements that it seems like this community likes to embrace.

[2:58:41] Voice 1: And so, yeah, I'm prepared to move forward with this.

[2:58:46] Voice 1: and uh yeah

[2:58:49] Voice 14: i think something that i learned through my research into this and i'm very

[2:58:55] Voice 14: thankful for this perspective is the fact that when our ocp was written you can

[2:58:59] Voice 14: buy a house for

[2:59:00] Voice 14: two hundred thousand dollars you cannot do that today we need to do the ocp reviews we need to

[2:59:07] Voice 14: be thinking of that as we move forward so i'm thankful for that that learning yeah

[2:59:12] Voice 1: yeah be

[2:59:15] Voice 15: make a

[2:59:16] Voice 14: motion yeah

[2:59:20] Voice 1: i mean i think just a little bit further i mean you look at um as we go along

[2:59:24] Voice 1: to this the terms of reference there's a lot of guidelines here there's a lot of things there's

[2:59:29] Voice 1: a lot of checks and balances as we proceed forward so yes there is

[2:59:33] Voice 14: there's us yeah there's

[2:59:35] Voice 1: only

[2:59:35] Voice 14: in the future has to go through your local trust committee yeah

[2:59:39] Voice 1: yeah sorry go ahead all right

[2:59:43] Voice 14: I move that Galeano Local Trust Committee, bylaw number 296, cited as Galeano Official Community Plan bylaw number 108, 1995, amendment number 3, 2024, be read a second time.

[3:00:00] Voice 5: I'll second the motion.

[3:00:02] Voice 5: The motion has been moved and seconded.

[3:00:03] Voice 5: Any further discussion?

[3:00:08] Voice 9: Alright, I'll call the question.

[3:00:09] Voice 9: All

[3:00:10] Voice 1: those in favour?

[3:00:10] Voice 9: The motion carries.

[3:00:12] Voice 1: I move that the Galliano Island Local Trust Committee By-law No. 296, cited as Galliano

[3:00:17] Voice 1: Island Official Community Plan By-law No. 108, 1995, Amendment No. 3, 2024, be read

[3:00:24] Voice 1: for a third time.

[3:00:26] Voice 9: Second.

[3:00:26] Voice 9: The motion has been seconded.

[3:00:27] Voice 9: Any further discussion?

[3:00:29] Voice 9: No.

[3:00:30] Voice 9: Seeing any, I'll call the question.

[3:00:32] Voice 9: All those in favour?

[3:00:33] Voice 9: The motion carries.

[3:00:35] Voice 14: I move that the Galliano-Isle Local Trust Committee propose bylaw number 296 be forwarded

[3:00:40] Voice 14: to the Secretary of the Isle's Trust for executive committee approval.

[3:00:44] Voice 9: I'll second the motion.

[3:00:46] Voice 9: Seconded.

[3:00:46] Voice 9: Any discussion?

[3:00:48] Voice 9: No.

[3:00:48] Voice 9: Seeing any, I'll call the question.

[3:00:50] Voice 9: All those in favor?

[3:00:51] Voice 9: The motion carries.

[3:00:53] Voice 9: I

[3:00:53] Voice 1: move that the Galliano-Isle Local Trust Committee propose bylaw number 296 be forwarded

[3:00:58] Voice 1: to the Minister of Housing and Misappearance for approval.

[3:01:01] Voice 14: Second.

[3:01:02] Voice 1: Moved.

[3:01:03] Voice 1: Seconded.

[3:01:03] Voice 9: Any discussion?

[3:01:06] Voice 9: I'll call the question. All those in favour? And that motion

[3:01:10] Voice 1: carries as well.

[3:01:11] Voice 1: And my final comment is I just want people to, and I know we're being recorded, to know

[3:01:18] Voice 1: that we're encouraging the entrepreneurship on Galliano, the small business entrepreneurship

[3:01:24] Voice 1: that will make this community succeed. Thank you.

[3:01:28] Voice 1: okay

[3:01:30] Voice 20: just yeah quickly

[3:01:33] Voice 11: um i just also want to emphasize that bylaw number 297 the land use

[3:01:40] Voice 11: bylaw we have not had a public hearing so discussion from community members is still

[3:01:45] Voice 11: encouraged to receive those

[3:01:46] Voice 11: comments um so this is just in regards to bylaw 296 the ocp

[3:01:51] Voice 11: component but the land use bylaw still in process okay

[3:01:56] Voice 9: thank you for that reminder all right just

[3:02:00] Voice 9: sort of running through trying to make sure we haven't missed anything on our way we have nothing

[3:02:05] Voice 9: in the new business section uh the next scheduled meeting is for september 9th uh at the galliano

[3:02:13] Voice 9: south community hall and with that uh geez we're nearly on our projected timeline amazing um so

[3:02:24] Voice 9: we do have another town hall uh opportunity schedule and uh to remind everyone we won't

[3:02:33] Voice 9: be speaking about the uh subject of the public hearing uh however if there are other um topics

[3:02:42] Voice 9: that are in the purview of the local trust committee that you'd like to address,

[3:02:47] Voice 9: please raise your hands.

[3:02:50] Voice 9: And I'm going to start with you because I haven't heard from you yet today.

[3:02:54] Voice 9: Sure.

[3:02:54] Voice 13: My name is Lauren.

[3:02:55] Voice 13: I just have a question about the MAP-IT interface on the Island Trust website.

[3:03:01] Voice 13: I'm wondering if there's an update on that.

[3:03:07] Voice 13: Not

[3:03:07] Voice 15: that I don't

[3:03:07] Voice 13: love communicating with the staff,

[3:03:10] Voice 13: But I'm just curious if there is any timeline for it to be available.

[3:03:19] Voice 14: Me too.

[3:03:20] Voice 14: I read that it's under works or whatever.

[3:03:22] Voice 14: Yeah,

[3:03:22] Voice 11: I don't have any updates. I

[3:03:24] Voice 14: really hope it's soon though.

[3:03:25] Voice 11: Yeah, I

[3:03:25] Voice 14: was at Trust Council and I was asking about it.

[3:03:27] Voice 14: I'll

[3:03:27] Voice 1: try to move

[3:03:27] Voice 11: around to see when I can find out.

[3:03:29] Voice 14: Yeah, right.

[3:03:30] Voice 14: It

[3:03:30] Voice 1: was a tough conversation.

[3:03:32] Voice 14: There is a

[3:03:34] Voice 14: provincial similar one that's like it,

[3:03:38] Voice 14: that does have the for making maps or for looking at the layers are in there you can actually put

[3:03:44] Voice 14: your own layers in as well okay like the dpas right so there's um i can't remember they have

[3:03:51] Voice 14: it right now because i still have that but i'm like toolbar here i guess it too we

[3:03:56] Voice 9: are and we

[3:03:57] Voice 9: we are we are informed that that it will be rolling out uh properties and i think there was

[3:04:02] Voice 9: just um i don't believe him when he comes back what was

[3:04:08] Voice 9: the left there was there there's one

[3:04:09] Voice 9: little hump to get over and of course

[3:04:12] Voice 15: i don't remember what it was yeah

[3:04:13] Voice 15: yeah but

[3:04:16] Voice 9: we're we're

[3:04:17] Voice 9: sure staff is working on it and it will come online at some point celebrate

[3:04:22] Voice 14: that though which

[3:04:23] Voice 14: i think is a underused uh utility that the amstress does offer right now that is excellent

[3:04:28] Voice 14: that I used all the time.

[3:04:30] Voice 14: The application portal.

[3:04:31] Voice 14: The application portal, you'll find lots of information

[3:04:32] Voice 14: and maps in there as well.

[3:04:36] Voice 8: OK.

[3:04:38] Voice 8: And then I know I saw Steven and Karamita.

[3:04:41] Voice 8: I think Karamita, go ahead.

[3:04:42] Voice 18: Yes.

[3:04:42] Voice 18: It's about jurisdiction to take decisions.

[3:04:52] Voice 18: In 2022, in Sechelt, when there was a drought,

[3:04:58] Voice 18: the Sunshine Coast Rational District gave a state of local emergency due to the drought

[3:05:14] Voice 18: with an order that stopped some small business who use intensive water.

[3:05:28] Voice 18: And that was the cidery, brewery, cement, etc.

[3:05:34] Voice 18: With the application of Palmer for cidery, I would like to know if something like that happened,

[3:05:44] Voice 18: that is a very strict route and water has to be safe for homes use,

[3:05:53] Voice 18: who is here the one who could give that kind of order?

[3:05:58] Voice 18: because this is under the island trust. So if the local trust committee who could give an order to stop a business

[3:06:10] Voice 18: who use intensive water like a side array and enforce it, or is the CRD who could do it?

[3:06:19] Voice 18: Because that would be very important to know in this kind of application.

[3:06:25] Voice 11: So the applicant will have to apply to the province for a large water license, specifically

[3:06:31] Voice 11: for the uses that are proposed, so if there is any concerns with the teacher in terms

[3:06:37] Voice 11: of drought or provincial orders, it would be the province who would actually be doing

[3:06:42] Voice 11: that.

[3:06:43] Voice 11: We need the province?

[3:06:45] Voice 11: The province.

[3:06:46] Voice 11: In that

[3:06:47] Voice 18: case, who is it in the province?

[3:06:49] Voice 11: I'm

[3:06:50] Voice 18: not sure, the water sustainability?

[3:06:52] Voice 11: I

[3:06:52] Voice 18: don't know the exact name.

[3:06:53] Voice 18: it

[3:06:53] Voice 11: changes quite often

[3:06:56] Voice 11: changing the names

[3:06:58] Voice 18: it's not the CRD

[3:07:00] Voice 18: no

[3:07:01] Voice 18: the license

[3:07:04] Voice 18: will enforce that

[3:07:06] Voice 18: yes absolutely

[3:07:11] Voice 20: okay anyone else

[3:07:13] Voice 20: I just want to thank you all for your time

[3:07:15] Voice 20: and for Brent

[3:07:17] Voice 20: and Ben coming down to

[3:07:19] Voice 20: check on our place

[3:07:20] Voice 20: and making that all go through

[3:07:23] Voice 20: yeah

[3:07:24] Voice 20: Yeah,

[3:07:24] Voice 4: thank you very much.

[3:07:27] Voice 22: Steven.

[3:07:28] Voice 22: Two quick things.

[3:07:30] Voice 22: You're meeting with the in September.

[3:07:33] Voice 22: I hope we can get a report from you on the discussions

[3:07:38] Voice 22: that you held with the .

[3:07:40] Voice 22: I realize it's not your business meeting,

[3:07:45] Voice 22: so I don't expect a formal set of minutes,

[3:07:49] Voice 22: but at least a report to the community

[3:07:51] Voice 22: on the areas of discussion that were held. And secondly, with the Penelakut,

[3:08:00] Voice 22: I've been very, I am very impressed with their land code and I would hope that the

[3:08:08] Voice 22: local island trust would be able to find an appropriate time and venue for the Penelakut to come

[3:08:16] Voice 22: back to a trust meeting and advise explain how they would apply their land

[3:08:29] Voice 22: code to any properties that were transferred to them just basically to

[3:08:36] Voice 22: satisfy community interest and probably smooth the process or more information

[3:08:42] Voice 22: on what we can expect is going to be better in terms of coming to a a better final decision

[3:08:51] Voice 22: on the rezoning properties thank

[3:08:54] Voice 1: you uh just to make it yeah just in reference to that i think

[3:08:57] Voice 1: um the panelica would be happy to do that i think uh finding the timing thanks for that but i think

[3:09:04] Voice 1: that's a part of it like if we can get into our ocp review as well and when we're working with

[3:09:09] Voice 1: the panel again I think we're going to be we're going to become fairly

[3:09:12] Voice 1: knowledgeable with their point as well too but

[3:09:16] Voice 22: it would seem that you might be

[3:09:18] Voice 22: you know when it comes time to discuss the covenant for example is that an

[3:09:27] appropriate time to

[3:09:28] Voice 22: introduce this subject and have them present no

[3:09:33] Voice 1: I

[3:09:34] Voice 1: understand i understand what you're saying um the lanco is available online yeah and um so you know

[3:09:40] Voice 1: if the public want to to view it it's there but i i do i understand your question and i will take it

[3:09:46] Voice 1: to canon and see if there is a time one of the staff can come over and we can we can include

[3:09:51] Voice 1: that in a meeting yeah yeah also appreciate that

[3:09:55] Voice 9: suggestion uh jennifer

[3:09:57] Voice 19: just a quick question that

[3:09:59] Voice 19: that occurs to me based on what Stephen asked.

[3:10:01] Voice 19: So has it, have the Penelope agreed

[3:10:05] Voice 19: that they will be part of a covenant on their land

[3:10:09] Voice 19: on those two, 85 and 86, because I recall

[3:10:14] Voice 19: there being some reluctance at one point

[3:10:19] Voice 19: to engage in a covenant process.

[3:10:24] Voice 19: Am I misunderstanding that or misremembering that?

[3:10:27] Voice 19: out yeah

[3:10:29] Voice 11: thank you um my understanding is yeah it's not necessarily something a tool that they

[3:10:36] Voice 11: use um yes so that's a discussion that we'll have to have with penelaket and more than likely if

[3:10:42] Voice 11: they wish to have those covenants discharged um generally we would through the subdivision stage

[3:10:48] Voice 11: and sure but that would be after the lack has been transferred or through the subdivision process to

[3:10:55] Voice 11: ensure that that law is actually transferred and we can discharge that those covenants for them

[3:11:00] Voice 11: but it would have to be the ltc would have to give approval for those as well

[3:11:04] Voice 14: so

[3:11:04] Voice 11: there would necessarily remain a protected covenant on the land that they will own the

[3:11:12] Voice 11: protective covenant is just sustainable sustainable forestry covenant it's just for the f3

[3:11:19] Voice 11: portion right but there the portion that's to be transferred back to

[3:11:24] Voice 11: Penelope it will be rezoned to nature protection which they've agreed with

[3:11:28] Voice 11: that there won't be a further covenant on their land. And

[3:11:31] Voice 19: that will have certain

[3:11:32] Voice 19: protective criteria? Yeah, the nature

[3:11:37] Voice 5: protection in our LTP is

[3:11:39] Voice 19: not under a covenant but just

[3:11:41] Voice 5: one gender standard.

[3:11:44] Voice 5: They have indicated that they're perfectly satisfied with that. They actually

[3:11:50] Voice 5: preferred they requested that's all yeah

[3:11:51] Voice 11: okay okay anything

[3:11:55] Voice 9: further all right then uh thank

[3:11:59] Voice 9: you everyone for coming out today and uh we call for adjournment