Islands Trust Council special meeting, July 29, 2025

[0:00:01] Voice 18: We are meeting here across locations across Coast Salish territories.

[0:00:09] Voice 18: And specifically, I'm here speaking to you from Sinemaq Territory on Gabriela Island.

[0:00:15] Voice 18: We are deeply grateful to be living in these unceded territories.

[0:00:20] Voice 18: And we look for guidance to Indigenous knowledge holders and leaders who shared with us their

[0:00:25] Voice 18: their values, and their long relationship, land-based knowledge, stories, and stewardship

[0:00:32] Voice 18: of these lands and waters. Since 2015, Islands Trust Council has committed to the principles

[0:00:39] Voice 18: of reconciliation. Islands Trust Council recognizes that reconciliation is fundamental

[0:00:45] Voice 18: to building meaningful relationships now and into the future. And the work of reconciliation is key

[0:00:51] Voice 18: to understanding our shared history

[0:00:53] Voice 18: and preserving and protecting the Islands Trust area

[0:00:56] Voice 18: for generations to come.

[0:01:00] Voice 18: I want us to be mindful and careful

[0:01:03] Voice 18: and kind in our work today.

[0:01:07] Voice 18: We are not just here to represent our own interests

[0:01:10] Voice 18: and constituents, Islands Trust communities and residents,

[0:01:13] Voice 18: but the interests of the province, of British Columbia,

[0:01:18] Voice 18: the silent voices of ecosystems, watersheds, flora and fauna

[0:01:22] Voice 18: that are such a vibrant part of the islands.

[0:01:25] Voice 18: The interests and inherent rights of First Nations

[0:01:28] Voice 18: and Indigenous governing bodies must be reflected

[0:01:31] Voice 18: and respected in our policies.

[0:01:34] Voice 18: This work must be done with serious regard for future generations,

[0:01:37] Voice 18: to those who have come before us,

[0:01:39] Voice 18: and to the enduring relationships of First Nations in this area.

[0:01:45] Voice 18: So thank you for bearing with me.

[0:01:48] Voice 18: I'm sitting in acting as chair at the request of Chair Laura Patrick

[0:01:53] Voice 18: for this special meeting of Islands Trust Council

[0:01:57] Voice 18: on July 29th, 2025.

[0:02:01] Voice 18: We'll move to approve the agenda and ask if there are...

[0:02:05] Voice 18: Oh, sorry, I should do a round of introductions.

[0:02:08] Voice 18: Let's go around to trustees.

[0:02:10] Voice 18: Turn to you, Trustee Patrick, for an introduction.

[0:02:15] Voice 11: Hi, I'm Laura Patrick.

[0:02:17] Voice 11: I'm elected on Salt Spring territories

[0:02:19] Voice 11: of many Coast Salish First Nations.

[0:02:22] Voice 11: and

[0:02:25] Voice 18: trustee evans hi

[0:02:30] Voice 4: i'm trustee evans i'm speaking today from sadea south panda

[0:02:34] Voice 4: thank you trustee hunter thank

[0:02:40] Voice 31: you ken hunter on fetus island

[0:02:43] Trustee Fast: trustee fast hi everybody su

[0:02:48] Trustee Fast: ellen fast calling from nuclear liquid bowen island in alcatraz territory of squamish nation

[0:02:56] Trustee Fast: trustee getty hi

[0:02:59] Voice 13: same place judy getty um elected on bowen island welcome and um yeah happy to be

[0:03:06] Voice 13: here

[0:03:07] Voice 18: trustee peterson good

[0:03:12] Voice 32: afternoon from beautiful and sunny way to isla skidi island

[0:03:17] Voice 18: trustee maberly trustee

[0:03:22] Voice 28: maberly uh galliano island trustee

[0:03:26] Voice 18: borthwick yes

[0:03:29] Voice 24: i'm trustee borthwick on

[0:03:30] Voice 24: denman island uh stake in the comox uh traditional territories of the comox first people first

[0:03:35] Voice 24: nations sorry

[0:03:44] Voice 17: trustee govro good

[0:03:47] Voice 20: afternoon uh lisa govro elected on galliano island uh core

[0:03:51] Voice 20: territory to the patelica tribe thanks happy to be here

[0:03:55] Voice 25: trustee yates good afternoon everyone

[0:04:00] Voice 25: chiming in from snenebuck territory for the gabriola local trustee trustee bernardo

[0:04:09] Voice 18: hello

[0:04:14] Voice 30: everybody uh my name is joe bernardo elected from gambier keats and associated

[0:04:19] Voice 30: Islands up in up in Howe Sound.

[0:04:23] Voice 18: And Trustee Boland.

[0:04:26] Voice 22: Hello everybody. I'm speaking to you from Saturna Island. It's my name is Maureith Boland. Thank you.

[0:04:34] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Grahame.

[0:04:38] Voice 5: Hi everyone. I'm colloquially elected on Denman, the traditional territory of the Comox.

[0:04:44] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Stamford. Good afternoon. Kate Stamford calling today from the House of Clans, the Schulte Nation.

[0:04:53] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Middleton.

[0:04:59] Trustee Middleton: Thank you, Lee Middleton from Saturna Island, South Sakeham Traditional Territories. Thank you.

[0:05:08] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Larone.

[0:05:12] Voice 16: Trustee Mikhaila Larone, elected on Laskete Island, Hoyote, coming to you today from Vancouver, Traditional Territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations.

[0:05:24] Voice 18: Thank you. And Trustee Harris.

[0:05:27] Voice 18: us

[0:05:28] Voice 29: here elected on salt spring island thank you thank

[0:05:33] Voice 18: you trustees it's just so wonderful to hear

[0:05:35] Voice 18: where you're from and uh the acknowledgments of the territories in which you live and work

[0:05:39] Voice 18: appreciate it very much um i'll turn to our cao ruben brony if you could introduce the staff here

[0:05:45] Voice 18: to support us today sure

[0:05:47] Voice 7: thank you chair good afternoon uh trustees from the staff side today

[0:05:53] Voice 7: Director of Trust Area Services, Claire Freider.

[0:05:56] Voice 7: Director of Legislative and Information Services, David Marler.

[0:06:01] Voice 7: Director of Planning Services, Stefan Cermak.

[0:06:04] Voice 7: Our Senior Policy Advisor on Policy Statement, Jason Yeomans.

[0:06:08] Voice 7: Senior Indigenous Relations Advisor, Joe Elliott.

[0:06:11] Voice 7: Our Senior Freshwater Specialist, William Shoba is also with us.

[0:06:15] Voice 7: Our Meeting Administrator, Lisa Millard.

[0:06:18] Voice 7: And our Executive Coordinator, Alexandra Tripanese.

[0:06:21] Voice 7: Thank you.

[0:06:23] Voice 18: Wonderful. Okay, with that, we'll move to introduce any new items. I am hoping to consider today. So unless it's related to that. Oh, okay. I'll take it by general consent that the agenda is approved. And now we come to our public comment period.

[0:06:49] Voice 18: period. So this is a time where we invite the public to address Trust Council for any thoughts

[0:06:56] Voice 18: or perspectives you'd like to share with us as we consider the business before us today.

[0:07:02] Voice 18: We ask that you keep your comments respectful, mindful that this is a workplace and speak to

[0:07:09] Voice 18: issues. I think we've got ample time today, so I'm not inclined to set a time or anything, but

[0:07:16] Voice 18: But if we run overly long, I might request you to wrap things up.

[0:07:24] Voice 18: But if anybody would like to speak, would you raise your hand and we'll promote you

[0:07:28] Voice 18: to speaker?

[0:07:29] Voice 18: I see three panelists.

[0:07:37] Voice 18: Okay.

[0:07:38] Voice 18: And if you could promote Jennifer Margeson.

[0:07:40] Voice 18: Thank you.

[0:07:42] Voice 18: Go ahead.

[0:07:46] Voice 17: Hello.

[0:07:47] Voice 10: Good afternoon, everyone.

[0:07:49] Voice 10: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak.

[0:07:52] Voice 10: In advance of your discussions of the draft trust policy statement,

[0:07:57] Voice 10: I'd just like to make some comments about a specific part of the document,

[0:08:03] Voice 10: and that is the definition of environment in the glossary.

[0:08:07] Voice 10: I think it has been clear, at least from the response that Friends of the Gulf Islands have had

[0:08:14] Voice 10: from the senior policy advisor, Jason Yeomans,

[0:08:17] Voice 10: that the Trust Council wants a definition of environment that has a Canadian source somewhere.

[0:08:24] Voice 10: So it's not surprising that in the July 9th Committee of the Whole meeting,

[0:08:29] Voice 10: the proposal of another definition from Trustee Yates that did not have a source was not given serious consideration.

[0:08:37] Voice 10: However, the current definition, as presented in the glossary,

[0:08:42] Voice 10: sourced from the Impact Agency of Canada,

[0:08:45] Voice 10: which focuses on the impact of large infrastructure projects, is deficient.

[0:08:51] Voice 10: While the definition in the current draft TPS glossary does say in point three,

[0:08:58] Voice 10: the interacting natural systems, this seems to be a very weak definition

[0:09:04] Voice 10: definition without the interpretation section of 1.3 of the 2023 September 8th Draft Trust

[0:09:13] Voice 10: Policy Statement, which served to define and support definitions of environment and of

[0:09:22] Voice 10: unique amenities in the trust context, and that has now been deleted in its entirety.

[0:09:28] Voice 10: While a desire for a stripped-down version of the trust policy statement has been stated by trustees, it seems that this is now a problematic document without the specific trust contextual explanations of critical parts of the mandate.

[0:09:48] Voice 10: So, one could argue that these contextual references should be replaced into the draft, or at the very least, the explanation of the environment should be added to the current definition in the glossary.

[0:10:05] Voice 10: Because without that additional contextual information, a better definition is needed in the glossary that more clearly supports the intent of the Islands Trust Act and gives clear context and direction to OCPs and LTCs.

[0:10:27] Voice 10: we believe that insufficient attention has been given to the critical underpinning of the trust

[0:10:34] Voice 10: policy statement the definition of the word environment and request that you raise this

[0:10:40] Voice 10: in discussion prior to first reading without a reference to the wording in the interpretation

[0:10:46] Voice 10: Section 1.3 of the 2023 September 8th Draft Trust Policy Statement, this will be a very problematic

[0:10:56] Voice 10: governing document ongoing. Brevity is not always the best option. Please give this some serious

[0:11:05] Voice 10: consideration. Thank you. Thank

[0:11:11] Voice 18: you, Ms. Margeson. Appreciate your comments. Is there anybody else

[0:11:17] Voice 18: who'd wish to address Trust Council.

[0:11:20] Voice 18: If you could raise your hand electronically

[0:11:23] Voice 18: or somehow signal through the airwaves.

[0:11:29] Voice 18: Okay, if we could promote Carmita from Galliano.

[0:11:32] Voice 18: Thank you.

[0:11:35] Voice 18: Do you hear me?

[0:11:37] Voice 23: Yes, we do.

[0:11:39] Voice 23: Thank you.

[0:11:40] Voice 23: Good afternoon.

[0:11:41] Voice 23: Thank you for listening.

[0:11:44] Voice 23: I will comment about the part one,

[0:11:47] Voice 23: the Island Trust Act.

[0:11:50] Voice 23: In this draft, 2025, you mentioned that through the Island Trust Conservancy protects places of natural and cultural significance.

[0:12:09] Voice 23: Now, it's like there is no other bodies on the Island Trust with the mandate to protect places of natural and cultural significance.

[0:12:24] Voice 23: like it's only the island trust conservancy and that is wrong if you continue reading this draft

[0:12:33] Voice 23: you will see like in the advisory policies indigenous cultural heritage and culturally

[0:12:40] Voice 23: significant area sites say local trust committees and island municipalities should

[0:12:48] Voice 23: 3.24 Indigenous Cultural Heritage Sites, through engagement with Indigenous Governing

[0:12:55] Voice 23: Bodies, identify and prioritize protection of Indigenous Cultural Heritage Sites, including

[0:13:04] Voice 23: etc.

[0:13:05] Voice 23: And the directed policies, ecosystem integrity, local trust committees and island municipalities

[0:13:14] Voice 23: shall, in all official community plan by laws, another by laws that require executive committee

[0:13:22] Voice 23: or trust council review or approval, 331, protected area networks, identified, established,

[0:13:33] Voice 23: and sustained a network of protected areas, etc. It's also, and they're under trust council

[0:13:43] Voice 23: guiding principles 2.1.2 prioritize environmental and indigenous cultural

[0:13:52] Voice 23: heritage protection to place priority on preserving protecting and restoring the

[0:14:00] Voice 23: environment and preserving protecting and supporting restoration of indigenous

[0:14:07] Voice 23: of cultural heritage in all decision-making.

[0:14:11] Voice 23: So you could see that it's not through the Island Trust Conservancy

[0:14:17] Voice 23: the idea of Protect Place of Natural Cultural Significance,

[0:14:21] Voice 23: but it's everybody of the Island Trust,

[0:14:25] Voice 23: the Trust Council Executive Committee and Local Trust Committee.

[0:14:30] Voice 23: So it seemed like a way to push the mandate

[0:14:35] Voice 23: from this other body to the Conservancy.

[0:14:40] Voice 23: The second thing is that I compare the draft of the Island Trust Policy Statement 2023 with the 2025.

[0:14:52] Voice 23: In 2023, when it's talking about the special purpose provision government,

[0:15:00] Voice 23: I will say, and a conservation-oriented mandate.

[0:15:06] Voice 23: to preserve and protect the erection in cooperation with others.

[0:15:12] Voice 23: And after this, this unique government mandate.

[0:15:18] Voice 23: In this one, you have to eliminate the idea

[0:15:22] Voice 23: of that the mandate is conservation-oriented.

[0:15:26] Voice 23: Instead, you put through the Island Trust Conservancy,

[0:15:30] Voice 23: and after you put this unique government mandate.

[0:15:33] Voice 23: But it's not clear because it was taken away, the sentence, a conservation-oriented mandate to preserve and protect.

[0:15:45] Voice 23: So I would like you to consider a change to the draft of the 2025 with respect to the Island Trust Act.

[0:15:56] Voice 23: I just would like to add one more thing.

[0:15:58] Voice 23: It's a general thing.

[0:16:00] Voice 23: Sometimes I wonder about this trust council that was given a gift of being the electoral officials of the Island Trust.

[0:16:15] Voice 23: The Island Trust is a government body unique, unique in Canada, because the idea of protection and preservation, the idea of an ecological mandate.

[0:16:29] Voice 23: And it feels often that the trustees will feel more comfortable just to be a municipality

[0:16:40] Voice 23: without having to have in account the conservation mandate, just to be one of thousands and thousands

[0:16:50] Voice 23: of municipalities.

[0:16:51] Voice 23: Now that we are beginning with the climate crisis, it has given to you this special mandate

[0:17:03] Voice 23: that no other government body in Canada has.

[0:17:08] Voice 23: I hope in this draft policy statement, you will consider this, this gift that has given

[0:17:19] Voice 23: to you.

[0:17:19] Voice 18: Thank

[0:17:20] Voice 23: you very much.

[0:17:21] Voice 18: Thank you very much for your comments.

[0:17:25] Voice 18: we will endeavor to address them in our discussion today are there any other speakers who wish to

[0:17:33] Voice 18: address trust council okay seeing and hearing none um we will consider public comment period

[0:17:54] Voice 18: closed although noting that should this work proceed today and result in a first reading of

[0:18:03] Voice 18: of the draft a period of intensive public engagement will follow so thank you for your

[0:18:09] Voice 18: comments members of the public we do appreciate every single time you come and speak to us okay

[0:18:20] Voice 18: so i think we may have to remove the three speakers uh jennifer margeson just from the

[0:18:29] Voice 18: um i hear some background noise i'm not sure where that's coming from but

[0:18:39] Voice 18: we

[0:18:40] Voice 15: have one more member of the public that has just joined wondering if um sure

[0:18:45] Voice 18: thank you yeah

[0:18:48] Voice 18: um samia would you miss harris would you like to address trust council today

[0:18:56] Voice 18: if you do you just raise your electronic hand and we'll promote you to speaker

[0:19:03] Voice 18: speaker.

[0:19:09] Voice 9: Okay. Thank you. Please go ahead. Thank you very much.

[0:19:21] Voice 15: Miss Harris,

[0:19:26] Voice 18: you are muted.

[0:19:28] Voice 18: We can't hear you. Hello. Can you

[0:19:32] Voice 18: hear me now? Yes, we can. Thank you. Wonderful. Thank you for

[0:19:35] Voice 9: giving me the opportunity. I am Samia Harris and I relocated on the island. And I have a vast

[0:19:46] Voice 9: interest in trying to make the island more suitable for the young people as

[0:19:55] Voice 9: well as the older residents so I want to see how we can all help enhance the

[0:20:04] Voice 9: financial and economic status of the island at the same time not to hurt the

[0:20:10] Voice 9: the beauty and the nature of the island.

[0:20:15] Voice 9: I heard just this morning that the Prime Minister,

[0:20:20] Voice 9: Karni, has reduced the rate for the ferries,

[0:20:25] Voice 9: but that's for the big ferries going in between the provinces.

[0:20:31] Voice 9: So here's another thing for us.

[0:20:33] Voice 9: How about the small ferries?

[0:20:35] Voice 9: You know, people here are having a hard time.

[0:20:39] Voice 9: I hear it from even friends on how expensive food and everything is getting.

[0:20:46] Voice 9: That's one of the aspects.

[0:20:48] Voice 9: The other is we own businesses on the island.

[0:20:51] Voice 9: We can't find any workers.

[0:20:54] Voice 9: What can we do to get together to attract good workers and manpower to the island?

[0:21:02] Voice 9: But the third is I am here to help, and I want to be involved,

[0:21:08] Voice 9: And I want to really put my effort where my mouth is. I want to help, you know, get the businesses together, the community together, and just get it all for everybody's benefit. Thank you for allowing me to speak, Sami.

[0:21:25] Voice 9: you. Thank

[0:21:29] Voice 18: you so much. We appreciate your comment. Okay, just holding the floor open for

[0:21:38] Voice 18: final time. So seeing no one else in the attendees or participants, I think we'll carry on with

[0:21:52] Voice 18: section five. So here, we are scheduled to close the meeting in order to consider advice subject

[0:22:01] Voice 18: to solicitor client privilege. So if somebody could read the motion, and we'll move into

[0:22:06] Voice 18: to close meeting. We'll put a notice up, if we could, Alexandra, when we are about to reopen

[0:22:13] Voice 18: the meeting and probably take a five-minute break at that point so that members of the public can

[0:22:18] Voice 18: rejoin. Thank you, Trustee Getty.

[0:22:27] Voice 13: I'll unmute first. I move that the meeting be closed to

[0:22:30] Voice 13: the public subject to section 90 sub 1 sub i of the community charter in order to consider matters

[0:22:37] Voice 13: related to the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege,

[0:22:41] Voice 13: including communications necessary for that purpose, and that staff attend the meeting.

[0:22:47] Voice 18: Thank you. Moog, do I have a seconder? Seconded by Trustee Peterson. And I'll call the vote. All

[0:22:54] Voice 18: those in favor? I count 17 in favor. Please lower your hands. Any opposed? Okay, that is carried.

[0:23:20] Voice 18: and if we could close the meeting and turn off live streaming everyone bear with us

[0:23:26] Voice 18: thank you um alex i've just noticed a problem okay go ahead can you hear me

[0:23:44] Voice 18: again

[0:23:45] Voice 15: we are live and recording are

[0:23:49] Voice 18: we live streaming yes

[0:23:50] Voice 15: um

[0:23:51] Voice 18: can members of the public see

[0:23:53] Voice 18: the chat uh no

[0:23:57] Voice 15: no but that's right let me see if i can delete but i don't think so oh dear

[0:24:08] Voice 18: somebody did well done made

[0:24:14] Voice 15: it go away good catch

[0:24:15] Voice 18: miracles all right uh so i just put in the chat

[0:24:20] Voice 18: the draft wording for a motion which I know our minute taker will be able to

[0:24:29] Voice 18: translate any of the sorry we're not started yet but we'll wait for trustees

[0:24:35] Voice 18: to get back looks

[0:24:45] Voice 15: like people trustees are turning their videos back on yeah we

[0:24:58] Voice 18: We got your motion.

[0:24:59] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Boland.

[0:25:08] Voice 18: All right.

[0:25:11] Voice 18: If we are all back together, thank you to the members of the public

[0:25:17] Voice 18: who have been watching and patiently waiting for our closed session.

[0:25:23] Voice 18: We will now return to our open meeting agenda for the sole business item.

[0:25:30] Voice 18: So item 6.11, consideration of the policy statement bylaw, draft bylaw number 183, and request for decision that is on page 2 to 81 of your agenda.

[0:25:48] Voice 18: And I just want to open before we ask staff to introduce this.

[0:25:54] Voice 18: Oh, Trustee Peterson?

[0:25:55] Voice 18: sorry

[0:25:58] Voice 32: just a quick note and i meant to mention this at our approval of the agenda the second of

[0:26:05] Voice 32: the draft motions there notes attachment two it should be attachment three thank

[0:26:17] Voice 18: you for that

[0:26:17] Voice 18: so noted we can change that and

[0:26:22] Voice 4: trustee evans i do apologize for asking for clarification again

[0:26:26] Voice 4: um my internet froze did we already rise and report from the closed meeting or and are we

[0:26:33] Voice 4: going to carry on that conversation or not there

[0:26:36] Voice 18: was nothing to rise and report um we considered

[0:26:39] Voice 18: um legal advice and we are going to debate the um the draft trust policy statement and if trustees

[0:26:50] Voice 18: want to bring forward a motion uh based on the advice received in closed we'll deal with emotions

[0:26:55] Voice 18: motions in the order that that they've come in so we'll get to that discussion as we I think we've

[0:27:05] Voice 18: got a few other motions that have come in earlier but we'll deal with those first and so just as a

[0:27:12] Voice 18: quick preamble or introduction this is a special meeting today of trust council to consider the

[0:27:20] Voice 18: the work done to date on the draft islands trust policy statement with the goal of advancing it

[0:27:26] Voice 18: to communities and other agencies and first nations for review and further comment the draft

[0:27:34] Voice 18: before us today has been through a number of committees to get us to this point and i just

[0:27:39] Voice 18: want to turn to the chair of trust programs committee to say a few words about the work

[0:27:44] Voice 18: that has gone in and brought us to this point today trustee evans did you freeze oh looking

[0:27:56] Voice 18: for the unmute button yes

[0:27:59] Voice 4: sorry i'm just uh having a few few little glitches here so i do apologize

[0:28:05] Voice 4: um yes so with the trust programs uh committee um so as part of the previous term's work staff

[0:28:15] Voice 4: Staff completed the 32 resolutions from the last term.

[0:28:18] Voice 4: And as per the project charter, the revised draft trust policy statement was provided to First Nations for comments with the caution that the current trust council members had not yet seen a copy of the revisions and that additional edits were to be expected once the current trust council had reviewed it in conjunction with legal advice.

[0:28:42] Voice 4: Trust Programs Committee was originally tasked with working on this project, and First Nations

[0:28:48] Voice 4: request additional time to make their reviews and provide their comments, and that was provided.

[0:28:55] Voice 4: It was then brought in front of Trust Council last year, at which point Trust Council, after

[0:29:01] Voice 4: receiving the draft trust policy statement, decided to have Committee of the Whole convene

[0:29:06] Voice 4: to review those changes that, you know,

[0:29:10] Voice 4: collated those 32 resolutions and the comments from First Nation,

[0:29:13] Voice 4: as well as some advice that we got from legal.

[0:29:17] Voice 4: As Committee of the Whole struggled to meet with quorum,

[0:29:20] Voice 4: it was decided at the March Trust Council meeting

[0:29:22] Voice 4: to hand the review back to Trust Programs with an expanded committee.

[0:29:26] Voice 4: Trust Programs met five times between April and May

[0:29:30] Voice 4: to get the draft to a reviewed state

[0:29:33] Voice 4: with proposed edits to be recommended to Trust Council.

[0:29:36] Voice 4: and for Trust Council's consideration. It was then provided back to Committee of the Whole

[0:29:44] Voice 4: for review on July 9th which brings us to today. So should this draft be read a first time today

[0:29:51] Voice 4: this will then move into the next phase of public engagement as planned and shown in the project

[0:29:56] Voice 4: charter and it is still expected that there will be further edits and changes.

[0:30:00] Voice 4: So this is more the beginning of the process, not the final gasps, as it were.

[0:30:10] Voice 4: But this is more traditionally the beginning of a project.

[0:30:15] Voice 4: So I just wanted to say that up front and thank everyone who joined the Expanded Trust Programs Committee.

[0:30:23] Voice 4: It was very much appreciated.

[0:30:24] Voice 4: That was a lot of time.

[0:30:26] Voice 4: There were some very long days in there.

[0:30:28] Voice 4: and there are a lot of great comments and I just really appreciate everyone and all of their very

[0:30:35] Voice 4: diverse thoughts and and ideas and ways to look at things which is exactly what we need so thank

[0:30:41] Voice 4: everybody very much thank

[0:30:46] Voice 18: you chair Evans it's it's been a real delight actually to to work with

[0:30:51] Voice 18: you and uh the rest of trustees on this um so let's turn to staff to introduce uh the request

[0:31:00] Voice 18: for decision and contextualize it. Of course, there's been, there is a lot there and thank

[0:31:07] Voice 18: you, Trustee Evans, for articulating the path. But does staff want to address anything? Thank

[0:31:17] Voice 18: you. Jason Eumanns?

[0:31:19] Voice 1: Sure. Thank you, Chair Elliott. Trustee Evans and yourself actually

[0:31:24] Voice 1: covered off much of what I was going to say in my introductory remarks, so I don't think I need

[0:31:27] Voice 1: need to repeat all of that. But, you know, as staff, we are pleased to be with you today for

[0:31:32] Voice 1: your consideration of first reading of Trust Council By-law number 183, the draft policy

[0:31:35] Voice 1: statement. The two resolutions that staff are recommending as part of our request for decision

[0:31:41] Voice 1: are that you do give the by-law first reading and that you resolve to refer it to the Indigenous

[0:31:46] Voice 1: Governing Bodies, agencies, and various services who are listed in Appendix 3 of your agenda

[0:31:53] Voice 1: a package. Before you begin your discussions on these matters, I just wanted to take a couple of

[0:31:58] Voice 1: minutes to review the documents that are attached to the request for decision, starting with

[0:32:03] Voice 1: Appendix 2, which is a redline version that contains all of the changes that have been

[0:32:08] Voice 1: recommended by Committee of the Whole and Trust Programs Committee since Trust Council last

[0:32:13] Voice 1: endorsed a revised version of the draft policy statement at your meeting in September of 2024.

[0:32:19] Voice 1: 2024. So at that meeting of September of 2024, you received a few other revisions that came via

[0:32:26] Voice 1: discussions that had happened at Committee of the Whole over the course of that summer.

[0:32:30] Voice 1: Those changes were incorporated into a revised version of the draft policy statement. And since

[0:32:34] Voice 1: then, you've been making further revisions through your meetings. These recommended revisions emerged

[0:32:41] Voice 1: from the initiative of individual trustees who put forward motions for change around issues of

[0:32:46] Voice 1: importance to them or that their constituents have been bringing forward, revisions based on

[0:32:51] Voice 1: advice from staff that was then carried forward by trustees, and indeed revisions based on the

[0:32:57] Voice 1: advice of legal counsel who last had a chance to review the document in June of this year.

[0:33:04] Voice 1: Appendix 1 of your request for decision is a clean version of the draft policy statement bylaw that

[0:33:10] Voice 1: accepts all of the changes that are in the red line and has been reformatted in accordance with

[0:33:15] Voice 1: the Islands Trust's style guide and this revised version or this formatted version of the policy

[0:33:21] Voice 1: statement forms Schedule A of Policy Statement By-law number 183. And then Appendix 3 of your

[0:33:29] Voice 1: Request for Decision is the list of Indigenous Governing Bodies, Agencies and Improvement

[0:33:35] Voice 1: Districts to whom staff are recommending that you refer the by-law for additional comment.

[0:33:41] Voice 1: we are here to support your discussion today provide whatever advice we are able to

[0:33:48] Voice 1: and i'm not sure whether you were going to cover this chair elliot but we had had some conversation

[0:33:53] Voice 1: previously that in the formatting of resolutions on the fly to make revisions to the document if

[0:34:01] Voice 1: the conversation is starting to get a little boggy maybe there's an opportunity to take a

[0:34:07] Voice 1: a short break and then staff can work with the trustees who are bringing forward motions and

[0:34:10] Voice 1: make sure they're crafted in in the best way possible to achieve the effect that they're

[0:34:15] Voice 1: looking to thank you thank

[0:34:19] Voice 18: you so much uh and i've put the uh the draft language for

[0:34:26] Voice 18: amendments is down under response options alternatives that trust council bylaw

[0:34:34] Voice 18: not cited, be amended as follows by da, da, da, da. So I trust the minute taker will help us with

[0:34:42] Voice 18: that and all the formatting. And if we could see the proposed motions on screen, that would

[0:34:47] Voice 18: probably be most helpful. So what I have that's come in so far, and I'd like to deal first with

[0:34:56] Voice 18: With the motions that were sent in in advance, Trustee Yates, with myself, a motion to address the definition of environment.

[0:35:10] Voice 18: So I'll just give an overview first, and then if anything is missing and you're working on motions, please do send them in.

[0:35:17] Voice 18: I myself have a motion on the preamble language under Goal 1 regarding reconciliation.

[0:35:26] Voice 18: It's just a very small suggestion.

[0:35:29] Voice 18: Trustee Boland has just sent in a motion on the reconciliation items 3.11 and 3.12.

[0:35:41] Voice 18: to the um the discussion on the verbs cooperate versus engage and so we'll move through those

[0:35:53] Voice 18: three first and starting with the definition of environment so trustee yates um would you like to

[0:36:00] Voice 18: i would thank you

[0:36:03] Voice 3: and i did

[0:36:05] Voice 25: send another one in as well almost as a backup motion

[0:36:10] Voice 25: motion um so it i sent that in shortly before the meeting started um so if this one doesn't fly then

[0:36:18] Voice 25: i have another one however i hope this one flies so um i move that the definition of environment

[0:36:27] Voice 25: be removed from the glossary of the draft policy statement and i will speak to this

[0:36:34] Voice 25: please go ahead okay so first of all um the current draft definition is is simply unsatisfactory and

[0:36:45] Voice 25: it is causing so many challenges in interpretation and i don't want this to be something that just

[0:36:53] Voice 25: continues to divide us and i i myself as am someone who is divided on how i think about

[0:37:01] Voice 25: what the environment means for the policy statement. So that's one reason. My second

[0:37:07] Voice 25: reason that I can't find a definition of, I can't find a really good holistic definition that

[0:37:16] Voice 25: encompasses the, you know, the whole environment, terrestrial, marine, they seem to be separated

[0:37:24] Voice 25: into, depending on what agency or ministry you look at, they seem to be separated into

[0:37:31] Voice 25: to ecological regions, which is actually what I'm more familiar with, having worked in a number of

[0:37:37] Voice 25: different biogeoclimatic areas in BC for most of my life. So my third reason is that there is no

[0:37:47] Voice 25: definition of unique amenities. And we all have our ideas of what those unique amenities might be

[0:37:55] Voice 25: in the trust area. Certainly for Gabriola, it's our recycling depot and our bus and things like

[0:38:00] Voice 25: that therefore maybe we can just leave out environment and allow it to be whatever we wish

[0:38:08] Voice 25: to wish to work on to protect the trust area and support its mandate and fourthly and thank you

[0:38:16] Voice 25: trustee elliott for um a previous discussion which really made me think about this and this may be

[0:38:22] Voice 25: the most important reason it's impossible to define environment as separate from human

[0:38:30] Voice 25: interactions because this whole region was shaped and cultivated by first nations by indigenous

[0:38:38] Voice 25: people and what we may think of as an untouched natural environment um has all sorts of beautiful

[0:38:48] Voice 25: beautiful cultural historical values that are definitely part of the

[0:38:54] Voice 25: environment. So those are my reasons. And as I say,

[0:38:57] Voice 25: I have another motion if this one doesn't fly. Thank you.

[0:39:03] Voice 18: Thank you, trustee Yates.

[0:39:06] Voice 18: And so before I call for seconders on the motion,

[0:39:11] Voice 18: I think we'll proceed as we do in committee of the whole with some general

[0:39:16] Voice 18: discussion um just so that we make sure that we have the wording right and so trustee boland

[0:39:23] Voice 18: i

[0:39:27] Voice 22: agree i think it should be removed i think what we have is a very tortured sort of explanation

[0:39:34] Voice 22: that raises more questions than it answers and i think the environment we're surrounded by

[0:39:40] Voice 22: is not pristine and for many reasons both you know uh recent history and longer ago history

[0:39:49] Voice 22: um and it just creates and divides uh opinion trying to nail it down we have to deal with

[0:39:57] Voice 22: what we have to deal with you know every day and um i don't think we need this definition it just

[0:40:04] Voice 22: just creates confusion and divisiveness.

[0:40:08] Voice 22: And I'll second the motion when we're ready.

[0:40:10] Voice 22: Thank you.

[0:40:13] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Boland.

[0:40:16] Voice 18: Do we have any advice from staff on the wording?

[0:40:19] Voice 18: Do you want these motions to be written

[0:40:21] Voice 18: as that Trust Council By-law number 183,

[0:40:24] Voice 18: cited as Trust Council Policy Statement By-law 2025,

[0:40:28] Voice 18: be amended as follows?

[0:40:30] Voice 18: Or is this wording sufficient?

[0:40:31] Voice 18: And then we can do a general list of amendments at the end.

[0:40:39] Voice 18: What's, what's your preference?

[0:40:44] Voice 18: Chair Patrick?

[0:40:45] Voice 18: Nope.

[0:40:45] Voice 18: Yeah.

[0:40:46] Voice 19: We can speak with Director Marger in the room suggesting that, yes,

[0:40:49] Voice 19: it should be the more formal wording.

[0:40:51] Voice 19: So we're just working on that now for you.

[0:40:53] Voice 18: Okay.

[0:40:53] Voice 18: Thank you.

[0:41:08] Voice 11: Okay.

[0:41:14] Voice 18: General discussion, Trustee Bernardo.

[0:41:18] Voice 30: Right.

[0:41:18] Voice 30: Right. You know, ending second, and I might as well throw in my two bits worth here.

[0:41:23] Voice 30: I would support the motion once it's formally made.

[0:41:26] Voice 30: I think Trustee Yates used exactly the right word to describe the current definition, unsatisfactory.

[0:41:33] Voice 30: um and i agree with her that um i think it's a hopeless enterprise to try to come up with a

[0:41:43] Voice 30: a term um that uh encompasses the usages to which we we use that word environment um

[0:41:54] Voice 30: it's not a static def i mean if we understand anything about the environment it's never static

[0:42:01] Voice 30: and although there's a lot of thinking about the environment that assumes that it's something

[0:42:06] Voice 30: thing to be that preservation is the only thing that matters about it um the thing that we're

[0:42:13] Voice 30: trying to preserve with the with the mandate is is a dynamic process it's a dynamic process

[0:42:22] Voice 30: it's not a thing and that process isn't static and it what the process encompasses is often very

[0:42:30] Voice 30: contextual there are some places where we can discuss the environment in terms of there being

[0:42:37] Voice 30: a relatively untouched piece of land that is closer to you know the the uh natural unhuman

[0:42:45] Voice 30: touched land uh or marine environment there are some areas where that might that that the the

[0:42:52] Voice 30: balance of environment goes in that direction there's other situations where the environment is

[0:42:57] Voice 30: this intermingling of human and natural um components and um although it's not

[0:43:07] Voice 30: uh it's not the greatest thing in legislation to to use a word that has so much importance but not

[0:43:12] Voice 30: define it i think we are in a situation where we have to accept that um the meaning of the word

[0:43:20] Voice 30: environment is going to likely to be contextual most of the time and that we have to um have that

[0:43:26] Voice 30: flexibility to it and i i think the meaning will emerge in the discussions that we have

[0:43:33] Voice 30: on a case-by-case basis so that's why i would support uh this motion by trustee yates once

[0:43:38] Voice 30: it has been seconded thank you and i too would be prepared to second it thank you

[0:43:44] Voice 18: hey lots of volunteers on seconding uh trustee eddie i

[0:43:48] Voice 13: have a question of process um

[0:43:53] Voice 13: we've been through a number of meetings and we've we have these really good discussions and we get

[0:43:57] Voice 13: you know, down to fine points on different sections. And we've gone through a number of

[0:44:04] Voice 13: meetings where we haven't been able to finish the document. And we've had to go into a series

[0:44:11] Voice 13: of other meetings. If we have detailed debates on each of these motions that are coming up today

[0:44:18] Voice 13: to amend this document, what is the process in terms of the next steps? Do we have to have it

[0:44:25] Voice 13: come back to another special meeting or can we agree to the amendments today have it revised

[0:44:32] Voice 13: and sent out to the agencies um does it uh if we have lengthy debates and we don't get through

[0:44:39] Voice 13: all of the motions today um what happens with our timeline thank

[0:44:47] Voice 18: you director marler

[0:44:51] Voice 8: yeah i was actually going to ask if director fraser had comments on the timeline i was going

[0:44:56] Voice 8: going to speak more to the process go

[0:44:58] Voice 19: ahead okay um well certainly i can speak to the fact around

[0:45:04] Voice 19: i'll take a stab at all of it and perhaps that director marler can

[0:45:07] Voice 19: supplement my comments

[0:45:08] Voice 19: on page five of your agenda today we have some sample motions it was our intention

[0:45:12] Voice 19: that should you make amendments today that you then um read the bylaw as amended um so that we

[0:45:18] Voice 19: can then move forward with the process as planned should you not make it through today i think we'll

[0:45:23] Voice 19: We'll come back to, you know, should you have a prolonged discussion today and not be able to get to consideration of first reading or not, it doesn't pass.

[0:45:31] Voice 19: We will then circle back to executive committee for consideration of the next steps and put together a revised project charter for the Trust Council to consider in September.

[0:45:41] Voice 19: But there is, at this point, staff have not turned our minds to a whole new trajectory for the project in hopes that you can indeed consider first reading today.

[0:45:50] Voice 19: date but i think we would have to provide some candid and honest advice to trust council around

[0:45:54] Voice 19: the ability to achieve this project by this term and would likely be bringing you back an extended

[0:45:59] Voice 19: timeline and

[0:46:02] Voice 8: if i may just add on to that the yeah so you can just make all the changes you want

[0:46:07] Voice 8: and then the last five minutes of the meeting you can give it first reading as amended as

[0:46:12] Voice 8: director freighter indicated it's um this again is going out for comment so you can change it a

[0:46:20] Voice 8: at second reading you can change it at third reading you've got lots of opportunities so just

[0:46:25] Voice 8: keep that in mind if you're concerned about time and uh back to you yeah

[0:46:31] Voice 18: and i want to reiterate

[0:46:33] Voice 18: that um we will try to keep our discussion focused and moving forward if we lag and need a lot of

[0:46:41] Voice 18: discussion or advice from staff we will recess um to refine motions so that's um the process that i

[0:46:49] Voice 18: think would work best trustee evans again

[0:46:54] Voice 4: mine was sort of a little bit in process um and i'm

[0:46:59] Voice 4: just asking here normally we would ask for comments to be on the wording once the wording is

[0:47:04] Voice 4: satisfactory then we would have second uh we'd get a second this would get into discussion but

[0:47:09] Voice 4: it seems like we're in discussion right now so my question is are we in discussion or should we have

[0:47:15] Voice 4: it seconded so we can get into discussion and once we're in discussion i would like to have

[0:47:21] Voice 4: I would like to have some comments.

[0:47:23] Voice 18: Yeah, I think now I'll call for seconders

[0:47:27] Voice 18: because we've refined the wording.

[0:47:30] Voice 18: Oh, Director Marler has some advice.

[0:47:34] Voice 8: No, I just forgot to put my hand there.

[0:47:36] Voice 18: Oh, okay, sorry.

[0:47:38] Voice 18: I just wanted to make sure that we had the wording correct.

[0:47:41] Voice 18: We've changed it so that it's more clear for the record.

[0:47:46] Voice 18: And so now I'd like to call for seconders

[0:47:49] Voice 18: on the motion by Trustee Yates.

[0:47:51] Voice 18: at trustee boland i see your hand seconded by trustee boland and discussion on the motion

[0:48:00] Voice 18: trustee evans thanks

[0:48:03] Voice 4: um i will support this i think at the moment we've heard from a lot of

[0:48:07] Voice 4: people that uh the um the current wording that we've got in there is not uh is not sitting well

[0:48:16] Voice 4: it's not being received well this does not mean that should we find wording that does work that

[0:48:22] Voice 4: we can't put it in but i think for right now let's remove the contention and uh move on

[0:48:29] Voice 4: so i would support this thank

[0:48:33] Voice 18: you trustee peterson uh

[0:48:36] Voice 32: speaking in support of the motion for some of

[0:48:38] Voice 32: the reasons that have already been elucidated um if we have a a proposed definition that we

[0:48:46] Voice 32: don't think is um a good one and and i'm looking at it i can see why we have had comments from

[0:48:54] Voice 32: members of the public that are not perfectly thrilled with it and then just also the other

[0:49:00] Voice 32: notion being that um uh the act itself and the mandate written by the province uses the word but

[0:49:07] Voice 32: what definition is the province using so i think that this is um i think that this is a simple way

[0:49:15] Voice 32: to move ahead it doesn't mean that we're completely undefined it means we haven't

[0:49:19] Voice 32: selected a definition and i'm in support thank you thank

[0:49:26] Voice 18: you uh i also am in support um i had

[0:49:31] Voice 18: done quite a lot of digging in the ministry of environment uh website to try to find a holistic

[0:49:37] Voice 18: definition uh but the unfortunate thing is uh the ministry seems to parcel out environment into its

[0:49:45] Voice 18: It's many different components, and I just wasn't able to find a holistic definition of environment from that area.

[0:49:53] Voice 18: Of course, it wasn't exhaustive, but I do support the motion and the intent.

[0:50:00] Voice 18: I think the term environment is well understood, and its use in the glossary is very minimal.

[0:50:14] Voice 18: that's all for my comments trustee Harris

[0:50:18] Voice 29: undecided on this I find it

[0:50:22] Voice 29: interesting that a so-called Environmental Protection Agency doesn't

[0:50:27] Voice 29: have a clear definition of environment I'll leave it at that thank you thank

[0:50:38] Voice 18: you any more discussion on the motion are we ready to vote all those in favor

[0:50:46] Voice 18: please raise your hand or say aye director Marla if you could help me with

[0:50:55] Voice 18: counting I can't quite see everything but three six yeah

[0:50:57] Voice 8: I see 16 electronic hands up 16 okay

[0:51:02] Voice 18: lower your hands please any opposed is that one opposed trustee Bernardo no yeah

[0:51:16] Voice 8: yeah none opposed

[0:51:17] Voice 8: this is also 19

[0:51:18] Voice 8: okay

[0:51:20] Voice 18: thank you that is carried okay so moving on to the next motion which is

[0:51:28] Voice 18: is one that i had put forward uh so the intent was to look at the preamble language under goal

[0:51:42] Voice 18: one so it's on page goals advancing reconciliation so page 18 of our agenda

[0:51:58] Voice 18: 11 of the draft document and so i'll just read it out that the preamble language under goal one

[0:52:12] Voice 18: be amended to read so currently it reads starting at the second sentence the policies in this

[0:52:21] Voice 18: section aim to acknowledge the history and legacy of indigenous peoples in the area since time

[0:52:26] Voice 18: immemorial what i'd like to propose changing it to because well is to read the history legacy

[0:52:35] Voice 18: legacy and continuing relationships of Indigenous peoples in the area

[0:52:41] Voice 18: since time immemorial.

[0:52:44] Voice 18: I think this is somewhat older language.

[0:52:49] Voice 18: It implies that Indigenous peoples' relationship to the land

[0:52:55] Voice 18: is a historical and a legacy-making piece,

[0:52:58] Voice 18: but I think their presence here is continuing,

[0:53:02] Voice 18: continuing and I'd like to see that referenced as a continuing relationship in the area. I don't

[0:53:10] Voice 18: know if you have the wording, Lisa, trustee Fast.

[0:53:16] Trustee Fast: Thank you. While the motion is coming up, there it

[0:53:19] Trustee Fast: is, I support this and when the time is ready, I'll be glad to second it because the idea of,

[0:53:27] Trustee Fast: I think it's a dangerous idea to assume that Indigenous governing bodies and First Nations people only exist in the past, and I support this idea, and I'll look at your message more carefully. I was going to ask for it to be on the screen. Thank you.

[0:53:51] Trustee Fast: So

[0:53:53] Voice 18: if I could just request refinement of the motion before I go to other speakers here, it could say to read, oh, no, sorry,

[0:54:04] Voice 15: that the

[0:54:06] Voice 18: preamble language be amended to read.

[0:54:12] Voice 19: You could specify the second sentence of the preamble language.

[0:54:16] Voice 18: Oh, that's good. Thank you.

[0:54:21] Voice 19: Sorry, say that again?

[0:54:22] Voice 19: The second sentence.

[0:54:26] Voice 11: in the preamble so

[0:54:29] Voice 19: amend i would say that trust council bylaw 183 amend be amended in the second

[0:54:36] Voice 19: sentence under gold one to read here uh no you know so um i would delete

[0:54:46] Voice 19: the words i don't know

[0:54:48] Voice 19: read but cited as the bylaw be amended in the second sentence under gold or be amended in the

[0:54:57] Voice 19: the second sentence of the pre-angle language under full one and

[0:55:11] Voice 15: then to

[0:55:17] Voice 21: read to

[0:55:21] Voice 15: no

[0:55:24] Voice 18: i think i think the original writing should be there no

[0:55:29] Voice 15: so your original writing didn't have

[0:55:32] Voice 15: the pre-tester but i can grab that again no

[0:55:35] Voice 18: no i just meant the the draft language the the way

[0:55:39] Voice 18: that its word is

[0:55:39] Voice 19: so if we take out the words to read it could be amended from to read from thank

[0:55:44] Voice 18: you that's what i meant if

[0:55:45] Voice 19: you wish to have the previous language in your motion take out to read

[0:55:54] Trustee Fast: not there i think it needs

[0:55:56] Trustee Fast: to be to read and then take out the word from all the way down

[0:56:02] Trustee Fast: to the second to read oh

[0:56:06] Voice 26: no

[0:56:07] Voice 18: sorry i'm gonna if i if i could just ask after the word

[0:56:15] Voice 18: the first word amended remove to read the second sentence the prelim the language so it's from

[0:56:24] Voice 18: this sentence to read this sentence and i know it's long but i think having the previous version

[0:56:32] Voice 18: in there is important so is that clear stuff yes

[0:56:39] Voice 19: and can i just ask your intention for the bold

[0:56:41] Voice 19: language in the motion you've got oh no

[0:56:44] Voice 18: they can oh sorry and this is what i wanted

[0:56:48] Voice 18: to refine with uh debate before we second it so is it continuing in relationships or

[0:56:56] Voice 18: uninterrupted relationships those were two suggestions that i had so it has not been

[0:57:05] Voice 18: seconded and i welcome discussion on this draft motion trustee bernardo thank

[0:57:14] Voice 30: you um i i think

[0:57:17] Voice 30: it's a valid point and i i would support the change question is what is the change and look

[0:57:23] Voice 30: looking at the language, I think continuing is probably the better word in the sense that

[0:57:33] Voice 30: if I put it this way, those relationships have been interrupted. That's what reconciliation

[0:57:39] Voice 30: is all about, is doing something about repairing that, at least in part. So I would go with

[0:57:47] Voice 30: continuing. The other part, my main point though, is continuing relationships with what? I think

[0:57:54] Voice 30: that phrase needs an object otherwise relationships is just floating out there

[0:58:02] Voice 30: with with with not attached to anything are we do we mean relationships to the

[0:58:06] Voice 30: area with each other what I'm assuming it's to the area but it's your motion

[0:58:12] Voice 30: trustee Elliott so I just think it needs a subject here thanks yep

[0:58:18] Voice 18: thank you for

[0:58:19] Voice 18: that so we can consider continuing relationships of indigenous peoples to

[0:58:25] Voice 18: to the area. Since time immemorial, that would sort of fix that. I hear you, it does need a subject.

[0:58:33] Voice 18: Trustee Yates. That

[0:58:35] Voice 25: was exactly my point. Thank you very much. And I also agree that continuing

[0:58:39] Voice 25: is good and just leave out uninterrupted. Okay, Trustee Fast.

[0:58:47] Trustee Fast: Yeah, as I mentioned,

[0:58:48] Trustee Fast: thank you. I like the word continuing. I was thinking an alternative might be presence.

[0:58:57] Trustee Fast: because either way thank you continuing presence

[0:59:03] Voice 18: trustee luckham sorry i can't hear you

[0:59:13] Voice 6: yeah bear with me uh thank you uh i guess uh i am in complete support of using

[0:59:22] Voice 6: continuing and not determining interrupted or uninterrupted um i would and if there was

[0:59:31] Voice 6: I was interested in it being interrupted.

[0:59:33] Voice 6: I would suggest that ancestors of the people

[0:59:39] Voice 6: that are here today don't think it was ever interrupted,

[0:59:42] Voice 6: certainly interfered with might be a better choice of words,

[0:59:47] Voice 6: but I don't think we need to say that.

[0:59:48] Voice 6: So I think continuing is excellent thing

[0:59:53] Voice 6: to have picked up here in this amendment.

[0:59:56] Voice 6: Thank you, Toby.

[1:00:00] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Boland.

[1:00:03] Voice 22: What about, I support this,

[1:00:05] Voice 22: what about the continuing relationship of Indigenous peoples

[1:00:11] Voice 22: to the land moved in this area since time immemorial?

[1:00:15] Voice 22: Would that work?

[1:00:18] Voice 18: I think that's getting overly wordy.

[1:00:21] Voice 18: I think it's just simplest to go continuing relationships

[1:00:24] Voice 18: of Indigenous peoples to the area,

[1:00:27] Voice 18: and that includes

[1:00:28] Voice 18: lands and waters,

[1:00:30] Voice 18: so it's not just terrestrial.

[1:00:32] Voice 18: So if we could make that change, I think I've heard from several people, we could remove or uninterrupted and add to the area.

[1:00:41] Voice 18: Trustee Yates.

[1:00:43] Voice 25: I agree with keeping it more open and not closed because there's relationships with the land, the water, with each other, with history.

[1:00:53] Voice 25: So I think the way you have it now is better.

[1:00:56] Voice 25: Thank you.

[1:00:59] Voice 18: Excellent.

[1:00:59] Voice 18: Trustee Boland.

[1:01:02] Voice 18: All right.

[1:01:03] Voice 18: Now I'll call for a seconder.

[1:01:08] Voice 18: Trustee Yates, I saw your hand marginally there for everyone, although I've forbidden you from

[1:01:14] Voice 18: seconding every motion in this meeting. Joking. All right. Discussion on the motion?

[1:01:25] Voice 18: No. All right. I'll call for the vote. All those in favor? I see 13 in favor, 14, 15 in favor.

[1:01:46] Voice 18: and lower your hands any opposed none opposed that is carried thank you trustees two motions

[1:01:58] Voice 18: dealt with good progress so trustee boland uh your motion was next and then trustee fast i did

[1:02:09] Voice 18: get yours so thank you for that they both deal with the same elements so if you could get that

[1:02:17] Voice 18: that on the screen and if anyone needs a break at any point please remind me they

[1:02:27] Voice 22: might be saying

[1:02:27] Voice 22: the same thing if they are we

[1:02:30] Voice 18: can just they are the wording is different for trusty fast

[1:02:37] Voice 18: but i think the intent was yeah the intent is the same i believe trusty fast yeah so now it's

[1:02:46] Voice 22: going to be a vote on preferences for wording of the motion okay i'm happy either way well do you

[1:02:58] Voice 18: want to make your speak to your make your motion um or at least read it out so we can make sure

[1:03:05] Voice 22: yeah i'll read it out and then if trustee fast wants to amend it because she has something

[1:03:10] Voice 22: particular in hers it's fine uh the trust council bylaw number 183 cited as trust council policy

[1:03:18] Voice 22: statement by law 2025 be amended by replacing the words cooperate with indigenous governing bodies

[1:03:27] Voice 22: with the words engage with indigenous governing bodies in the draft policy statement policy

[1:03:34] Voice 22: headers of reconciliation item 3.1.1 and item 3.1.2 and i'm just in favor of making it clean

[1:03:45] Voice 22: and simple and we can discuss and revert to something else later this is first reading

[1:03:55] Voice 22: so um this simplifies and aligns the language thank you thank

[1:04:05] Voice 18: you so before it's uh seconded

[1:04:08] Voice 18: any um wording changes i see trustee fast um

[1:04:14] Trustee Fast: my motion was worded a little different

[1:04:16] Trustee Fast: means the same happy to second it when it comes there uh this is fine i like to see the word

[1:04:21] Trustee Fast: headers in there thank you thank

[1:04:25] Voice 18: you so no further refinements of the motion it reads stuff that

[1:04:34] Voice 18: reads well okay i'll call for seconders seconded by trustee luckham and now would you like to speak

[1:04:49] Voice 18: to your motion trustee boland you already did but any anything else no okay so discussion on

[1:04:58] Voice 18: the motion trustee fast excuse

[1:05:06] Trustee Fast: me just that i think um that removing the inconsistency of having

[1:05:10] Trustee Fast: uh a different word in the heading than in the uh body of the text the policy begins with the word

[1:05:19] Trustee Fast: engage. And so I think the header should also use the word engage for both of these two. One is

[1:05:27] Trustee Fast: of these two. Thank you. I

[1:05:37] Voice 18: want to proceed slowly through this. There is no rush.

[1:05:40] Voice 18: This is an important question. So if anybody needs to collect their thoughts, but

[1:05:46] Voice 18: discussion on the motion. Trustee Bernardo.

[1:06:00] Voice 30: Yes, I would just like to voice my agreement

[1:06:03] Voice 30: that consistency avoids confusion so uh that's why i support this motion thank you

[1:06:32] Voice 18: trustee borthwick

[1:06:35] Voice 27: yeah um so i mean as uh we talked about a little bit earlier in the closed meeting and i'm not

[1:06:42] Voice 27: going to get into the specifics of that but um i really appreciated the work that uh our current

[1:06:50] Voice 27: chair did to sort of bring this this language cooperate into the mix i do absolutely support

[1:06:56] Voice 27: the desire for consistency and something that's the same across the documents.

[1:07:03] Voice 27: I personally would like to see the words cooperate featured more strongly. I feel like it

[1:07:10] Voice 27: pulls us closer to reconciliation and working proactively in that regard. I totally take the

[1:07:18] Voice 27: points. There have been points that have been made that say that, you know, engagement does

[1:07:22] Voice 27: does not preclude cooperation. And I, I totally grant that. Um, and also, you know, I, as I see

[1:07:29] Voice 27: it, we have a duty, uh, to, to, to move forward on reconciliation. And I would like to not shy

[1:07:35] Voice 27: away from language that, that encourages that. Um, so I will be voting against, although I totally

[1:07:41] Voice 27: understand. And I, this will not stop us from doing any of that work. Um, but I it's that that's,

[1:07:47] Voice 27: it's a, it's a quibble, but it's, I think it's, I think it is significant and I appreciate the

[1:07:51] Voice 27: point that was made before about uh involving the word cooperate thank

[1:07:58] Voice 18: you trustee maverly

[1:08:01] Voice 28: yeah thank you chair um yeah i will not be supporting the motion um i think the whole

[1:08:07] Voice 28: point of reconciliation and moving on rec reconciliation is to be bold um i think the

[1:08:13] Voice 28: word cooperate should be in there so uh i will not be supporting the motion thank

[1:08:20] Voice 18: you trustee evans

[1:08:23] Voice 4: Based on the conversation that we had regarding the legal opinion, I would like to take up the legal advice and support this motion based on all of the risks that were associated with going the other way, as was previously discussed. Thank you.

[1:08:40] Voice 4: Thank you.

[1:08:44] Voice 4: Trustee Yates?

[1:08:45] Voice 25: I just wanted to sort of reiterate something we have talked about, that engaging with First

[1:08:52] Voice 25: Nations and Indigenous governing bodies never precludes cooperating or collaborating with

[1:08:59] Voice 25: them.

[1:09:00] Voice 25: And I'm sure that engaging with them, to me, means that that leads to cooperation and collaboration.

[1:09:14] Voice 18: Thank you.

[1:09:15] Voice 18: you. I'll let other speakers go first, but I'll keep myself on the list. Trustee Fast.

[1:09:22] Voice 18: Thank you,

[1:09:22] Trustee Fast: Trustee Elliott. I've got my editor's hat on, and I'm looking at this as a document

[1:09:30] Trustee Fast: that we want to take out to Indigenous governing bodies, all kinds of members of the public,

[1:09:39] Trustee Fast: other organizations. And I would like it to be a smooth, polished document that people can

[1:09:46] Trustee Fast: read cleanly. And I wonder, why leaving this inconsistency in between the headers and the

[1:09:55] Trustee Fast: policy? Why would we do that? Unless we want to create a point of friction or somewhere where

[1:10:03] Trustee Fast: your eye stumbles. What's the point of leaving an inconsistency in? I don't mind if it's one way or

[1:10:11] Trustee Fast: the other. I object to the inconsistency because I think we want people to take this document

[1:10:19] Trustee Fast: seriously and give it their full attention so that we can get the best feedback. And I think

[1:10:26] Trustee Fast: we're introducing a distraction and there's a lot of good work and thought and important

[1:10:33] Trustee Fast: significant policies in this document and I'd like people to look at them all. So that's why

[1:10:41] Trustee Fast: I'm in favor of this motion and if it fails I'll probably move in favor of something else that

[1:10:47] Trustee Fast: removes the inconsistency which seems to me to be creating a distraction. Thank you.

[1:10:55] Trustee Fast: Thank

[1:11:00] Voice 18: you. Trustee Getty?

[1:11:05] Voice 13: Okay, so we've had lots of discussion about the use of both of these words in different places in these, both the headers and the actual policies.

[1:11:20] Voice 13: and I'm going to support this motion at this point

[1:11:24] Voice 13: and I think that it's, I accept the discussions that we've had

[1:11:29] Voice 13: both in various open meetings and closed meetings

[1:11:35] Voice 13: and without getting into all of the details of what we talked about in closed

[1:11:40] Voice 13: but I think that this is going to be something that we will be talking about

[1:11:46] Voice 13: out with some of the governing bodies and being able to understand and explain and get

[1:11:53] Voice 13: feedback, I think would be very, very helpful.

[1:11:58] Voice 13: So for first reading, I'm quite happy to try and keep it consistent so that, but the

[1:12:04] Voice 13: change will be noted.

[1:12:05] Voice 13: And I think that that's going to be an interesting conversation as well.

[1:12:12] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Harris.

[1:12:15] Voice 29: Yeah, maybe I'm missing something in the draft.

[1:12:18] Voice 29: but is there a definition of both cooperate and engage somewhere there?

[1:12:25] Voice 29: And if so, could you tell me where?

[1:12:28] Voice 29: And if not, can we please maybe have one up on the screen to look at?

[1:12:34] Voice 18: That's a great idea.

[1:12:39] Voice 18: Could staff look up a definition of cooperate?

[1:12:42] Voice 18: I see staff humans.

[1:12:44] Voice 18: Hello.

[1:12:46] Voice 1: Hi.

[1:12:49] Voice 1: I suppose I could look up a definition of cooperate,

[1:12:52] Voice 1: though i don't know to which publication i would turn for for one i suppose a dictionary of of

[1:13:00] Voice 1: repute is is that an interest to this body

[1:13:06] Voice 8: it's david here please

[1:13:11] Voice 18: go ahead yeah

[1:13:12] Voice 8: so our lawyers

[1:13:13] Voice 8: would be using the oxford english dictionary the latest edition okay

[1:13:20] Voice 18: so if we can hold that

[1:13:21] Voice 18: question um trustee harris do you have a follow-up um

[1:13:26] Voice 29: interesting that we'll just go with the oxford

[1:13:28] Voice 29: dictionary i wonder why we couldn't do that for the word environment as well um anyways um

[1:13:34] Voice 29: yeah i think specifics are very important in something of such magnitude here um or you know

[1:13:42] Voice 29: possible magnitude um and actually you know um you know being successful with reconciliation so

[1:13:51] Voice 29: Thanks.

[1:13:55] Voice 18: So you had a question.

[1:13:57] Voice 18: We have a motion on the floor.

[1:14:00] Voice 18: It would be helpful if you indicated support or not in your comments.

[1:14:07] Voice 18: Trustee Luckham.

[1:14:10] Voice 6: I am in support of the motion as presented for all of the reasons that others have brought

[1:14:18] Voice 6: forward.

[1:14:19] Voice 6: We absolutely can engage to cooperate.

[1:14:23] Voice 6: operate. And I, quite frankly, am not interested in a definition of either of these particular

[1:14:31] Voice 6: words, because this is where we end up constantly in debate over one interpretation versus another.

[1:14:40] Voice 6: And you can pick any dictionary you want, French or English, come up with different

[1:14:46] Voice 6: interpretations.

[1:14:51] Voice 18: Thank you, Trustee Bernardo.

[1:14:53] Voice 18: uh

[1:14:57] Voice 30: thank you i'm in uh this may shock trustee luckham but i'm in agreement with him that

[1:15:02] Voice 30: we should avoid getting into definitional exercise and some scholastic exercise of trying to

[1:15:10] Voice 30: determine you know the fine points of the meaning a difference between engage and cooperate i think

[1:15:15] Voice 30: the plain language of the words is pretty obvious it's on the surface uh we don't have to drill too

[1:15:20] Voice 30: too deep into it. Engage is a wider, more general term of simply means engagement. And it's why we

[1:15:27] Voice 30: use that word frequently in much of our work. Cooperate means a different thing. It means

[1:15:36] Voice 30: cooperating. It means working together on a common goal, among other things.

[1:15:42] Voice 30: We're not there yet in this area. And as Trustee Yates pointed out, and I think this is an

[1:15:48] Voice 30: important point engagement is a process that if we exercise it and go through it properly

[1:15:56] Voice 30: we'll lead to cooperation and I think the word engagement in this situation needs to be read in

[1:16:02] Voice 30: the larger context of what the province is trying to do and what we're trying to do in terms of

[1:16:06] Voice 30: reaching for reconciliation cooperation I think it's fair to say although we don't have the

[1:16:15] Voice 30: jurisdiction are under legislation yet cooperation is a goal it is a stated policy goal of the

[1:16:21] Voice 30: province and a stated policy goal of this body of trust council um but um getting to that goal

[1:16:31] Voice 30: uh isn't something that we can uh simply assume that we can do today or tomorrow or whenever the

[1:16:37] Voice 30: the trust policy statement gets passed um we don't necessarily it's a complicated business

[1:16:42] Voice 30: getting to the point where we can cooperate.

[1:16:45] Voice 30: And I don't think we should prejudge the process.

[1:16:48] Voice 30: As Trustee Yates pointed out, engagement, do it properly,

[1:16:53] Voice 30: it will lead to cooperation, but we're not

[1:16:55] Voice 30: quite there yet.

[1:16:56] Voice 30: So let's stick with the word engagement.

[1:16:57] Voice 30: Thank you.

[1:17:00] Voice 4: Thank you.

[1:17:01] Voice 4: Trustee Evans.

[1:17:03] Voice 4: Thanks.

[1:17:04] Voice 4: I'm also not in favor of looking up

[1:17:06] Voice 4: the Oxford Dictionary explanation of this.

[1:17:08] Voice 4: It has a much deeper implication

[1:17:10] Voice 4: when it comes to the legal implications,

[1:17:12] Voice 4: which is why we got legal advice on this and again the dictionary isn't going to say what

[1:17:19] Voice 4: those risks and ramifications are when it's interpreted in a court of law when something

[1:17:25] Voice 4: has come up so I would rather not get into a debate on what the wording says in a dictionary

[1:17:30] Voice 4: it's the implications and the advice that we've received from legal that we had the prior

[1:17:36] Voice 4: conversation conversation on um so again i am in support of taking legal's advice it is a less

[1:17:46] Voice 4: risky point

[1:17:49] Voice 12: it's yeah thank you

[1:17:51] Voice 18: um i'm also um we cannot refer to um advice received in closed

[1:17:57] Voice 18: meeting and an open meeting. So we can just speak to your views, please, based on. Thank you.

[1:18:06] Voice 4: Then in my view, it is a less risky path to take. If we were to replace it with the word

[1:18:15] Voice 4: cooperate, and we failed to deliver on that, we run the risk of damaging relations with First

[1:18:21] Voice 4: Nations. We also run the risk of overstepping our jurisdiction when it comes to getting

[1:18:27] Voice 4: ministerial approval on the document if we've overstepped our jurisdictional ability and that

[1:18:34] Voice 4: will put um this this uh project in jeopardy of being um uh being pulled back for yet another term

[1:18:43] Voice 4: thank you thank

[1:18:46] Voice 18: you trustee peterson well

[1:18:50] Voice 32: i will confess that in the intervening uh moments there

[1:18:53] Voice 32: I went ahead and looked up the Oxford version.

[1:18:58] Voice 32: If that's where legal comes from,

[1:19:01] Voice 32: then I can see why there may be some concerns around

[1:19:05] Voice 32: the term.

[1:19:07] Voice 32: Point of order, please.

[1:19:08] Voice 32: What is

[1:19:09] Voice 18: your point of order?

[1:19:12] Voice 30: Again, it's not appropriate to refer to the legal advice

[1:19:17] Voice 30: either directly or indirectly that you give enough

[1:19:22] Voice 30: in what you're talking about that gives hints

[1:19:24] Voice 30: about what the legal advice was.

[1:19:25] Voice 30: I mean, that's just, please,

[1:19:27] Voice 30: I do think we need to be much more disciplined about that.

[1:19:30] Voice 30: Let's discuss about the merits of this at a policy level.

[1:19:36] Voice 30: The legal stuff, we've discussed that separately.

[1:19:39] Voice 30: It doesn't belong in this space.

[1:19:41] Voice 30: Thank you.

[1:19:44] Voice 32: All right, fair enough.

[1:19:45] Voice 32: Thank you.

[1:19:45] Voice 32: So when we get down to what the goals of Trust Council

[1:19:52] Voice 32: are in terms of reconciliation,

[1:19:55] Voice 32: Reconciliation, what we've heard from nations around desires for co-governance,

[1:20:01] Voice 32: we know it's not in our legal power to do so.

[1:20:04] Voice 32: We know that that's the province's jurisdiction.

[1:20:07] Voice 32: The province has turned down two requests for reviews of the act by trust council,

[1:20:14] Voice 32: which included reconciliation and how we get there.

[1:20:20] Voice 32: and to me the way forward for that type of work is to engage with first nations

[1:20:29] Voice 32: and if we can get to a point of of cooperation down the road where uh nations and trust council

[1:20:37] Voice 32: could approach the province with really specific requests around reviews of the act i think that's

[1:20:45] Voice 32: that's you know that's somewhere down the road obviously but i am in support of the motion

[1:20:50] Voice 32: um i there's a long a long way to go there's a lot of work to be done and uh and this is merely

[1:20:59] Voice 32: our our present step thank you thank

[1:21:07] Voice 18: you for that um good discussion everyone i put myself on the

[1:21:12] Voice 18: list um and i'm honestly not even sure which way i would vote i'm of two minds um the work that we

[1:21:25] Voice 18: we do must be done in cooperation with all the other agencies and First Nations. And I 100%

[1:21:33] Voice 18: support interpreting the object of the trust in as liberal and consultative and deeply meaningful

[1:21:51] Voice 18: meaningful way as possible, while recognizing that to take a word in cooperation, which

[1:22:01] Voice 18: is in the purpose statement of how we are to do the work, and change it into the active

[1:22:06] Voice 18: verb of that we cooperate with First Nations in everything that we do, it changes the meaning

[1:22:16] Voice 18: slightly, and there is a lot of challenge that will come with that.

[1:22:25] Voice 18: both with building good relationships that are based on a foundation of we come to it with a

[1:22:36] Voice 18: shared vision, as Trustee Bernardo said. Do we have that shared vision yet? Are we moving towards

[1:22:41] Voice 18: the same goal with First Nations? And so the cooperation as a verb, I think, is difficult

[1:22:50] Voice 18: Because are we there yet? Are we able? Do we have the processes and the relationships in place? Do we have the trust? And so those are all very difficult questions. But on the other hand, engagement is what we do. That is the bare minimum. That is the standard.

[1:23:13] Voice 18: um so i'm still i'm challenged because i don't feel engagement moves us any further along in

[1:23:24] Voice 18: recognizing the interest of first nations in having a higher involvement in decision making

[1:23:31] Voice 18: that affects their lands and territories so i still don't know which way i'm going on this

[1:23:38] Voice 18: trustee harris thank

[1:23:40] Voice 29: you i'm very undecided on which way to go with this motion as well

[1:23:45] Voice 29: Well, one of the main problems I have is that both words seem contradictory to what a lot of the directive policies state in this draft when it comes to First Asians that live and work on the islands as it is now.

[1:24:01] Voice 29: So I struggle with, you know, just contradictory terms and statements and policies. Thank you.

[1:24:13] Voice 18: thank you this is a difficult discussion have we heard from everyone trustee govro

[1:24:29] Voice 17: hi

[1:24:30] Voice 20: yeah excellent uh discussion i think we're putting a lot of um it's like we're putting the

[1:24:36] Voice 20: future reconciliation on two different words so um i don't think we have the power to do that

[1:24:42] Voice 20: i think that engaging with indigenous covering bodies is what our statutory authority allows

[1:24:49] Voice 20: allows us to do and that'll lead to cooperation but I think making the assumption that we that

[1:24:55] Voice 20: nations do want to cooperate with us is another thing I'm in favor of this motion as engage

[1:25:02] Voice 20: because I think as I heard at one point there's engagement leads to cooperations and it doesn't

[1:25:10] Voice 20: kind of work backwards as well so I'll be supporting the motion thank

[1:25:19] Voice 18: you trustee govro

[1:25:21] Voice 18: I put myself back on the list, if you'll forgive me, because you raised, or another point that I

[1:25:27] Voice 18: don't think was raised is to remind us all that this is first reading. And if this draft policy

[1:25:37] Voice 18: precedes an Indigenous governing bodies, and the feedback that we get is that engagement is not

[1:25:43] Voice 18: strong enough, we have a place to go to, and we've had this discussion, and we have these values,

[1:25:51] Voice 18: and we've evaluated how our values can be enshrined in policy

[1:25:57] Voice 18: and the feedback of First Nations into our policy statement.

[1:26:01] Voice 18: So I think the point does need to be made

[1:26:04] Voice 18: that we are not the only decision makers here.

[1:26:08] Voice 18: We need to hear from First Nations.

[1:26:11] Voice 18: If the call is to have stronger language,

[1:26:16] Voice 18: we can move in that direction.

[1:26:18] Voice 18: So I just wanted to make that point

[1:26:20] Voice 18: because I don't think anyone articulated it.

[1:26:23] Voice 18: Thank you.

[1:26:24] Voice 18: Trustee Luckham?

[1:26:26] Voice 6: Thank you, Chair.

[1:26:27] Voice 6: Only because the word and the concept of co-governance

[1:26:34] Voice 6: has ended up in the conversation now.

[1:26:41] Voice 6: Honestly, where that lives in the future

[1:26:46] Voice 6: is how hard we work towards it

[1:26:50] Voice 6: and how specifically we engage with nations,

[1:26:54] Voice 6: how we engage with the province,

[1:26:57] Voice 6: how we engage our communities

[1:26:59] Voice 6: and understanding what co-governance means.

[1:27:03] Voice 6: Because maybe there's even a different word

[1:27:06] Voice 6: that fits into that

[1:27:08] Voice 6: because I wouldn't want a definition

[1:27:09] Voice 6: of co-governance either.

[1:27:11] Voice 6: But the salvation from this conundrum

[1:27:18] Voice 6: is we need to be committed to undertake the work.

[1:27:22] Voice 6: And engaging with nations, engaging with government, and engaging with public is where the future is.

[1:27:28] Voice 6: And carrying our concerns, our wishes, doing the right thing here in the Salish Sea.

[1:27:38] Voice 6: Thank you.

[1:27:43] Voice 18: Thank you.

[1:27:45] Voice 18: Thank you, everyone, for a very thoughtful discussion.

[1:27:50] Voice 18: Trustee Middleton.

[1:27:54] Trustee Middleton: Thank you.

[1:27:55] Trustee Middleton: I appreciate everyone's trying to be careful and well-meaning,

[1:28:03] Trustee Middleton: but I think the concept of cooperation is well out of the bag

[1:28:08] Trustee Middleton: and it's well understood by those nations that were consulted

[1:28:12] Trustee Middleton: that this was a goal.

[1:28:16] Trustee Middleton: I believe nations understood that this document is aspirational in nature.

[1:28:21] Trustee Middleton: It's not merely the ingredients on the back of your cornflakes,

[1:28:24] Trustee Middleton: As in day to day, this is what we muddle our way through. Do we aspire to something more? I think nations said loud and clear they're looking for cooperation leading to co-governance in the trust area. I didn't hear anyone speak back against that strongly. And if you do feel strongly against that, you should say so.

[1:28:47] Trustee Middleton: You shouldn't hide in a definition out of fear.

[1:28:51] Trustee Middleton: So I'm going to have to side with my dear and long-suffering friend here

[1:28:56] Trustee Middleton: who has in some ways championed this document

[1:28:59] Trustee Middleton: and moved it forward on the basis that it is a tool for reconciliation.

[1:29:04] Trustee Middleton: Primarily, that's Trustee Maberly and say,

[1:29:07] Trustee Middleton: you've got to have the word cooperation in here.

[1:29:09] Trustee Middleton: As uncomfortable as it might make you.

[1:29:11] Trustee Middleton: Otherwise, you simply are creating a bland disappointment for those who've already spoken as to what their desires are in seeing the wording of this document. Thank you.

[1:29:31] Voice 18: Thank you. Any further discussion? And Trustee Biddleton, if you could put your hand down because I'm about to call for the vote. Thank you.

[1:29:43] Voice 18: Thank you. So I'm actually going to ask Trustee Boland to read your motion out. And then I will call for the vote just so we're all clear. Oh, Trustee Middleton, you have your hand up again? Nope. Okay, thanks.

[1:30:00] Voice 18: Okay.

[1:30:05] Voice 22: I move that Trust Council By-law number 183, cited as Trust Council Policy Statement

[1:30:12] Voice 22: By-law 2025, be amended by replacing the words cooperate with indigenous governing bodies

[1:30:19] Voice 22: with the words engage with indigenous governing bodies in the draft policy, draft statement

[1:30:26] Voice 22: and policy headers of Reconciliation Item 3.1.1 and Item 3.1.2.

[1:30:36] Voice 18: Thank you.

[1:30:39] Voice 18: I was about to call for the vote, Trustee Luckham.

[1:30:42] Voice 18: Are you one more comment?

[1:30:44] Voice 6: I'm seconding it.

[1:30:46] Voice 6: No,

[1:30:47] Voice 18: you did second it.

[1:30:48] Voice 6: Oh, you just re-read it.

[1:30:49] Voice 6: Originally, yes.

[1:30:50] Voice 18: The Chair is

[1:30:51] Voice 18: re-reading the motion for clarity.

[1:30:54] Voice 18: All right.

[1:30:55] Voice 18: Now I will call for the vote.

[1:30:57] Voice 18: All those in favor?

[1:30:58] Voice 18: 14

[1:31:07] Voice 8: hands up electronically thank

[1:31:10] Voice 18: you i count 14 in favor hands down please

[1:31:15] Voice 18: all those opposed it's five opposed five opposed thank you the motion is carried

[1:31:29] Voice 18: and again we are not the only ones here we will seek feedback on these policies and hope that we

[1:31:39] Voice 18: we hear what is integral to First Nations on the matter.

[1:31:45] Voice 18: Okay, so Trustee Fast, I believe that dealt with your proposed motion as well.

[1:31:53] Voice 18: And I haven't seen any others coming in.

[1:31:58] Voice 18: Staff, are there any other motions sent to the motion email?

[1:32:05] Voice 15: Just double checking now, but I don't think so.

[1:32:08] Voice 15: One moment.

[1:32:10] Voice 15: No.

[1:32:12] Voice 15: Okay.

[1:32:18] Voice 18: Okay. I do want to take a big breath and a bit of a break. Consider reading through the document one last time, making sure we're all satisfied. There's no niggly headers out of line.

[1:32:39] Voice 18: Five minute break. And what do you think?

[1:32:44] Voice 18: Yeah, I think a five minute break would be good. Trustee Bernardo?

[1:32:50] Voice 30: uh yes i've been waiting to find out how we intend to proceed with this actually um like the process

[1:32:56] Voice 30: are is a plan that we are going to take them after these initial motions have been dealt with are we

[1:33:02] Voice 30: going to be simply taking the document like line by line as we just plow through it

[1:33:08] Voice 18: um i'll look

[1:33:10] Voice 18: to staff but my impression is that you're if you want to make amendments to the draft that is in

[1:33:17] Voice 18: in the agenda today you send them to motion um at islandstrust.bc.ca and we'll consider those

[1:33:25] Voice 18: we are not going line by line through the document that has already been done by three committees

[1:33:32] Voice 30: um yes and not all the trustees were able to participate for various reasons in that and um

[1:33:38] Voice 30: just so i'm clear about this so the plan here is that this is just we're just going to entertain

[1:33:45] Voice 30: motions to amend there's not going to be a discussion about these different items

[1:33:49] Voice 30: if

[1:33:52] Voice 18: there are motions to amend the current draft that is that will lead to discussion

[1:33:59] Voice 18: there is not an intention to go through line by line so i would propose that we take a 15 minute

[1:34:07] Voice 18: recess if you have other items that you want to see discussed propose them send them to the motions

[1:34:17] Voice 18: email and then we will wrap this up and we can proceed to consideration of first reading

[1:34:23] Voice 18: uh

[1:34:26] Voice 30: although okay i'm struggling here because we have scheduled till eight o'clock tonight

[1:34:32] Voice 30: right so okay i i have your point that's how we're going to deal with it thank you

[1:34:39] Voice 30: okay

[1:34:43] Voice 18: so if we could take a 15 minute recess i think just in light of um giving everyone time to

[1:34:52] Voice 18: make sure you get your motions in for any amendments come back at my time keeps being

[1:35:00] Voice 18: okay how about 3 40

[1:35:05] Voice 17: longer and shorter trustee boland um

[1:35:12] Voice 22: just to trustee bernardo's point

[1:35:16] Voice 22: and to the proposed way forward and i'm i'm pretty happy with it but would it be helpful

[1:35:23] Voice 22: helpful if we did a sort of a straw poll like are there people who have a concern but they don't

[1:35:30] Voice 22: have a motion ready I mean basically that's what it boils down to you know and maybe come back

[1:35:36] Voice 22: after this break and if you say I want to discuss item xyz then we can have a discussion without a

[1:35:44] Voice 22: a motion being uh proposed but not line by line till eight o'clock tonight thank

[1:35:52] Voice 18: you i would i

[1:35:53] Voice 18: guess i would ask what the intention of discussion is if you need clarification or further information

[1:36:01] Voice 18: because there's something you want to amend um i would still suggest that you propose a motion

[1:36:10] Voice 18: because it's it's what do you want to see done to this document that needs to be clear and that's

[1:36:18] Voice 18: why we asked for motions ahead of time so that staff could prepare bring up all the draft

[1:36:21] Voice 18: resolutions and everything that had grounded the discussion and why the draft is the way it is so

[1:36:28] Voice 18: i'm not sure we're here to just entertain wide-ranging discussion that was committee of

[1:36:34] Voice 18: the whole um but if you have an amendment to make and you need clarification on that

[1:36:42] Voice 18: propose it let staff collect the information then we can discuss it but if there's no point

[1:36:49] Voice 18: and it's just a general discussion i don't think that really has a place here unless i misspoke

[1:36:57] Voice 4: trustee evans thank you i would very much support what the chair elliot just stated

[1:37:06] Voice 4: We've had some very broad ranging discussions.

[1:37:09] Voice 4: We've had, I've lost count of the number of meetings,

[1:37:11] Voice 4: but it's been more than 10,

[1:37:13] Voice 4: but through Committee of the Whole,

[1:37:15] Voice 4: Trust Council and Trust Programs.

[1:37:21] Voice 4: At this juncture, it's not the end of changes.

[1:37:26] Voice 4: At this juncture, it's first reading

[1:37:28] Voice 4: and it's the beginning of the project

[1:37:31] Voice 4: where we bring forth various amendments as needed.

[1:37:34] Voice 4: we've got two other readings to do them so if you've not had time yet to really review or fully

[1:37:39] Voice 4: understand or something comes up afterwards and you go oh i hadn't really considered that or oh

[1:37:45] Voice 4: i hadn't thought about it in that manner we can bring those conversations forward to follow-up

[1:37:51] Voice 4: meetings this is this is not the final meeting this is the first step thank you thank

[1:38:00] Voice 18: you so

[1:38:01] Voice 18: So with that, let's take a break till 3.45.

[1:38:04] Voice 18: Alexandra, if you wouldn't mind changing that.

[1:38:08] Voice 18: Thank you, everyone.

[1:38:09] Voice 18: Please reconvene so that we have quorum.

[1:39:05] Voice 4: Trustee Luckham, just so you know, your microphone is still on.

[1:39:10] Voice 6: I'm breathing heavy, am I?

[1:39:13] Voice 4: Just in case you were to say anything.

[1:39:17] Voice 6: No, thank you for caring.

[1:39:19] Voice 6: No, that's great.

[1:39:20] Voice 6: So, yeah.

[1:39:23] Voice 12: All right.

[1:59:34] Voice 18: Thank you, trustees, for coming back.

[1:59:37] Voice 18: Actually, we should probably do a quorum or account for quorum now.

[1:59:41] Voice 18: Just make sure we're all, we still have quorum.

[1:59:47] Voice 15: We definitely do.

[1:59:49] Voice 18: We do? Okay, great.

[1:59:52] Voice 18: Okay, so I'm glad we took a break.

[1:59:55] Voice 18: There were a few motions sent in.

[2:00:00] Voice 18: that i saw just uh one from trustee bernardo with a grouping of motions so uh let's deal with those

[2:00:09] Voice 18: um probably be helpful to see it on screen alexander if that's possible

[2:00:20] Voice 18: okay and trustee bernardo if you would like to go ahead yes

[2:00:30] Voice 30: um uh if i may like to introduce those

[2:00:35] Voice 30: all these three motions come from the same place and my chief concern here is that the language

[2:00:44] Voice 30: of the trust policy statement draft trust policy statement be as clear as possible

[2:00:48] Voice 30: right now i'm not sure it's clear enough about the intended meaning of some of the directive

[2:00:57] Voice 30: policies and some of the guidance and i worry about that because we don't want there to be

[2:01:04] Voice 30: any ambiguity about the intended purposes of a policy or some guidance here and and i i do

[2:01:09] Voice 30: appreciate that nothing's cast in stone after first reading but um i think we're all familiar

[2:01:16] Voice 30: with how public engagement um is kind of a tricky business and frankly tends to be you know seems to

[2:01:25] Voice 30: become very fraught um often um there seems to be a thing at least to my observation which is

[2:01:33] Voice 30: limited there's other trustees that are more experienced than i do but there seems to be a

[2:01:37] Voice 30: phenomenon where there's a projection of anxiety is the source of the commentary some people are

[2:01:44] Voice 30: concerned about the risk of overdevelopment conversely others are worried about overly

[2:01:49] Voice 30: restrictive an overly restrictive approach to land planning and it's like anxiety and fear about what

[2:01:56] Voice 30: things might mean is often seems to be the source of the comments that we're getting and it

[2:02:01] Voice 30: And that seems to trump the actual meaning or understanding of the bylaw.

[2:02:07] Voice 30: And we definitely want robust public discussion, but it should be about the actual substance of what we intend, not what people worry about or what they imagine.

[2:02:20] Voice 30: And I really do think it's important to be as clear as possible that we transmit in as plain language as possible the substance of what we're trying to achieve.

[2:02:30] Voice 30: Part of that will be the engagement process, but I think it starts with using the clearest language we can.

[2:02:37] Voice 30: We don't want, at the end of this piece, even after all the public commentary, we don't want to end up in situations where an LTC can read a provision and it's a reasonable interpretation of the trust policy statement.

[2:02:50] Voice 30: They read it one way, but the executive committee ends up bouncing it on the basis of a competing reasonable interpretation.

[2:02:56] Voice 30: interpretation we want there to be one reasonable interpretation of the language we just don't want

[2:03:00] Voice 30: that confusion so that's the starting point for all of this and that's why i would now uh refer

[2:03:08] Voice 30: us to article 2.1.5 of the um trust policy statement that's where my first motion uh i

[2:03:16] Voice 30: would like to make comes from and um and that's about the precautionary principle that we talk

[2:03:25] Voice 30: about there and uh you know the precautionary principle i think we have to be very careful

[2:03:34] Voice 30: about how we apply that because it really is a default provision and instead of saying right now

[2:03:41] Voice 30: it you know it talks about uh we should follow the precautionary provincial uh principle where

[2:03:50] Voice 30: Where there may be uncertainty. Well, no, not there might be uncertainty. There is uncertainty.

[2:03:57] Voice 30: I think it should be incumbent on us as legislators to, when we're looking at a situation, to say, to make that finding first.

[2:04:06] Voice 30: First, we are uncertain, not maybe uncertain.

[2:04:10] Voice 30: We are uncertain about the consequences of doing a thing or, you know, granting a variance or passing a bylaw or some potential threat.

[2:04:22] Voice 30: And right now, the language talks about there being a threat.

[2:04:26] Voice 30: I think we should be clear that what we're talking about is material uncertainty over the potential for threat.

[2:04:33] Voice 30: because when you you know i'm being picky about the grammar here but um there is no uncertainty

[2:04:41] Voice 30: when you have identified the threat if you can follow the reasoning what we're dealing here is

[2:04:47] Voice 30: risk management we don't know really if there's an absolute threat but we look at the circumstances

[2:04:53] Voice 30: and we're worried that there may be a serious threat and uh but we're not sure and that

[2:05:01] Voice 30: that uncertainty is material.

[2:05:03] Voice 30: It's not about some trivial marginal aspect.

[2:05:06] Voice 30: It's like, no, we think that there's real uncertainty

[2:05:08] Voice 30: over real damage, but it's potential,

[2:05:12] Voice 30: which is why I'm suggesting this wording here.

[2:05:15] Voice 30: So with that, I would like to make the motion.

[2:05:19] Voice 30: I move that trust council by-law number 183

[2:05:22] Voice 30: cited as trust council policy statement by-law 2025

[2:05:26] Voice 30: be amended as follows by amending article 2.1.5

[2:05:31] Voice 30: five, by replacing the words, there may be uncertainty over the threats of serious irreversible

[2:05:37] Voice 30: damage from development with there is material uncertainty over the potential for serious or

[2:05:42] Voice 30: irreversible damage from development. And that's the motion. And I don't think it changes the

[2:05:52] Voice 30: intention or purpose or meaning of the thing. It just makes it clearer.

[2:06:00] Voice 18: Okay. Thank you,

[2:06:02] Voice 18: trustee bernardo um i'd like to ask staff uh to confirm or not whether it does in their view

[2:06:10] Voice 18: change the material or the substance of the um policy 2.15 and i appreciate that this is a bit

[2:06:21] Voice 18: of a we haven't had time to prepare for this um i agree with you the grammar is actually confusing

[2:06:32] Voice 18: confusing in the current draft. But I want to be sure that what you suggest changing it to

[2:06:42] Voice 18: isn't a significant change, or do we need more advice?

[2:06:46] Voice 30: And just to be clear about something, what I'm striving for here is precision and clarity. And

[2:06:53] Voice 30: I'm certainly open to tweaking even the language I've suggested to make it more precise if people

[2:06:58] Voice 30: if people have better language

[2:06:59] Voice 12: okay

[2:07:02] Voice 18: trustee getty on

[2:07:16] Voice 13: page 41 of the agenda there's also the in the

[2:07:19] Voice 13: glossary there's a definition of um the phrase precautionary um and i think that has to be

[2:07:30] Voice 13: read in conjunction so to me that gets a little bit complicated just in terms of dealing with

[2:07:38] Voice 13: this off the top of my hand thank

[2:07:46] Voice 18: you for pointing that out trustee evans i

[2:07:52] Voice 4: got distracted with

[2:07:53] Voice 4: reading um i was just going to ask are we going into discussion or can we go into discussion

[2:08:02] Voice 4: on this and have staff come back with their opinion on the material

[2:08:11] Voice 18: Yes, I do want advice from staff, but Trustee Bernardo indicated that he was open to wording changes, and so I'd just like to be sure that the wording reads as the mover intends.

[2:08:27] Voice 18: Okay,

[2:08:28] Voice 4: so I don't have a comment on the wording. It's more for discussion, so I will wait until we can get into discussion. Thank you.

[2:08:35] Voice 4: Thank you. Trustee Yates?

[2:08:37] Voice 25: um same with me i support the motion as long as as long as the wording is okay thank you

[2:08:46] Voice 25: okay um

[2:08:47] Voice 18: turn to staff see you it's

[2:08:53] Voice 7: not a quick initial assessment um it's a view of staff that

[2:08:56] Voice 7: it's not a problematic change and that um well it will it's a substantive change it doesn't

[2:09:03] Voice 7: material impact the the intent of what that policy is proposed to do okay

[2:09:11] Voice 18: thank you for that um i'll

[2:09:13] Voice 18: call for a seconder two at once trustee yates seconds thank you uh discussion on the motion um

[2:09:28] Voice 18: to you trustee bernardo if you have anything else and then you

[2:09:33] Voice 30: know i exactly kind of shot

[2:09:35] Voice 30: my bolt on this one so uh other trustees feel free to weigh in your

[2:09:39] Voice 18: language is always so

[2:09:43] Voice 4: interesting trustee evans thank you and thank you trustee bernardo for actually bringing this up

[2:09:48] Voice 4: because I had discomfort around this,

[2:09:53] Voice 4: but I couldn't put my finger on it

[2:09:54] Voice 4: and you've done that for me.

[2:09:55] Voice 4: The way that it was previously written,

[2:09:58] Voice 4: so where there may be uncertainty over threats,

[2:10:01] Voice 4: this then opens it up to opinion versus risk.

[2:10:05] Voice 4: And those are two different things.

[2:10:07] Voice 4: A precautionary principle should be used with risk,

[2:10:10] Voice 4: not opinion and fear.

[2:10:12] Voice 4: So I appreciate that.

[2:10:14] Voice 4: And I like the language and I will be in support.

[2:10:18] Voice 4: so thank you very much thank

[2:10:22] Voice 18: you trustee getty and trustee yates i don't know if you dropped

[2:10:26] Voice 18: out of the queue but i don't see your hand up no i just support the motion thank you

[2:10:31] Voice 13: i'm wondering if we can remove make an amendment to remove material so if we want to change maybe

[2:10:38] Voice 13: uncertainty to there is uncertainty um that's one change but to throw in material i'm not

[2:10:44] Voice 13: not sure what that means

[2:10:45] Voice 30: if i

[2:10:48] Voice 13: may just try to

[2:10:50] Voice 30: do there and if if we need to have a motion to

[2:10:54] Voice 30: amend it that's fine but uh the theory here is there's always a certain amount maybe i'm being

[2:10:59] Voice 30: overly you know precise or obsessive in my own reasoning here but there's always a certain

[2:11:06] Voice 30: amount of uncertainty about the outcome of any kind of decision and what i was trying to groping

[2:11:13] Voice 30: at here is that an LTC or trust council should have an apprehension that there is like real

[2:11:20] Voice 30: uncertainty, substantive uncertainty over something. It's not about some incidental

[2:11:24] Voice 30: factor to it. So I take Trustee Getty's point, you know, because from her remark, I gather that

[2:11:34] Voice 30: the term material may be in some sense distracting. So that's what I'm trying to get at,

[2:11:41] Voice 30: You know, that it's not a trivial uncertainty about some marginal issue, but it's like substantive. It goes to the core of it. And that seemed like the simplest way of doing it. Whether it works or not, I guess, is up to the other trustees to decide.

[2:11:55] Voice 18: So material, I also heard another word in there, substantive. Trustee Yates?

[2:12:02] Voice 18: I

[2:12:02] Voice 25: would prefer if the word material could be removed.

[2:12:07] Voice 18: Okay, thank you. Trustee Getty, you still have your hand up. I'm skipping over you to trustee Fast.

[2:12:12] Voice 18: Thank

[2:12:16] Trustee Fast: you. I'd prefer if the word material was gone as well, because then it leaves me wondering, what is material uncertainty compared with serious or irreversible damage? Those are also strong descriptive words for the threat.

[2:12:34] Trustee Fast: And so I think it would be, I would prefer that the word material went away because I think it adds a level of confusion that doesn't need to be there. Thank you. Otherwise, I'm in support.

[2:12:50] Trustee Fast: Thank you.

[2:12:52] Trustee Fast: Trustee Evans.

[2:12:52] Trustee Fast: Evans?

[2:12:53] Voice 4: I'm actually in support of it remaining. And that was the piece that actually helped me

[2:12:59] Voice 4: with this precautionary principle. If the word material is removed and not replaced with anything,

[2:13:06] Voice 4: so we're just saying if there is uncertainty over potential for serious irreversible damage

[2:13:11] Voice 4: from development, that again, that's nothing tangible that can be opinion or fear on

[2:13:20] Voice 4: on um something that that that uh may not actually be um i can't think of the word um

[2:13:31] Voice 4: if i can think of words i'll i'll put my hand back up but i actually like having material or

[2:13:36] Voice 4: something to um to expand on what it is versus my in my opinion or based on my fear the you know

[2:13:47] Voice 4: whatever it may be could cause xyz but i have nothing to base it on i have nothing to back me

[2:13:54] Voice 4: up yeah

[2:13:56] Voice 18: thank you uh trustee getty i apologize i may have skipped over you assuming you'd already

[2:14:03] Voice 18: spoken but okay

[2:14:04] Voice 13: so i think the definition helps actually principle 15 of the real real declaration

[2:14:09] Voice 13: known as the precautionary principle states quote in order to protect the environment the

[2:14:14] Voice 13: precautionary approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities where

[2:14:19] Voice 13: Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

[2:14:31] Voice 13: Four central components of the precautionary principle include taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty, shifting the burden of proof to the proponents of an activity, exploring a wide range of alternatives to possible harmful actions, and increasing public participation in decision-making.

[2:14:48] Voice 13: So that's the principle that we're trying to instill in this. And if the one concern is whether it's maybe or a direct, I mean, the definition says shall.

[2:15:05] Voice 13: But in terms of material, I think that that is going to be – that offers up a range of possibilities.

[2:15:16] Voice 13: And it seems to me that rather than getting a discussion bogged down in terms of whether or not it's a real or material or objective threat of serious or irreversible damage,

[2:15:29] Voice 13: much that the principle is that that becomes more public participation, burden of proof on the

[2:15:38] Voice 13: proponents, taking preventative action in the face of uncertainty, you know, exploring a wide range

[2:15:44] Voice 13: of alternatives. So I think that's, you know, whether it's opinion or real, and somewhere on

[2:15:52] Voice 13: on that continuum, then I think that what we're trying to do is just make it so that it becomes

[2:16:01] Voice 13: a question that gets debated.

[2:16:07] Voice 18: Thank you. Trustee Boland, do you have your hand up?

[2:16:12] Voice 18: Nope. Okay. Any more speakers unless I hear a motion to amend the motion as it is?

[2:16:21] Voice 18: I see

[2:16:21] Voice 18: Trustee Yates has her hand up. I apologize. I kept thinking you left your hand up,

[2:16:26] Voice 18: trustee yates

[2:16:27] Voice 25: but i i'm sorry i actually did leave my hand up accidentally um but i'm wondering if we

[2:16:33] Voice 25: do need a motion to delete the word material you want it deleted that would be the path

[2:16:46] Voice 25: i will so move um but well i don't know is this is could this be just a friendly amendment to

[2:16:54] Voice 25: this motion uh david said

[2:16:58] Voice 8: no you should do it by resolution given the discussion okay

[2:17:02] Voice 25: go ahead sorry i move that the word material be removed from

[2:17:16] Voice 25: from

[2:17:19] Voice 26: the

[2:17:21] Voice 25: motion that reads no

[2:17:27] Voice 11: just that's okay just on the floor yeah yeah

[2:17:30] Voice 25: just from the motion

[2:17:31] Voice 25: yeah on the floor thank you i

[2:17:34] Voice 16: second that it's kate thank

[2:17:37] Voice 18: you seconded by trustee stamford

[2:17:46] Voice 18: okay so on the amendment any discussion okay i'll call for the vote all those in favor i see

[2:18:06] Voice 8: 11 in

[2:18:08] Voice 18: favor please lower your hands those opposed i see four four opposed okay that is carried

[2:18:24] Voice 18: so the new amended motion thank you just want to check with the mover is that motion still

[2:18:49] Voice 18: your intent and you wish to well it's on the floor so it has to be voted

[2:18:56] Voice 12: on never mind

[2:19:01] Voice 18: any further discussion okay i'll call for the votes all those in favor i see 15

[2:19:18] Voice 18: 15

[2:19:19] Voice 8: in

[2:19:20] Voice 18: favor please hold your hands any opposed trustee patrick is that a opposed no

[2:19:31] Voice 18: Oh, none opposed.

[2:19:33] Voice 18: That is carried.

[2:19:35] Voice 18: Okay.

[2:19:37] Voice 18: Thank you for your work here.

[2:19:41] Voice 18: And we'll go to the next one.

[2:19:43] Voice 18: So Article 2.2.3, that is on page?

[2:19:49] Voice 18: It's

[2:19:57] Voice 30: on page 16.

[2:19:58] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:20:00] Voice 18: Okay.

[2:20:00] Voice 18: So this is in reference to the Trust Council Reconciliation Principles.

[2:20:05] Voice 18: They're originally tables.

[2:20:06] Voice 18: tables. And what is your motion? Yeah, if you could speak to your motion. Thank you.

[2:20:17] Voice 30: Right. If what I propose to do is I'll simply read out the motion, make the motion and then

[2:20:23] Voice 30: or I don't know, I should ask the chair, how should I proceed here? Should I explain what

[2:20:27] Voice 30: I'm trying to do here? Or should I read it, put the

[2:20:29] Voice 30: motion on the floor and then explain it?

[2:20:31] Voice 30: What should I do?

[2:20:32] Voice 18: Yeah, let's put the motion on the floor and actually call for a seconder. It's

[2:20:37] Voice 18: so I don't think there's any ambiguity about the wording.

[2:20:39] Voice 18: I'll call for a seconder, then we'll have discussion.

[2:20:41] Voice 18: Thanks.

[2:20:42] Voice 30: Okay.

[2:20:43] Voice 30: I move that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183,

[2:20:46] Voice 30: cited as Trust Council Policy Statement Bylaw 2025,

[2:20:49] Voice 30: be amended as follows by deleting Article 2.2.3.

[2:20:57] Voice 18: Okay.

[2:20:58] Voice 18: I'll call for a seconder.

[2:21:05] Voice 18: Seconded by Trustee Harris.

[2:21:07] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:21:10] Voice 18: So would you like to speak to the motion?

[2:21:13] Voice 30: Yes, I would.

[2:21:15] Voice 30: I fully understand that this is a sensitive and very painful issue,

[2:21:22] Voice 30: not just for First Nations, but for everybody.

[2:21:30] Voice 30: It's maybe one of the sorriest episodes or elements of a fairly disgraceful history.

[2:21:37] Voice 30: Right now I'm in Terrace, which is on Highway 16,

[2:21:40] Voice 30: also known as the Highway of Tears for very good reason.

[2:21:43] Voice 30: There's a lot of women have gone missing over the past 20, 30 years along that highway.

[2:21:49] Voice 30: many, if not most, First Nations women.

[2:21:53] Voice 30: This is, it's a terrible report

[2:21:57] Voice 30: in the sense that it reports on a terrible thing.

[2:22:00] Voice 30: But I don't think it belongs

[2:22:05] Voice 30: in our trust policy statement.

[2:22:08] Voice 30: I don't believe there's guidance in there

[2:22:10] Voice 30: that is relevant to us as a land use planning body.

[2:22:17] Voice 30: The guidance in that report

[2:22:19] Voice 30: or is certainly highly relevant to the question of reconciliation and frankly just plain justice

[2:22:27] Voice 30: but that's not um and you know i'm not entirely comfortable bringing this forward because i know

[2:22:36] Voice 30: it's so sensitive and it's so painful but i just don't see the relevance to our work

[2:22:41] Voice 30: it's relevant to us as a society is relevant to to us at the level of law and justice

[2:22:48] Voice 30: Justice is relevant definitely to reconciliation, but it's not relevant to land use planning, which is what we do.

[2:22:55] Voice 30: If we were a municipality and we had some authority over policing or even some authority over the delivery of social services, it might be relevant to it.

[2:23:06] Voice 30: I wouldn't say those things, but we're very, very narrow.

[2:23:09] Voice 30: We're a land use planning body.

[2:23:11] Voice 30: There's nothing we can do within our jurisdiction to bring about the type of changes that are necessary to bring an end to this type of, frankly, disgrace.

[2:23:25] Voice 30: So it's a question of relevance, which is with I think there's a real risk that this becomes a distraction in the trust policy statement precisely because it's not relevant.

[2:23:34] Voice 30: And that's why I'm I'm arguing that it should be removed.

[2:23:40] Voice 18: Thank

[2:23:41] Voice 25: you, Trustee Yates.

[2:23:42] Voice 25: Thank you, Trustee Bernardo, for bringing this up. And it is indeed a very painful subject. I, too, really pondered this as to why it might be in the trust policy statement.

[2:23:57] Voice 25: Because one of the things I think about when I think about land use and how we can plan so that the situations that arise that result in such just horrific results of missing and murdered women and girls,

[2:24:19] Voice 25: A lot of those relate to services like, for example, public transportation, how we design parks and public walkways and services that basically help people to fit into their community and not be isolated.

[2:24:41] Voice 25: And so I really struggled with this one myself, too.

[2:24:45] Voice 25: So I would like to hear from other trustees as to what they think, because I kept thinking about, well, this relates definitely to regional districts, to the provincial government.

[2:24:56] Voice 25: But if it relates directly to us in some way, I would love, I'd really like to hear from other people.

[2:25:04] Voice 18: Thank you. I'll go to the boardroom. Is there advice from staff? And then I'll go to other trustees.

[2:25:11] Voice 19: Thank you. I just want to call attention to the fact that the policy references the principles

[2:25:15] Voice 19: for change that were used to develop the calls for justice. So the principles for change,

[2:25:22] Voice 19: they're named in the document. And if you wish to click through, there's a hyperlink

[2:25:26] Voice 19: to the document itself. And you can see on page, I think it's on page three,

[2:25:30] Voice 19: that the principles for change were a focus on substantive equality in human and Indigenous

[2:25:35] Voice 19: Indigenous rights, a decolonizing approach, the inclusion of family and survivors in the work

[2:25:42] Voice 19: that we do, a commitment to work towards self-determined and Indigenous-led solutions

[2:25:47] Voice 19: and services, and recognizing distinctions, cultural safety, and using a trauma-informed

[2:25:53] Voice 19: approach. Those are the principles that Council would be committing to be guided by rather than

[2:25:58] Voice 19: the calls for justice themselves, which in many cases aren't as applicable to our

[2:26:03] Voice 19: So I just wanted to offer that point of clarity, if that's helpful.

[2:26:07] Voice 19: We had considered the calls for justice and recognized that many of them are not applicable.

[2:26:11] Voice 19: But there was a discussion, I think, years ago that, in fact, the principles used to develop them might be applicable to Trust Council.

[2:26:21] Voice 18: Thank you, Director Frater.

[2:26:24] Voice 18: Trustee Evans.

[2:26:26] Voice 4: Also, we do have Bowen Island Municipality as part of the trust area.

[2:26:32] Voice 4: And I just wanted to ask a question.

[2:26:34] Voice 4: Does the Bowen Island Municipality have some of these services that would also be relevant to this? Because I can see that that would also be a fit to keeping this here. Thank you.

[2:26:48] Voice 18: Thank you. So question before we go to Trustee Fast.

[2:26:54] Voice 19: I'm happy to speak to that at this point but the document simply references the principles

[2:26:59] Voice 19: for change which are principled guidelines for decision making there would have to be a deeper

[2:27:04] Voice 19: consideration of whether you wanted to include any of the calls for justice themselves in the

[2:27:09] Voice 19: document but staff wouldn't be able to answer that this time without refreshing ourselves on

[2:27:13] Voice 19: which one and how it might apply in the bone island municipality context that might be something

[2:27:20] Voice 19: me for Bowen Island Municipality to comment on at the referral stage.

[2:27:24] Voice 18: Thank you. I'll go to

[2:27:26] Voice 18: Trustee Fast and then I'll end the speaker's list. Thanks.

[2:27:29] Trustee Fast: Thank you. I'm not in favor of this motion

[2:27:34] Trustee Fast: because it deletes the principles for change, which I can really see are relevant to Bowen

[2:27:45] Trustee Fast: island and uh the trust area one of them well trustee uh sorry director frader just read them

[2:27:53] Trustee Fast: all out uh but focus on substantive equality and human and indigenous rights um we have a lot of

[2:28:01] Trustee Fast: work going on in our community uh not just at municipal hall but we also at the municipality

[2:28:08] Trustee Fast: municipality have a inclusion, diversity and equity and soon to include accessibility policy

[2:28:21] Trustee Fast: that's in place and being updated. So that relates to substantive equality in human and

[2:28:31] Trustee Fast: Indigenous rights. The second one here is decolonizing approach. I think Bowen Island

[2:28:37] Trustee Fast: municipality is taking that since you've asked for an example um we have a bunch of uh you know

[2:28:45] Trustee Fast: work underway our library for example uh decolonized the shelves um anyway there's a

[2:28:52] Trustee Fast: bunch of actions that are happening these are these are really good guidelines i think

[2:28:58] Trustee Fast: inclusion of families and survivors is the next one do we include people who don't live on the

[2:29:05] Trustee Fast: islands anymore uh but may have voices that and want to have a say i think we do these ideas of

[2:29:16] Trustee Fast: all forms of familial kinship including but not limited to biological families

[2:29:23] Trustee Fast: chosen families families of the heart these are relationships i think that we're

[2:29:29] Trustee Fast: recognizing more and more not limited to a nuclear family this is a great principle

[2:29:35] Trustee Fast: what's wrong with that self-determined and indigenous-led solutions and services i think we

[2:29:40] Trustee Fast: have been discussing that for a big chunk of this meeting um how can we um point of order

[2:29:50] Trustee Fast: what

[2:29:51] Voice 18: is your point of order i

[2:29:53] Voice 29: don't see how this these comments are in any way shape or

[2:29:56] Voice 29: form relevant to this um motion in front of us right now it's way off on it

[2:30:00] Voice 29: tangent, in my opinion.

[2:30:02] Voice 18: I'm sorry, but your point is not valid because she is speaking to the

[2:30:07] Voice 18: principles that are referenced in Article 2.2.3. But if you're following along, they are in the

[2:30:15] Voice 18: document. So please continue, Trustee Fast. Thank you, Chair.

[2:30:20] Trustee Fast: So I'll be brief. That's the

[2:30:23] Trustee Fast: self-determined and Indigenous-led solutions and services seems to me to be in line with our

[2:30:28] Trustee Fast: reconciliation action plan and uh uh declaration that we made many years ago 2015 maybe and uh

[2:30:40] Trustee Fast: recognizing distinctions all of these cultural safety trauma informed approaches these all seem

[2:30:47] Trustee Fast: to me to be very good useful guidelines and then of course there's the big part of it which is this

[2:30:54] Trustee Fast: This is half of humanity, and that this is particularly speaking towards, and I think there's a whole element of inclusion in women, and all the other letters that go along with that in terms of Indigenous women, girls, and 2SLGBTQQQIA, etc.

[2:31:20] Trustee Fast: et cetera. I think we should have me including everybody. These are good principles and a way

[2:31:25] Trustee Fast: to go forward. I don't want them removed from the trust policy statement. Thank you.

[2:31:30] Voice 18: Thank you. I put myself on the list. I just want to point out that in the principles

[2:31:39] Voice 18: listed on page under the substantive equality portion, all governments refers to federal,

[2:31:49] Voice 18: provincial territorial municipal and indigenous governance governments to me for our government

[2:31:57] Voice 18: to not respond to this by at least referencing and embedding principles that can change our culture

[2:32:08] Voice 18: change how we do things change how we include people specifically the distinctions

[2:32:17] Voice 18: approach, recognizing on-reserve and off-reserve

[2:32:21] Voice 18: rural and urban, remote and northern communities and settlements,

[2:32:25] Voice 18: it's an approach to the work

[2:32:29] Voice 18: that these calls

[2:32:30] Voice 18: to action is asking the governments, all governments

[2:32:33] Voice 18: to uphold. And a decolonizing

[2:32:37] Voice 18: approach, cultural safety, they all belong. And I think it

[2:32:42] Voice 18: would be disrespectful for our local government to

[2:32:47] Voice 18: opt out simply because we don't have specific services that relate to indigenous peoples in

[2:33:00] Voice 18: the ways that are

[2:33:00] Voice 18: prescribed so much so i'm not in support of the motion uh trustee bernardo you've

[2:33:06] Voice 18: already spoken once can i go to other first time speakers by

[2:33:10] Voice 30: all means okay

[2:33:11] Voice 18: and trustee getty i'll

[2:33:13] Voice 18: I'll come back to you, Trustee Baberly.

[2:33:17] Voice 28: Yeah, thank you.

[2:33:19] Voice 28: So I'm not in favour of the motion.

[2:33:21] Voice 28: I just, for what I consider to be quite a simple reason,

[2:33:26] Voice 28: is the principles of change or for change speaks about how we want our relationship

[2:33:32] Voice 28: with First Nations to evolve, to look like.

[2:33:37] Voice 28: And I think in all of the work we do, that should be a consideration.

[2:33:44] Voice 28: you know so i think it for me it's as simple as that i i don't see

[2:33:49] Voice 28: um the the need to remove it um i would leave that up to first nations if if they felt that

[2:33:57] Voice 28: it shouldn't be in here then then they'll let us know but um but for me it just talks about the

[2:34:03] Voice 28: you know the the nature of a relationship thank

[2:34:09] Voice 18: you and i'm going to first-time speakers on the

[2:34:13] Voice 18: motion uh trustee bull and then trustee luckham and then we'll go back to trustee bernardo um

[2:34:20] Voice 22: i don't support removing it but i do support making it more clear that what we're talking

[2:34:26] Voice 22: about is the principles for change i did look into this the first go around when we started to edit

[2:34:32] Voice 22: this document and i realized that there was this distinction the title is calls for justice and

[2:34:40] Voice 22: And that causes a little bit of a kind of a trip up.

[2:34:44] Voice 22: But the principles for change I support in that they are generic ways of approaching whatever it is you're doing.

[2:34:53] Voice 22: And I think if we put principles for change, capitalize it as it is in the document, because it's a big header in the document, then that might help with making it more clear.

[2:35:07] Voice 22: Thanks.

[2:35:10] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:35:11] Voice 18: Trustee Luckham.

[2:35:18] Voice 15: Okay. There we go.

[2:35:20] Voice 6: Thank you. Yeah. I'm on a phone now. I apologize for being offline for a bit. So I am not in favor of removing this. There's lots of reasons for why.

[2:35:35] Voice 6: I want to echo what Ben Mabley said. I certainly do not, cannot, and will not speak for nations on their perspective, but I will say that nations have been waiting for change and acknowledgement of so many things for such a very long time with patience.

[2:35:55] Voice 6: And we need to, if we can't stand on this point in the Island Trust area in British Columbia and Canada, then I have some grave concerns about a lot of things.

[2:36:13] Voice 6: So I am not in favor of removing or altering this.

[2:36:20] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:36:21] Voice 18: Trustee Bernardo, then Trustee Getty, then Harris.

[2:36:25] Voice 30: Thank you.

[2:36:27] Voice 30: Thank you. Well, you know, the difficulty I'm having here, the difficulty I'm having here is that...

[2:36:39] Voice 30: You're

[2:36:39] Voice 22: very quiet, Trustee Bernardo. You seem to have become more quiet.

[2:36:45] Voice 22: I

[2:36:45] Voice 30: can speak louder if you want me to.

[2:36:47] Voice 22: Yes, please. Thanks.

[2:36:48] Voice 30: Okay. The principles for change, the way people were talking about it here, is in a generic sense, except I'm uneasy about simply looking at them out of context, because those principles for change, frankly, already inform Articles 2.21, 2.2.2, and 2.2.4.

[2:37:19] Voice 30: I mean, the idea that somehow a report, you know, a committee inquiry that looked into missing and murdered Indigenous women, and then it reverts to these principles for change to avoid that in the future.

[2:37:40] Voice 30: Those principles are changed in that document, articulated or articulated in that context.

[2:37:48] Voice 30: And that's why, I mean, to say, OK, no, we're just looking at this generic language.

[2:37:54] Voice 30: Well, that generic language is actually, I mean, is in itself derivative of what you get out of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and UNDRIP.

[2:38:03] Voice 30: and so to that extent if we're only looking at the principles of change in this generic sense

[2:38:10] Voice 30: they're redundant and what makes me uneasy about referring to them is that they do come out of a

[2:38:15] Voice 30: specific context that has actually nothing to do with the work that we do and if we're talking

[2:38:20] Voice 30: about land planning and with a view to sort of uh making you know better public safety issues or

[2:38:29] Voice 30: or something like that i mean it just seems very very remote to me it seems um where i'm coming

[2:38:38] Voice 30: from is i i want this trust policy statement to be substantive to be about things that we can

[2:38:43] Voice 30: actually do and i worry that something like this is looks too much like um i'm trying to find the

[2:38:54] Voice 30: right words here but uh too much like it's playing lip service to something that we can't actually do

[2:39:00] Voice 30: anything meaningful about and I worry about the insincerity of it to be honest

[2:39:09] Voice 30: so I don't think we lose anything by by by deleting this section because to the

[2:39:16] Voice 30: extent that the principal to the extent that the attempt is to limit it to the

[2:39:19] Voice 30: principles for change they're already in the other guidance thank you thank you

[2:39:28] Voice 18: I see Trustee Peterson has since raised his hand. He's a first-time speaker.

[2:39:32] Voice 18: If I could allow him to take the floor for a bit, and then I'll go to Trustee Getty.

[2:39:40] Voice 32: Thank you, Chair.

[2:39:43] Voice 32: Yeah, I think that being informed by the principles for change is totally fine to leave in.

[2:39:53] Voice 32: I don't see a need to remove it.

[2:39:55] Voice 32: But I think if there was a compelling argument why it needs to be removed, that would be different.

[2:40:05] Voice 32: And I haven't heard such an argument that has swayed my opinion yet.

[2:40:09] Voice 32: So presently, I'm opposed.

[2:40:11] Voice 32: Thank you.

[2:40:14] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:40:14] Voice 18: Now, Trustee Getty.

[2:40:17] Voice 13: I think the preamble to this section is really important as well.

[2:40:20] Voice 13: So we're declaring, and this was in a different section in an earlier rendition of this statement, and it's been moved into something that is more overriding and more general principles.

[2:40:38] Voice 13: And I think that if we are committed, we have declared ourselves to be committed to reconciliation. And I think the findings of the two commissions and the acceptance and adoption of the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People in the province gives us the obligation to be familiar with.

[2:41:04] Voice 13: It's a long-term relationship-building process and a commitment to be informed by the reconciliation

[2:41:09] Voice 13: principles to the extent that they engage the object of the trust.

[2:41:13] Voice 13: And I've always thought of this in terms of it being safe communities and that there's,

[2:41:21] Voice 13: you know, we live all the colonialism has been very patriarchal and which has been overlaid

[2:41:31] Voice 13: on top of a matriarchal society and I think that there's a great deal to learn and the principles

[2:41:37] Voice 13: particularly from the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women Commission are really important

[2:41:45] Voice 13: in terms of of having a much broader deeper cultural understanding of of you know the people

[2:41:51] Voice 13: that we're neighbors with that are part of our community so it's not just in the far north and

[2:41:59] Voice 13: And it's, you know, welcoming people that, you know, have been displaced and finding ways of having the EDI principles and accessibility.

[2:42:12] Voice 13: We're changing it to IDEA so that we've included accessibility on Bowen.

[2:42:17] Voice 13: But, you know, I think that all of those basic principles and it's not just land use planning, although that might come up in terms of housing and different ways of meeting some of the needs of people.

[2:42:32] Voice 13: But I think that the basic principles rather than the specifics are really important and that we worked hard in terms of doing the preamble so that it was, yes, we understand that there's some things that just don't fit in terms of jurisdiction, but there's other things that really are basic in terms of what's happening to all the reconciliation principles.

[2:42:54] Voice 13: So that's why I think it was included and I would be opposed to this idea of deleting it.

[2:43:03] Voice 18: Thank you,

[2:43:03] Voice 12: Trustee Harris. Okay, Trustee Luckham.

[2:43:14] Voice 29: Thank you for indulging me.

[2:43:16] Voice 29: Sorry, sorry,

[2:43:17] Voice 29: my mic was off. I apologize.

[2:43:19] Voice 17: Okay.

[2:43:21] Voice 29: Thank you.

[2:43:24] Voice 29: Anyways, I'm undecided on this.

[2:43:26] Voice 29: Now, what troubles me the most, you know, I'm on Salt Spring Island here.

[2:43:33] Voice 29: um it's no secret that many of the prominent first nations families that live on this island

[2:43:41] Voice 29: supported me greatly for my campaign to run as trustee and and i definitely do not want to be

[2:43:50] Voice 29: disrespectful to any first nations including the ones that live here locally and is removing this

[2:43:56] Voice 29: disrespectful possibly but what in my opinion is even more disrespectful is being disingenuous

[2:44:04] Voice 29: about our call for reconciliation and help um with to first nations and i i think that because

[2:44:14] Voice 29: i look at past years for quite a long time now that the islands trust has actually been a threat

[2:44:22] Voice 29: threat to the livelihoods and and lives and jobs and um of many first nations that live here also

[2:44:31] Voice 29: friends of theirs and people who are in their inner circles and to the rest of the community

[2:44:36] Voice 29: which then affects the first nations that um that live here and you know their families have never

[2:44:40] Voice 29: left so and then what i see in the rest of this policy statement and the undirected policies

[2:44:49] Voice 29: policies

[2:44:50] Voice 18: trustee harris if you

[2:44:51] Voice 29: could speak to the motion

[2:44:52] Voice 29: i am speaking to the motion what i see

[2:44:55] Voice 29: and um the rest of the um policy statement under directive policies these are again a threat

[2:45:03] Voice 29: to first nations that are here including their friends so when basically any of this stuff that

[2:45:09] Voice 29: i see i feel that it's disingenuous because it's contradictory to what the policies state in the

[2:45:15] Voice 29: a statement and so again i'm uncertain whether to vote for or against this i think it's very

[2:45:21] Voice 29: problematic i think the whole statement is problematic thank you thank

[2:45:27] Voice 18: you trustee welcome

[2:45:28] Voice 18: yeah

[2:45:30] Voice 6: thank you again for indulging me one more time this is an important conversation

[2:45:36] Voice 6: conversation that's very multifaceted through the organization as an employer.

[2:45:45] Voice 6: We may not have anything directly to do with public safety, which was raised earlier, but

[2:45:51] Voice 6: personal safety and safety of the individual in protecting certain values and rights and

[2:45:59] Voice 6: And looking for change is important to us within our policy statement, our guiding principles document, and as a flag of the organization broadly.

[2:46:14] Voice 6: And just feel it's important to speak that safety encompasses so many things.

[2:46:21] Voice 6: And that's one thing I've learned in recent years is safety of the individuals is important.

[2:46:30] Thank

[2:46:33] Voice 18: you. And for the final word before we move to the vote, Trustee Peterson.

[2:46:41] Voice 32: Thank you, Chair. I won't attempt not to repeat too much, but I think that in the introduction to this section, the final line, and I will just repeat that, it says to the extent that it's a commitment to be informed by these reconciliation principles to the extent that they engage the object of the trust.

[2:47:03] Voice 32: And so with that as perspective, I see no compelling reason to remove this, and I am not in favor. Thank you.

[2:47:16] Voice 18: Thank you. Good discussion, everyone. Appreciate your perspectives. And so if there's no further discussion, I will call for the vote. All those in favor.

[2:47:37] Voice 4: Let

[2:47:38] Voice 18: me just clarify, this is to remove the article?

[2:47:40] Voice 18: yep so it is to delete thank you for that clarification so i see five in favor yeah

[2:47:52] Voice 8: please

[2:47:52] Voice 18: lower your hands those opposed 15

[2:48:01] Voice 8: 15

[2:48:02] Voice 18: opposed that fails thank you

[2:48:08] Voice 4: okay

[2:48:10] Voice 4: if you can just clarify that means that that article is remaining it is so

[2:48:22] Voice 18: now we're going

[2:48:22] Voice 18: to be moving to section 3.3.2 and 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. So if we can just have a page reference

[2:48:34] Voice 18: and let everybody get there. So that's page 21 of the agenda. So these are directive policies

[2:48:42] Voice 18: and the ecosystem integrity. Okay. Please proceed, Trustee Bernardo. You are muted.

[2:49:03] Voice 30: Sorry. I'll just read out the motion and we'll get the process underway that way.

[2:49:08] Voice 30: I move that Trust Council By-law No. 183 cited as Trust Council Policy Statement By-law 2025 be amended as follows.

[2:49:23] Voice 30: By amending articles 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.5, 3.3.6, 3.3.7, by in each case replacing the word prioritize with establish opportunities for advancing.

[2:49:46] Voice 30: Thank

[2:49:50] Voice 18: you. I think it's pretty clear. So I will call for a seconder. Seconded by Trustee Borthwick. And so speaking to the motion, Trustee Bernardo.

[2:50:05] Voice 18: Thanks.

[2:50:09] Voice 30: If you look at the guiding principles of 2.1.2, it identifies prioritizing environmental protection as one of the guiding principles of the trust policy statement.

[2:50:19] Voice 30: And then it goes forward, the trust policy statement goes forward in the directive policies.

[2:50:26] Voice 30: These ones that I've just read out, ecosystem integrity, directive policies, following the guiding principle I just referred to, are in fact, as far as I can tell, the only directive policies that talk about prioritizing anything.

[2:50:42] Voice 30: What that means is ecosystem integrity is the priority.

[2:50:47] Voice 30: You know, all of those separate items there are basically all subsets of that larger principle of prioritizing ecosystem integrity.

[2:50:58] Voice 30: What that means, obviously the plain language of that is it nets out that everything else in the trust policy statement is of secondary importance.

[2:51:07] Voice 30: That's what the word priority means.

[2:51:10] Voice 30: My concern about that is not that we should, you know, ignore ecosystem integrity.

[2:51:16] Voice 30: integrity. My concern, and I guess it's an objection, is that that's an unbalanced way for

[2:51:22] Voice 30: us to do our work. Life's complicated. The decisions we come up with from community to

[2:51:31] Voice 30: community are a combination of environmental issues, but also there's community issues that

[2:51:37] Voice 30: we have to care about and how our bylaws affect individuals. When we go through the shopping list

[2:51:43] Voice 30: of what our priorities here from 3.3.2 to 3.3.7 or sorry, 3.8. And in fact, I think the resolution

[2:51:59] Voice 30: as I see this now has a typographical error because it should actually a 3.3.7 should be

[2:52:07] Voice 30: be followed and 3.3.8 yes

[2:52:10] Voice 18: i do see that um director marler can we change that now that

[2:52:16] Voice 18: it's been seconded or do we need an amending motion i did see the intent and i didn't

[2:52:22] Voice 18: for a seconder yeah

[2:52:25] Voice 8: i think in this case because the um it was intended to be all the prioritizers

[2:52:29] Voice 8: in those uh sections so i think it's okay it's just missed all

[2:52:34] Voice 18: right so if you could change

[2:52:35] Voice 18: Change 3.3.7, the last one to eight and carry on.

[2:52:42] Voice 30: Yeah, thank you.

[2:52:43] Voice 30: That mechanism, well, actually that isn't correct.

[2:52:49] Voice 30: I'm missing on the screen here.

[2:52:50] Voice 30: It has to, great, thank you.

[2:52:53] Voice 30: By identifying all of these separate

[2:52:56] Voice 30: ecosystem protection mechanisms

[2:52:58] Voice 30: and identifying them as priorities,

[2:53:00] Voice 30: that's putting them in precedent over everything else

[2:53:03] Voice 30: that's in the trust policy statement,

[2:53:04] Voice 30: including housing and everything else. And that means every bylaw that we do, every decision that

[2:53:13] Voice 30: we make, our first concern will have to be to preserve ecosystems. There's no opportunity for

[2:53:19] Voice 30: balancing here. And it's not that I don't think it's important and it should be a goal of ours

[2:53:25] Voice 30: to preserve ecosystems. But if we make these priorities to the exclusion of other priorities

[2:53:31] Voice 30: or other policies, these will be the policies,

[2:53:36] Voice 30: the directive policies that rule everything else.

[2:53:39] Voice 30: And if a reasonable argument can be made that a forest ecosystem

[2:53:43] Voice 30: is going to be affected by the development of some housing

[2:53:46] Voice 30: on Salt Spring or Gabriel or somewhere else, the housing loses.

[2:53:51] Voice 30: That's not a way to make a decision.

[2:53:52] Voice 30: The way to make a decision is on the merits of the situation.

[2:53:58] Voice 30: What does this community need or what does this environment need

[2:54:01] Voice 30: at this time and i want to preserve that flexibility for local trust committees so that

[2:54:08] Voice 30: that they're not chained to an obligation to protect ecosystems at all costs to the detriment

[2:54:14] Voice 30: of other purposes so that's the purpose behind this uh this resolution uh again i'm going to

[2:54:20] Voice 30: repeat myself it's not because i i you know i'm not part of the pro development let's have a casino

[2:54:25] Voice 30: part of people you know part of the constituency here what i'm talking about is let's make a trust

[2:54:31] Voice 30: policy statement that's balanced so that we have maximum flexibility for local trust committees

[2:54:37] Voice 30: to advance ecosystem integrity together with all our other purposes that are articulated here

[2:54:44] Voice 30: including reconciliation thank you thank

[2:54:48] Voice 18: you trustee bernardo so recognize trustee peterson

[2:54:50] Voice 18: then trustee yates uh

[2:54:55] Voice 32: thank you chair um i guess i read this a little bit differently than the mover

[2:55:02] Voice 32: However, to me, there are these various things to identify, and then we're prioritizing each of those, their preservation, et cetera, et cetera.

[2:55:18] Voice 32: I see nowhere in here and no language that states in any way, and nor would I interpret it to mean that these items listed here take precedence over anything else in the policy statement.

[2:55:34] Voice 32: So I guess if you read it as though there were a comma after identify, perhaps that would help make the point I'm trying to make here.

[2:55:47] Voice 32: it's it's i think it's how you read it i i don't see i don't see these as taking precedence over

[2:55:53] Voice 32: anything else in the policy statement and i don't see how that can be so um and i just also add that

[2:56:01] Voice 32: trust programs committees certainly we spent a fair bit of time talking about this word and uh

[2:56:11] Voice 32: and uh so i i can't support the motion thank you thank

[2:56:17] Voice 25: you trustee yates i can't support the motion

[2:56:21] Voice 25: either and just one quick example if if you were looking at a housing possibility perhaps

[2:56:29] Voice 25: increasing density somewhere for a housing project the last thing you would do is put it in a

[2:56:36] Voice 25: sensitive ecosystem douglas fir forest or water catchment or area you would find a different area

[2:56:44] Voice 25: to put it so um in that in that sense those those um those values would be prioritized

[2:56:54] Voice 25: the values of the of the ecosystem or the ecology of that place they would be prioritized but it

[2:57:01] Voice 25: certainly would never preclude establishing what you need for your community in perhaps a different

[2:57:07] Voice 25: location.

[2:57:12] Voice 18: Thank you. Trustee Luckum?

[2:57:18] Voice 6: Thank you again. I'm afraid I can't support removing

[2:57:23] Voice 6: those clauses. I reflect that over time here, we have sacrificed so much and altered so much

[2:57:36] Voice 6: in trying to provide some sense of balance, in fact, which is what the conversation around

[2:57:46] Voice 6: the whole Preserve and Protect mandate turned out to be, that we make decisions, balanced decisions,

[2:57:52] Voice 6: prioritising a number of elements against each other to determine what the outcome might be.

[2:57:58] Voice 6: Historically, we have removed the words shall, we have removed the words must. In some instances,

[2:58:05] Voice 6: is we might have replaced that word or added a phrase

[2:58:09] Voice 6: that included prioritize, and I think we ended up

[2:58:12] Voice 6: in a very good place in some of those situations

[2:58:15] Voice 6: in recognizing that there are other values and interests

[2:58:19] Voice 6: at the table in decision-making, but to provide a priority

[2:58:23] Voice 6: to one item does not exclude any of the other items,

[2:58:28] Voice 6: particularly when we have been reminded on numerous occasions

[2:58:32] Voice 6: that we have to make our decisions on balanced reasons and rationale.

[2:58:40] Voice 6: And certainly we have to consider those things as important elements,

[2:58:45] Voice 6: not just any other element that is not important.

[2:58:49] Voice 6: So I am afraid I have to disagree with this motion.

[2:58:53] Voice 6: And I think we should leave it the way it is.

[2:58:59] Voice 18: Thank you.

[2:59:00] Voice 18: Trustee Getty?

[2:59:04] Voice 13: Well, I think that the amendment is a very close interpretation of the word prioritize. And I don't think, I'm not sure if we've got an unintended consequence here.

[2:59:19] Voice 13: So when I think about all the work that we did on the Section 3 and all the work in terms of balancing the interests of the three parts of that mandate, I'm wondering if we've built in some sort of a conflict.

[2:59:39] Voice 13: So I'm not prepared to vote in favor of this at this point, but I would think that it might be something that we should put on our list of getting a legal opinion about whether this is an unintended consequence of prioritizing these, the list of things to the.

[3:00:00] Voice 13: Which would be not the balanced approach that we've been told we should be taking with the mandate. So I hadn't thought of it in that context in terms of the emphasis on prioritize and how that lifts it above all else.

[3:00:18] Thank

[3:00:23] Voice 18: you. I put myself on the list. I think this needs public comment. This has been a subject of great debate internally, and lots of members of the public have different views around whether prioritization is a desired goal.

[3:00:49] Voice 18: what should be prioritized it actually makes me quite sad to be honest when I

[3:00:57] Voice 18: look at our directive policies with indigenous cultural heritage and

[3:01:01] Voice 18: culturally significant areas that the language is far from strong in fact it's

[3:01:11] Voice 18: not about identifying and prioritizing its minimize potential adverse impacts

[3:01:15] Voice 18: impacts so I think there is there is a lot of work to be done but I think removing the

[3:01:27] Voice 18: prioritization of and I would I agree with trustee Luckham it's not prioritizing over

[3:01:36] Voice 18: and above everything else it's in relation to ecosystem integrity these areas will be identified

[3:01:44] Voice 18: identified prioritized and protected and that is going back to the mandate of the trust

[3:01:49] Voice 18: what are we here for so i don't have a problem with identify and prioritize i think in the

[3:01:56] Voice 18: context of ecosystem integrity those policies make sense the document is meant to be read as a whole

[3:02:04] Voice 18: one area does not cancel out another um but it makes me sad when i look at

[3:02:11] Voice 18: the directive policies with Indigenous cultural heritage

[3:02:14] Voice 18: that we cannot yet reach to that,

[3:02:18] Voice 18: whether because of scope, capacity,

[3:02:20] Voice 18: we're not there yet with identification and protection

[3:02:23] Voice 18: and prioritization of their precious cultural heritage areas.

[3:02:30] Voice 18: So I don't support the motion.

[3:02:32] Voice 18: I think we need public input on this.

[3:02:34] Voice 18: Thank you.

[3:02:35] Voice 18: And Trustee Evans, then Boland,

[3:02:38] Voice 18: and I'll go to Trustee Fast,

[3:02:39] Voice 18: then finally to Trustee Bernardo,

[3:02:41] Voice 18: and I'd like to call for the vote. Thanks.

[3:02:44] Voice 4: Thanks. Yes, we've had this discussion at

[3:02:48] Voice 4: trust programs and other meetings as well. And my question again is, this is the only section where

[3:02:56] Voice 4: everything is prioritized. So reading the document as a whole, it reads that this area

[3:03:02] Voice 4: holds priority over the other areas. If that is not the case, it could be interpreted to be that

[3:03:09] Voice 4: that case. It might not be the intention, but it could be interpreted that way, which then,

[3:03:15] Voice 4: as previous speakers have said, goes sort of the opposite way of what we had sort of reached

[3:03:26] Voice 4: as Trust Council, that one particular area should not be prioritized over the others,

[3:03:31] Voice 4: but held in balance. My other question would be, if that is not the case, using the word

[3:03:38] Voice 4: prioritize in here, what are we prioritizing against? Because to prioritize something means

[3:03:44] Voice 4: to put it before something else and higher than something else. So as we're creating our bylaws

[3:03:52] Voice 4: and other bylaws within our community plans, et cetera, and we're directed to prioritize all of

[3:03:59] Voice 4: these eight sections, and we've used the word prioritize in here in every single one except for

[3:04:05] Voice 4: two. So we're not prioritizing light pollution and we're not prioritizing protected area networks

[3:04:11] Voice 4: as the only two that we're not prioritizing, but we are prioritizing everything else in this

[3:04:15] Voice 4: section. So again, how, if everything's prioritized, how do you, how does that become

[3:04:22] Voice 4: prioritized? If it's prioritized in a separate section, what is it being prioritized against?

[3:04:28] Voice 4: gains because we haven't clarified that so i do see some issues and as a different speaker had

[3:04:37] Voice 4: mentioned i would like to get a legal opinion on this and how it can be interpreted or what some

[3:04:44] Voice 4: of the pitfalls may be that we haven't seen or understood um during these conversations of which

[3:04:49] Voice 4: there have been plenty so thank you thank

[3:04:55] Voice 18: you trustee boland then trustee fast and trustee

[3:04:58] Voice 18: about at all um

[3:05:00] Voice 22: i was present for and i remember some of these discussions i don't like the word

[3:05:07] Voice 22: prioritize first of all because it causes so much dissension here dissension is the one word

[3:05:13] Voice 22: discussion because we are all getting on so well um i um i really don't like it and we did speak

[3:05:22] Voice 22: speak about balance and I think it does create an imbalance in the whole policy statement

[3:05:31] Voice 22: and I think to be fair to everybody like this is the first time we've really read through

[3:05:38] Voice 22: something that's easy to read and to follow the logic of everything else all those red line

[3:05:44] Voice 22: versions it was very very difficult to kind of wind your way through it and consider you were

[3:05:50] Voice 22: considering everything in isolation suddenly we're looking at the flow and the logic and it it has

[3:05:57] Voice 22: an impact beyond what's intended so um i would vote in favor of this or i have a motion um which

[3:06:06] Voice 22: i sent which would be to ask that we consider this again before a second reading and i also

[3:06:15] Voice 22: So it just looked up the meaning of, and I thought there is a difference between making it a priority and prioritizing.

[3:06:23] Voice 22: So I don't know if that feeds into it.

[3:06:26] Voice 22: But I agree that the use of the word in this place has or may have unintended consequences.

[3:06:34] Voice 22: Thanks.

[3:06:36] Voice 22: Thank you, Trustee Fast.

[3:06:39] Trustee Fast: Thank you, Chair.

[3:06:41] Trustee Fast: What an interesting discussion. As somebody who has been part of most of these, what is it, 16, 17 meetings since May 2024, I've been looking at clean versions most of the time, as far as I can tell.

[3:07:01] Trustee Fast: I think they've been included, just speaking to the process, along with the redline versions.

[3:07:08] Trustee Fast: But I have to say, having worked with the Islands Trust directive policies low these 25 years or whatever in a volunteer capacity on Bowen, these don't look that dissimilar to me.

[3:07:22] Trustee Fast: I don't, I take the object of the Islands Trust seriously.

[3:07:28] Trustee Fast: I'm with Susan Yates on this in terms of how you can, the purpose of the planning is to move things around so things fit together and you can achieve multiple purposes.

[3:07:43] Trustee Fast: I think on an island, especially, you need ecosystem integrity because that's where your water and your secure slopes above the road and your pollinators and all of the ecosystem services come from, as well as our wild neighbors, our wildlife, green, beautiful surroundings and well-being for islanders and protection for islanders.

[3:08:13] Trustee Fast: from the increasing storms and things of climate change.

[3:08:17] Trustee Fast: Anyway, I'm fine with the way, with using the word prioritize.

[3:08:21] Trustee Fast: I won't be supporting this motion.

[3:08:23] Trustee Fast: I think we're in the middle of a biodiversity crisis on the earth,

[3:08:27] Trustee Fast: and we in the Islands Trust Council are elected to uphold

[3:08:33] Trustee Fast: the Islands Trust Act, which is a preserve and protect act,

[3:08:38] Trustee Fast: and a function, sorry, biodiversity crisis, climate,

[3:08:42] Trustee Fast: and the security for communities that ecosystem integrity brings to us.

[3:08:49] Trustee Fast: When they're not damaged, they protect us better

[3:08:52] Trustee Fast: and they bring us the water and other services that we need.

[3:08:59] Trustee Fast: Storm water takes care of all that.

[3:09:01] Trustee Fast: And so I think in the face of the poly crisis that humanity finds itself on

[3:09:08] Trustee Fast: and our position as elected people for the islands trust that we should be prioritizing

[3:09:18] Trustee Fast: ecosystem integrity as is in here and i won't be supporting this motion thank you

[3:09:23] Trustee Fast: thank

[3:09:25] Voice 18: you trustee bernardo and then trustee peterson i think you spoke trustee peterson

[3:09:29] Voice 18: once already on the motion so yeah carry on well

[3:09:34] Voice 30: trustee fast is right which is if if if our goal

[3:09:38] Voice 30: if our intention with this document is to prioritize specific ecosystem protections

[3:09:43] Voice 30: as identified here, and by prioritizing making those the most important things that we do

[3:09:50] Voice 30: with the trust over other things, then this is the way to do it.

[3:09:55] Voice 30: But what I'm trying to deal with here, and if that's where Trust Council is at, so be

[3:10:04] Voice 30: it.

[3:10:04] Voice 30: But what I'm trying to struggle with here is the plain meaning of the words we're using

[3:10:09] Voice 30: in the trust policy statement and it goes in my introductory remarks about these motions

[3:10:14] Voice 30: i'm very anxious that we that we ourselves do not send something out into the community for comment

[3:10:21] Voice 30: when we ourselves aren't entirely sure what it means that's not exactly responsible and if this

[3:10:28] Voice 30: is what we intend then the wording's fine if it isn't what we intend then we need to do something

[3:10:34] Voice 30: about it. Or we need to rethink it. Because the plain meaning of the word prioritize means

[3:10:40] Voice 30: preferring one thing over another. That's what the word means. And it's not used in the other

[3:10:46] Voice 30: policies. So by definition, those other policies are secondary. That's just how it works. So I've

[3:10:53] Voice 30: got a question here for Trustee Peterson, who mentioned that there was a lot of discussion

[3:10:57] Voice 30: around the use of the word prioritize at the committee level. Why was the word, you know,

[3:11:03] Voice 30: If the idea here is prioritized as a kind of being used as a form of emphasis that doesn't

[3:11:11] Voice 30: really mean prioritize, why is that word not used in other directive policies to emphasize

[3:11:17] Voice 30: their importance?

[3:11:18] Voice 30: And as Trustee Elliott was delicately working her way around, why isn't it used with respect

[3:11:26] Voice 30: to the reconciliation-focused policies?

[3:11:30] Voice 30: policies? Why are they less important than ecosystem protection? So I'd like to know,

[3:11:40] Voice 30: perhaps, Trustee, it might help me figure out what's going on here a bit more, if Trustee

[3:11:43] Voice 30: Peterson could elaborate a bit more about those committee discussions and what was intended by

[3:11:49] Voice 30: the use of the word prioritize in this context. Thank you.

[3:11:53] Voice 18: And just before we go to Trustee

[3:11:55] Voice 18: Peterson, I had a note from Planner Yeomans that it was the committee of the whole discussion of

[3:12:01] Voice 18: December 12th, 2024, where we had a long discussion about this. So I think there's

[3:12:07] Voice 18: some briefing on it in that agenda package, but over to you, Trustee Peterson.

[3:12:14] Voice 32: Thank you, Chair. And I'm coming to understand that what I think the issue here is word order.

[3:12:24] Voice 32: While I don't support this motion as it's written, what I might support is changing

[3:12:32] Voice 32: the order of the words. For example, in Policy 3.3.7, it reads, identify and prioritize the

[3:12:46] Voice 32: preservation, protection, and restoration of critical habitat for species at risk.

[3:12:51] Voice 32: What I would support, if it helps for clarity, is reading it so that it would say, identify

[3:12:58] Voice 32: Identify critical habitat for species at risk

[3:13:00] Voice 32: and prioritize their preservation, protection, and restoration.

[3:13:06] Voice 32: This is what I was talking about a little bit earlier.

[3:13:10] Voice 32: It's we're identifying X,

[3:13:14] Voice 32: and then we're prioritizing preservation, protection, and restoration.

[3:13:19] Voice 32: Obviously, these are specific to each of these policies.

[3:13:25] Voice 32: And so maybe it's a matter of the word ordering.

[3:13:29] Voice 32: ordering um which is going to be a bit more of a hefty uh motion to put together but I wonder if

[3:13:36] Voice 32: that would satisfy some of what I'm hearing or not I don't know um it's identify said item

[3:13:45] Voice 32: prioritize its protection preservation restoration as may be I I still don't see that the use of the

[3:13:53] Voice 32: word even as it's set out um in this draft in any way uh takes precedence for these policies over

[3:14:03] Voice 32: any other precedents in in the draft uh but if this is part is as confusing as it seems to be

[3:14:12] Voice 32: then perhaps that is the way to to go about it i don't support support this motion to do that but

[3:14:18] Voice 32: but I would support a reordering, and I will leave it there.

[3:14:23] Voice 32: Thank you.

[3:14:24] Voice 22: Could you just tell us what your reordered version would be

[3:14:28] Voice 22: for one of them again, please?

[3:14:30] Voice 22: Thank you.

[3:14:32] Voice 32: If that's all right with the chair?

[3:14:34] Voice 22: Mm-hmm.

[3:14:35] Voice 18: Yes.

[3:14:36] Voice 32: So I'm picking the shortest one on purpose here.

[3:14:40] Voice 32: 3.3.7 reads, identify and prioritize the preservation,

[3:14:46] Voice 32: protection, and restoration of critical habitat for species at risk.

[3:14:51] Voice 32: What I'm proposing as a possible solution that is not removing prioritize would be to have it read as identify critical habitat for species at risk and prioritize its preservation, protection, and restoration.

[3:15:08] Voice 32: And I think when you order it like that, maybe what is making sense to me isn't making perhaps the same sense to everyone else.

[3:15:21] Voice 32: But we're identifying X, in this case, the critical habitat, and we're prioritizing the preservation, protection, and restoration of that habitat.

[3:15:34] Voice 32: It's not overarching of any other principle in the policy.

[3:15:41] Voice 18: I don't

[3:15:42] Voice 32: know if that's helpful or not.

[3:15:43] Voice 18: Well, I do see your point, Trustee Peterson. But I think we're getting overly long into other potential motions. If you want to put that forward as a motion, I suggest you do. But I think we need to close debate here. We've heard a lot of perspectives. And so for the last word, if you can keep it succinct, Trustee Harris, over to you. And then I'll call for the vote.

[3:16:10] Voice 12: Thank you.

[3:16:17] Voice 29: I'm in favor of this motion. And to me, this is just another example of the contradictions of this policy statement.

[3:16:28] Voice 29: You know, a good point was made where why is all of a sudden this a priority and why isn't reconciliation a priority?

[3:16:36] Voice 29: And the majority of the directive policies in this statement are a direct attack on First Nations families, you know, First Nations landowners on Salt Spring Island.

[3:16:49] Voice 29: So for me, I'm completely in favor of this. Thank you.

[3:16:53] Voice 29: Thank

[3:16:56] Voice 18: you. So I will call for the vote in a moment. I think if staff could circulate the briefing from the December meeting where that was debated, and if Trustee Peterson wants to put forward a motion to, well, whether this is defeated or not, that would be the path.

[3:17:24] Voice 18: But again, we need to reiterate this first reading is to seek public comment, and this may be an important piece to receive comment on, but I'll leave it over to you.

[3:17:42] Voice 18: So I'm going to call for the vote on the motion of amending articles in section 3.3.0 that reference prioritize and replacing them with established opportunities for advancing.

[3:17:59] Voice 18: Is that clear to everyone?

[3:18:01] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:18:02] Voice 18: All those in favor, please raise your hands.

[3:18:11] Voice 18: I see eight.

[3:18:13] Voice 18: I see eight.

[3:18:15] Voice 18: Eight in favor.

[3:18:17] Voice 18: Please lower your hands.

[3:18:19] Voice 18: those opposed oh sorry too fast two lower your hands that's my hands going up and down

[3:18:26] Voice 18: one more hand trustee peterson please lower your hands thank you those opposed please raise your

[3:18:36] Voice 18: hands i

[3:18:42] Voice 8: see 10 and i think we still have 19 in the room 20 oh we have 20 in the room so that'd

[3:18:49] Voice 8: be two abstains that's uh 10 to 10 so that fails on that okay

[3:18:57] Voice 18: so abstentions counting as a vote in

[3:19:00] Voice 18: favor yet it still fails because it didn't reach a majority sorry

[3:19:07] Voice 22: can you can you just really

[3:19:09] Voice 22: explicitly give us those decisions that decision please uh

[3:19:13] Voice 18: your hand is still up trustee stanford

[3:19:17] Voice 18: heard thanks director marler yeah

[3:19:21] Voice 8: so the vote was eight in favor there was 10 opposed we have 20 in

[3:19:27] Voice 8: the room so that means there was two abstains so that means the vote was 10 to 10 and under

[3:19:32] Voice 8: legislation a tie vote fails did

[3:19:40] Voice 22: you say new legislation or just legislation under the

[3:19:44] Voice 8: the legislation okay thank you

[3:19:46] Voice 22: okay

[3:19:48] Voice 18: thank you director marler um just before i go to you trusty

[3:19:55] Voice 18: boland uh i did see you've got a motion to do with future actions but i just want to check in with

[3:20:04] Voice 18: staff about that and also noting it's 5 p.m um we don't have a lot more business because i haven't

[3:20:12] Voice 18: seen any more substantive uh motions come in so is your motion related to actually it disappeared

[3:20:24] Voice 18: trustee boland could you state what your motion was yeah

[3:20:31] Voice 22: my motion is uh the trust council

[3:20:34] Voice 22: revisits section 3.3 to consider the impact of using the word prioritize before second reading

[3:20:41] Voice 22: reading comma before second reading because i think this discussion has been good but we're

[3:20:52] Voice 22: still um talking about things that we're not completely clear on and i think trustee getty

[3:20:59] Voice 22: made the point that she too was concerned that we might have an unintended consequence here

[3:21:05] Voice 22: especially since it conflicts with all the work that went on with respect to the mandate and

[3:21:11] Voice 22: balance and i think it would merit a revisit by trust council when we're not tired thanks

[3:21:20] Voice 22: is

[3:21:21] Voice 18: this direction to reconsider a question at a future meeting i'm a little uncomfortable with

[3:21:32] Voice 18: it but i'm not quite sure so i'm going to ask director marler is this um yeah

[3:21:38] Voice 8: it's um probably

[3:21:39] Voice 8: not really appropriate. What I would suggest is that you could ask staff to report back and do

[3:21:46] Voice 8: some more work on it sometime down the road. Right now I don't think that's appropriate,

[3:21:52] Voice 8: but you could take a different approach and ask staff to do some work on

[3:21:57] Voice 8: the meanings or whatever it is that you're looking for. You need to be clear on that.

[3:22:01] Voice 8: Okay, are

[3:22:03] Voice 22: you suggesting that I phrase it as that Trust Council requests staff to prepare a briefing on the impact of using the word prioritise, and that this should happen before second reading? Would that be adequate?

[3:22:20] Voice 22: push okay

[3:22:22] Voice 8: please

[3:22:23] Voice 22: do yeah i'll

[3:22:24] Voice 8: start and maybe director freder and just maybe to avoid having

[3:22:29] Voice 8: staff doing incorporate this as part of that i think that might be a more appropriate way to do

[3:22:39] Voice 8: it you will be getting a report on the public feedback so you could ask for this as as part

[3:22:45] Voice 8: of that as well so director freder yeah

[3:22:49] Voice 19: certainly you can ask what you know once you compile all

[3:22:51] Voice 19: the feedback there'll likely be a number of issues that are aired through that process

[3:22:55] Voice 19: and as we bring

[3:22:56] Voice 19: that back to you you can certainly ask for advice as it relates to the topics that

[3:22:59] Voice 19: have been raised and any amendments you might wish to consider at second reading we can bring

[3:23:03] Voice 19: in additional briefings at that time certainly we'll take your direction but and

[3:23:08] Voice 7: if you already

[3:23:10] Voice 7: mentioned that the we can recirculate the briefing on this issue that was done last September and so

[3:23:16] Voice 7: So it may be wise to review that briefing and determine whether or not any further analysis and information is available before you make a motion for further work to be done on it.

[3:23:27] Voice 7: So I think to Director Frager's point, look at the previous briefing and then assess that against what public feedback you get.

[3:23:35] Voice 7: And that will be the opportunity then to come back before second reading of the amendments you made.

[3:23:41] Voice 7: one

[3:23:41] Voice 22: okay i i'm happy to read the briefing but i believe it was about the meaning of the word

[3:23:46] Voice 22: prioritize and i think what's happening here is a consideration of the use in this particular

[3:23:53] Voice 22: context versus the rest of the document so but you know so how do i make sure that this doesn't

[3:24:03] Voice 22: get lost that's my question i

[3:24:10] Voice 19: don't have a method for you i would suggest to make a note for

[3:24:13] Voice 19: yourself for when this comes forward again that this would be a topic you'd want to raise

[3:24:16] Voice 19: I mean I expect this will be a conversation in community around the values that community hold

[3:24:21] Voice 19: and where what the vision is for Islands Trust and its method for executing its mandate

[3:24:26] Voice 19: so I can't I can imagine that this will be something that you'll be thinking about as

[3:24:30] Voice 19: you undertake second reading and you know prepare amendments that you desire for that

[3:24:34] Voice 19: for second reading okay

[3:24:36] Voice 22: maybe I'll just simplify it to that we ask staff to circulate the material

[3:24:42] Voice 22: that was prepared for the Committee of the Whole

[3:24:45] Voice 22: in, I think it was November or December 2024.

[3:24:50] Voice 22: Thank you.

[3:24:51] Voice 18: Do you need a resolution for that?

[3:24:53] Voice 18: I think we can probably do

[3:24:56] Voice 18: that.

[3:24:58] Voice 18: I think, Trustee Boland, if you make a note

[3:25:01] Voice 18: that you want to have this question analysed,

[3:25:06] Voice 18: I think we do need to figure out is that,

[3:25:09] Voice 18: you know, depending on the feedback we get,

[3:25:11] Voice 18: is it a legal opinion is it um you know we we really need to hear more information before we

[3:25:18] Voice 18: ask staff to go do some work so um if we can trust you to follow up on that i'll go to trustee

[3:25:24] Voice 18: bernardo and trustee evans thanks thank

[3:25:29] Voice 30: you um the way i've approached it uh the meaning

[3:25:37] Voice 30: of words in a legal document which this is you know it's going to be a form of legislation

[3:25:45] Voice 30: legislation, that's necessarily an interpretive question, which, I'm sorry, ends up becoming a

[3:25:51] Voice 30: legal question. It is a legal question. So without getting into the substance, I've got a question

[3:25:58] Voice 30: here for staff. And again, we're not going to get into substance. I just want to know whether this

[3:26:04] Voice 30: happened or not. Did we obtain any legal advice or input on that specific question, on the interpretive

[3:26:11] Voice 30: effect of the use of the word prioritize uh in this context we did we consult um legal counsel

[3:26:19] Voice 30: on this that's a question for staff and uh yeah

[3:26:24] Voice 21: go ahead i

[3:26:28] Voice 19: can start with answering that and

[3:26:30] Voice 19: perhaps bring my colleagues to supplement um not specifically on that the document has had legal

[3:26:34] Voice 19: review um in the briefing that will be circulated to you we sort of note the um guidance from don

[3:26:41] Voice 19: on Lidstone that's provided in a workshop around interpretation of bylaws. We've summarized

[3:26:45] Voice 19: that for you in terms of the interpretive context and the guidance that's been given there.

[3:26:51] Voice 19: But no, it has had legal review. And this is essentially a political question.

[3:26:54] Voice 19: And the extent to which, you know, you have satisfactorily considered prioritization of

[3:27:00] Voice 19: something would ultimately be a political consideration of the local trust committee,

[3:27:04] Voice 19: executive committee, and perhaps trust council. So it would be for future elected officials to

[3:27:10] Voice 19: to adjudicate for themselves has that how policy been satisfactorily addressed I guess I would say

[3:27:16] Voice 19: to you there's only a certain extent to which we can um I think anyone who fried you with assurance

[3:27:22] Voice 19: but we I'll look to my colleagues to let me know if I've forgotten any legal advice we've had over

[3:27:27] Voice 19: the course of the project but I don't believe we've had anything specifically with

[3:27:33] Voice 30: respect if

[3:27:34] Voice 30: If I could follow up, this is a mixed,

[3:27:40] Voice 30: I have to register disagreement with the director in that this is both a

[3:27:46] Voice 30: legal and a political question.

[3:27:49] Voice 30: The political issue is the decision we ultimately make,

[3:27:53] Voice 30: but we need to know what the decision is.

[3:27:57] Voice 30: That's why you get the legal advice as to what the meaning of the word is.

[3:28:01] Voice 30: It's not for us.

[3:28:02] Voice 30: Yes, it's like the legal weight of the use of the word prioritize, not something we can

[3:28:08] Voice 30: decide.

[3:28:09] Voice 30: That is something that is going to be objectively in there.

[3:28:12] Voice 30: And so that's why we need the advice on that.

[3:28:15] Voice 30: The political thing is once we receive the advice or once we have settled on a conclusion

[3:28:20] Voice 30: about what the use of that word means, whether we accept or reject that approach, that's

[3:28:25] Voice 30: the political question.

[3:28:27] Voice 30: And as I said before, and I'm sorry, I'm in danger of repeating myself here.

[3:28:33] Voice 30: uh and i appreciate that you know the motion went down but i'm very anxious about bringing

[3:28:40] Voice 30: anything forward to the press policy you know to to the community when we you know which seems to

[3:28:47] Voice 30: me a pretty material question that about which there's a lot of uncertainty i think we owe it

[3:28:51] Voice 30: to the community before we vote on first reading here to clarify this issue so that we have answers

[3:28:59] Voice 30: when the public comes to us and says hey what does this mean right now we can't say what it means we

[3:29:04] Voice 30: We don't know. I think we should know before we send this out to the public.

[3:29:08] Voice 18: Trustee Bernardo, I'm going to put this to a stop right now, because if we need a legal opinion, that is a separate direction.

[3:29:17] Voice 18: We've heard from staff that legal review has reviewed the draft document.

[3:29:23] Voice 18: What is before us today has passed our legal review.

[3:29:27] Voice 18: view. So if there are further questions that come after this goes for public comment, I think that

[3:29:35] Voice 18: is the time, just as there are other issues that are still subject to interpretation and contextual

[3:29:41] Voice 18: analysis of what does it mean, those questions, if we need more legal review to satisfy these

[3:29:51] Voice 18: these points that are raised, we can do it then.

[3:29:53] Voice 18: But I think your

[3:29:56] Voice 30: motion to

[3:29:57] Voice 18: remove priority was defeated.

[3:30:00] Voice 18: And if you want further action.

[3:30:00] Voice 18: I understand that.

[3:30:03] Voice 30: But point of privilege here, I don't think you're properly representing.

[3:30:07] Voice 30: I'm sorry, Chair.

[3:30:07] Voice 30: You're properly representing what Director Frater said.

[3:30:13] Voice 30: Director Frater said this specific question, legal counsel did not address it and wasn't

[3:30:18] Voice 30: asked to address it.

[3:30:20] Voice 30: So in the process of legal review, counsel can look at the overall thing for sufficiency,

[3:30:28] Voice 30: but for the meaning of a specific clause or something, it has to be asked.

[3:30:32] Voice 30: that question was never asked. So simply referring to the fact that legal review

[3:30:37] Voice 30: happened doesn't answer the question that's outstanding. That's my point. But I've said

[3:30:42] Voice 30: enough. I appreciate your point. Thank you.

[3:30:44] Voice 18: Thank you. Trustee Evans, Trustee Boland,

[3:30:48] Voice 18: Trustee Getty. Thank

[3:30:50] Voice 4: you. And Trustee Bernardo has basically touched on the points that I wanted

[3:30:55] Voice 4: to make as well. This question wasn't asked of legal and considering that it was a split vote,

[3:31:03] Voice 4: It shows that there is uncertainty around the table. I feel we do need to ask the question of legal. What are the implications of the use of the word prioritize? If they come back and say, you know what, there is no issue. There is no issue that that then puts to rest any uncertainty that people who voted for that motion.

[3:31:24] Voice 4: And if there is an issue that we haven't considered or there are ramifications or elements that we haven't considered or thought of because of

[3:31:39] Voice 13: understanding here.

[3:31:46] Voice 4: Trustee, you

[3:31:47] Voice 4: froze for a minute.

[3:31:51] Voice 4: I don't know where I froze, but I was saying because there was a split, I feel that there is a division of understanding.

[3:31:59] Voice 4: Either this gets to put to rest because there is no issue or elements are brought forward from a legal perspective that shows heightened risk or unintended consequences that may not have been considered.

[3:32:13] Voice 4: I would like to request that we ask legal to review this section in context of using the word prioritize only here, and whether or not that has any risk or not.

[3:32:30] Voice 4: So I'm not sure how to do that. So I'm asking the question, how do we do that? Do I have to make a motion or do we just ask staff?

[3:32:38] Voice 4: staff.

[3:32:41] Voice 18: If our goal today is to get to first reading so that we can get these larger questions

[3:32:47] Voice 18: out to the public, there is not going to be time to have a legal review to reconsider to do first

[3:32:54] Voice 18: reading. That

[3:32:55] Voice 4: is not, sorry to interrupt, that is not my point. My point is not to hold up the

[3:32:59] Voice 4: process. My point is to ask for legal advice.

[3:33:02] Voice 18: And I think the time for that, if I'm not mistaken,

[3:33:05] Voice 18: is is once we get those comments back but i defer to staff on advice when we need to ask for legal

[3:33:13] Voice 18: review and where our legal budgets are

[3:33:15] Voice 4: at and i'm also going to um couch this i do believe this

[3:33:21] Voice 4: question was asked before and i think we were told we didn't need to have a resolution i can't

[3:33:30] Voice 4: remember how it went but the the request was there that we did want to have legal review specifically

[3:33:34] Voice 4: specifically on this and it may have just been missed or dropped somewhere in in the process

[3:33:43] Voice 8: I could speak to that and then I think Director Fraser and CEO would like to comment

[3:33:48] Voice 8: I think what I would recommend is your next decision point will be after you've heard from

[3:33:54] Voice 8: the public and from nations and anybody else who wants to speak and talk to you uh we will

[3:34:07] Voice 8: at that point you'll be looking to make a decision and there may be other things that the public raise

[3:34:13] Voice 8: that would require you to have some legal advice so in the interest of keeping costs down and

[3:34:20] Voice 8: providing you the best advice possible before you make a decision it would make sense to do this

[3:34:25] Voice 8: this have this question at that time so that you can deal with maybe more than one issue

[3:34:32] Voice 8: you and get a single legal opinion that will deal with them or a legal review of the document

[3:34:37] Voice 8: and then we can come back as staff and provide some recommended changes to you or at least

[3:34:43] Voice 8: present the legal so that you can make some informed decisions. So this is only one issue

[3:34:49] Voice 8: you're going to hear a lot more over the next six months so I think in the interest of using

[3:34:55] Voice 8: some best staff time is make sure we have that information to you before you make your next

[3:35:02] Voice 8: decision and i just asked if director phrase wants to add anything to that um

[3:35:08] Voice 19: i can simply add i mean

[3:35:09] Voice 19: it's your prerogative to ask for legal advice at any time that you wish and we'll happily go and

[3:35:13] Voice 19: get that for you and provide it to you um i would say our legal budget for the project has we expect

[3:35:21] Voice 19: it to be allocated already so we'd be overspending the project budget to achieve this but if it's

[3:35:25] Voice 19: important to trust council certainly if this is important for you to understand and explain the

[3:35:29] Voice 19: concept in the policy statement we're here to support you it's just where where in the project

[3:35:34] Voice 19: is it best suit you um so we leave that in your hands i think yeah

[3:35:38] Voice 20: we're

[3:35:40] Voice 19: here we're here to support

[3:35:40] Voice 19: you making good informed decisions but also want to support you in advancing this project as

[3:35:45] Voice 19: expeditiously as possible given all the investment today yeah

[3:35:49] Voice 7: if i may i would just echo director

[3:35:53] Voice 7: Director Marker's point, though, that if it's likely that we will be seeking legal review or

[3:35:59] Voice 7: legal advice on other elements after we go through the public engagement period, it would probably be

[3:36:05] Voice 7: more fiscally responsible to bundle that in a number of questions rather than pursue individual

[3:36:12] Voice 7: requests. But if you feel this is important enough, as Director Frater said, to pursue it as

[3:36:17] Voice 7: an individual request for legal advice, then you can give us that direction and we'll do so.

[3:36:23] Voice 18: Thank you. And so, Trustee Boland, Trustee Getty, Trustee Graham.

[3:36:30] Voice 22: Okay, I am content to have this request bundled later, but I would like it explicitly recorded that we have that intention.

[3:36:42] Voice 22: and because I feel that I would vote for first reading content that that would come back and be

[3:36:51] Voice 22: explicitly um you know made clear the the possibility of an unintended consequence

[3:36:58] Voice 22: so I would propose that we make a motion saying that in the fullness of time before second reading

[3:37:06] Voice 22: this issue may go for legal counsel and then I'm happy to vote for first reading

[3:37:14] Voice 22: because I feel comfortable that this may change and may the information required

[3:37:22] Voice 22: to perhaps change this will be gathered. Thanks. So

[3:37:28] Voice 18: Trustee Boland can I suggest you work with

[3:37:31] Voice 18: staff on a motion that would um bring that forward so maybe just email we don't want to

[3:37:36] Voice 18: get bogged down in uh wordsmithing here let's hear other people uh trustee getty yeah i'll do that

[3:37:42] Voice 18: thanks thank

[3:37:44] Voice 13: you um thank you director marler i find that very um helpful and i think that um

[3:37:51] Voice 13: we've had this looked at uh by legal and this did not jump out at them so um it is a fine point that

[3:38:00] Voice 13: that may have consequences. But I think that at this point in time, we need to

[3:38:07] Voice 13: look at all of the questions that are going to come up. So this is one of potentially a list of

[3:38:12] Voice 13: many. And we're going to have more chances to come up with some solutions. So we might not even need

[3:38:20] Voice 13: legal if we come up with something elegant ourselves.

[3:38:26] Voice 18: Always the hope to be more elegant

[3:38:28] Voice 18: than legal trustee graham thank

[3:38:31] Voice 5: you chair what an interesting afternoon um thank you director

[3:38:36] Voice 5: marler for bringing the financial question to bear and as a member of financial planning i'm

[3:38:42] Voice 5: always aware that we could spend more money but we perhaps don't need to um thank you trustee

[3:38:48] Voice 5: getty for and perhaps also director freighter for reminding us that after first reading we'll

[3:38:55] Voice 5: be looking at an awful lot of the information that's going to come to us from first nations from

[3:38:59] Voice 5: their other bodies and there and there may in fact uh be some concern about uh prior prior

[3:39:08] Voice 5: prioritizing or not prioritizing we have looked at this before i i know that i know the vote was

[3:39:13] Voice 5: very close but it failed and remember uh it's one of trust council's um ways of doing business that

[3:39:20] Voice 5: that once the vote is taken, we all stand behind the result.

[3:39:23] Voice 5: So, you know, and that's also important.

[3:39:25] Voice 5: I really hope we can get to first reading before dinner.

[3:39:28] Voice 5: I think that would be a tremendous conclusion to this afternoon.

[3:39:32] Voice 5: So I am ready to vote yes on first reading.

[3:39:38] Voice 18: Well, we can deal with Trustee Boland's motion,

[3:39:42] Voice 18: which has to do with other business than the draft before us.

[3:39:47] Voice 18: So if anybody wishes to make a motion at this point, I haven't seen anything else come in

[3:39:55] Voice 18: in terms of amendments to the draft.

[3:39:58] Voice 18: I would be happy to entertain a motion.

[3:40:04] Voice 18: So trustee Luckham's hand flashed up there quickly.

[3:40:11] Voice 18: If he can find the mute button, you're next.

[3:40:15] Voice 18: And if not, trustee Fast.

[3:40:19] Voice 18: It's those darn phones.

[3:40:20] Voice 18: It's difficult.

[3:40:25] Voice 18: I think it's star seven to mute and unmute or six.

[3:40:31] Voice 6: oh there we go um so i move the trust council bylaw number 183 cited as trust council policy

[3:40:39] Voice 6: statement bylaw 2025 be read a first time so

[3:40:49] Trustee Fast: as amended uh

[3:40:51] Voice 6: yes thank you oh thank you as amended

[3:40:54] Voice 6: absolutely as

[3:40:58] Voice 18: amended and i call for a seconder i see oh the competition between bowen

[3:41:04] Voice 18: municipal counselors here all right we have a motion on the floor and it's seconded this is

[3:41:11] Voice 18: what we've been working towards for many many months um so

[3:41:15] Voice 6: if i might speak to it chair um

[3:41:18] Voice 6: i just thank everybody for today's conversation all the previous conversations this has been

[3:41:25] Voice 6: challenging in many respects and you know um i still think this is a team sport and we win

[3:41:31] Voice 6: together we lose together and certainly some of us get hits out into the outfield and some of us

[3:41:37] Voice 6: get to run home but the team is moving forward so thank you everybody for all this work and

[3:41:44] Voice 6: I'm really excited to hear what comes back from the public and we can take we know we're going

[3:41:51] Voice 6: to hear things and we will likely make changes so I look forward to those conversations as well.

[3:41:56] Voice 6: thank

[3:41:58] Voice 18: you trustee evans and then trustee getty thank

[3:42:02] Voice 4: you i also wanted to give a big shout out

[3:42:03] Voice 4: to staff and all the work that they've put into um all of these committee meetings that we've been

[3:42:08] Voice 4: having especially the trust program committee meetings that were so close together and just the

[3:42:13] Voice 4: absolute huge amount of work that they did in order to get us here so thank you so much

[3:42:23] Voice 18: yes second that trustee fast or trustee getty your hand went down go ahead uh

[3:42:29] Trustee Fast: thank you i'd

[3:42:30] Trustee Fast: just like to see the motion i would just want to make sure it says as amended because we did move

[3:42:36] Trustee Fast: several um changes today a great um yeah a

[3:42:43] Trustee Fast: great session and uh just hoping that we can have the

[3:42:46] Trustee Fast: motion in front of us so everybody's clear on what we're voting on and uh looking forward to it thank

[3:42:51] Trustee Fast: you this is one small step forward as they say and uh uh i think it's i'm really looking forward

[3:42:59] Trustee Fast: to getting input from all of the local and the non-local and the different kinds of people out

[3:43:07] Trustee Fast: there, including maybe some who haven't been engaged yet. Thank you. Thank you.

[3:43:14] Voice 18: Okay, so the

[3:43:17] Voice 18: motion is clear for everyone. I think we should screenshot this moment if it passes. If it fails,

[3:43:25] Voice 18: this is not not a good moment but um okay are any further speakers uh trustee getty

[3:43:33] Voice 18: yep a

[3:43:34] Voice 13: very fine point but as amended should be after 2025 oh

[3:43:41] Voice 8: sure yeah thanks for that

[3:43:47] Voice 18: trustee bernardo yeah

[3:43:53] Voice 30: i uh i can't support the uh the first reading um i respect the work that's

[3:43:59] Voice 30: gone into it it's a terrific amount of work the work product is actually pretty good on balance

[3:44:05] Voice 30: um this one issue though um uh it's important enough to me that i have to uh i can't vote for

[3:44:15] Voice 30: first reading here uh and the reason is pretty simple i just don't see how it's responsible for

[3:44:21] Voice 30: us to send out legislation for public comment when we ourselves are not in a position to

[3:44:28] Voice 30: to intelligibly answer public inquiries

[3:44:30] Voice 30: about what the legislation actually means,

[3:44:33] Voice 30: what its effect would actually be.

[3:44:37] Voice 30: So I won't belabor it,

[3:44:39] Voice 30: but I oppose first reading at this stage.

[3:44:44] Voice 18: Thank you.

[3:44:47] Voice 18: Trustee Peterson.

[3:44:53] Voice 32: Thank you, Chair.

[3:44:54] Voice 32: It is my pleasure to be in a position

[3:44:59] Voice 32: where I'm speaking to the motion for first reading

[3:45:02] Voice 32: the draft new policy statement um not all of you were around last term where we never quite

[3:45:10] Voice 32: got this motion on the floor so um an awful lot of work has been done since then and i will echo

[3:45:18] Voice 32: all of the uh previous comments uh the immense amount of work and dedication that staff had put

[3:45:25] Voice 32: into this many many many trustees and many many many committee meetings of various types and

[3:45:31] Voice 32: and shapes and forms to get us here.

[3:45:34] Voice 32: And I just want to remind us all, this is first reading.

[3:45:37] Voice 32: We're going to go out and hear from others.

[3:45:42] Voice 32: And we can amend before second reading.

[3:45:45] Voice 32: And we can amend before third reading.

[3:45:49] Voice 32: This is not over.

[3:45:51] Voice 32: This is launching the canoe on the wild waters of the Salish Sea

[3:45:57] Voice 32: to find out where we end up.

[3:46:00] Voice 32: We've got a lot more work before we're sending this off to the minister or anything like that.

[3:46:06] Voice 32: So very happy we're at this space today.

[3:46:09] Voice 32: I feel like we have done an immense amount of work and I feel like we're in good enough shape for me to wholeheartedly support giving first reading today and sending it out for all the rest of it.

[3:46:21] Voice 32: Thank you very much.

[3:46:25] Voice 18: Thank you.

[3:46:26] Voice 18: I put myself on the list.

[3:46:27] Voice 18: I echo Trustee Peterson, and I guess speaking to your discomfort, Trustee Bernardo, of having elements in here that leave a trustee uncertain.

[3:46:41] Voice 18: I think that is totally valid.

[3:46:45] Voice 18: I am comfortable going in front of my community and saying there are points that I don't 100%, you know, agree with.

[3:46:53] Voice 18: with. There are things that I debated in council and it didn't go my way. But I am very content

[3:47:01] Voice 18: with reaching a 95% threshold or an 80% threshold is usually my level of comfort so that we can get

[3:47:11] Voice 18: those other voices to speak to it. That is the important point. I'm okay with the uncertainty

[3:47:18] Voice 18: or the discomfort that not everything aligns perfectly with what I'd like to see, but

[3:47:23] Voice 18: But I think this is a great first draft.

[3:47:25] Voice 18: Congratulations, everyone.

[3:47:28] Voice 18: I'm happy to support the motion.

[3:47:29] Voice 18: Trustee Harris.

[3:47:31] Voice 29: Thank you.

[3:47:32] Voice 29: The draft policy statement from last term was a real election issue here on Salt Spring anyways.

[3:47:40] Voice 29: And at this point, I don't see this as an improvement.

[3:47:49] Voice 29: So I'll leave it at that.

[3:47:50] Voice 29: I'm not in favor of reading this the first time at all.

[3:47:53] Voice 29: Thanks.

[3:47:56] Voice 18: Thank you. Trustee Boland?

[3:48:00] Voice 22: Well, I support this.

[3:48:03] Voice 22: With the condition that my motion will go through,

[3:48:09] Voice 22: I think it's possible to explain the logic issue here.

[3:48:16] Voice 22: I see it as a huge improvement.

[3:48:18] Voice 22: I don't agree with everything in it.

[3:48:20] Voice 22: There are lots of subtleties and less subtle things in there

[3:48:24] Voice 22: that I would love to rewrite,

[3:48:26] Voice 22: right, but I think it's good enough.

[3:48:28] Voice 22: And I think it's very clear, which is a huge step forward because it's like,

[3:48:36] Voice 22: it's, it's relatively, it supports good discussion because it's relatively clear.

[3:48:41] Voice 22: You know, we can have these conversations.

[3:48:44] Voice 22: I think earlier drafts, it was very difficult to have a conversation anyway.

[3:48:49] Voice 22: Anyway, I support it, but I look forward to more clarity

[3:48:54] Voice 22: on the consequences of using the word prioritise in that section.

[3:49:00] Voice 22: Thanks.

[3:49:02] Voice 18: Thank you.

[3:49:03] Voice 18: Trustee Hunter?

[3:49:05] Voice 31: Thank you, Chair Elliott.

[3:49:07] Voice 31: With the utmost respect to staff and to all the hardworking trustees,

[3:49:12] Voice 31: I'm not able to support the draft in its present form.

[3:49:17] Voice 31: Thank you.

[3:49:21] Voice 18: Thank you.

[3:49:24] Voice 18: So any more speakers to the motion on the floor?

[3:49:29] Voice 18: And Trustee Hunter, we're about to go into a vote.

[3:49:31] Voice 18: There's your hand, thanks.

[3:49:34] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:49:36] Voice 18: All those in favor, please raise your hand.

[3:49:39] Voice 18: I count 17 in favor.

[3:49:49] Voice 18: Okay, thank you.

[3:49:50] Voice 18: Lower your hands.

[3:49:56] Voice 18: Thank you.

[3:49:57] Voice 18: Those opposed?

[3:50:01] Voice 18: Three opposed.

[3:50:02] Voice 8: Three opposed.

[3:50:03] Voice 8: That's still the 20, so that's everybody.

[3:50:05] Voice 18: Okay, thank you.

[3:50:06] Voice 18: Thank you. That is carried. Thank you, Council. We have one more requested resolution. Trustee Fast.

[3:50:18] Voice 18: Thank you,

[3:50:19] Trustee Fast: Trustee Elliott. I move that Trust Council request staff to refer bylaw number 183 to the agencies, Indigenous governing bodies and organizations listed in attachment three of the request for decision dated July 29th, 2025.

[3:50:39] Voice 18: Thank you. Just before it's seconded, there was a question about Attachment 3. Is that correct? Yes? Great. Okay. Call for a seconder. Trustee Yates, this is your moment. Okay. Seconded by Trustee Yates.

[3:50:59] Voice 13: Do we need to say as amended?

[3:51:02] Voice 13: No.

[3:51:03] Voice 18: that's the list of agencies is uh still okay any discussion on the motion all right

[3:51:15] Voice 18: everyone uh i will call for the vote all those in favor 16 i can't yeah

[3:51:28] Voice 18: thanks lower your hands

[3:51:30] Voice 18: just uh trustee borthwick there you go thanks and any opposed i see two opposed

[3:51:49] Voice 18: that is carried

[3:51:53] Voice 18: okay council

[3:51:58] Voice 18: trustee Boland

[3:51:59] Voice 18: you had one more motion to bring forward

[3:52:02] Voice 18: thank you

[3:52:03] Voice 18: please go ahead

[3:52:04] Voice 18: I

[3:52:08] Voice 21: did send it

[3:52:12] Voice 21: yeah and there was

[3:52:13] Voice 21: some feedback

[3:52:15] Voice 21: in the meantime if that speeds things along

[3:52:18] Voice 21: yeah

[3:52:18] Voice 8: we're just bringing it up right now

[3:52:20] Voice 8: just give us about 30 seconds

[3:52:21] Voice 8: trustee Boland

[3:52:23] Voice 18: take a movement break

[3:52:26] Voice 19: trustee Boland I did

[3:52:27] Voice 19: send you a suggested revision to your proposed motion if you wanted to take a look at that

[3:52:32] Voice 22: sure i'll just quickly look yeah um

[3:52:36] Voice 19: yeah

[3:52:37] Voice 22: that works for me about

[3:52:46] Voice 15: okay

[3:53:08] Voice 26: should

[3:53:11] Voice 22: we put in not just the meaning because they might want to

[3:53:16] Voice 22: revisit the meaning but i just want to make it clear that really what we're asking for is

[3:53:23] Voice 22: the sort of potential unintended consequences in the context implications is that the word

[3:53:30] Voice 18: looking for so can we

[3:53:32] Voice 22: yeah that was sorry that

[3:53:34] Voice 22: was i agreed i agreed with the the suggested

[3:53:37] Voice 22: modification yeah right

[3:53:39] Voice 18: so could so that was um jason you're suggesting the implications of using

[3:53:46] Voice 18: using the word

[3:53:46] Voice 18: prioritize yeah so if we could change the wording after prior to second reading

[3:53:54] Voice 18: remove on the use not the meaning we change that to on the implications of using the word

[3:54:02] Voice 18: but

[3:54:04] Voice 22: is it specific to that section because it's like nested within there's only one other place

[3:54:11] Voice 18: it appears oh sorry to interrupt well

[3:54:14] Voice 22: it's just that if and uh trustee bernardo perhaps you can

[3:54:18] Voice 22: clarify because i believe it was not the word prioritize at the highest level it was using it

[3:54:24] Voice 22: exclusively in that section could you answer that or amend this to reflect what you wanted

[3:54:32] Voice 18: okay so you're inviting comment on a motion that hasn't been seconded yes so i have other speakers

[3:54:41] Voice 18: on it but i'll see trustee bernardo and then trustee yates and then trustee evans

[3:54:45] Voice 18: I

[3:54:46] Voice 30: can keep the thought in mind

[3:54:49] Voice 30: Just a

[3:54:52] Voice 25: clarification on whether we wanted that advice

[3:54:55] Voice 25: for the whole policy statement or for just that one section

[3:54:59] Voice 25: My

[3:55:00] Voice 22: intention was just that section because I believe that's

[3:55:04] Voice 22: where we trip over ourselves potentially

[3:55:07] Voice 22: but that's why I think maybe Trustee Bernardo can speak to that

[3:55:12] Voice 22: Thank you

[3:55:12] Voice 22: sure

[3:55:14] Voice 18: trustee bernardo i

[3:55:15] Voice 30: i think the more specific it is the easier it is for legal counsel to figure

[3:55:19] Voice 30: out what we're on about um and i would suggest in that respect um i would suggest some other

[3:55:27] Voice 30: wording to this as well where it says on the implications of using i would suggest on the

[3:55:33] Voice 30: interpretive implications of using the word prioritize in section

[3:55:39] Voice 22: 3.3 yeah

[3:55:42] Voice 30: section 3.3

[3:55:43] Voice 30: of the draft policy statement okay

[3:55:46] Voice 22: that's fine by me so it's on the interpretive implications

[3:55:51] Voice 22: of using the word prioritize in section 3.3 in the draft policy statement it

[3:55:59] Voice 30: is referenced in

[3:56:00] Voice 30: the in the principle but the the guiding principle is um is simply the overarching statement that

[3:56:07] Voice 30: drives 3.30 so it's like you know forget it don't have to get into that so

[3:56:12] Voice 18: i hand up in the board

[3:56:13] Voice 18: boardroom thank you i'm just gonna let's keep moving what uh does staff have advice here i just

[3:56:19] Voice 19: want to be clear that the concept also appears in advisory policies specifically 3.2.4 and 3.2.5

[3:56:27] Voice 19: and it also occurs in other contexts in the document so we would want want you to be clear

[3:56:32] Voice 19: around exactly what you are looking for if it's just as it relates to the environment

[3:56:36] Voice 19: or potentially as it also relates to protection of cultural heritage oh

[3:56:40] Voice 30: if i may speak to that

[3:56:44] Voice 18: I want to recognize Trustee Evans, and then we can come back to you.

[3:56:50] Voice 18: Thanks.

[3:56:51] Voice 3: I was going to recommend that we just look at Section 3.3, the

[3:56:56] Voice 4: way that the word prioritized has been used in the other elements, and it's 30 times in the document.

[3:57:04] Voice 4: I would say specifically in that section, and then secondary the rest, if they have time.

[3:57:13] Voice 18: Okay.

[3:57:14] Voice 18: Okay. So we still don't have a second in motion. Let's keep order here. Trustee Bernardo, you wanted to...

[3:57:20] Voice 30: Yes, in the motion, so it hasn't been

[3:57:22] Voice 30: changed the language.

[3:57:25] Voice 30: Yeah.

[3:57:25] Voice 17: Is there somebody on the keyboard? Is that you?

[3:57:29] Voice 15: Chair, I was hearing multiple voices from different people other than the mover. So I just wanted to wait until the conversation was over. And then I will definitely at any time, if you could direct me or Trustee Boland to what she would like.

[3:57:44] Voice 18: Okay. You're right. We're having a discursive discussion. Trustee Evans and then Trustee

[3:57:51] Voice 18: Boland, let's amend the motion. I

[3:57:54] Voice 30: hadn't finished my remark here, actually.

[3:57:57] Voice 18: Okay. Sorry. I

[3:58:00] Voice 30: wanted to address that comment by Director Frater. She's right, of course,

[3:58:04] Voice 30: that the word prioritized used in the advisory, a number of advisory policies. But as the trust

[3:58:11] Voice 30: policy statement, it says, itself says, those are advisory. The rubber hits the road on the

[3:58:16] Voice 30: directive policies. That's where it really matters. Those are the ones that have the potential for

[3:58:21] Voice 30: disagreement between an LTC and the executive committee. That's why we care about it because

[3:58:26] Voice 30: those are the, you know, the, frankly, to be blunt, the directive policies are the ones that

[3:58:33] Voice 30: condition LTCs. So that's why I think we want to zero in on 3.30.

[3:58:37] Voice 30: zero thank

[3:58:40] Voice 18: you i apologize for interrupting you and trustee evans i'm

[3:58:47] Voice 3: not sure if anyone has

[3:58:48] Voice 3: actually asked to do this yet but can we add in the words after um prioritize in in yeah so

[3:59:00] Voice 4: add in the words after using the word prioritize in section 3.3 i guess do we put zero there or

[3:59:10] Voice 4: was just 3

[3:59:10] Voice 3: .3 i guess 3.3 2 to 8 3.2 to 8 in perfect thank you and

[3:59:30] Voice 22: the other one was the

[3:59:32] Voice 22: interpretive implications so before implications interpreted okay this is a vast improvement

[3:59:43] Voice 22: on my first draft so thank you everybody i

[3:59:47] Voice 18: have to say we almost made a meeting without

[3:59:50] Voice 18: having a group think crafted motion but here we are we

[3:59:55] Voice 18: had to have one um okay so to the mover

[4:00:00] Voice 18: uh trustee boland does this satisfy you that yeah intent i

[4:00:05] Voice 22: think uh was there some

[4:00:07] Voice 22: did somebody say something about no we've discussed it we're going to focus on 3.3 yeah

[4:00:13] Voice 22: so should i read it out okay uh i move that trust council requests staff to seek legal advice

[4:00:22] Voice 22: prior to second reading on the interpretive implications of using the word prioritize

[4:00:28] Voice 22: in Section 3.3.2 to Section 3.3.8

[4:00:34] Voice 22: in the draft policy statement.

[4:00:37] Voice 22: Great. Do

[4:00:38] Voice 18: I have a seconder?

[4:00:41] Voice 18: Seconded by Trustee Bernardo.

[4:00:43] Voice 18: Oh, sorry, Trustee Yates.

[4:00:46] Voice 18: Seconded by Trustee Bernardo. Excellent.

[4:00:48] Voice 18: Discussion on the motion.

[4:00:53] Voice 18: Appears we have satisfied the need to discuss.

[4:00:57] Voice 18: Oh, Trustee Getty. Thank you.

[4:00:59] Voice 13: Ha, ha, ha.

[4:01:00] Voice 13: Does this preclude or

[4:01:03] Voice 13: sorry, I got a noisy dog. Any other legal questions

[4:01:07] Voice 13: that might be bundled with this?

[4:01:14] Voice 18: Question for staff. Could other motions be

[4:01:18] Voice 18: or other questions be bundled with this?

[4:01:20] Voice 7: I think so because this doesn't specify

[4:01:22] Voice 7: a particular timeline other than before.

[4:01:26] Voice 7: Administratively, we can bring forward other pieces as part of that

[4:01:30] Voice 7: legal advice.

[4:01:33] Voice 18: Great. Thank you. Trustee Fast?

[4:01:39] Trustee Fast: Thank you, Toby. Sorry, Trustee Elliott. I'm just, I don't think I'm in favor of this motion because it precludes comment that we're going to get. I think we should follow the process and trust the process that we've got in our policy project that we've worked on and endorsed.

[4:02:11] Voice 18: trustee luckham i think your mic is unmuted if you could mute yourself just if in case thanks

[4:02:19] Trustee Fast: anyway i think we should let the process play out and see what uh input we get we'll get a

[4:02:25] Trustee Fast: what we heard kind of report back we could have all kinds of surprises in there including from

[4:02:32] Trustee Fast: uh groups maybe that haven't responded yet because we haven't so far haven't uh sent them

[4:02:39] Trustee Fast: a something that we feel comfortable enough for first reading now maybe they will commit

[4:02:44] Trustee Fast: staff or the energy to um give it a fulsome review and uh give us some input so i i'm i kind of think

[4:02:54] Trustee Fast: this is uh getting ahead of ourselves and um i i'll be voting against it because i want to see

[4:03:00] Trustee Fast: what the input is uh as financial planning committee chair i want to be respectful of the

[4:03:06] Trustee Fast: resources that we've got and uh and i don't want to preclude uh needing the resources for other

[4:03:13] Trustee Fast: things different things or maybe we will need it for this and we can move it then so i won't be

[4:03:18] Trustee Fast: voting in favor thank you thank

[4:03:21] Voice 18: you final speakers on the motion okay seeing none i'll call for the

[4:03:30] Voice 18: vote all those in favor let's raise your hand i see six in favor seven

[4:03:44] Voice 8: seven

[4:03:45] Voice 18: oh sorry who am i

[4:03:47] Voice 18: missing oh yeah thank you seven in favor uh lower your hands any opposed nine opposed

[4:04:04] Voice 8: there's seven in favor nine opposed we have 17 in the room so that leaves one as staying so it

[4:04:12] Voice 8: It fails at 8 to 9.

[4:04:16] Voice 18: 8 to 9.

[4:04:19] Voice 18: Okay.

[4:04:21] Voice 18: So that fails.

[4:04:24] Voice 18: Thank you.

[4:04:25] Voice 18: And trustees, I think there's a lot of comfort in the fact that there's still lots of runway left and time to ask for legal opinions when we hear back.

[4:04:38] Voice 18: Do staff want to give any further thoughts on the next steps of the process, what the public can expect?

[4:04:45] Voice 18: and when we anticipate sending this new draft by-law out to communities?

[4:04:57] Voice 19: Yes, thank you, Chair.

[4:04:58] Voice 19: Happy to comment on that.

[4:05:00] Voice 19: We will be making the revisions that were requested today,

[4:05:04] Voice 19: and we have to make them through a suite of products.

[4:05:07] Voice 19: So we won't be immediately initiating public engagement,

[4:05:10] Voice 19: but we'll get those changes done as expeditiously as possible.

[4:05:13] Voice 19: and we will then be kicking off our next phase for the project which includes

[4:05:20] Voice 19: referrals out to all the agencies listed today so there's about 115 of those and First Nations

[4:05:27] Voice 19: and also then initiating public engagement. On the public engagement phase the public can expect

[4:05:33] Voice 19: a variety of ways in which they can provide comment on this draft that will include an

[4:05:38] Voice 19: an online survey.

[4:05:39] Voice 19: We will also be providing copies

[4:05:42] Voice 19: in select public libraries throughout the islands

[4:05:45] Voice 19: for those who are making accessibility challenges

[4:05:47] Voice 19: with online surveys.

[4:05:49] Voice 19: We will also be holding a community workshop in the fall.

[4:05:53] Voice 19: Dates will be announced shortly.

[4:05:54] Voice 19: We will also welcome,

[4:05:56] Voice 19: I'm sure Trust Council would welcome comment

[4:05:58] Voice 19: at upcoming meetings in September and December.

[4:06:01] Voice 19: We also welcome written comment as needed,

[4:06:05] Voice 19: but we do encourage people to channel their thoughts

[4:06:07] Voice 19: through the survey if possible. And then a variety of LTCs will be hosting events of their own,

[4:06:14] Voice 19: in most cases it's town hall events, to seek comments that will inform the Local Trust

[4:06:19] Voice 19: Committee and Bowen Islands comments back to Trust Council as part of the referral process.

[4:06:27] Voice 19: I'd be happy to provide more detail if you'd like, but that sort of gives you in broad strokes what

[4:06:31] Voice 19: the next steps will be for the project. Once all of that feedback is received, staff will collate

[4:06:37] Voice 19: a report to Trust Council summarizing all the feedback and then providing recommendations for

[4:06:42] Voice 19: potential amendments to the project which will also include seeking legal advice as appropriate

[4:06:47] Voice 19: on the next round of editing of this document. So lots of runway left. I think everyone involved in

[4:06:54] Voice 19: the project is very excited to hear the feedback. We haven't heard from communities on this document

[4:06:58] Voice 19: in a number of years and really look forward to hearing the values and visions that everyone

[4:07:03] Voice 19: one holds for the trust area these islands are beloved by many and this is an opportunity to

[4:07:08] Voice 19: really hear so many voices that care about this place and want to craft a good future for it

[4:07:13] Voice 19: so we're very excited to hear the voices come in and to hear the values are held in community

[4:07:17] Voice 19: and in nations thank

[4:07:22] Voice 18: you director freighter i don't know why i raised my hand but thank you

[4:07:26] Voice 18: for all your work we raise our hands to you specifically director freighter you have carried

[4:07:33] Voice 18: this for so long and I really commend your patience and kindness and really wanting to

[4:07:43] Voice 18: to see council own this document and and thoroughly be able to stand behind it I know we have

[4:07:53] Voice 18: not everybody here but I trust that through the process we are going to get there together

[4:07:59] Voice 18: other. So significant milestone here today. Everyone can feel proud of themselves. I would

[4:08:05] Voice 18: suggest that since executive committee is still the holder of public communications and engagement,

[4:08:13] Voice 18: if there's opportunity to do check-ins on how much survey input or feedback are we getting,

[4:08:21] Voice 18: do we need to get the word out to more communities, please feed that back up to

[4:08:27] Voice 18: executive committee members and we can um sort of keep track i hope i'm not overstepping here but

[4:08:33] Voice 18: um to support the project and public engagement as best way possible but with that um i think our

[4:08:42] Voice 18: business is finished today shall we call for adjournment okay

[4:08:47] Voice 17: oh is that yes okay all those

[4:08:49] Voice 17: All those in favor?

[4:08:51] Voice 6: Aye.

[4:08:52] Voice 17: Aye.

[4:08:52] Voice 17: Thank you.

[4:08:53] Voice 17: We're adjourned.

[4:08:54] Voice 17: Thanks, everyone.

[4:08:55] Voice 6: Thank you, Chair Elliot.

[4:08:57] Voice 17: Well done, Chair Elliot.

[4:08:59] Voice 17: Oh, thanks, guys, folks.

[4:09:01] Voice 6: We did it.

[4:09:04] Voice 17: We did it.

Trust Council                                                                                     ADOPTED                                                                                   1 of 6 
Special Meeting Minutes 
July 29, 2025   
                                                        Trust Council 
Minutes of a Special Meeting 
 
Date:  
Location:  
July 29, 2025 
Electronic Meeting 
 
 
 
 Executive Members 1.  Laura Patrick, Chair, Salt Spring Island Local Trust Area 
 
 Present: 2.  Tobi Elliott, Acting Chair, Vice-Chair, Gabriola Island Local Trust Area 
 
 3.  David Maude, Vice-Chair, Mayne Island Local Trust Area 
 
 4.  Timothy Peterson, Vice-Chair, Lasqueti Island Local Trust Area 
 
 
Members Present: 
 
5.   Sue Ellen Fast, Bowen Island Municipal Trustee 
6.  Judith Gedye, Bowen Island Municipal Trustee 
 
 7.  Sam Borthwick, Denman Island Local Trust Area 
 
 8.  David Graham, Denman Island Local Trust Area 
 
 9.  Susan Yates, Gabriola Island Local Trust Area 
 
 10. Lisa Gauvreau, Galiano Island Local Trust Area 
 
 11. Ben Mabberley, Galiano Island Local Trust Area  
12.  Joe Bernardo, Gambier Island Local Trust Area 
 
 13. Kate-Louise Stamford, Gambier Island Local Trust Area 
14.  Mikaila Lironi, Lasqueti Island Local Trust Area 
 
 15. Jamie Harris, Salt Spring Island Local Trust Area 
 
 16. Mairead Boland, Saturna Island Local Trust Area  
17. Lee Middleton, Saturna Island Local Trust Area 
 
 18. Kristina Evans, South Pender Island Local Trust Area 
 
 
 
Members Regrets: 
 
Members Absent: 
19. Ken Hunter, Thetis Island Local Trust Area 
20. Peter Luckham, Thetis Island Local Trust Area 
 
21. Alex Allen, Hornby Island Local Trust Area 
22. Jeanine Dodds, Mayne Island Local Trust Area 
 
23. Grant Scott, Hornby Island Local Trust Area 
24. Dag Falck, South Pender Island Local Trust Area 
25. Aaron Campbell, North Pender Island Local Trust Area 
26. Deb Morrison, North Pender Island Local Trust Area  
 
 
Staff Present: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Others Present: 
 
Rueben Bronee, Chief Administrative Officer 
Stefan Cermak, Director, Planning Services 
Clare Frater, Director, Trust Area Services 
David Marlor, Director, Legislative and Information Services 
Joe Elliott, Senior Indigenous Relations Advisor 
William Shulba, Senior Freshwater Specialist 
Alexandra Trifonidis, Executive Coordinator 
Jason Youmans, Senior Policy Advisor 
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder  
 
There were four members of the public present. 

 
Trust Council                                                                                     ADOPTED                                                                                    
Special Meeting Minutes 
July 29, 2025   
1. CALL TO ORDER 
Acting Chair Elliott called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. 
2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 
Acting Chair Elliott acknowledged that the meeting was held on the territory of the Coast 
Salish First Nations. 
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
3.1 Introduction of New Items - None 
3.2 Approval of Agenda   
By general consent the agenda was approved as presented. 
4. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD 
A member of the public spoke to the definition of “environment” in the Glossary of the draft 
Trust Policy Statement and stated the following: 
• The definition is sourced from the Impact Agency of Canada which focuses on the 
impact of large infrastructure projects and it is not sufficient for the intended purpose; 
• Section 1.3 of the September 2023 draft Trust Policy Statement, which defined and 
supported definitions of “environment” and “unique amenities”, has been deleted; 
• The current draft is problematic in the absence of contextual explanations of critical 
parts of the mandate and without contextual information a better definition of 
“environment”, which more clearly supports the intent of the Islands Trust Act, is 
needed; and 
• Consideration of this matter prior to First Reading is requested. 
Trustee Luckham joined the meeting at 1:14 p.m. 
A member of the public spoke to Part 1 of draft Trust Policy Statement and stated the 
following: 
• The draft states places of natural and cultural heritage are protected through Islands 
Trust Conservancy which results in the appearance that no other bodies of Islands Trust 
have the mandate to protect places of natural and cultural significance; 
• References to the protection of areas of natural and cultural significance being the 
responsibility of local trust committees and Island Municipalities through Official 
Community Plan bylaws are mentioned within the Advisory Policies, Directive Policies, 
and Trust Council Principles sections of the draft Trust Policy Statement; 
• The 2025 version of the draft eliminates the unique governance aspect of the preserve 
and protect mandate; and 
• Islands Trust is a government body that is unique in Canada due to its mandate and it 
appears that trustees would feel more comfortable without being held accountable for 
the conservation mandate. 
A member of the public spoke to the importance of making the islands more suitable for 
young people and all residents by enhancing the financial and economic status of the 
islands without harming the environmental aspects. 
2 of 6

 
Trust Council                                                                                     ADOPTED                                                                                    
Special Meeting Minutes 
July 29, 2025   
5. CLOSED MEETING 
 TC-2025-068 
  It was MOVED by Trustee Gedye, and SECONDED by Trustee Peterson, 
that the meeting be closed to the public subject to Sections 90(1)(i) of the 
Community Charter in order to consider matters related to the receipt of advice that 
is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that 
purpose; and that staff attend the meeting.  
CARRIED 
The meeting was closed to the public at 1:24 p.m. and reconvened at 2:10 p.m. 
Trustee Stamford left the meeting at 2:10 p.m. 
6. BUSINESS ITEMS 
6.1  Policy Statement Bylaw No. 183 – Consideration of First Reading – Request for 
Decision 
Trustee Evans provided a summary of the timeline of the work done through 
Committee of the Whole and Trust Programs Committee on the draft Trust Policy 
Statement. 
The Senior Policy Advisor introduced the Request for Decision and indicated the 
agenda package contained both a red line version showing all of the document edits 
since it was last put before Trust Council in September 2024 and a clean version. 
Discussion ensued regarding the definition of “environment” in the Glossary and a 
trustee noted environment is a broad term, the environment is made up of many 
different ecosystems, bioregions, and microclimates, there is no holistic definition 
that encompasses the terrestrial, marine, and ecological environments, and it is 
impossible to define environment as separate from human interactions as the 
region was shaped and cultivated by Indigenous Peoples. 
TC-2025-069 
It was MOVED by Trustee Yates, and SECONDED by Trustee Boland, 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183, cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025”, be amended by removing the definition of “Environment” from 
the Glossary of Terms. 
CARRIED 
TC-2025-070 
It was MOVED by Trustee Elliott, and SECONDED by Trustee Yates, 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183 cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025” be amended in the second sentence of the preamble language 
under Goal 1 from "The policies in this section aim to acknowledge the 
history and legacy of Indigenous Peoples in the area since time immemorial” 
to read "The policies in this section aim to acknowledge the history, 
legacy and continuing relationships of Indigenous Peoples to the area since 
time immemorial.” 
CARRIED 
3 of 6

 
Trust Council                                                                                     ADOPTED                                                                                    
Special Meeting Minutes 
July 29, 2025   
The merits and potential challenges of using the word “engage” instead of 
“cooperate” were discussed. 
 
Trustee Stamford returned to the meeting at 3:15 p.m. 
 
TC-2025-071 
It was MOVED by Trustee Boland, and SECONDED by Trustee Luckham, 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183 cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025”, be amended by replacing the words “Co-operate with 
Indigenous Governing Bodies” with the words “Engage with Indigenous 
Governing Bodies” in the draft Policy Statement Policy headers of 
Reconciliation Item 3.1.1 and Item 3.1.2. 
CARRIED 
 
The meeting was recessed for a break at 3:24 p.m. and reconvened at 3:45 p.m. 
Trustee Luckham left the meeting at 3:24 p.m. and returned at 4:05 p.m. 
Discussion ensued regarding the use of the term “threat” in section 2.1.5. 
TC-2025-072 
   It was MOVED by Trustee Bernardo, and SECONDED by Trustee Yates, 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183, cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025”, be amended as follows: by amending article 2.1.5 by 
replacing the words “there may be uncertainty over the threats of serious or 
irreversible damage from development” with “there is material uncertainty 
over the potential for serious or irreversible damage from development”. 
 
TC-2025-073 
   It was MOVED by Trustee Yates, and SECONDED by Trustee Stamford, 
that the word “material” be removed from motion on the floor. 
CARRIED 
  The question on the following motion, as amended, was then called. 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183, cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025”, be amended as follows: by amending article 2.1.5 by 
replacing the words “there may be uncertainty over the threats of serious or 
irreversible damage from development” with “there is uncertainty over the 
potential for serious or irreversible damage from development”. 
CARRIED 
Discussion ensued regarding section 2.2.3 which references that Islands Trust be 
informed by the principles for change used by the National Inquiry into Missing and 
Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Calls for Justice. 
TC-2025-074 
   It was MOVED by Trustee Bernardo, and SECONDED by Trustee Harris, 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183, cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025”, be amended as follows: by deleting article 2.2.3. 
DEFEATED 
4 of 6

 
Trust Council                                                                                     ADOPTED                                                                                    
Special Meeting Minutes 
July 29, 2025   
 
The use of the word “prioritize” within the Directive Policies – Ecosystem Integrity 
section was discussed.  
 
TC-2025-075 
It was MOVED by Trustee Bernardo, and SECONDED by Trustee 
Borthwick, 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183, cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025”, be amended as follows: by amending articles 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 
3.3.4, 3.3.5, 3.3.6, 3.3.7 and 3.3.8 by, in each case, by replacing the word 
“prioritize” with “establish opportunities for advancing”. 
DEFEATED 
Trustees discussed obtaining legal advice on the use of the word “prioritize” within 
the context of the draft Trust Policy Statement to determine if there might be 
unintended consequences of using the term. The Director of Legislative and 
Information Services indicated that following the receipt of referral and engagement 
responses all comments will be provided to Trust Council at which point any items 
that require legal opinion could be sent to legal counsel at the same time.  
TC-2025-076 
It was MOVED by Trustee Luckham, and SECONDED by Trustee Fast, 
that Trust Council Bylaw No. 183, cited as “Trust Council Policy Statement 
Bylaw, 2025”, as amended, be read a first time. 
CARRIED 
TC-2025-077 
It was MOVED by Trustee Fast, and SECONDED by Trustee Yates, 
that Trust Council request staff to refer Bylaw No. 183 to the agencies, 
Indigenous Governing Bodies and organizations listed in attachment 3 of the 
request for decision dated July 29, 2025. 
CARRIED 
TC-2025-078 
It was MOVED by Trustee Boland, and SECONDED by Trustee Bernardo, 
that Trust Council request staff to seek legal advice, prior to 2nd Reading, on 
the interpretive implications of using the word "prioritize" in Sections 3.3.2-
3.3.8 in the draft Policy Statement. 
 
Trustees Bernardo, Harris, and Mabberley left the meeting at 5:45 p.m. during discussion on the 
motion and prior to the vote being called. 
DEFEATED 
7. NEW BUSINESS - None 
8. ADJOURNMENT 
 
By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m. 
 
 
5 of 6

 
Trust Council                                                                                     ADOPTED                                                                                    
Special Meeting Minutes 
July 29, 2025   
_________________________ 
Tobi Elliott, Acting Chair 
 
 
 
Certified Correct: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder 
 
 
6 of 6