Gambier Island Local Trust Committee community information meeting, January 27, 2026

[0:00:21] Voice 8: You're ready to go, Chair Patrick.

[0:00:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you very much.

[0:00:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, good morning.

[0:00:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'd like to call to order this regular meeting of the Gambier-Keats

[0:00:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): Local Trust Committee.

[0:00:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): We're live streaming and recording this meeting.

[0:00:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): I begin by acknowledging with respect and humility that the lands and

[0:00:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): waters of the Gambier-Keats Local Trust Area have been home to

[0:00:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): Indigenous people since time immemorial.

[0:00:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): Their deep connection to these islands continue to this day.

[0:00:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): We honor their enduring presence, constitutional rights,

[0:00:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): and responsibilities.

[0:00:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm Laura Patrick. I'm elected on Salt Spring and the chair of this local trust committee.

[0:00:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): Joining me is Trustee Joe Bernardo and Trustee Kate Louise Stanford.

[0:01:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): Together, we make up your local trust committee.

[0:01:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): There's a number of staff that are joining us today.

[0:01:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): We will have Sonia Zupnets will be joining us.

[0:01:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): We have Marlis McCarger as Island Planners, and we have our Regional Planning Manager,

[0:01:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): Renee Jamrat, is with us, as well as Lisa Millard, who's helping

[0:01:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): do the administrative work with this meeting. So thank you very much to the staff.

[0:01:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): This meeting is an official forum for your local trust committee to make decisions about

[0:01:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): land use planning matters and discuss relevant business. This is also a place of employment.

[0:01:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): Our staff have the right to a safe and respectful workplace.

[0:01:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'll be going over in a few moments about the public comment period, but first, we have an agenda before us, trustees.

[0:01:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): I understand from staff that Planner Zupanik will only be available at 1 o'clock, so we need to adjust item 10.1, the major project update, our staff report, until 1 p.m. when she can be with us.

[0:02:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): are there any additions or other additions or changes to the agenda not

[0:02:17] Trustee Stamford: for me all right thank

[0:02:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): you no okay so can we approve the agenda as amended uh through general consent excellent

[0:02:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): uh we can move on to uh trustee uh reports first we have um uh over to the trustees who'd like to

[0:02:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): to go first i can go

[0:02:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): first go ahead there trustee stanford uh

[0:02:44] Trustee Stamford: what what i'll do is just defer to my

[0:02:46] Trustee Stamford: written uh report that i sent out to uh community members a couple of days ago so i'll i'll forward

[0:02:53] Trustee Stamford: that to the trustees and to the scribe all

[0:03:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): right well thank you very much then um over to you then

[0:03:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): and Trustee Bernardo.

[0:03:09] Voice 5: Sure, I don't have a tremendous amount to report

[0:03:11] Voice 5: in terms of actually reporting on developments

[0:03:15] Voice 5: that are specifically applicable to Gambier-Keats

[0:03:19] Voice 5: and the associated islands.

[0:03:22] Voice 5: I do have a couple of comments about some of the things

[0:03:26] Voice 5: that we heard at the community information meeting

[0:03:29] Voice 5: a little while ago, the community information meeting

[0:03:31] Voice 5: that was held with respect to the OCP progress

[0:03:38] Voice 5: for Gambier. One of the things we heard at that meeting were some public concerns about

[0:03:45] Voice 5: the potential impact of the Callaghan decision on people's property rights and

[0:03:50] Voice 5: how the LTC conducts its business. Those are deep waters, obviously, that are very complicated. And

[0:03:58] Voice 5: I don't think any of us have any firm views about that. But I do think it's important to simply

[0:04:05] Voice 5: simply observe and be mindful that those concerns are out there and addressing those concerns

[0:04:14] Voice 5: to the extent that we're able to do so in the normal course of our work, I think is

[0:04:19] Voice 5: all to the good.

[0:04:22] Voice 5: There's a lot of excitement out there and I think if we can calm things down by just

[0:04:28] Voice 5: keeping things based on fact and reason, I think we should.

[0:04:32] Voice 5: So did that comment.

[0:04:34] Voice 5: comment. Another one is there are kind of related comments about that with the trust

[0:04:40] Voice 5: policy statement. And I would just use this occasion to remind people that, you know,

[0:04:45] Voice 5: we are still in the deliberation stage about the trust policy statement and we have been

[0:04:51] Voice 5: seeking the input of the public. And I urge anyone who hasn't made their views known yet

[0:04:57] Voice 5: and think they might have something that they'd like to contribute,

[0:05:03] Voice 5: that they should do so, that they should jump in there

[0:05:06] Voice 5: and make their views known one way or the other

[0:05:08] Voice 5: about whether they think the draft trust policy statement

[0:05:11] Voice 5: is going in the right direction, the wrong direction,

[0:05:14] Voice 5: or it needs to be tweaked in some respects.

[0:05:17] Voice 5: We do need, a document is important to that,

[0:05:20] Voice 5: we do need public input, and we welcome it.

[0:05:25] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:05:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you very much. I'll keep mine brief. I think people will, from a trust council perspective, we are going through the budget considerations for next term, for the 26-27 budget, which we'll be needing to approve in our March trust council meetings.

[0:05:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): meetings. It is a significant lift from previous years. Right now it's estimated at approximately

[0:05:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): 13.9% increase. So there will be a Committee of the Whole meeting coming up in February

[0:06:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): where Trust Council will discuss that in advance of the March. So I encourage you to reach

[0:06:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): out to your local trustees on any concerns. Also the Trust Policy Statement, as Trustee

[0:06:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): Bernardo pointed out is going through the public comment period is coming coming to an end in the

[0:06:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): next few weeks really encourage you to get your comments and be as specific as possible if there's

[0:06:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): a policy you feel needs to be improved please make suggestions on it that helps the trustees

[0:06:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): as we go into these next phases understand where any amendments may be necessary please make your

[0:06:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): comments to islands 2050 at islandstrust.bc.ca i encourage you to copy your local trustees always

[0:06:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): to help them as they move forward and we'll be considering that later today for the referral

[0:07:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): so i'll leave that as my report and i'll look back to trustee stamford for any electoral area

[0:07:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): report items that you'd like to bring to attention today thank

[0:07:12] Trustee Stamford: you chair i just want to

[0:07:15] Trustee Stamford: thank the local trust committee for attending the islands trust uh scrd joint meeting the other day

[0:07:24] Trustee Stamford: um it can be a bit um underwhelming i think there is there's lots of big wide stroke

[0:07:32] Trustee Stamford: items to speak about uh but in the long run because there's not a lot of detailed work

[0:07:38] Trustee Stamford: I think it means that we're all on the right track with the regional district, that we are working together well, and that we really don't need these meetings a lot, but it's just to connect and ensure we're aware of the bigger projects.

[0:07:59] Trustee Stamford: So, coming to the big project in the regional district, it doesn't affect Gambier as much as a bit more of an impact on Keats, but the official community plan continues to move ahead.

[0:08:17] Trustee Stamford: head. The reason I bring in Keats is there's always principal discussions around water service,

[0:08:26] Trustee Stamford: things like that, what the expectation level is at the OCP level. And Keats has more of a

[0:08:33] Trustee Stamford: connection to that, as well as how we're going in directions with other kinds of service delivery.

[0:08:41] Trustee Stamford: So the focus for the next four months for the SCRD official community plan process will be housing, where it is most appropriate on the mainland, opportunities for densification, and also opportunities for coordination between municipalities.

[0:09:02] Trustee Stamford: palaties and really emphasizing how we can all work together because discussing housing and

[0:09:09] Trustee Stamford: isolation tends to um not be that effective so that's the direction we're working in now

[0:09:16] Trustee Stamford: and then the next big item that we're all working on similar to the islands trust

[0:09:21] Trustee Stamford: is um we're heading into round two budget um and those discussions start

[0:09:28] Trustee Stamford: start with a regional perspective on Thursday with the municipalities and then move into

[0:09:36] Trustee Stamford: the detail of round two discussions. The regional district tries not to speak in percentages.

[0:09:44] Trustee Stamford: We are really referring to per $100,000 assessment values because, and I understand

[0:09:54] Trustee Stamford: that's more challenging for the Islands Trust,

[0:09:56] Trustee Stamford: but it does provide a more accurate recognition

[0:10:00] Trustee Stamford: of the impact that our tax increases have on the community.

[0:10:05] Trustee Stamford: So I think I'll just leave it at that

[0:10:07] Trustee Stamford: unless there's any questions.

[0:10:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee Bernardo.

[0:10:11] Voice 5: Yeah, I do have a question for Trustee Sanford.

[0:10:14] Voice 5: I'm just hoping to the extent that you're able to,

[0:10:19] Voice 5: I appreciate that the OCP process

[0:10:22] Voice 5: process for the regional district is in development and that's always a complicated business of

[0:10:29] Voice 5: talking about potential options, not necessarily any certainties about anything. But if it's

[0:10:37] Voice 5: possible to perhaps elaborate a little bit about the water situation or how the OCP is,

[0:10:45] Voice 5: is whether there's any directions or potential directions of interest to the folks over at

[0:10:53] Voice 5: Eastbourne, of course, because that's where the SCRD has responsibility for delivering water

[0:10:59] Voice 5: on Keats. And that has been a challenge for quite some time. And also, it's been a big expense item

[0:11:08] Voice 5: of the SCRD as well. And the reason I raise it is obviously the residents over at Eastbourne

[0:11:15] Voice 5: that this is a thing of great interest and concern for them.

[0:11:20] Voice 5: But as I said before,

[0:11:21] Voice 5: I appreciate that you may be limited, Trustee Stamford,

[0:11:24] Voice 5: in how far you can go in terms of elaborating

[0:11:26] Voice 5: what's being discussed over at the SCRD side.

[0:11:28] Voice 5: But if you could sort of fill in some of those blanks a bit,

[0:11:33] Voice 5: that might be great.

[0:11:34] Voice 5: Thanks.

[0:11:36] Trustee Stamford: Thank you, Trustee Bernard.

[0:11:39] Trustee Stamford: It actually turns out to be more of a budget question

[0:11:42] Trustee Stamford: that impacts Eastbourne.

[0:11:45] Trustee Stamford: And it's front and center of how I view the budget.

[0:11:49] Trustee Stamford: The budget is including our overall water strategy as we move forward.

[0:11:57] Trustee Stamford: The big issue is that, like framing this in the most accurate way, is Eastbourne water system is part of the regional water system.

[0:12:08] Trustee Stamford: It's not seen as, budget-wise, it's not seen, or function-wise, it's not seen as a separate item.

[0:12:15] Trustee Stamford: Therefore, Eastbourne is in the position where they're paying for all improvements across the regional district, including their own, which is still on the books. It will happen. I think there's $1.2 million set aside for that.

[0:12:31] Trustee Stamford: not. It looks like it'll be started in 2027, which is at least three years further down the road than

[0:12:38] Trustee Stamford: I wanted. But in terms of other water projects, it's coming into play with several new initiatives,

[0:12:50] Trustee Stamford: big initiatives, including Langdale Well, which is an $18 million project, potentially a new

[0:12:59] Trustee Stamford: reservoir the reason I'm bringing these in there's another big well potentially

[0:13:05] Trustee Stamford: online is because the regional district as a whole does not have adequate water

[0:13:10] Trustee Stamford: to get through the changing summer season the impact of the strategy which

[0:13:18] Trustee Stamford: is to provide multiple sources of water and remediation as well as being able to

[0:13:25] Trustee Stamford: to respond to emergencies, all require different kinds of water sources.

[0:13:32] Trustee Stamford: Eastbourne is pulled into this.

[0:13:36] Trustee Stamford: And my concern is that the policy of providing a certain amount of water

[0:13:43] Trustee Stamford: to residents as a whole in the regional district

[0:13:48] Trustee Stamford: is absolutely not possible to Eastbourne.

[0:13:53] Trustee Stamford: And so to me, that is a big gap in how we reconcile their ability to fund within the regional system and our ability to service back.

[0:14:08] Trustee Stamford: so that will be ongoing discussions but I do think it's worth understanding that they will get

[0:14:16] Trustee Stamford: a well an alternate water source as per the policies in within the next few years so it

[0:14:24] Trustee Stamford: is all on the books it will happen but it's just not happening as quickly as I think it needs to

[0:14:30] Trustee Stamford: so it's part of that bigger question just

[0:14:33] Voice 5: if I could follow up go ahead

[0:14:34] Voice 5: on the eastburn in terms

[0:14:37] Voice 5: of what um in their capacity as um rate payers for the um the scrd's water um strategy i understood

[0:14:49] Voice 5: your remarks to be that um eastbourne residents uh they're participating like any other residents of

[0:14:56] Voice 5: the of the electoral district uh in terms of what they're paying because it's like everybody they're

[0:15:03] Voice 5: all contributing to the kitty so to speak to fund all of the water strategy for the sdrd

[0:15:09] Voice 5: but there's limited delivery even potential at eastbourne given what's available there

[0:15:18] Voice 5: and you identified a couple of larger projects so um is it reasonable to anticipate that

[0:15:27] Voice 5: eastbourne residents are going to be looking at increase in cost in terms of their contribution

[0:15:31] Voice 5: to the larger strategy because the strategy is having to deal with things like the Langdale

[0:15:35] Voice 5: Whale and elsewhere?

[0:15:37] Trustee Stamford: I think that is, well, I know that is the reality. It's mitigated in the idea

[0:15:46] Trustee Stamford: that what would Eastbourne be paying if they were responsible for their own system? They also would

[0:15:53] Trustee Stamford: be facing increases. The question I have is how does that compare and contrast? And I don't have

[0:16:00] Trustee Stamford: that data yet but um i'm hoping that once the because they've already paid into um the kitty

[0:16:09] Trustee Stamford: so to speak for the upgrade to their eastbourne well and the system as a whole i would like to be

[0:16:17] Trustee Stamford: then go into discussions of what it's going to take for them to then separate out and be their

[0:16:23] Trustee Stamford: their own system and you know there's pros and cons to both of that because I am concerned about

[0:16:31] Trustee Stamford: how much how large the projects are that the regional district is is moving towards

[0:16:39] Trustee Stamford: they're all necessary and they're you know the potentially really good projects to help take that

[0:16:47] Trustee Stamford: That stress off that, unfortunately, Sunshine Coast has become globally famous for.

[0:16:54] Trustee Stamford: But on the other hand, recognizing each time we add these projects, it does not necessarily benefit eSport at all.

[0:17:02] Trustee Stamford: So we have to go into the principle of you pay into a regional district for functions that you use.

[0:17:11] Trustee Stamford: And there should be a percentage fairness to a certain extent as to how much you get back.

[0:17:21] Trustee Stamford: So these are all really important questions.

[0:17:23] Trustee Stamford: I can't really answer them

[0:17:24] Trustee Stamford: specifically, but certainly it's on my radar to keep moving on this, especially once that well system is constructed and brought online at Eastmore.

[0:17:39] Voice 5: Just one last point. What I'm hearing Trustee Sanford is that

[0:17:44] Voice 5: sometime in the near future, sometime after this new well thing, the new well system is online,

[0:17:51] Voice 5: Eastbourne residents need to have a, would be well advised to put some thinking into whether or not

[0:18:01] Voice 5: the cost benefit of participating in the SCRD water program or strategy is worth it for them

[0:18:08] Voice 5: in terms of what they're getting out of it,

[0:18:09] Voice 5: in terms of what they contribute

[0:18:11] Voice 5: and what is even feasible

[0:18:13] Voice 5: in terms of getting back in return.

[0:18:14] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, yeah.

[0:18:15] Trustee Stamford: So that's something that I've got on my goal list

[0:18:20] Trustee Stamford: in the upcoming term.

[0:18:22] Trustee Stamford: If I'm reelected,

[0:18:24] Trustee Stamford: that's certainly on the top of my list

[0:18:26] Trustee Stamford: as to how to address that bigger project.

[0:18:29] Voice 5: Thank you for the additional information.

[0:18:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you very much.

[0:18:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Complex questions

[0:18:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): and grateful to have Trustee Stanford

[0:18:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): Stanford wearing a couple of hats here to help this local trust area.

[0:18:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, trustees, I would normally read quite a prolonged statement to open a public comment period,

[0:18:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): but I noticed we have zero attendees, so I think I will hold those comments.

[0:18:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): I want to make it clear to people who are listening, your local trustees or all of us want to hear from you.

[0:19:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): So if you have things to say, please always reach out to your local trustees.

[0:19:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): If you want your information on the record as well, it's at northinfo at islandstrust.bc.ca is where you can submit your comments, and they are important, and we do want to hear from you.

[0:19:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, trustees, I'm going to keep moving on then.

[0:19:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): We have some minutes here.

[0:19:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): We have our minutes at item 6.1 from September 9th for adoption on page 4 of the agenda package.

[0:19:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): Are there any additions or changes to those minutes?

[0:19:36] Trustee Stamford: It was so long ago, but it seems fairly straightforward, these ones.

[0:19:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[0:19:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): With general consent, can we approve the minutes as presented or adopt them?

[0:19:50] Voice 10: Yes.

[0:19:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay.

[0:19:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): We have a report here, just resolutions without meetings, dated January 20th, here for your information.

[0:19:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): And we also have item 6.4 on page 14, the policy statement amendment project community information meeting summary.

[0:20:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): uh notes from november 25th for your information uh go ahead uh trustee stanford

[0:20:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): yeah

[0:20:15] Trustee Stamford: well whenever we have these types of engagement and we get a report back like this

[0:20:21] Trustee Stamford: um i find that there's always a step that we we tend to miss and that is responding back to these

[0:20:29] Trustee Stamford: comments i i understand that's not necessarily the role that could be done across the

[0:20:35] Trustee Stamford: the, um, uh, uh, violence trust, but I'm wondering about the realistic ability to, um, at least

[0:20:46] Trustee Stamford: respond. I mean, I'm willing to look at some of this stuff. Um, I I'm more concerned about how

[0:20:54] Trustee Stamford: my comments would be interpreted. Um, but I do think it's important to be able to, uh, turn this

[0:21:02] Trustee Stamford: around and say here's the comments here's some of them can be responded to even in a very

[0:21:09] Trustee Stamford: statutory way like this cannot be commented on or something like that um uh i'm just wondering what

[0:21:17] Trustee Stamford: the other committee members think of being able to do that but

[0:21:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): bernardo has any thoughts on that

[0:21:29] Voice 2: well i

[0:21:30] Voice 5: you know i'm afraid i wish i had something uh useful to say about it but i don't think i can

[0:21:36] Voice 5: add much to what Trustee Stanford said, which is that it's constructive, and in fact, really,

[0:21:49] Voice 5: in terms of how we do our work, it really is necessary for us to be responsive to the public

[0:21:55] Voice 5: commentary and the public engagement. How we do that, though, in a meaningful way, you know,

[0:22:02] Voice 5: without just simply paying lip service to things but also uh respecting the process which is this

[0:22:11] Voice 5: it's still under development and so taking positions on one thing or another is really not

[0:22:17] Voice 5: in the cards for us as a local house

[0:22:20] Voice 5: committee because um just as um you know the public wants

[0:22:25] Voice 5: us to have an open mind that's what it means to have an open mind which is you're not going to

[0:22:31] Voice 5: satisfy people who've got gripes about something or even just plain suggestions,

[0:22:38] Voice 5: we can say, yeah, okay, that's important. We're going to take it into account.

[0:22:43] Voice 5: Anything more than that, I struggle trying to figure out how to do that. But having said that,

[0:22:51] Voice 5: you know, we have public information meetings and engage the public in various ways. And

[0:22:55] Voice 5: And any conversation, you know, people expect a response, and that's reasonable.

[0:23:03] Voice 5: So I don't

[0:23:04] Voice 5: think Stanford's identified a real issue here, but I confess I'm at a loss to have any suggestions at the moment.

[0:23:12] Trustee Stamford: I mean, I have good

[0:23:13] Trustee Stamford: intention, but I'm looking at this.

[0:23:15] Trustee Stamford: The specific questions would be very difficult to, I mean, short of acknowledging that these are questions

[0:23:25] Trustee Stamford: or concerns to be addressed at a later time.

[0:23:28] Trustee Stamford: But some of them are more, I'm just seeing there were a couple,

[0:23:34] Trustee Stamford: like will this new policy statement impact current subdivisions

[0:23:38] Trustee Stamford: and progress?

[0:23:39] Trustee Stamford: That kind of has a yes or no answer to it.

[0:23:43] Trustee Stamford: I'm not quite sure what it is.

[0:23:44] Trustee Stamford: I think I know what it is.

[0:23:45] Trustee Stamford: But, you know, those kind of questions can be responded to.

[0:23:49] Trustee Stamford: too. I'm not sure, Chair Patrick, if you've had this comment before.

[0:23:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, two things. I don't know if the notes kind of capture the comments that were made,

[0:24:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): but they don't capture the commentary and answers that we did have.

[0:24:04] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, we did make some.

[0:24:05] Voice 10: That

[0:24:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): is a little challenging. The challenge with this overall project is there's two streams

[0:24:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): happening. There's information to you on responding today on the referral as to how

[0:24:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): how the trust policy statement may show up

[0:24:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): or doesn't show up in your local trust area.

[0:24:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): Overall, the project will have a what we heard report

[0:24:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): and all of that coming out at a later stage.

[0:24:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think it's because it's been a kind of a protracted

[0:24:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): or long period of time for this public comment period.

[0:24:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): Information's coming from all over the local trust area.

[0:24:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): It will be pulled together and hopefully,

[0:24:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): hopefully, you know, like I said, shown in a what you were heard report is that goes up to all

[0:24:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): trust, all trustees, all 26 of us as we proceed forward. And communications is critically important

[0:24:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): as we go forward. You know, how, how did we use the information we heard? What changes did we make?

[0:25:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): And where, where are we in the process? Those, those are important communication topics for,

[0:25:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): for the public. Um, so it's challenging, but, um,

[0:25:14] Trustee Stamford: well, as a way forward, um, what I might do

[0:25:20] Trustee Stamford: when I have time soon, um, is, is take out the names and just, um, the bigger

[0:25:30] Trustee Stamford: sort of principal questions, just say this will be part of the overall engagement. But then there's

[0:25:43] Trustee Stamford: some questions that are quite specific. Who's the current minister who will review and propose

[0:25:48] Trustee Stamford: the proposed policy statement bylaws? I can answer those. You know, there are some very specific

[0:25:54] Trustee Stamford: questions that could be responded to just so that it indicates we have read this we've acknowledged

[0:26:01] Trustee Stamford: it here's where we can this is how we're going to deal with those questions and then could i pass

[0:26:09] Trustee Stamford: it through somebody in communications just to make sure there there's no um red flags always a good

[0:26:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): idea to uh and i see um and of course

[0:26:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): mccarver did

[0:26:26] Trustee Stamford: you have trust ricardo would also if he's

[0:26:28] Trustee Stamford: entrusted to and yourself chair patrick yeah

[0:26:32] Planner McCargar: i didn't attend this meeting um but i would imagine

[0:26:37] Planner McCargar: that there was uh as chair patrick mentioned some back and forth that happened where staff did answer

[0:26:42] Planner McCargar: questions so you know we could yeah i would imagine that they just weren't captured in the

[0:26:48] Planner McCargar: notes but that there was a bit of um answering that happened during that meeting but if you know

[0:26:53] Planner McCargar: i think if you do end up putting together something then absolutely trustee stanford send it to um

[0:26:59] Planner McCargar: communications probably send it to the uh policy advisor who's working on the project and

[0:27:05] Planner McCargar: they can can help you coordinate that okay yeah

[0:27:09] Trustee Stamford: okay yeah

[0:27:11] Voice 5: yeah i would point out that

[0:27:13] Voice 5: Because the community information meeting was held by the LTC and the LTC received the information, the response, whatever form it takes, should be seen as coming from the LTC, the entirely responsive.

[0:27:32] Voice 5: Trustee Stanford shouldn't have to be.

[0:27:33] Voice 5: I'm happy for her to bear the weight of doing the work, but she shouldn't get all the credit for it.

[0:27:40] Voice 5: no what i'm getting at jokes aside is that uh to just add to the you know to whatever weight

[0:27:47] Voice 5: the public gets from it is like to acknowledge that the ltc is responding here so i i'm not

[0:27:53] Voice 5: looking for some great formal debate or anything like that but i think if you know the rest of us

[0:27:58] Voice 5: sign off on it um and so that it then it is possible for the communication to go out with

[0:28:04] Voice 5: that kind of you know label on it that's an ltc thing i think that would be good um uh

[0:28:10] Voice 5: separately from that about those more tricky questions that can't be answered directly

[0:28:17] Voice 5: without going into it without you know creating a whole bunch of unnecessary work i think pointing

[0:28:22] Voice 5: the questioner in the direction of um either providing context background context that is

[0:28:31] Voice 5: helpful to try to understand the issue as you know there's some things you simply can't answer

[0:28:36] Voice 5: directly because we're in the middle of the process but we can refer people to information

[0:28:40] Voice 5: sources and and um provide information about how the process works and you know just the

[0:28:47] Voice 5: current surrounding context stuff at least that's somewhat helpful to the person who's asking the

[0:28:52] Voice 5: question if but again you know within reason we don't want to create a tremendous amount of work

[0:28:57] Voice 5: for staff or for yourself either but there are things that we already know about that we can

[0:29:01] Voice 5: refer people to is like it might be for you to read this or that you

[0:29:05] Trustee Stamford: know yeah no that's a good

[0:29:06] Trustee Stamford: point yeah i certainly i mean some of these comments truly are just this is their perspective

[0:29:12] Trustee Stamford: to be part of the wider conversation with the policy statement but then there's other specific

[0:29:20] Trustee Stamford: questions or like you said questions that could be easily answered um with the right direction into

[0:29:27] Trustee Stamford: to, you know, whatever is available.

[0:29:31] Voice 2: That's right, yeah.

[0:29:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, trustees, before we move on in the agenda,

[0:29:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): I note that an attendee has arrived,

[0:29:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): and because we're kind of within the time period

[0:29:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): that we said we'd be having public comments,

[0:29:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'd look to you, I would like to request this person

[0:29:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): to see if they would like to address this this morning.

[0:29:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): First, I'd like to ask the person that's attending the meeting,

[0:29:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): if you were able to raise your hand,

[0:29:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): if you had intended to speak to the local trust committee.

[0:30:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): This morning in the public comment period, I am not seeing a hand go up, so I just want to make sure we're giving the individual an opportunity.

[0:30:15] Trustee Stamford: Is that

[0:30:15] Trustee Stamford: Mr. Dickinson?

[0:30:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yes.

[0:30:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[0:30:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[0:30:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): As he's not raising his hand, I'm going to then carry on.

[0:30:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you for joining us.

[0:30:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): And if you didn't hear, we do want to hear your comments all the time.

[0:30:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): You can issue them to the individual trustees or to northinfo at islandstrust.bc.ca.

[0:30:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay.

[0:30:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm going to move on then.

[0:30:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): We are at item 7.1 of the agenda, which is the follow-up action list dated January 20th,

[0:30:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): 2026.

[0:30:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'll look to staff.

[0:30:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): Are there any items that they wish to bring to our attention in the follow-up action list?

[0:31:03] Planner McCargar: No.

[0:31:04] Planner McCargar: If there's any questions, I'm happy to take those, but I don't have anything to add.

[0:31:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustees, Trustee Stanford.

[0:31:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): Oh,

[0:31:11] Trustee Stamford: I'd just like to comment that the maps for the aquifer and groundwater recharge, the target date was October 2024. We're now into 2026. And, you know, will this be available to us before the end of term?

[0:31:29] Trustee Stamford: Sure.

[0:31:31] Planner McCargar: I can follow up and, and ask, I know that there had been some challenges with staffing

[0:31:37] Planner McCargar: and funding for the project. But I will follow up.

[0:31:43] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, is there like, just in that then to help?

[0:31:47] Trustee Stamford: Is there any like in this data format, when we say status and project and progress? Is there

[0:31:55] Trustee Stamford: there anything that on that line that we could say delayed because of staffing uh challenges or

[0:32:02] Trustee Stamford: stuff so it's actually in the document we can refer back to it

[0:32:06] Planner McCargar: yeah we can i actually thought

[0:32:09] Planner McCargar: that i had written something in here but i don't see it yes

[0:32:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): we would receive an update in uh at our

[0:32:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): september meeting but we didn't yeah what

[0:32:22] Planner McCargar: number are you looking at i'm at

[0:32:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): one on page 20 uh the

[0:32:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): The second part, May 28th.

[0:32:29] Planner McCargar: Yes, I see.

[0:32:31] Planner McCargar: Yeah, so I can get an update and then put it in there.

[0:32:35] Planner McCargar: Is that what you're requesting, Trustee Sanford?

[0:32:38] Voice 3: Yes, please.

[0:32:38] Voice 3: That'd be great.

[0:32:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any other questions?

[0:32:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee Bernardo.

[0:32:42] Voice 5: Yeah, I've got a question about the first item on the list, which is it was some time

[0:32:46] Voice 5: ago we were hoping, you know, we asked staff to initiate a, do what it could to initiate

[0:32:55] Voice 5: a meeting with elected officials over at Squamish Nation.

[0:32:58] Voice 5: that was quite a while ago back in 2024 i see there hasn't been any work done on that

[0:33:08] Voice 5: it doesn't strike me as that complicated to write a letter but i also may well be unaware of

[0:33:16] Voice 5: important considerations here i'm just asking perhaps planet mccarver can just update us on to

[0:33:21] Voice 5: why there it's um why there hasn't been any traction on getting that request out

[0:33:26] Voice 5: Yeah,

[0:33:28] Planner McCargar: so I believe that it was kind of related to the OCP project and that the meeting was initially to look at the engagement recommendations.

[0:33:38] Planner McCargar: And because the LTC hasn't fully considered those recommendations and hasn't made any decisions on which they'll be implementing and which they won't be,

[0:33:47] Planner McCargar: that it was seen as sort of best to kind of wait for those decisions to be made so that you could

[0:33:54] Planner McCargar: be going back to the Squamish nation with more of a sort of concrete plan moving forward. And then

[0:34:02] Planner McCargar: with the elections, I think that there was some discussion around whether it'd be appropriate to

[0:34:07] Planner McCargar: be reaching out during their busy election season. So now I know there is a item on this agenda to

[0:34:16] Planner McCargar: to sort of congratulate the newly elected members.

[0:34:20] Planner McCargar: And you also have on this agenda a report looking more closely

[0:34:27] Planner McCargar: at the recommendations that were given by Squamish Nation.

[0:34:32] Planner McCargar: So I think those were some of the reasons why it had been stalled.

[0:34:36] Voice 5: Yeah.

[0:34:37] Voice 5: Speaking just for myself, I didn't view the request to initiate that meeting.

[0:34:43] Voice 5: and I hope we still have it

[0:34:44] Voice 5: or are able to try to orchestrate

[0:34:47] Voice 5: one sometime this year

[0:34:48] Voice 5: before our elections

[0:34:51] Voice 5: I didn't view it as principally

[0:34:55] Voice 5: related to the OCP

[0:34:56] Voice 5: certainly I was alive to the very

[0:34:58] Voice 5: you know it's the immediate piece

[0:35:01] Voice 5: of business that would naturally come up

[0:35:03] Voice 5: but for me the larger

[0:35:05] Voice 5: question is actually

[0:35:07] Voice 5: simply cultivating a relationship with

[0:35:09] Voice 5: Squamish Nation

[0:35:09] Voice 5: nation um wanting to get a kind of frankly face-to-face encounter to get a better sense of

[0:35:17] Voice 5: where squamish nation uh wants the relationship with the ltc to go how it whether it has ideas

[0:35:25] Voice 5: a sense of um um the kind of areas that we can and should work on together really relationship

[0:35:34] Voice 5: building, because it frankly strikes me as a little odd, given the importance of reconciliation,

[0:35:42] Voice 5: the importance of building ongoing relationships, both with Seasilt Nation and Squamish Nation,

[0:35:51] Voice 5: in the course of doing our work at the LTC, because we are committed

[0:35:56] Voice 5: to working with our local Indigenous governing bodies.

[0:36:01] Voice 5: bodies um and i appreciate that really the heavy lifting gets done on a staff-to-staff basis that's

[0:36:08] Voice 5: where the substance of things gets hashed out before it comes for decision for any one of the

[0:36:13] Voice 5: bodies ltc or squamish nation or ccl but um it seems to me that we have an opportunity here to

[0:36:21] Voice 5: work on developing a relationship getting to know each other uh getting to know each other's

[0:36:27] Voice 5: perspectives without decisions, without having to sort of, without any, you know, without any

[0:36:34] Voice 5: specific business to be discussed or resolved. So I would hope that would be the tenor of the

[0:36:39] Voice 5: meeting. Now that's just my view of it. Trustee Stamford and Patrick may have different views.

[0:36:45] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:36:46] Planner McCargar: I'll just say just

[0:36:47] Planner McCargar: a quick minute before through the chair. That's just not how

[0:36:51] Planner McCargar: the resolution was worded. So I think if that was the intent, then it would be helpful to have that

[0:36:56] Planner McCargar: direction the way the resolution was worded was to discuss the status of the implementation of

[0:37:01] Planner McCargar: squamous nation invasion engagement recommendations so i think if it's to more broadly engage and and

[0:37:08] Planner McCargar: get to know each other and build the relationship that would be helpful to to know all right trustee

[0:37:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): stanford yeah

[0:37:13] Trustee Stamford: so i did add an item in uh under first nations engagement um on this agenda and

[0:37:22] Trustee Stamford: And it was to congratulate the new council.

[0:37:27] Trustee Stamford: And we can add that kind of request in that part of that congratulation is to advance the OCP and also that relationship building,

[0:37:40] Trustee Stamford: which is one of the recommendations in their referral back to us about the OCP is developing that relationship.

[0:37:50] Trustee Stamford: So we can keep it quite general.

[0:37:52] Trustee Stamford: But I think the opportunity is good right now with the new council.

[0:37:56] Trustee Stamford: They've had a couple of months in place, and I think this is good timing with the Seychelles.

[0:38:04] Trustee Stamford: They are heading into an election mid-February, so it would be probably better to wait till afterwards.

[0:38:15] Trustee Stamford: And I know, like the Squamish, they are very busy.

[0:38:19] Trustee Stamford: um so you know we can certainly work on that as well so

[0:38:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): we can discuss this in items 13.7.1

[0:38:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): later in the agenda that's okay all right any other questions on the follow-up action list

[0:38:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): not seeing any then we'll move on to item 7.2 uh sunshine coast regional district coastal

[0:38:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): floodplain mapping project general verbal update i see a regional planning manager renee

[0:38:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): Gemma does with a beautiful background photo. Go ahead. Good

[0:38:56] Voice 12: morning, everyone. Good morning,

[0:38:58] Voice 12: LTC. The purpose of this update is just a brief overview of the Sunshine Coast's regional

[0:39:08] Voice 12: coastal floodplain mapping project. The intention is that as some follow-up actions and next steps

[0:39:15] Voice 12: that you'll get a more fulsome presentation with the Sunshine Coast, some team members,

[0:39:22] Voice 12: to talk about what came out of this report.

[0:39:24] Voice 12: So please forgive me if the detail is more of an overview,

[0:39:29] Voice 12: but feel free to ask any questions that come up.

[0:39:34] Voice 12: So just a brief overview of what the project is about.

[0:39:38] Voice 12: The Sunshine Coast Regional Board initiated this project

[0:39:42] Voice 12: called the Coastal Flood Mapping Project in 2022

[0:39:45] Voice 12: in partnership with its member municipalities,

[0:39:48] Voice 12: the Town of Gibsons, the District of Sechelt, and Islands Trust.

[0:39:52] Voice 12: The project was funded through UBCM's Disaster Risk Reduction Climate Adaptation Grant Program.

[0:40:00] Voice 12: Sechelt Nation Government District also completed some detailed coastal flood mapping in 2022 as well.

[0:40:07] Voice 12: There were consultants hired for this particular project to help us deliver some main deliverables.

[0:40:13] Voice 12: And that included the Coastal Flood Management Policy Brief,

[0:40:17] Voice 12: Reef, which focused on high-level land use planning recommendations. Coastal flood mapping

[0:40:25] Voice 12: for the Sunshine Coast under various scenarios. So that included inundation maps, flood construction

[0:40:32] Voice 12: level maps, and coastal vulnerability index maps. Those are available on the Sunshine Coast's

[0:40:38] Voice 12: website as well. And a preliminary community outreach and engagement, and those included

[0:40:44] Voice 12: to some activities related to coastal flooding and outreach to communities.

[0:40:51] Voice 12: So this also involves some collaboration with the Sunshine Coast Regional District and its

[0:40:56] Voice 12: member municipalities, and it offers a consistent way of providing information and reviewing

[0:41:03] Voice 12: information across borders, and that was really a good exercise for the maps, for producing maps.

[0:41:10] Voice 12: The project also provided some important data to better understand coastal flooding hazards, which can inform decision-making and long-term planning.

[0:41:22] Voice 12: And that will be some of the next steps that we can discuss in the future.

[0:41:26] Voice 12: Highlights of key learning from this project.

[0:41:29] Voice 12: Sea level rises are occurring and will continue to occur.

[0:41:33] Voice 12: Although the time is uncertain, there is cuts that are happening to pollution.

[0:41:40] Voice 12: While they would slow the rate of sea level rise, levels will continue to rise over the long term.

[0:41:46] Voice 12: There is time to adapt, but the sooner adaptation starts, the better.

[0:41:50] Voice 12: And it's better to position communities and, sorry, and the better to position our communities together.

[0:41:59] Voice 12: Local governments can improve existing policies and regulations for development with coastal

[0:42:04] Voice 12: flooding hazards. The project provides some policy recommendations and all participating

[0:42:12] Voice 12: local governments do regulate development with coastal flood flooding hazards found in their

[0:42:18] Voice 12: OCP policies and their land use bylaws. So this the project and the briefing that came out from

[0:42:27] Voice 12: from this project recommends that member municipalities

[0:42:30] Voice 12: look at their development permit areas

[0:42:33] Voice 12: and also recommend some more awareness

[0:42:35] Voice 12: of coastal flooding in communities and in OCPs.

[0:42:41] Voice 12: So I'm happy to go over a couple terms

[0:42:43] Voice 12: because people may not be familiar when we talk about,

[0:42:47] Voice 12: and pardon me, and in terms of the maps

[0:42:50] Voice 12: and the data that was discussed and the methodology

[0:42:54] Voice 12: or how the data was arrived at

[0:42:57] Voice 12: and the maps were arrived at

[0:42:58] Voice 12: was all provided in a technical report

[0:43:00] Voice 12: that's also available on the Sunshine Coast's webpage.

[0:43:04] Voice 12: So some terminology that was discussed

[0:43:07] Voice 12: is flood construction levels.

[0:43:09] Voice 12: And that was a map that was produced

[0:43:11] Voice 12: that refers to the minimum height

[0:43:13] Voice 12: that living spaces in new development

[0:43:16] Voice 12: should be built to in order to reduce risk of flooding.

[0:43:20] Voice 12: And there's also other analysis.

[0:43:22] Voice 12: So we've also worked on coastal vulnerability index maps, and that index evaluates the coastline's susceptibility to erosion and measures it in a percentage.

[0:43:36] Voice 12: So I'm happy to share all of these reports with the LTC following this update, as well as the link to the website that you can share out more fulsome with community members who are interested.

[0:43:47] Voice 12: Some of the next steps that we've talked about and that I'll be coordinating with the Sunshine Coast staff is we've accessed mapping information in the reports.

[0:44:03] Voice 12: Following the Sunshine Coast board meeting on October 23rd, the board gave some direction to refer this information out to member municipalities like us with an offer to present to council.

[0:44:17] Voice 12: So that's the next step that we'll be working on.

[0:44:21] Voice 12: And if the LTC wishes, you could provide a motion, but that's something that is already set into motion between myself and the Sunshine Coast staff.

[0:44:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you.

[0:44:36] Voice 12: I

[0:44:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): was going to share, because all the regional districts have been doing this work, but in particular at Gabriela just last week,

[0:44:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): regional district in Nanaimo is proceeding forward with some pilot work to look at

[0:44:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): model approaches to certain areas that will be quite useful and something that we can follow

[0:44:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): along and share from. So being that we are in a regional family, I think I would hope that we can

[0:44:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): share some of the lessons learned from some of the other regional districts as they apply to

[0:45:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): the islands here in the Islands Trust. So just wanted to have that information out there. Any

[0:45:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any questions, Trustee Stamford?

[0:45:12] Trustee Stamford: Having looked at the mapping it was given to us in a report form was massive,

[0:45:20] Trustee Stamford: recognizing that only we'd be looking at just the island portion,

[0:45:25] Trustee Stamford: which makes it much more manageable.

[0:45:29] Trustee Stamford: I think the challenge for us will be interpreting it in a way that makes sense for constituents.

[0:45:35] Trustee Stamford: I think there will be an interest initially, but then what to do with it when they see what it is.

[0:45:43] Trustee Stamford: I can't say there was any surprises when I looked specifically at the islands, but just the fact there's mapping out there and making people aware of it helps that overall knowledge gathering for people when they're looking at anything to do along the shoreline.

[0:46:03] Trustee Stamford: So, yeah, I look forward to seeing how people take that and we'll get a, I guess we'll get a presentation from SCRD staff.

[0:46:15] Trustee Stamford: That's right.

[0:46:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Bernardo.

[0:46:18] Voice 5: Yeah, I'm just thinking that, Manager Gemmaret, this may be an unfair question.

[0:46:25] Voice 5: question. But I'm thinking about the distinct geography of our islands, certainly Keats

[0:46:33] Voice 5: and Gambier. I'm not sure Gambier has any low-lying areas that are immediately vulnerable

[0:46:40] Voice 5: to short-term flooding issues. I can think of a few places on Keats, and certainly Keats

[0:46:46] Voice 5: Landing is subject to that. And I think some of the associated islands, particularly the

[0:46:54] Voice 5: thornbees i think we could uh take into consideration thinking they may be more

[0:46:58] Voice 5: vulnerable to immediate um uh flooding issues due to climate change and that sort of thing

[0:47:04] Voice 5: um and uh weather changes as well um are there again i i'm mindful that um this is a kind of a

[0:47:17] Voice 5: complicated question a complicated area but uh i i'm really asking a question here about your

[0:47:24] Voice 5: reading of the of the information that we've obtained from this mapping uh do you see any

[0:47:29] Voice 5: long-term planning implications for the ltc uh uh latent in that uh in that mapping uh is there

[0:47:36] Voice 5: information that has come to the surface that we weren't aware of before that is uh leading you to

[0:47:44] Voice 5: have some thoughts and i'm not asking you to commit to anything here but just some thoughts

[0:47:48] Voice 5: Thoughts about, OK, this this could be an this or that area could do with some improved kind of planning considerations to account for this flood risk.

[0:48:00] Voice 5: Has that come to the surface at all?

[0:48:03] Voice 12: Through the chair, that's part of the purpose of this project was to look at and look at areas within the scope of the project.

[0:48:15] Voice 12: The project wasn't able to cover all of the coastline.

[0:48:18] Voice 12: I think there's over 100 kilometers of coastline in the regional district, but it did include Gambier and Thormanby and I believe Keats.

[0:48:27] Voice 12: And so with a special eye in terms of staff looking at the maps and looking at what the information came forward, that some of the deeper information, I think the presentation we can share with the LTC and have some conversations about what brought out that information.

[0:48:45] Voice 12: I believe there were a couple areas that brought to light, I believe on South Thormanby, that the mapping highlighted. So I think that generates or that sort of solicits some ideas of when should we be thinking about policy or protections or what level.

[0:49:05] Voice 12: I think all those questions are good for the LTC to talk about with the maps and what it shows.

[0:49:11] Voice 12: And the regional district staff can also help with that through the presentation.

[0:49:17] Voice 5: Yeah, I think the presentation would be very helpful for us to have a certain amount of emphasis on those points,

[0:49:25] Voice 5: because obviously that's the most material to our decision making.

[0:49:28] Voice 12: And through the chair, just to add, this project is not requiring,

[0:49:33] Voice 12: hiring. There's no requirement for the LTC to make changes to policy right now. This is information

[0:49:40] Voice 12: to share, to educate, right, to discuss so that the LTC can make informed decisions. So if there's

[0:49:47] Voice 12: something that comes up the LTC would like to action sooner than later, that can be talked about,

[0:49:52] Voice 12: right?

[0:49:53] Voice 5: Yeah, and just to be clear, I recognize that. What I really want to do is just become

[0:49:57] Voice 5: more frankly sensitized to um potential uh issues that we may have to deal with uh either you know

[0:50:05] Voice 5: in the medium or long term in terms of planning um so but thank you for that

[0:50:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): all right any other

[0:50:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): questions i take it is there a presentation being thought of or trying to be scheduled or is that

[0:50:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): just something in the future um

[0:50:22] Voice 12: that's something i'll be connecting with the regional district

[0:50:25] Voice 12: district team on, and we'll have to coordinate some opportunities. So you'll hear back from me

[0:50:31] Voice 12: on some dates and things like that.

[0:50:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you. Any other questions?

[0:50:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): Going to continue on then. We are now at item 9.1, which is the referral for the proposed

[0:50:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trust Council bylaw number 183, the policy statement. There is a memorandum beginning at

[0:50:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): page 23. So I don't believe we're going to be receiving a report from staff on this. I think

[0:51:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): this is up to us. I'm seeing nods of heads from Planner McCarver. So trustees, I hope you've had

[0:51:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): a chance to review the correspondence that you've received or that are in the system from Islanders

[0:51:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): from your local trust area.

[0:51:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I'll open the floor for comments or thoughts on proceeding.

[0:51:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee Stamford.

[0:51:38] Trustee Stamford: I don't mean to put you on the spot, but I'm going to anyway.

[0:51:41] Trustee Stamford: Chair Patrick, have you heard of how other LTCs are responding to this?

[0:51:48] Trustee Stamford: Has there been, this has come up in other LTCs to date, if I understand.

[0:51:55] Trustee Stamford: and um because my i i just don't know how far down the rabbit hole we go on this um we have

[0:52:06] Trustee Stamford: some responses from our communities i haven't seen all of it um and um you know that is specific

[0:52:18] Trustee Stamford: to the local trust committee for me the only thing that really affects us is a big thing is

[0:52:27] Trustee Stamford: is the direction of the Gambier official community plan.

[0:52:31] Trustee Stamford: It's in process now.

[0:52:33] Trustee Stamford: It's slow, but it's in the middle of the process.

[0:52:36] Trustee Stamford: And as far as I can tell,

[0:52:40] Trustee Stamford: our proposed changes fit within this policy,

[0:52:43] Trustee Stamford: but I wouldn't know for sure.

[0:52:46] Trustee Stamford: So as far as I can see,

[0:52:47] Trustee Stamford: that is the only specific interest that is affected

[0:52:57] Trustee Stamford: that I can think of.

[0:52:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, I'm happy to share what I do know. I don't know what the status is from all the local trust areas. I know Maine, they had no comment. They said interest is unaffected and to proceed forward.

[0:53:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): Howard, the Gabriela, the trustees there carefully read and tried to collect every piece of correspondence that they could find and tried to cover each and every comment that they heard or sort of groupings of the comments.

[0:53:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): They made a number of general sort of recommendations that they would like to see for consideration on amendments.

[0:53:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): Other than that, I know Salt Spring sees it in February, so we haven't had a chance to respond yet.

[0:53:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I think it's kind of up to you on your overall, you know, it's really about how does the policy statement land in your area?

[0:53:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): Are there particular concerns that you want to raise or considerations you'd want to raise as the amendment process carries on?

[0:54:06] Voice 2: Well, sorry.

[0:54:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead.

[0:54:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah,

[0:54:10] Voice 2: this is

[0:54:15] Voice 5: difficult. I mean, this is actually a very big question that requires a lot of drilling into. And I'll say right away, I'm not equipped to make a decision today one way or the other about it.

[0:54:26] Voice 5: But I'd like us to have a fairly full discussion about it.

[0:54:35] Voice 5: But I can say there is, I have some reservations about the structure and about the structure

[0:54:48] Voice 5: and approach of the trust policy statement.

[0:54:50] Voice 5: That doesn't necessarily mean I'm opposed to them, but I'm personally, I'm struggling

[0:54:54] Voice 5: with them.

[0:54:54] Voice 5: um one issue and uh i could be accused of being a little simple-minded here is that there's just

[0:55:03] Voice 5: so much in it like um when you look at past trust policy statements i mean they're really

[0:55:10] Voice 5: kind of overarching statements of principle um these get much more granular and um that's okay

[0:55:22] Voice 5: i suppose with the advisory policies but there is this tension between the advisory policies

[0:55:27] Voice 5: and the directive policies and you know that my comments here are really um you know uh

[0:55:35] Voice 5: apply to the trust policy statement in general but it's like the way it's structured i think

[0:55:39] Voice 5: is relevant to how we do our work at gambier and um some but not all of the directive policies

[0:55:48] Voice 5: i want to be clear about that um it's not clear to me um whether it's appropriate for

[0:55:57] Voice 5: for Trust Council to be collectively limiting the discretion of the local trust committee

[0:56:02] Voice 5: in some areas through the means of the directive policies. Because that's what a directive policy

[0:56:09] Voice 5: does. I mean, it's telling an LTC, you have to, certain types of decisions have to operate within

[0:56:14] Voice 5: these parameters. And I'm struggling with some of them. I don't want to go into the details about

[0:56:23] Voice 5: about it now but um can

[0:56:25] Trustee Stamford: you because can you like pick an example because you've lost me

[0:56:29] Trustee Stamford: like i'll need an example in order to understand where your struggle is um

[0:56:35] Voice 5: i'm gonna have to

[0:56:39] Voice 5: apologize i can't give you one right now it's been a while since i've looked at trust policy

[0:56:42] Voice 5: statement but what i'm expressing here is um a more generalized sense from what i can recall

[0:56:49] Voice 5: from the last time i looked at it about specific policies i haven't done the deep that's why i'm

[0:56:54] Voice 5: kind of dancing around a little bit i haven't done the deep dive the analytical dive uh but um

[0:57:06] Voice 5: you know i have to apologize for this that there's kind of a i approach these things sometimes from a

[0:57:11] Voice 5: there's both the policy perspective of it but there's also the legal perspective of it

[0:57:16] Voice 5: it's not clear to me when i look at it through my legal lens from my background training

[0:57:21] Voice 5: training, that everything in the directive policies actually is something Trust Council

[0:57:32] Voice 5: has the jurisdiction to direct LTCs to do.

[0:57:36] Voice 5: And one of the reasons I'm struggling here is it's not clear to me, and I think maybe

[0:57:44] Voice 5: the legal review of the trust policy statement might make some of these things clearer, but

[0:57:49] Voice 5: but it's not clear to me at all what the scope

[0:57:52] Voice 5: of the trust council's jurisdiction is

[0:57:56] Voice 5: in terms of what those directive policies can be.

[0:57:59] Voice 5: They can't, I'm pretty confident in one thing.

[0:58:02] Voice 5: It's not open to trust councils to just say

[0:58:04] Voice 5: whatever it wants in terms of directing

[0:58:07] Voice 5: local trust committees into how they can do their work.

[0:58:10] Voice 5: Because the local trust committees have been given

[0:58:12] Voice 5: their own independent jurisdiction to exercise discretion

[0:58:15] Voice 5: progression uh in terms of land planning for their own local trust areas and um there's a

[0:58:26] Voice 5: there's a certain tension there and that there's some of the things if i recall correctly um for

[0:58:32] Voice 5: example um issues about water usage if i can and again don't hold me to it because my recollection

[0:58:38] Voice 5: could be faulty here but i just say this is a hype let's put it this way it's a hypothetical

[0:58:43] Voice 5: A directive policy that goes in the direction of water management type issues may not fit all of the islands appropriately.

[0:58:57] Voice 5: The islands are not part of the same region.

[0:58:59] Voice 5: They are diverse.

[0:59:01] Voice 5: Southern Gulf Islands have a kind of an identity, a geographical identity.

[0:59:06] Voice 5: The islands in Howe Sound, you know, Bowen, Gambier, Cates, we have a geographical reality that we're all coping with.

[0:59:13] Voice 5: that's different than the southern gulf islands you know by examples and that directive policies

[0:59:21] Voice 5: that might be more suitable in terms of addressing common issues in the southern

[0:59:27] Voice 5: gulf islands aren't relevant to necessarily relevant to how sound islands and to me that

[0:59:36] Voice 5: raises a question of um because local trust committees have this jurisdiction to address

[0:59:42] Voice 5: address land planning for their areas that that's why they exist to exercise a separate jurisdiction

[0:59:48] Voice 5: a separate discretion um it seems to me that that has a kind of a that has a modifying influence on

[0:59:57] Voice 5: and how far the Trust Council can go.

[1:00:00] Voice 5: in terms of how specific it can be in being prescriptive.

[1:00:03] Voice 5: Now, I've been very, you know, again,

[1:00:05] Voice 5: I apologize yet again for being so vague about this

[1:00:07] Voice 5: and speaking such general terms, but that's my,

[1:00:11] Voice 5: to me, that's an impediment to saying,

[1:00:13] Voice 5: yeah, okay, there's no problem with this.

[1:00:14] Voice 5: I don't know if there's a problem.

[1:00:16] Voice 5: And I confess I haven't done that deep drill into it yet.

[1:00:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): Before we go, I want to say today is the day

[1:00:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): to have the conversation or local trust meeting

[1:00:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): because you have more meetings between that,

[1:00:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): But there's also us as individual trustees moving forward in the trust council overall piece. So I know it is complicated when we have, we're a federation and we're a local body. But go ahead, Trustee Stanford.

[1:00:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well,

[1:00:44] Trustee Stamford: I went through it again last night and actually I was, I felt that between the advisory policies and the directive policies, it did seem quite clear.

[1:00:56] Trustee Stamford: um and they actually some of them specifically around the fresh water um was more to what we've

[1:01:05] Trustee Stamford: always had um in terms of what we've had authority to do um you know ensuring that islands are

[1:01:12] Trustee Stamford: self-sufficient in their supply of fresh water that's always been something that the the islands

[1:01:18] Trustee Stamford: trust is driven strive for um and then there's exceptions to that that we work with it we have

[1:01:26] Trustee Stamford: a couple of exceptions in the gambier local trust committee area so um that part of it

[1:01:35] Trustee Stamford: i wasn't as concerned about because i could um going through it for the most part sort of

[1:01:43] Trustee Stamford: direct it back to an authority that we had sort of in a general sense that i had seen us use um

[1:01:55] Trustee Stamford: land use bylaws that would support those concepts or those you know ocp directives that would

[1:02:04] Trustee Stamford: support those concepts or not like it you know there there was an authority there

[1:02:09] Trustee Stamford: the only part looking back at the comments um from um members of my community is is around

[1:02:20] Trustee Stamford: around how the much needed reference to Indigenous peoples

[1:02:28] Trustee Stamford: and their rights and title have been put in

[1:02:34] Trustee Stamford: and the way it's being put in.

[1:02:36] Trustee Stamford: And then that sort of reverse comment

[1:02:40] Trustee Stamford: that I've been trying to research more about is,

[1:02:43] Trustee Stamford: well, what about landholder rights?

[1:02:47] Trustee Stamford: And so I was trying to sort of parse that part out, and it isn't necessarily clear. If anything, I was seeing from Gambier comments that they'd like some kind of generalized understanding of what their rights as landholders are in terms of this document, because it's not stated.

[1:03:11] Trustee Stamford: and looking at just a little bit of research that I've tried to do online is there isn't one

[1:03:18] Trustee Stamford: document that they can go to that clearly states that. And that's not just for the Islands Trust,

[1:03:23] Trustee Stamford: but that's for people in British Columbia. There are different statutes that protect them,

[1:03:29] Trustee Stamford: but that's not acknowledged anywhere in this document. So if I was to have one concern,

[1:03:37] Trustee Stamford: concern it is trying to acknowledge for people in a very general way that we all have a certain

[1:03:45] Trustee Stamford: rights as as residents um and landholders on the islands and what the difference may be i don't know

[1:03:52] Trustee Stamford: but it's it could be a very simple statement and then how that's played out through this document

[1:03:58] Trustee Stamford: But to me, that's too vague for me to say there is a concern. Change XYZ in the recommendations. I think that does require trust counsel conversation. It's not specific to Gambier.

[1:04:17] Trustee Stamford: here. Anything I saw in here that I could relate to our local trust committee in general could be

[1:04:29] Trustee Stamford: approached from our own perspective within our own official community plan to different levels.

[1:04:35] Trustee Stamford: Like there's talk about whether or not we should have docks. I think that's a good example that

[1:04:42] Trustee Stamford: that docks are approached differently on different islands.

[1:04:46] Trustee Stamford: And it gives us the wide interpretation of you should try and have combined docks

[1:04:55] Trustee Stamford: or limit docks where there's sensitive areas.

[1:04:57] Trustee Stamford: Well, we're doing that anyway.

[1:04:59] Trustee Stamford: And we're aiming for that anyway.

[1:05:03] Voice 10: So

[1:05:04] Trustee Stamford: to me, that fit within the overall authority and how it's interpreted,

[1:05:10] Trustee Stamford: because I know some islands have no private dock access.

[1:05:15] Trustee Stamford: So that still allows for that.

[1:05:17] Trustee Stamford: And then we could interpret from there.

[1:05:19] Trustee Stamford: So as I went through it, that's sort of the questions

[1:05:23] Trustee Stamford: and the commentary I had in the back of my head

[1:05:26] Trustee Stamford: was those kinds of things.

[1:05:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): I wanted to share with Trustee Bernardo,

[1:05:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): I know the question of, because it was discussed here

[1:05:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): on Salt Spring and the community information,

[1:05:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): in section 1.4 of the policy statement

[1:05:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): under directive policies, those colorful boxes,

[1:05:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): it talks about directive policies should be consistent

[1:05:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): to avoid rejection or objection.

[1:05:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): And they were like, oh, it

[1:05:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): should be must.

[1:05:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): And it was like, well, this is a regional document.

[1:05:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): We've done our best to say, you know, to collect these things,

[1:05:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): but there is a potential that a policy in certain circumstances

[1:05:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): does not apply to a particular island.

[1:06:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): And that was the intent of the interpretation being should there.

[1:06:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's just that we have to have that test all the time of, you know,

[1:06:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): Does this apply to the island when you're in the thick of a real decision or creating a bylaw?

[1:06:15] Trustee Stamford: And in addition, for instance, the housing, which doesn't really apply to Gambier Local Trust Committee area.

[1:06:23] Trustee Stamford: I mean, there's some things we could use in it, but our housing section, our OCP is always really small.

[1:06:28] Trustee Stamford: all we have to have it um as part of our ocp but how we layer that out um is completely different

[1:06:37] Trustee Stamford: from island to island and i wanted to make sure we had that choice within this document so that

[1:06:45] Trustee Stamford: we could say yeah well housing's this and in you know quite simple terms compared to what it would

[1:06:51] Trustee Stamford: be housing on salt spring or maine or anywhere else well

[1:06:56] Voice 2: go ahead if

[1:06:57] Voice 5: i may um one of trustee

[1:07:01] Voice 5: sanford's first comments uh i think is well taken uh which is this uh addressing the question about

[1:07:09] Voice 5: addressing the concern that's been floating around out there as a result of the ocp it's

[1:07:16] Voice 5: just sort of surfaced the question and the concern about the status of uh title to private property

[1:07:24] Voice 5: uh and um given recent judicial decisions how that has cast the perceptions of some people

[1:07:36] Voice 5: and it's understandable when they they look at some of the provisions that relate to

[1:07:40] Voice 5: reconciliation and engagement with indigenous governing bodies there is um it's provoked some

[1:07:49] Voice 5: anxieties because you know just to be blunt the sheer volume of those issues that are there

[1:07:55] Voice 5: necessarily because we're trying to move forward to a different place but it has

[1:08:00] Voice 5: provoked a certain amount of concern the question is how do we deal with it and I

[1:08:07] Voice 5: have thought about that one thing and I and I think trustee Sanford's right to

[1:08:12] Voice 5: say it applies to really it's not unique to get to our local trust area it's

[1:08:17] Voice 5: going to apply to all of them but that doesn't mean we can't say it affects us

[1:08:21] Voice 5: because it does affect us and i would like to see certainly in the trust policy statement

[1:08:28] Voice 5: uh an amendment that simply clarifies that there is no intention uh in this like for there's no

[1:08:36] Voice 5: intention for this document the trust policy statement uh um to affect um to have any effect

[1:08:44] Voice 5: on title to private property you know something to that effect i don't have

[1:08:50] Voice 5: the words but that um

[1:08:53] Voice 5: And I do think having that change could be relevant, specifically because it's a question

[1:09:00] Voice 5: that's arisen in the course of the Gambier OCP review, and we certainly have heard that

[1:09:05] Voice 5: from the public, but it's also separate from that.

[1:09:10] Voice 5: We're in this area of legal uncertainty, and I think it does make sense for Trust Council

[1:09:18] Voice 5: to go on record to say, look, we're not going there, basically.

[1:09:22] Voice 5: and I think that would be helpful but so that's one specific issue but my dancing around with

[1:09:31] Voice 5: this issue and my ambiguous uncertainty about it is colored by some of the stuff I've been

[1:09:38] Voice 5: reading lately about materials in my capacity on the governance committee because we have a

[1:09:45] Voice 5: memo in front of us that talks about um the various um authorities that executive committee

[1:09:53] Voice 5: has that have been granted to it either under legislation or by policy or by um trust council

[1:10:01] Voice 5: bylaw and if i recall correctly i mean and this does affect the whole business about the um

[1:10:10] Voice 5: the the enforceability question about the trust policy statement and i think that's something that

[1:10:18] Voice 5: that all of us on trust council are going to have to drill into when we you know as part of our

[1:10:23] Voice 5: discussions of the trust policy statement but this provision that we have this mechanism that we have

[1:10:29] Voice 5: that executive committee compares when it's assessing whether or not it should approve

[1:10:37] Voice 5: or you know for sending on to the minister a bylaw that's passed by local trust committee

[1:10:44] Voice 5: One of those elements is whether or not it passes muster under the then current trust policy statement.

[1:10:52] Voice 5: Now, under the legislation, there's just this blanket approval function that's been given to the executive committee to do that.

[1:11:06] Voice 5: And then there is a policy that makes it specific.

[1:11:10] Voice 5: The contrast, like the compare and contrast with the trust policy statement isn't in the legislation.

[1:11:14] Voice 5: It's in a policy. And we are examining all of these elements of what the authority of the executive committee should be. So that becomes an open question. Is that something that we still want to have and why? And so that complicates, in my view, the analysis of the whole issue.

[1:11:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee Stanford.

[1:11:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well,

[1:11:44] Trustee Stamford: I do recognize, I mean, that's not just to this particular policy statement. This has been an ongoing question since year dot, I guess. And there is ways around that, that we can challenge that as a trust counsel, if it comes up to that.

[1:12:04] Trustee Stamford: But, you know, whether or not we have the authority as trust counsel to make these statements is really what we should be asking for this particular document. How that authority is translated through the executive committee or whatever we decide does go through governance.

[1:12:24] Trustee Stamford: But to me, I see them as two different things. And until I would hate to see like sort of the unstated assumption here is we can't move forward without the other because of that critical sense. And I don't think that's true.

[1:12:39] Trustee Stamford: I think we have to allow ourselves this process and then assert our ability to be comfortable in how those decisions are made at the council level.

[1:12:57] Trustee Stamford: So I see them as related, but not necessarily one dependent on the other as we go through the governance procedures.

[1:13:06] Trustee Stamford: procedures because i think there are ways around it if if ltc disagrees with the interpretation of

[1:13:13] Trustee Stamford: the executive committee on on a policy issue then we can turn it around and say okay let's go to

[1:13:22] Trustee Stamford: council but to say that we don't have the authority as a trust council we do that's so that's where i

[1:13:30] Trustee Stamford: disagree well you know if

[1:13:32] Voice 5: i may

[1:13:34] Voice 5: respond i

[1:13:35] Trustee Stamford: just want to

[1:13:35] Voice 5: acknowledge something which is i i don't

[1:13:37] Voice 5: disagree in fact i'm with what trustee stanford just said in terms of drawing a distinction

[1:13:42] Voice 5: between uh the authority to develop the trust policy statement versus the um the application

[1:13:50] Voice 5: of it so the trustee stanford's right these are two different things they're conceptually

[1:13:56] Voice 5: different one doesn't the the latter doesn't necessarily inform the former but uh what i'm

[1:14:04] Voice 5: trying to say is my thoughts are cluttered with this which is that uh to the extent that policies

[1:14:10] Voice 5: are directive it's what i'm struggling with is it is you know are those questions that we do want to

[1:14:20] Voice 5: have in the hands of executive committee in all cases and uh in my mind it's you know yes we can

[1:14:29] Voice 5: have our methodology of how we apply and enforce the trust policy statement but to me it raises

[1:14:34] Voice 5: the question of what do we you know just the way i'm thinking about it it reflects back in my mind

[1:14:42] Voice 5: on being very uh clear in my own mind about what directive policies we would want whether it's

[1:14:50] Voice 5: executive committee or some other process to be in a sense enforceable uh on the ltcs

[1:14:57] Voice 5: so that's what i'm struggling with but i take i take sorry

[1:15:00] Trustee Stamford: well

[1:15:01] Voice 5: it's okay uh members of the public

[1:15:04] Voice 5: are welcome um but you know i uh i'm just trying to explain how my my my muddled thinking is

[1:15:13] Voice 5: operating on this thing but uh i i do want to acknowledge that yes trustee sanford the law

[1:15:18] Voice 5: law is right. Those are two different things.

[1:15:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah. I actually have a hard time separating

[1:15:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): what we're going to bring forward from a trust council perspective. But

[1:15:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): when it comes back to

[1:15:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): the questions you were asking about rights, I think what staff would prefer us not to do is

[1:15:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): wordsmith something and say, we want to see this policy changed with this word. So it would be okay

[1:15:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): for you to have a general statement saying, you know, we think this is something that needs to

[1:15:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): be addressed you don't have to um you know try to be very very specific so that gives staff

[1:15:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): more freedom to think about it and respond to your comments so

[1:15:56] Trustee Stamford: that's helpful yeah yeah

[1:15:58] Trustee Stamford: um so i'm

[1:16:00] Trustee Stamford: i'm happy to propose something but i'm hoping that we can have a five minute break so i can

[1:16:06] Trustee Stamford: just write it

[1:16:06] Trustee Stamford: down first would

[1:16:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): are you right do you want to is there other items you want

[1:16:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): to discuss on this or would you like to take a break and work on a resolution

[1:16:14] Trustee Stamford: i mean i i just

[1:16:16] Trustee Stamford: to respond to trustee bernardo that i i do understand the concerns of you know where

[1:16:24] Trustee Stamford: authority of directive versus advisory um i just what i did is go through okay what could this

[1:16:33] Trustee Stamford: indicate when i looked at the directive like in in terms of gambier for instance um

[1:16:40] Trustee Stamford: um and there's there's some areas that yeah i kind of pushed our envelope um but it didn't

[1:16:49] Trustee Stamford: have to and i i guess that's where my line was was could we take this angle or could we take a

[1:16:56] Trustee Stamford: an angle that was it's hard to find an example um that isn't

[1:17:06] Trustee Stamford: yeah i just looking through it i didn't find anything that would completely be a game changer

[1:17:13] Trustee Stamford: for gambier um there's some questions about subdivision but we get those everywhere because

[1:17:20] Trustee Stamford: we don't have full authority um you know when we're thinking of development and stuff like that

[1:17:26] Trustee Stamford: um it generally landed on different authorities each time i you know would like to have stronger

[1:17:33] Trustee Stamford: stronger language on transportation infrastructure.

[1:17:38] Trustee Stamford: But again, that's not really, outside of a sort of advocacy,

[1:17:42] Trustee Stamford: that's not really our authority.

[1:17:44] Trustee Stamford: So it did all fit within where I could see a fairly wide lane of options

[1:17:52] Trustee Stamford: on each of the directives.

[1:17:54] Trustee Stamford: They didn't curtail our particular community to an extent

[1:18:01] Trustee Stamford: that would be challenging but you know i didn't i i can't think of all scenarios

[1:18:07] Trustee Stamford: um so as i look through it that's how i i had it in my mind um yeah

[1:18:14] Voice 5: um i think part of this

[1:18:16] Voice 5: is just kind of intellectual temperament i'm just uh i i i don't have a problem with policies that

[1:18:23] Voice 5: are aspirational and that yeah or um and this is more like an administrative law sort of thing that

[1:18:31] Voice 5: or directive in the sense that they compel the local trust committee to seriously examine an

[1:18:39] Voice 5: issue and apply rational thought to it like and you have to create the record that you've actually

[1:18:44] Voice 5: put you know real mind power onto a thing i'm fine with that what i get uneasy with is the idea that

[1:18:53] Voice 5: there is any kind of outcome directed directive policy where it says look you must reach to that

[1:19:00] Voice 5: type of result and i was better prepared for this meeting i would be able to go to some specifics

[1:19:05] Voice 5: as it is all i'm able to do is express a generalized anxiety about it so i'm sorry

[1:19:11] Voice 5: about that now if i could ask trustee stamford about the the thing that you're thinking about

[1:19:15] Voice 5: working on um and and following up on what trustee patrick is saying sure some sort of general

[1:19:20] Voice 5: statement um uh is that are you looking to develop some language about the um no intention to affect

[1:19:28] Voice 5: the title of private property type issue because if not i might try to during the break i might try

[1:19:35] Voice 5: to sort of cobble together some language on that

[1:19:37] Trustee Stamford: well yeah yeah i was it was along those lines but

[1:19:40] Trustee Stamford: i don't think the word intention is accurate i think it's understanding the authority like it

[1:19:45] Trustee Stamford: it statutes outside of our our ability to um influence um but just a very general statement

[1:19:54] Trustee Stamford: statement acknowledging that there are people on the land um and yeah it right now is super vague

[1:20:07] Trustee Stamford: right just because i don't want it because i don't i know what morally more what i don't want

[1:20:14] Trustee Stamford: which is to define against the rights and title uh for first nations which is more clearly laid

[1:20:20] Trustee Stamford: out and it's not

[1:20:22] Trustee Stamford: intended to go against that it's just to acknowledge that people live here

[1:20:26] Trustee Stamford: um and and they have certain aspirations uh to be able to continue living and benefiting

[1:20:35] Trustee Stamford: on their private property yeah

[1:20:38] Voice 5: i i i hear you i i agree very

[1:20:41] Trustee Stamford: vague no

[1:20:42] Voice 5: no but i hear you i i don't

[1:20:44] Voice 5: think we should be you know and i certainly don't have any intention that we should be

[1:20:54] Voice 5: pulling back from the recognition of having to sort of reach a better working relationship

[1:21:04] Voice 5: in our role basically a working relationship with with the very real aboriginal rights and

[1:21:12] Voice 5: titles that are out there and some titles are already defined others are simply at the right

[1:21:21] Voice 5: stage that are in process of being defined the organization our organization is committed to

[1:21:27] Voice 5: working in concert with indigenous governing bodies to sort of get to a more cooperative form

[1:21:34] Voice 5: of governance that accounts for the proper spheres of the of the of indigenous government

[1:21:41] Voice 5: bodies and ourselves so no it's not you know pulling back from that stuff but i do think we

[1:21:48] Voice 5: We need to have in a trust policy statement, which is supposed to provide guidance.

[1:21:55] Voice 5: I don't think simply acknowledging a fact that people have private title and aspire to keep it and like use their property rights within the regulatory environment that we create.

[1:22:09] Voice 5: I don't think that goes far enough. I do think we do have to say because it's an interpretive question.

[1:22:15] Voice 5: What I'm really getting at is I think we want to be clear that nothing in the trust policy

[1:22:20] Voice 5: statement should be interpreted as implying any kind of rescission or qualification of

[1:22:29] Voice 5: the title to private property that people have today.

[1:22:35] Voice 5: Something along those lines.

[1:22:38] Voice 10: I

[1:22:38] Voice 5: think we have to address the interpretive question.

[1:22:41] Voice 5: you know so

[1:22:43] Trustee Stamford: that i think is a question for trust council more that i would like to see some

[1:22:48] Trustee Stamford: basic statement um acknowledging i i'm not even sure i want to go to private title because

[1:22:56] Trustee Stamford: it's not even our definition it it's created through a series of statutes

[1:23:02] Trustee Stamford: through the provincial government it's surprisingly vague

[1:23:09] Trustee Stamford: comparatively right well the land acts for crown land so it's almost like anything but right it's

[1:23:15] Trustee Stamford: i'm i'm actually quite surprised how it it's laying out but um i was thinking more just

[1:23:23] Trustee Stamford: that we this is not our um ability to

[1:23:35] Trustee Stamford: supersede private land title but we do have the authority to limit rights so it is important to

[1:23:43] Trustee Stamford: acknowledge that

[1:23:44] Voice 5: no i hear you that's what land planning is yeah

[1:23:47] Trustee Stamford: i'm

[1:23:48] Voice 5: not i'm not saying no we're

[1:23:50] Voice 5: not we're going to stop land planning no yeah yeah so

[1:23:53] Voice 5: yeah i'm just sort of

[1:23:54] Trustee Stamford: carrying down that

[1:23:55] Trustee Stamford: that same language but

[1:23:58] Voice 5: I think we need to at least have very general language

[1:24:02] Voice 5: that allows us to have the discussion of trust counsel that addresses the private

[1:24:08] Voice 5: title issue to say that trust policy statement shouldn't be interpreted as

[1:24:14] Voice 5: providing guidance or direction to either lend either to LTC's or staff

[1:24:21] Voice 5: staff that it's okay to sort of um step on the concept of title or to um minimize it or qualify

[1:24:32] Voice 5: it

[1:24:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): because

[1:24:34] Voice 5: that's the way that for one thing that's what the concern is out there yeah

[1:24:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): the

[1:24:39] Voice 5: problem is as you just adverted it's actually kind of none of our business

[1:24:44] Voice 5: in any like objectively like we don't actually have the authority to do it

[1:24:49] Voice 5: um but some of

[1:24:52] Trustee Stamford: the things we do that we've been given authority to does limit uh land title but

[1:24:58] Trustee Stamford: that's not a

[1:24:59] Voice 5: land title or just usage of usage yes that's quite different yeah well

[1:25:06] Trustee Stamford: let me read

[1:25:06] Trustee Stamford: yeah

[1:25:07] Voice 5: it's about it's really the title issue which we don't really have the discretion to

[1:25:12] Voice 5: do anything about yeah the

[1:25:13] Voice 5: problem is uh i've seen and you know i'm not going to get into

[1:25:18] Voice 5: examples about this uh i have seen um some things that um trust council and ltc not so much the ltcs

[1:25:30] Voice 5: but some on occasion i've seen some things that trust council has done which raise a question for

[1:25:36] Voice 5: in my mind as to whether or not we have the jurisdictions do it i mean let's be honest a

[1:25:42] Voice 5: close examination about whether or not we do or don't have the jurisdiction to do a thing

[1:25:46] Voice 5: uh isn't consistently applied and i could see i could see some local trust committees getting the

[1:25:58] Voice 5: wrong impression from some of the stuff that's in the trust policy statement i think that qualifying

[1:26:04] Voice 5: language is in a sense stating what should be obvious under the law in bc like we don't have

[1:26:11] Voice 5: the jurisdiction to deal with private title issue but i think just for the benefit of making

[1:26:16] Voice 5: making the

[1:26:16] Voice 5: public feel comfortable, and frankly, making some of the other stuff that's in it more digestible,

[1:26:24] Voice 5: I think we should be pretty direct about talking about the title question.

[1:26:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): I was going to, just to help the statement that has been read as we have our public questions on the Trust Policy Statement,

[1:26:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): it says the Islands Trust does not have any authority to alter land ownership or land tenure.

[1:26:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): Those are just the words that we've been using, so if that helps.

[1:26:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah,

[1:26:46] Voice 11: I like that.

[1:26:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): As we put forward a resolution right now, it's basically you'd be considering, if you're willing to say it, say you're recommending approval subject to conditions outlined below, and this is what you're preparing as a condition statement.

[1:27:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): is that a good

[1:27:10] Trustee Stamford: starting point trustee bernard because i i think this does jump naturally into

[1:27:15] Trustee Stamford: the wider question with the trust council so i don't want to yeah i resolve

[1:27:20] Trustee Stamford: it here today but

[1:27:22] Trustee Stamford: um i think

[1:27:23] Voice 5: yeah you know i think something like that uh is sufficient to surface the question

[1:27:29] Voice 5: on the terms that it should be surfaced so yeah it

[1:27:33] Voice 5: would work something like that so

[1:27:35] Trustee Stamford: can we get

[1:27:36] Trustee Stamford: get somebody to read that out because that sounded just fine i'm just going back

[1:27:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): what i just it was

[1:27:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): the islands trust does not have any authority to alter land ownership or land tenure so we would

[1:27:49] Trustee Stamford: say option here i'm going through recommendation number two uh that the gambier island local trust

[1:27:57] Trustee Stamford: committee recommend to the islands trust council that the proposed bylaw number 183 proceed

[1:28:02] Trustee Stamford: oh no was that the one number three yeah

[1:28:05] Trustee Stamford: yeah subject

[1:28:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): approved subject to oh

[1:28:10] Trustee Stamford: yeah so it's number

[1:28:11] Trustee Stamford: three um yeah number three so the the following recommendation that a statement a general

[1:28:20] Trustee Stamford: statement acknowledging blah blah blah blah be included in the policy statement so if we could

[1:28:30] Trustee Stamford: can get that perhaps

[1:28:32] Voice 5: we could actually uh follow up on what trustee sanford is saying before we

[1:28:36] Voice 5: could take a break to allow some time for that language to be prepared and um that will also

[1:28:43] Voice 5: give me a chance to have a quick look again you know front to the trust policy statement to see

[1:28:49] Voice 5: if anything jogs my memory about any directive policies that really um you know separate from

[1:28:57] Voice 5: my general abstract concern, which, you know, you're right, is better reserved for discussions

[1:29:03] Voice 5: at Trust Council. See if there's anything specifically that intersects with what we do

[1:29:09] Voice 5: here at Gambia that raise any concerns. Just for my own sake, so I can just double check that. So

[1:29:14] Voice 5: maybe we could take a break for 10 or 15

[1:29:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): minutes. I would say let's take a break for 15 minutes.

[1:29:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Stanford, were you going to work on something and send it to Lisa?

[1:29:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): No,

[1:29:24] Trustee Stamford: I liked what you had.

[1:29:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay. I can send her what I had the worst.

[1:29:27] Trustee Stamford: Yeah. And then if we could see it, then we can work from there.

[1:29:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[1:29:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay. All right.

[1:29:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): So if it's all right, we'll take a break for 15 minutes. Come back at quarter to

[1:29:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): 12.

[1:29:38] Voice 5: If that works.

[1:29:39] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:29:40] Voice 5: All

[1:29:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): right. Well, then we're recessed for 15 minutes. See you shortly.

[1:44:50] Voice 11: All right, trustees, are we all back?

[1:45:07] Voice 10: Trustee Bernardo, are you there?

[1:45:13] Voice 5: Yes, I'm here.

[1:45:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, so we're all back and at it.

[1:45:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): I did jot down what we were talking about and sent it to Lisa.

[1:45:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): I don't know if you have other ideas,

[1:45:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): or you want to just put that on the screen to work that conversation,

[1:45:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): or if you had further thoughts.

[1:45:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): Here it goes.

[1:45:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you, Lisa.

[1:45:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, trustees.

[1:45:59] Trustee Stamford: I think for me, the intent is right.

[1:46:01] Trustee Stamford: right i just hate putting something negative in um like that no i i would be that a general

[1:46:10] Trustee Stamford: statement about um

[1:46:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): authority the trust council's authority to yeah alter yeah something like that

[1:46:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): that would be go ahead and make specific i see lisa's typing away go ahead lisa

[1:46:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): i think it's the island's trust authority yeah i

[1:46:43] Trustee Stamford: prefer that i um

[1:46:45] Voice 5: I have to ask Trustee Stanford, the point actually is to make the negative statement. I mean, I think that's the comfort that people, I think, need, isn't it?

[1:47:01] Trustee Stamford: maybe but i would like to see those i would like to have the words like i do want it somewhat

[1:47:09] Trustee Stamford: hate to say aspirational but um sort of in the general flavor of how the the principles

[1:47:17] Trustee Stamford: that we're working with like so it'd be in the upper levels of the the policy statements so

[1:47:24] Trustee Stamford: So I'd like to have that flexibility to be able to word it.

[1:47:30] Trustee Stamford: It just seems,

[1:47:32] Trustee Stamford: well, I start negative.

[1:47:35] Voice 5: But yeah,

[1:47:37] Trustee Stamford: no, I understand.

[1:47:38] Voice 5: I mean, the whole point is to negative a thing that people are afraid of.

[1:47:42] Voice 5: And it seems that we do need to say something that

[1:47:48] Voice 5: that items trust does not have the authority.

[1:47:52] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[1:47:52] Trustee Stamford: I mean,

[1:47:53] Voice 5: the way it's written now, include a general statement about the Islands Trust authority to not alter.

[1:47:59] Voice 5: That doesn't, I'm sorry, that doesn't make sense.

[1:48:01] Trustee Stamford: Okay.

[1:48:02] Trustee Stamford: You don't have

[1:48:02] Voice 5: authority to not do a thing.

[1:48:05] Voice 5: You have authority to do a thing.

[1:48:08] Voice 5: So you have to say, include a general statement about the Islands Trust not having authority to alter, you know, something like that.

[1:48:19] Trustee Stamford: Anyway, Chair Patrick?

[1:48:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah, no, that would work.

[1:48:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): No, that's fine.

[1:48:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): I was just.

[1:48:24] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[1:48:26] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, I was just and I'm just hoping for something a little more big picture.

[1:48:34] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[1:48:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah. And well, the thing is,

[1:48:40] Voice 5: we're like as trustee, sorry, Chair Patrick.

[1:48:43] Voice 5: But as Chair Patrick said before, we're not wordsmithing what we'll

[1:48:48] Voice 5: come up with.

[1:48:49] Voice 5: We're just getting the idea across.

[1:48:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah. OK, that's good.

[1:48:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): And I

[1:48:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): was going to say, I'd encourage you to have ongoing conversations with the policy advisor, Jason Yeoman, because he's the one that's going to take all of these things and kind of convert them to conversation. So context will be helpful to him.

[1:49:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee Bernardo.

[1:49:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah,

[1:49:11] Voice 5: I'm fine with this, but I think I would like to add something as well. And I did go back and had a quick look at the directive policies, and it reminded me of why my comments before were so maddeningly vague in general.

[1:49:31] Voice 5: it's because uh the truth of it is the directive policies that are there my my reservation about

[1:49:39] Voice 5: that is on the general idea of how far directive policy should go that's not a that's not really

[1:49:46] Voice 5: a gambier specific thing that applies to kind of just like the you know the strategy of the

[1:49:54] Voice 5: trust policy statement and that's really a subject better for discussion and trust at the trust

[1:50:00] Voice 5: council level. I'm a little uneasy about saying go ahead, but add this language when I'm really

[1:50:09] Voice 5: thinking in the back of my mind, I'm not sure the strategy is right, but I'm also not saying,

[1:50:14] Voice 5: that doesn't mean I'm saying it's wrong. I mean, I'm being ambivalent. So it's a little hard to

[1:50:18] Voice 5: say, by the way, one of our trustees is ambivalent. So, you know, there's that. So what I,

[1:50:26] Voice 5: To address my generalized concern about this directive policy issue, I would like to suggest that we put something in or recommend that the trust policy include language to emphasize that the directive policies should be applied in a manner that respects the trust policy.

[1:50:57] Voice 5: a different local context of each local trust area and um that's the best i could come up with

[1:51:07] Voice 5: uh you know in those minutes that we had to get the point across that um yeah they should apply

[1:51:14] Voice 5: you know if you're going to adopt any directive policy it's going to apply to everywhere but

[1:51:18] Voice 5: i would just like um i would like sensitivity to be like the need for sensitivity and applying them

[1:51:26] Voice 5: to respecting the local context be expressed somewhere?

[1:51:31] Trustee Stamford: Can you finish?

[1:51:32] Trustee Stamford: I think Lisa didn't get the end of your-

[1:51:35] Voice 5: Okay.

[1:51:36] Voice 5: Include language to emphasize that directive policies

[1:51:38] Voice 5: be applied in a manner that respects

[1:51:41] Voice 5: the different local contexts of each local trust area.

[1:52:01] Voice 5: And I guess it should say include language

[1:52:03] Voice 5: to emphasize that directive policies should be applied.

[1:52:06] Voice 5: though

[1:52:16] Trustee Stamford: i mean i i think it does say that but obviously it needs more clarity on how it says

[1:52:22] Trustee Stamford: that yeah

[1:52:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): yeah and i and i would agree because i mean right now just says right now it just says

[1:52:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): should be consistent and it just says it should so that could be um we we talked about what that

[1:52:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): meant for interpretation but it's not in the document so i think it's a fair statement you

[1:52:41] Voice 5: know because what what i want us to get away from is um i wonder if there was actually nothing to

[1:52:46] Voice 5: to get away from. What I don't want us to do, I mean, this trust policy statement, if we get it

[1:52:51] Voice 5: across the line, it's going to be there for a while. These are not things that, although the

[1:52:55] Voice 5: legislation says you can change it each term, forget it. I mean, it's such a steep hill to climb.

[1:53:01] Voice 5: It's likely to be there for quite a long time. Trust councils are, you know, and trustees come

[1:53:07] Voice 5: and go, staff comes and goes. I wouldn't, I mean, there's so much in there. I wouldn't, I really

[1:53:14] Voice 5: want to have language of some sort in there that makes clear that the trust policy statement

[1:53:21] Voice 5: uh is not outcomes oriented it's not about trying to deliver specific outcomes

[1:53:27] Voice 5: everywhere uniformly across the trust area it's about addressing these specific issues

[1:53:32] Voice 5: in a sensitive way that leans in the direction of getting those outcomes but how you get there

[1:53:44] Voice 5: uh and what those outcomes look like in your local trust area will depend on what the needs

[1:53:49] Voice 5: and the situations are in that particular area so anyhow that's the idea behind that

[1:53:57] Voice 2: okay i just want

[1:53:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): to acknowledge someone has their hand up but this is very important conversation

[1:54:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): right now for the trustees to have so um i just wanted to acknowledge that i saw that but i'm

[1:54:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): not going to call upon someone in the general public right now while we're having this

[1:54:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): conversation so trustees i'll look to you or do you feel this is uh okay for now are you please

[1:54:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): satisfied to move forward and make this resolution yeah

[1:54:24] Trustee Stamford: and understanding that we still have ways to

[1:54:28] Trustee Stamford: go on this and that we will be talking about this at trust council

[1:54:31] Voice 10: but i do want to

[1:54:33] Voice 5: reiterate you

[1:54:34] Voice 5: know or uh confirm something that trustee stanford had said before you know like you know and you

[1:54:39] Voice 5: you know, I apologize for not having done it before the meeting, but I did have a look again

[1:54:43] Voice 5: at the trust policy statement, this directive policies. And I don't see, I really don't see

[1:54:48] Voice 5: anything that, you know, I want to put it on the record that specifically interferes with any

[1:54:54] Voice 5: direction or is a bad fit specifically for Gambier. It all, it will all come down to how

[1:55:02] Voice 5: these different things are applied, you know? So I don't have an objection on that basis. So.

[1:55:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay. Well, does someone wish to make this resolution then? Go ahead, Trustee Stanford.

[1:55:16] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee recommend to the Islands Trust Council

[1:55:20] Trustee Stamford: that proposed bylaw number 183 proceed subject to the following recommendations. Number one,

[1:55:27] Trustee Stamford: include a general statement about the Islands Trust not having authority to alter land ownership or

[1:55:32] Trustee Stamford: land tenure. And number two, include language to emphasize that directive policy should be applied

[1:55:38] Trustee Stamford: in a manner that respects the different local context

[1:55:41] Trustee Stamford: of each local trust area.

[1:55:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): Lisa, there's a quote there at the end of the first I

[1:55:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): that doesn't go there anymore.

[1:55:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): Is there a second to this motion?

[1:55:53] Voice 5: A second

[1:55:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): by Trustee Bernardo.

[1:55:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any discussion?

[1:55:58] Voice 5: I think we had it.

[1:56:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, then.

[1:56:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'll call the vote.

[1:56:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor, raise your hands.

[1:56:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): And that carries.

[1:56:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, trustees.

[1:56:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): So we're off to the next conversation.

[1:56:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's back to the group of 26 that we'll be having on this document.

[1:56:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): So thank you.

[1:56:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, we're going to keep proceeding forward then.

[1:56:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): We have the next item is item,

[1:56:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): we're going to come back to item 10.1 at 1 o'clock here.

[1:56:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): So we're moving forward to item 12.1,

[1:56:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): which is the discussion of accessory buildings memorandum.

[1:56:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): That's on page 93 of the agenda package, and I see Planner McGarger.

[1:56:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): So over to you.

[1:56:42] Planner McCargar: Yeah, so I'll just give a brief intro.

[1:56:45] Planner McCargar: This memo is a preliminary assessment of options related to accessory building regulations on Gambier Island

[1:56:52] Planner McCargar: and clarifies the roles of the Islands Trust, the SCRD, and the province.

[1:56:57] Planner McCargar: So just a bit of background.

[1:56:59] Planner McCargar: Ground, back in June at an LTC meeting, concerns were raised about accessory buildings constructed

[1:57:05] Planner McCargar: before principal dwelling, and a resolution was passed at that time requesting that staff return

[1:57:11] Planner McCargar: with options and jurisdictional roles. So the jurisdiction, Islands Trust regulates land use

[1:57:19] Planner McCargar: through zoning only. It does not issue building permits or enforce the BC Building Code.

[1:57:23] Planner McCargar: Code. The Sunshine Coast Regional District, the SCRD, is responsible for building permits,

[1:57:29] Planner McCargar: inspections, and building code enforcement and confirms zoning compliance with the Islands Trust

[1:57:35] Planner McCargar: through referral. And the province sets the BC Building Code and technical construction standards.

[1:57:42] Planner McCargar: So the current context under the Land Use By-law, accessory buildings are only permitted

[1:57:47] Planner McCargar: in conjunction with a principal use. Temporary construction-related structures are allowed.

[1:57:54] Planner McCargar: but current wording creates a little bit of ambiguity, so that could be cleaned up.

[1:58:00] Planner McCargar: So some options are to maintain the current framework,

[1:58:05] Planner McCargar: or option two would be clarify existing regulations in the land use bylaw to reduce any uncertainty.

[1:58:12] Planner McCargar: Option three is allow limited non-residential structures prior to a dwelling,

[1:58:17] Planner McCargar: so that would be a departure from what's currently in the land use bylaw.

[1:58:21] Planner McCargar: and option four is to consider a temporary non-enforcement approach so this uh memo was

[1:58:29] Planner McCargar: just intended to frame the issues and support uh further ltc discussion all

[1:58:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): right questions for

[1:58:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): the planner go ahead trustee stanford um

[1:58:40] Trustee Stamford: thank you for this i think it it really lays out the

[1:58:44] Trustee Stamford: the different scenarios.

[1:58:46] Trustee Stamford: And I can see other problems that have occurred

[1:58:51] Trustee Stamford: on other islands, how this has helped

[1:58:54] Trustee Stamford: or made it more difficult for residents to function.

[1:59:00] Trustee Stamford: And I think given that we are considered

[1:59:03] Trustee Stamford: a remote island access area,

[1:59:07] Trustee Stamford: all of Gambier Local Trust area is remote access.

[1:59:10] Trustee Stamford: um having some flexibility on and having some kind of building structure when you're looking at

[1:59:20] Trustee Stamford: a bare land which a lot of newcomers that's what they're looking at we don't have a ton

[1:59:26] Trustee Stamford: of development especially on gambier so um you know i i think we need to make some changes on how

[1:59:34] Trustee Stamford: how how it you know the reality on the ground is how this functions for people to be able to have

[1:59:40] Trustee Stamford: a small structure to access while they're working on their principal dwelling or just um you know

[1:59:49] Trustee Stamford: it can take years sometimes to understand and have the ability to build um on properties in

[1:59:57] Trustee Stamford: on these particular islands.

[2:00:00] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, I'm very happy to see that this was laid out the way it was.

[2:00:05] Trustee Stamford: So thank you.

[2:00:06] Trustee Stamford: I'm not ready to make a motion yet, but I want to hear more about what others think.

[2:00:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Bernardo.

[2:00:14] Voice 5: Yeah, when we got the memo, I got interested in it and dived into the Gambria LUB, and dizziness was the result.

[2:00:26] Voice 5: uh the and uh thank you for planning mccarger for helping me uh navigate some of the concepts in

[2:00:33] Voice 5: there um separate from whether or not and this whether or not the lub um gets tweaked in substance

[2:00:44] Voice 5: to um make it easier for or um residents to uh live in temporary shelters pending the construction

[2:00:54] Voice 5: of a full-on um residence um i think the language uh in the accessory that relates to accessory

[2:01:08] Voice 5: buildings could be very uh could benefit from being clarified uh because it is just

[2:01:14] Voice 5: there is a logic to it you can follow it you know the approach that we're taking is consistent with

[2:01:20] Voice 5: with what is in the LUB, but boy, it's kind of hard to sort of go through the various little

[2:01:27] Voice 5: sections to sort of decode what it all adds up to. The planners are familiar with it because

[2:01:32] Voice 5: they deal with it every day. But I think for somebody coming into it cold, it's pretty

[2:01:36] Voice 5: confusing. So I think just, I'm a strong advocate now because I was confused. We need to tighten up

[2:01:42] Voice 5: that language just to make whatever we're going to do with accessory dwellings in Gambier clearer,

[2:01:47] Voice 5: Just so it's just more transparent to people.

[2:01:51] Voice 5: I have to defer to Trustee Stanford, though, in terms of any suggestions about how the substance of the LUB in that respect could be improved.

[2:02:04] Voice 5: From her remarks just a few minutes ago, I gather Trustee Stanford's thinking some adjustment to the temporary shelter provision,

[2:02:17] Voice 5: vision, which I think now is limited to two years or something. I don't know, perhaps that's what

[2:02:22] Voice 5: we're getting into, but I would ask Trustee Stanford to elaborate. Thank you.

[2:02:27] Trustee Stamford: Well, my

[2:02:28] Trustee Stamford: understanding is we don't even have that really. And part of this issue is being around having a

[2:02:36] Trustee Stamford: structure without a principal use attached to the land or principal dwelling on the land.

[2:02:44] Trustee Stamford: um and i think that's part of what's caused some problems as well um and it's actually

[2:02:50] Trustee Stamford: occurred on keats as well where you know a small structure is being put up um and not necessarily

[2:02:58] Trustee Stamford: a dwelling but just i'll use a gazebo for example and then that's caused issues because there's

[2:03:07] Trustee Stamford: still no principal dwelling um and whether that's what we're aiming for each time even though it's

[2:03:14] Trustee Stamford: residential zoning so i um and i know that i got confused because having worked on the excess or

[2:03:22] Trustee Stamford: the associate islands associated islands we had that provision in there and i just thought it was

[2:03:29] Trustee Stamford: across all the local trust committee ocps um and didn't realize that it was really only in

[2:03:35] Trustee Stamford: associated um islands so i would like to see um um some added language for for an option um

[2:03:48] Trustee Stamford: planner mccarger do you have an addition yeah i

[2:03:52] Planner McCargar: just wanted to clarify um so there is the

[2:03:56] Planner McCargar: ability in the gambier land use bylaw

[2:03:59] Planner McCargar: to use um like a temporary shelter building if you have an

[2:04:05] Planner McCargar: an active building permit.

[2:04:06] Trustee Stamford: Yeah. Not

[2:04:08] Planner McCargar: if you don't. But so I think that there was some

[2:04:11] Planner McCargar: thinking around that when this was probably developed that you might need a building

[2:04:15] Planner McCargar: either to shelter like construction materials. So, you know, that type of thing, or that you

[2:04:21] Planner McCargar: might need somewhere to stay while you're building your home, but that is specifically attached to

[2:04:25] Planner McCargar: a building permit for principal dwelling.

[2:04:28] Trustee Stamford: Yeah. And, and although that that's, I think I really

[2:04:34] Trustee Stamford: understand in that direction. I also recognize that

[2:04:38] Trustee Stamford: given how expensive it is to build on

[2:04:42] Trustee Stamford: these islands, that expectation of

[2:04:46] Trustee Stamford: having a current building permit in place or two-year limit

[2:04:50] Trustee Stamford: I think is a bit too restrictive.

[2:04:54] Trustee Stamford: I'm hoping to see that this is stretched out

[2:04:58] Trustee Stamford: a little bit or we give a little bit more opportunity.

[2:05:02] Trustee Stamford: opportunity so um i was looking at um uh option three which is but it it does depend on how far

[2:05:20] Trustee Stamford: we can go with you know i assume it would have to be a minor project i'm not sure how much more we

[2:05:26] Trustee Stamford: can add to the uh current ocplub um it keeps going back to square one if we if there's a danger of

[2:05:33] Trustee Stamford: by going back to square one

[2:05:34] Trustee Stamford: if we keep adding stuff to it.

[2:05:37] Trustee Stamford: So, you know, that was my thoughts.

[2:05:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Bernard?

[2:05:43] Voice 5: Yeah, this is actually,

[2:05:46] Voice 5: in my rambling way,

[2:05:47] Voice 5: is going to be a question

[2:05:48] Voice 5: that is directed at Planner McCarger.

[2:05:52] Voice 5: I have kind of a,

[2:05:53] Voice 5: dealing with what Trustee Sanford

[2:05:55] Voice 5: has raised this issue.

[2:05:58] Voice 5: I've got kind of a logic problem here.

[2:06:02] Voice 5: If somebody has,

[2:06:04] Voice 5: if somebody builds

[2:06:06] Voice 5: builds or puts on their lot on gambier what they believe to be a temporary shelter pending the

[2:06:14] Voice 5: construction of a principal dwelling and it's it's not a shelter for storing equipment it's

[2:06:22] Voice 5: actually they're going to live in it doesn't that make it uh a principal dwelling that that's a

[2:06:31] Voice 5: principal use of the property like pending whatever change they do they they're there

[2:06:36] Voice 5: They have a residence. It just turns out it's a shack or a small little building.

[2:06:43] Voice 5: And my understanding from the meeting we had with the SDRG folks when we discussed this issue is that from their perspective, the bylaw was being actually observed because there's been some reports and problems over there.

[2:06:58] Voice 5: The issue really was that the building permits were being arguably the wrong form of building permit was being applied for, which is it was being applied for the cheaper accessory building permit as opposed to the building permit for building a principal residence.

[2:07:16] Voice 5: residents but it's if we get into a situation where somebody builds what looks like and they

[2:07:22] Voice 5: hope is going to be temporary but ends up they're living there five six ten years uh i i guess i'm

[2:07:30] Voice 5: struggling here with the idea as to whether or not any real change is required other than just

[2:07:35] Voice 5: clarifying the language if it turns out the temporary shelter that's just a matter of opinion

[2:07:40] Voice 5: if you're living there that's your principal dwelling is that how is that how the language

[2:07:47] Voice 5: which works now that's

[2:07:49] Planner McCargar: my understanding if you yeah if as long as your building meets the

[2:07:53] Planner McCargar: definition of a dwelling um then yes it's considered a dwelling whether you for the

[2:07:59] Planner McCargar: land use bylaw it's not concerned with whether you have an occupancy permit or whether you

[2:08:05] Planner McCargar: you know it was the building what building permit was taken out on the dwelling it's

[2:08:09] Planner McCargar: it's whether what the current use of the building is and if the current use is as a dwelling

[2:08:13] Planner McCargar: meets that definition, then yeah, it would be a principle.

[2:08:18] Voice 5: Could I ask a follow-up?

[2:08:21] Voice 5: Let's deal with a hypothetical here where somebody puts up some quick and dirty house

[2:08:26] Voice 5: on their lot.

[2:08:27] Voice 5: We'll call it, you know, the theory is it's temporary shelter pending building something

[2:08:31] Voice 5: bigger.

[2:08:33] Voice 5: Okay.

[2:08:34] Voice 5: For the time being, it gets treated as a principal residence.

[2:08:37] Voice 5: Now, it turns out that in this hypothetical, these folks want to actually build a proper

[2:08:42] Voice 5: house.

[2:08:42] Voice 5: It's just going to take them time to get the money together and get the project happening.

[2:08:49] Voice 5: At that point, it seems that the second dwelling that they're going to build would technically fall under the current language.

[2:09:01] Voice 5: It would be currently, that's an accessory to the little shelter, you know, the bigger house.

[2:09:08] Voice 5: that would be the the route by which it would be acceptable for the for the proper house to

[2:09:17] Voice 5: get built under our land use bylaw and that the weird situation is when they set up their

[2:09:25] Voice 5: temporary shelter they had to get a principal dwelling building permit for necessary d but

[2:09:34] Voice 5: then when they're going to build the proper house then they can go and apply for an accessory

[2:09:37] Voice 5: accessory uh is that um does that make any sense is that how it actually would work or is there

[2:09:44] Voice 5: some other way of um that the what will eventually be the larger principal dwelling um uh is there

[2:09:53] Voice 5: some other way of interpreting what that is under the lub uh while it's being built so

[2:10:00] Planner McCargar: we'd have to

[2:10:00] Planner McCargar: look at the specific zone because different zones are going to have different requirements and some

[2:10:04] Planner McCargar: Some zones would allow, and I think it also depends on the size of the property on Gambier,

[2:10:08] Planner McCargar: some zones and properties would allow two dwellings.

[2:10:12] Planner McCargar: So a principal dwelling and a guest cottage, there would be a size of the guest cottage.

[2:10:16] Planner McCargar: But if you lived on one of those properties and you had built your small little temporary

[2:10:24] Planner McCargar: shelter that you ended up living in and it fit within the parameters of what's permitted

[2:10:29] Planner McCargar: in a guest cottage, so it was the right size, and then you went and built your principal

[2:10:33] Planner McCargar: principal dwelling that would just become your main principal dwelling and then you would have

[2:10:37] Planner McCargar: your guest cottage if you are not permitted to have two dwellings on your lot and you

[2:10:44] Planner McCargar: built a smaller one and then you went on years later to build a large dwelling you could

[2:10:49] Planner McCargar: decommission the small dwelling and you could just make that a studio or you know a studio an art

[2:10:56] Planner McCargar: studio or whatever you would probably need to remove the kitchen and just decommission it as a

[2:11:01] Planner McCargar: a dwelling and then your main larger home that you've recently built would just become your

[2:11:06] Planner McCargar: principal dwelling and

[2:11:08] Voice 5: the the bylaw as currently drafted allows planners um when they're reviewing

[2:11:16] Voice 5: um you know somebody applies to the srd for a building permit and you guys end up looking at

[2:11:23] Voice 5: that application to see if it's in compliance um that process you just described that's all

[2:11:29] Voice 5: already enabled by the by the lub as as currently drafted yeah

[2:11:34] Planner McCargar: in our referral response we would

[2:11:35] Planner McCargar: just note that um if it was the example where they're not permitted to have two dwellings so

[2:11:40] Planner McCargar: in the referral response we would back we would say not permitted two dwellings um accessory

[2:11:47] Planner McCargar: building or original dwelling needs to be decommissioned before occupancy permit is

[2:11:51] Planner McCargar: granted or something like that

[2:11:52] Voice 5: okay thanks

[2:11:55] Trustee Stamford: uh

[2:11:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustee stanford yeah

[2:11:59] Trustee Stamford: i'm still not sure where

[2:12:00] Trustee Stamford: i'm going with this because i the scenario i'm thinking of is i i see it quite a bit here is

[2:12:07] Trustee Stamford: somebody builds a basic um shed and they camp on their land for years it's a summer camping spot

[2:12:18] Trustee Stamford: um does that countervene any of this or is that fine for them to keep doing that

[2:12:26] Trustee Stamford: they'll put a kitchen in um you know

[2:12:30] Trustee Stamford: just like for a barbecue and stuff they they have no service

[2:12:33] Trustee Stamford: there's no electricity um but they're using their property with a small structure um in order to

[2:12:43] Trustee Stamford: have a summer place no

[2:12:47] Planner McCargar: so that's that's getting into this idea of allowing an accessory building

[2:12:51] Planner McCargar: without a principal dwelling so no you know a picnic shelter or a storage building for

[2:12:58] Planner McCargar: your kayaks and that type of thing is not currently permitted yeah

[2:13:02] Trustee Stamford: without

[2:13:03] Planner McCargar: without a

[2:13:04] Planner McCargar: principal dwelling or principal or principal use established yeah

[2:13:07] Trustee Stamford: um so i don't know what the

[2:13:09] Trustee Stamford: ramifications of of why we would restrict that like what is the logical sequence of where that

[2:13:17] Trustee Stamford: could go in a negative place but that's kind of having that option um i'd like to see that

[2:13:29] Trustee Stamford: at some point. I mean, it's not super urgent or anything, but clarifying the language is

[2:13:36] Trustee Stamford: definitely a goal. But I do see a consideration of a different project, which would be

[2:13:43] Trustee Stamford: to consider that kind of land use that's a little lighter on the land and is how many properties are

[2:13:53] Trustee Stamford: They're used quietly, especially on a place like Gambier.

[2:13:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Bernardo?

[2:14:02] Voice 5: Yeah, that's what I was, when you were mentioning that, Trustee Stanford, that's what struck me,

[2:14:06] Voice 5: which is in terms of having environmental impact, the folks who, you know, want to build a shelter for their kind of rough and ready outdoor kitchen

[2:14:17] Voice 5: and their main activity is you know they've got some plant you know camping platform and they

[2:14:24] Voice 5: just kind of live there you know like that's way less impact on the environment than actually

[2:14:30] Voice 5: building a full-on house with a drainage system and all that kind of stuff um it's it sounds like

[2:14:38] Voice 5: um what we're talking about here is the possibility of putting in that type of

[2:14:47] Voice 5: let's call it camping glamping i don't know but that type of camping as a principal use

[2:14:55] Voice 5: and then that would enable them to have their little shed where they've got their camp

[2:14:59] Voice 5: stove or whatever they're doing um my only um qualifier there would be if if you're going to

[2:15:07] Voice 5: allow long-term camping in that form i think we need to have waste management provisions in there

[2:15:15] Voice 5: to take into account that you know some basic you know you need to have an outhouse at least

[2:15:21] Voice 5: you know or something you know uh to cope with that

[2:15:25] Trustee Stamford: yeah and again i'm not sure if going down

[2:15:29] Trustee Stamford: that pathway what the implications would be but yeah like we're talking about a biffy um i mean

[2:15:35] Trustee Stamford: those are currently permitted on the properties here um within certain stipulations but um

[2:15:42] Trustee Stamford: Um, I don't know if there's, you could put term time limits, you know,

[2:15:47] Trustee Stamford: there's so much, I don't know about that. Um,

[2:15:50] Trustee Stamford: but is it worth looking at option two,

[2:15:53] Trustee Stamford: which is to clarify the regulations, the current regulations, and then,

[2:15:59] Trustee Stamford: um, then look at, um,

[2:16:06] Trustee Stamford: option three as a more long-term project.

[2:16:10] Trustee Stamford: project um and

[2:16:14] Voice 5: and if i can ask trustee stanford the goal there would be to um effectively

[2:16:21] Voice 5: legitimize current practices on some of these properties where people are more or less camping

[2:16:26] Voice 5: there as opposed to um anything else yeah

[2:16:31] Trustee Stamford: i i just think that's the reality on the ground um

[2:16:34] Trustee Stamford: and you want to be like it just i just know so many more people now are not in a position to

[2:16:42] Trustee Stamford: be able to build it with any short timeline so they're using their property in a limited way

[2:16:50] Trustee Stamford: and then almost once they're there they recognize just how complicated it is to

[2:16:57] Trustee Stamford: build on Gambier so almost their use is changes maybe their intent is to build but

[2:17:04] Trustee Stamford: once they realize how hard it is then they become limited on what they can do again I don't know

[2:17:11] Trustee Stamford: what the implications are of this. But it's something worth looking at. Certainly don't

[2:17:19] Trustee Stamford: want to see it stall the OCP process. I didn't get a chance to look at our minor project list.

[2:17:28] Trustee Stamford: But if we can clarify the current language as sort of the primary goal right now,

[2:17:36] Trustee Stamford: and then look at a more flexible approach to land use

[2:17:41] Trustee Stamford: in terms of being able to camp on your property.

[2:17:45] Trustee Stamford: And this, you know, we have to obviously define it as, you know,

[2:17:48] Trustee Stamford: no commercial camping, those kind of things.

[2:17:50] Trustee Stamford: You know, all that kind of stuff has to be considered.

[2:17:54] Trustee Stamford: So that's where my thoughts now.

[2:17:56] Trustee Stamford: I don't know if staff want to jump in and say that's a really crazy idea

[2:18:00] Trustee Stamford: it or if it happens somewhere else or um i just can see it coming out more and more

[2:18:06] Trustee Stamford: oh

[2:18:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): i see we've uh and then yeah

[2:18:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): warren dingman's attention yeah you

[2:18:12] Trustee Stamford: might have something to say

[2:18:13] Trustee Stamford: about it so

[2:18:16] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: chair on gabriola they have within their land use bylaw regulations where travel

[2:18:20] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: trailers or tents up to two can be used for camping for 60 days continuous for 90 days

[2:18:27] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: throughout the year and so that is exactly the situation that's being described here

[2:18:33] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: and uh for the most part that works quite well it's a reasonable regulation and uh property

[2:18:40] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: owners take advantage of it and uh i would say there's been no ongoing problems or concerns

[2:18:47] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: with that type of use

[2:18:48] Trustee Stamford: that's cool and

[2:18:52] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: that's the best example that we currently have yeah

[2:18:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think

[2:18:56] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: it works well.

[2:18:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): Gabriel, are they allowed a structure to lock things up?

[2:19:03] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: No, they are not.

[2:19:05] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: But it can be interpreted that as this permitted use, almost like a principal permitted use of these two travel trailers or accessory buildings are allowed, that it is not unreasonable to have a power shed or septic installed just to accommodate that use.

[2:19:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, thanks.

[2:19:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustee bernardo right

[2:19:27] Voice 5: um two questions one for um manager digman and the other one uh

[2:19:32] Voice 5: dingman and the other one for uh planning mccarger um on gabriola uh is that um provision

[2:19:42] Voice 5: that permits that usage does it come with any conditions in terms of requirements uh in terms

[2:19:49] Voice 5: of dealing with waste management you know um or is it just left on its own uh and then the question

[2:19:56] Voice 5: for planet mccarger is this kind of groping towards finding some uh permission structure for

[2:20:03] Voice 5: the camping on gambier um how much work is that in terms of trying to adapt say something that

[2:20:11] Voice 5: they've got over in gabriola for gambier because as jesse sanford was hinting we don't want to

[2:20:20] Voice 5: derail current work uh by kind of getting distracted by this thing it'd be great if

[2:20:26] Voice 5: if we could include it as part of the OCP

[2:20:29] Voice 5: and then LUB revision that goes with the OCP changes,

[2:20:35] Voice 5: but especially after the CAO's report a little while ago,

[2:20:40] Voice 5: we need to be sensitive about not overdoing it

[2:20:42] Voice 5: in terms of creating problems for staff,

[2:20:45] Voice 5: like dishing out one good idea after another.

[2:20:49] Voice 5: So two questions, maybe Mr. Dingman,

[2:20:53] Voice 5: and you can tell us about what kind of sanitary practices

[2:20:56] Voice 5: are required in Gabriola for campers.

[2:21:01] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So none, if you're just going to have the temporary use.

[2:21:05] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: There's no provision for that.

[2:21:06] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: There's only a provision if you're going to use it as a temporary residence,

[2:21:09] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: as in you're going to build your dwelling.

[2:21:12] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: Then you're supposed to have it, if you're going to use it as a residence,

[2:21:14] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: you're supposed to have it screened, and then you need to have septic.

[2:21:18] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: For just the temporary use, I mean, it was assumed that you're going to use

[2:21:22] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: the facilities within the trailer and have it pumped out but as I said many

[2:21:29] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: they do it anyway many install septic anyway because it's just more convenient

[2:21:33] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: to have it on site with the travel trailer that they do often do use but

[2:21:39] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: it's not required in the land use bylaw for that temporary use you know again

[2:21:45] Voice 5: there's in a different situation it's like a no road access so um travel

[2:21:49] Voice 5: travel trailer, our camping, if we went that direction, it'd have to be adjusted.

[2:21:57] Voice 5: Plan Ricard, the workload burden?

[2:22:02] Planner McCargar: Yeah, through the chair. I think that as I laid out in the

[2:22:05] Planner McCargar: memo, there is kind of two options. I mean, I think if you're going to go with option two and

[2:22:10] Planner McCargar: you only want to clarify the current regulations and you're not making any changes, that is a

[2:22:15] Planner McCargar: pretty simple fix. And I think that could easily be rolled into the LUB revisions. You know,

[2:22:20] Planner McCargar: know there's probably going to be some other technical amendments that are rolled into that

[2:22:24] Planner McCargar: as well when we whenever we do a land use bylaw revision we try to roll a lot of that in if you're

[2:22:32] Planner McCargar: looking at more of a minor project to start thinking about some of these other considerations

[2:22:38] Planner McCargar: around accessory buildings and camping and that kind of thing then I think that's a conversation

[2:22:44] Planner McCargar: we should probably have with planners Zupanek to see what that would look like to amend the

[2:22:48] Planner McCargar: the project charter to include an exploration of that or whether it does just make more sense to

[2:22:55] Planner McCargar: make it its own minor project and we could kind of go from there. All

[2:23:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): right well I think regardless

[2:23:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think there's always an important scoping conversation to have what are we trying to

[2:23:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): achieve and what's the best way to go forward so go ahead Trustee Stanford.

[2:23:17] Trustee Stamford: Well I'll just make a

[2:23:18] Trustee Stamford: sorry, I haven't written this

[2:23:20] Trustee Stamford: because I did want to have the discussion

[2:23:23] Trustee Stamford: first, is

[2:23:24] Trustee Stamford: I would

[2:23:27] Trustee Stamford: move that the Gambier Island

[2:23:29] Trustee Stamford: Local Trust Committee

[2:23:32] Trustee Stamford: add

[2:23:33] Trustee Stamford: option one,

[2:23:35] Trustee Stamford: was it? No, option two,

[2:23:39] Trustee Stamford: which

[2:23:39] Trustee Stamford: was retain current approach

[2:23:41] Trustee Stamford: with cleric. God, other cat.

[2:23:45] Voice 10: Did you

[2:23:45] Trustee Stamford: just turn me off?

[2:23:46] Trustee Stamford: a little we

[2:23:48] Voice 10: hear you

[2:23:49] Trustee Stamford: so i can't swear at the cat um um so option two um

[2:23:59] Trustee Stamford: as a goal now so i moved the gambier and local trust committee um add option to retain current

[2:24:09] Trustee Stamford: approach with clarifying regulations as part of the technical review of the Gambier OCP LUB

[2:24:19] Trustee Stamford: project? I'll

[2:24:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): look to staff. Is that satisfactory? Should

[2:24:29] Planner McCargar: I refer to the memo? I do wonder if you

[2:24:34] Planner McCargar: wanted to just maybe, I'm not super familiar with this project charter for this particular project,

[2:24:41] Planner McCargar: but if it would make sense to say amend the project charter to add, just so that we're

[2:24:46] Planner McCargar: kind of clear, or whether the project charter already includes technical amendment.

[2:24:51] Trustee Stamford: It does include a technical review, whether it's being done or not.

[2:24:54] Planner McCargar: I'm not sure,

[2:24:55] Planner McCargar: that's the part I haven't seen. Then it's, I think it's probably fine as is.

[2:25:01] Trustee Stamford: Okay. Do you want, I think it's important that I reference, as outlined in the memorandum

[2:25:10] Trustee Stamford: dated January 27th 26 regarding accessory building regulations before it's seconded

[2:25:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm going to wait for Lisa to put it up on the screen I really

[2:25:25] Trustee Stamford: like that we do this we don't

[2:25:27] Trustee Stamford: do this at the regional district and I'm just discombobulated all the time if I don't see the

[2:25:33] Trustee Stamford: the motion on the screen whenever

[2:26:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): you're ready Lisa here it comes

[2:26:08] does

[2:26:20] Trustee Stamford: that give adequate direction it

[2:26:31] Planner McCargar: looks clear to me yeah okay okay

[2:26:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): if you're satisfied let you

[2:26:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): read that again trustee stanford i

[2:26:37] Trustee Stamford: move that the gambier and local trust committee add option two

[2:26:40] Trustee Stamford: would retain current approach with clarified regulations as outlined in the memorandum dated

[2:26:47] Trustee Stamford: january 27 26 regarding accessory building regulations as part of the technical review

[2:26:55] Trustee Stamford: view of the Gambier OCP LUB project. It's ugly as all get out, but with

[2:27:02] Voice 5: the right level

[2:27:03] Trustee Stamford: of commas

[2:27:04] Trustee Stamford: and punctuations, I think it could

[2:27:07] Voice 5: work. It's clear enough for me to second it.

[2:27:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right. Seconded by Trustee Bernardo. Any discussion? I'll call the vote. All those in

[2:27:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): favor, raise your hands. And that carries. All right. Trustees, we're rapidly closing in on 1230.

[2:27:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): um i think we're scheduled to take a lunch break if um we probably oh go ahead trustee stamford

[2:27:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): i

[2:27:30] Trustee Stamford: did want to do another motion oh

[2:27:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): okay go ahead yeah

[2:27:33] Trustee Stamford: um i move that the gambier local trust

[2:27:36] Trustee Stamford: committee um uh add or i'm not sure if i should say potentially add option three of the memorandum

[2:27:52] Trustee Stamford: dated January 27th, 26, regarding accessory building regulations

[2:28:06] Trustee Stamford: to the minor project list.

[2:28:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): Is it a minor or a future project list?

[2:28:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): Or a future project list.

[2:28:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think it's a future project list.

[2:28:15] Voice 10: Yeah.

[2:28:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, I'll give Lisa a moment, and when she's ready,

[2:28:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): she'll bring that up on the screen.

[2:28:24] Voice 5: I'm not sure if it's...

[2:28:25] Voice 5: Just as a technical matter, isn't it more efficient

[2:28:31] Voice 5: should just roll it into what's happening now for the ocp lbp it

[2:28:34] Trustee Stamford: is what i'm i really should be

[2:28:37] Trustee Stamford: saying is that we discuss the implications of rolling in option uh three into the current

[2:28:49] Trustee Stamford: ocp project sorry lisa um then you're in that option three or um look review can we say that

[2:29:00] Trustee Stamford: that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[2:29:02] Trustee Stamford: review the implications of adding option three

[2:29:08] Trustee Stamford: as outlined in the, regarding extended future,

[2:29:14] Trustee Stamford: take out future projects list

[2:29:17] Trustee Stamford: and put in to the current OCP LUB,

[2:29:23] Trustee Stamford: Gambier Island OCP LUB project.

[2:29:28] Voice 5: And just a clarification,

[2:29:30] Voice 5: The theory here is that that is the basically direction or request to Planner Zubinick to come back to us to say, well, give us her perspective on the feasibility of doing that.

[2:29:45] Trustee Stamford: So we could ask staff?

[2:29:47] Voice 5: Yeah.

[2:29:47] Trustee Stamford: Ask staff to review the implications?

[2:29:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yes.

[2:29:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[2:29:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): Request staff to review.

[2:29:53] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[2:29:59] Voice 10: Okay.

[2:30:00] Voice 10: is that clear by

[2:30:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): deadline or that would just happen i guess yeah

[2:30:04] Trustee Stamford: everything's coming up to

[2:30:07] Trustee Stamford: the end of year end of term

[2:30:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): at this

[2:30:10] Trustee Stamford: point um all

[2:30:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): right is that

[2:30:14] Trustee Stamford: i think i'm willing to just

[2:30:16] Trustee Stamford: leave it like this and then try and make sure it doesn't get lost

[2:30:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): we'll go ahead and read that resolution if you're

[2:30:23] Voice 5: sorry let me just double check with

[2:30:26] Voice 5: with uh planner mccarver to make sure that this does the trick in terms of um providing the the

[2:30:32] Voice 5: kind of guidance to planner zupanik that you'd need to sort of do what trustee stanford would

[2:30:37] Voice 5: like i

[2:30:40] Planner McCargar: think so did you want staff to come back with um sort of the implications of of this or

[2:30:47] Planner McCargar: adding it to the future projects list or

[2:30:50] Trustee Stamford: yeah yeah

[2:30:51] Planner McCargar: do

[2:30:52] Trustee Stamford: i need to say that yeah

[2:30:53] Planner McCargar: i think maybe just

[2:30:56] Trustee Stamford: or so take out the period i'm so bad at this after all these years or um um for it to go on the

[2:31:08] Trustee Stamford: or

[2:31:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): adding it to or

[2:31:10] Trustee Stamford: adding it to the future projects list yeah

[2:31:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): it's a in right now there

[2:31:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): is a training class on how to craft resolutions i've

[2:31:23] Trustee Stamford: probably taken like five classes and we still

[2:31:25] Trustee Stamford: still just completely lose it when it comes to this all

[2:31:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): right so go ahead and read that again

[2:31:32] Trustee Stamford: okay that the gambier island local trust committee request staff to review implications of adding

[2:31:37] Trustee Stamford: option three as outlined in the memorandum dated january 27 2026 regarding accessory building

[2:31:43] Trustee Stamford: regulations to the current gambier island ocplub project or adding it to the future

[2:31:51] Trustee Stamford: projects list. Can we just put in or alternatively

[2:31:57] Trustee Stamford: adding it? And I'm not reading it

[2:32:01] Trustee Stamford: again.

[2:32:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yep. No, you do not. Is there a second? I second.

[2:32:05] Voice 2: Second

[2:32:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): by Trustee Bernardo. Any discussion? Call the vote. Then all those in favor.

[2:32:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): That carries. Okay. Now it's 1230.

[2:32:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yes. And we should take a break till 1 o'clock.

[2:32:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): And at 1 o'clock we'll reconvene and go back to item 10.1 on the agenda

[2:32:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): when Planner Dubnyk joins us.

[2:32:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): So with that, we are recessed for lunch till one o'clock.

[2:32:29] Voice 11: Thank you.

[2:32:31] Voice 11: Hi, Sonia.

[2:55:32] Voice 11: Hi, Lisa.

[2:55:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): How's my audio?

[2:55:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): Your audio's good.

[2:55:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay, thanks.

[2:55:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): I was having problems with this headset.

[2:55:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): We're just on a break until one.

[2:55:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): Yeah, perfect.

[2:55:48] Voice 8: That's what I asked for.

[2:55:51] Voice 8: Chair Patrick asked if we thought the meeting would go until one.

[2:55:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): How far are you guys in the agenda?

[2:55:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): um just a second actually

[2:56:11] Voice 8: just finished um marla's memorandum so we were going to come

[2:56:16] Voice 8: to staff reports you know with the annual meeting schedule and um notification bylaws so they're not

[2:56:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): done like they're not just waiting for me then no no

[2:56:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): okay perfect yeah this is as early as i could

[2:56:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): no

[2:56:31] Voice 8: after you they probably have another um it's hard to say but uh 20 minutes or so a half an

[2:56:39] Voice 8: an hour an hour okay

[2:56:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): and there's no uh trustee what's his name trustee bernardo's here yeah

[2:56:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): oh is he i don't see him on the no

[2:56:49] Voice 8: he must have um excuse me he was here okay yeah

[2:57:02] Voice 11: now we'll see how this one goes yeah good luck all

[2:59:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): right i see it's one o'clock looking to see

[2:59:47] Trustee Patrick (probable): See who all is back.

[2:59:55] Trustee Stamford: Rusty Stanford.

[2:59:58] Trustee Stamford: I'm just going to.

[3:00:00] Trustee Stamford: But I'll take my video off while I continue eating.

[3:00:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm a little concerned.

[3:00:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): It looks like Trustee Bernardo has dropped out of the meeting,

[3:00:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): but maybe he'll come right back.

[3:00:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): Hi, Chair Patrick.

[3:00:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): Hello, welcome.

[3:00:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): Thanks for accommodating my limited availability today.

[3:00:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): No, thank you very much.

[3:00:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): There we are, Trustee Bernardo.

[3:00:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay.

[3:00:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[3:00:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, I think we're all back.

[3:00:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Stanford such as leaving her video off for right now.

[3:00:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): Excuse me.

[3:00:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): We're gonna, we're going a little back in time.

[3:00:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): We had previously left off at just completed 12.1,

[3:00:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): but we're going back now to item 10.1,

[3:00:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): the major project for Gambier official community plan

[3:00:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): and land use bylaw targeted review.

[3:00:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): There's a staff report beginning on page 66

[3:01:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): of the agenda package.

[3:01:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): And I'm gonna turn this over to Planner Zucanac.

[3:01:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): Alright, thank you so much. So the summary of this report is to present to you the Squamish Nation comments regarding the draft shoreline development permit area and a draft heritage conservation area, which you're seeing for the first time, but we've discussed the concept of this numerous times over the last year.

[3:01:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): year. So that is included in this staff report for discussion. Also recommending some changes

[3:01:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): to your project charter to really hone in on a narrower set of objectives and deliverables

[3:01:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): that can actually be achieved before March 2027, which is the end of major project funding

[3:01:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): funding for the Gambier OCP review project.

[3:01:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): Following that, any remaining work that has not been completed on this project would

[3:02:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): need to be undertaken as a minor local trust committee project, sort

[3:02:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): of standalone projects based on future LTC direction.

[3:02:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): And because this is an election year

[3:02:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): for all local governments in British Columbia, there is a real urgency or sense

[3:02:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): of urgency to get as much as done as possible done um prior to september of this year so i think the

[3:02:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): best way to move through the staff report is um going through the recommendations there are four

[3:02:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): here for your discussion and i will be keen to take direction from the local trust committee

[3:02:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): on how you'd like to proceed after today so the first bit is you have the annotated copy of a

[3:02:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): draft shoreline development permit area and the draft heritage conservation area as attachments

[3:02:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): so Squamish Nation have concluded their referral of these drafts

[3:03:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): and they are substantially supportive of these being implemented as part of the recommendations

[3:03:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): to move forward with the OCP and LUB amendments.

[3:03:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): The comments are in the sidebar for your information.

[3:03:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): If this draft becomes part of an engagement package,

[3:03:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): hopefully it's easy enough for members of the public

[3:03:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): or your advisory planning commission to also follow along

[3:03:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): and see the scope of the comments and proposed recommendations

[3:03:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): that are coming directly from the Squamish Nation staff.

[3:03:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): staff. I've also included the advisory planning commission comments for the draft shoreline

[3:03:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): development permit area so that you have both on the same document for future referral

[3:03:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): moving forward in terms of changes that you might wish to consider.

[3:03:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): So we'll get back to that in a bit. Your business case to complete this project has been submitted

[3:04:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): to Trust Council and it's subject to approval in March 2026 just for information. So we

[3:04:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): we will know more after trust council meeting about the allocated fund that we have access to

[3:04:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): to complete this project. The key is your project charter is the mechanism by which staff take their

[3:04:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): direction and how to proceed moving forward. And currently, the project charter requires

[3:04:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): requires significant updates in order to for us to proceed so staff is recommending a much more

[3:04:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): focused work program so that we can just secure some progress on this OCP review before this fall

[3:04:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): and so page 69 of the staff report or recommendation number one includes the draft

[3:04:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): text that we're suggesting to really hone in on the deliverables from march 2026 until september

[3:05:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): 2026 and what we're suggesting is the piece that's really outstanding could be that could

[3:05:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): be undertaken is focusing on an amendment to your official community plan that really implements and

[3:05:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): is consistent with the swamish nation recommendations a one two four and five from the

[3:05:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): the engagement summary, which is updating the OCP with the Squamish Nation language references

[3:05:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): and appropriate land acknowledgement, specific commitments to reconciliation

[3:05:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): as sort of the overarching framework for all policy guidance and explicit recognition of the

[3:05:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): impacts of the existing patterns of settlement, protected areas and residential development

[3:05:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): on their rights and title so as a discrete mini amendment to the official community plan

[3:05:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): that draft language can be presented to you in march for consideration of first reading and we

[3:06:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): could try to get at least that moving forward as far as we could before september prior to the

[3:06:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): elections then the second piece of that for an amendment to the project charter in terms of the

[3:06:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): work plan would be to refer the draft DPA and the heritage conservation area language including the

[3:06:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): comments to date to your newly appointed advisory planning commission members immediately so that

[3:06:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): there is a chunk of time between now and the summer to solicit any input and spend the summer

[3:06:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): which seems to be the most appropriate time of year on a limited scope of public engagement for

[3:06:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): that so that it's simply collecting information for the local trust committee after the elections

[3:06:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): in terms of consideration of next steps on how to implement those comments and considerations

[3:07:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): so really the ocp bylaw and amendments reflecting squamish nations sort of policy directives plus

[3:07:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): this referral and public engagement piece would be working in tandem they are of course completely

[3:07:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): completely connected. However, in terms of what could be implemented first after the elections

[3:07:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): would be hopefully an adoption of that OCP bylaw, because it's highly unlikely that that could

[3:07:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): happen before September. However, perhaps it could. And then starting January 2027,

[3:07:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): that review of all this public information that's been collected and a review of those draft

[3:07:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): documents to make sure that they're still relevant could then further inform next steps on how this

[3:07:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): the remainder of the amendments might need to be rolled out um let's see so recommendation number

[3:08:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): one is then specific to amendments to the project charter which are necessary today

[3:08:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): to bring clarity to what it is that we intend to achieve between march and september and then

[3:08:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): onwards. We're really projecting the ideal of what it is that we're hoping to achieve before

[3:08:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): the end of the next fiscal, which is March 2027. Recommendation number two is directing staff then

[3:08:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): to bring forward the language in the official community plan that could implement the Squamish

[3:08:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): Nation recommendations that we just described for your consideration of first reading perhaps

[3:08:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): perhaps as early as March.

[3:08:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): Recommendation number three is simply to just post

[3:08:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): the annotated draft documents to the project website

[3:08:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): so they become publicly available for reference.

[3:08:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): However, recommendation four is to specifically refer those documents

[3:09:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): to the newly appointed Advisory Planning Commission

[3:09:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): for review and comment,

[3:09:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): as well as request some clarity on their preferred

[3:09:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): public engagement priorities regarding the remainder

[3:09:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the OCP project and the timeline and the level of participation that the APC would wish to

[3:09:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): recommend to the local trust committee for consideration and next steps. I think it's

[3:09:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): probably best to leave it at that so that we can save enough time for any specific technical

[3:09:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): questions regarding the drafts that are attached to the staff report or the specifics of any of

[3:09:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): these recommendations uh before you decide how to proceed uh

[3:09:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustees questions for the planner

[3:09:55] Trustee Stamford: that's a lot

[3:09:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): um

[3:10:01] Trustee Stamford: i'll start i just went back to the project charter and you see there's significant

[3:10:07] Trustee Stamford: amendments to the charter but i see basically what we have always requested what what was

[3:10:18] Trustee Stamford: taken off in terms of topics in scope is still um first nations perspectives

[3:10:29] Trustee Stamford: marine use heritage advocacy policies um we still are looking at public docks and forestry

[3:10:44] Trustee Stamford: ecosystem that's still the objectives but it's no longer in scope is that

[3:10:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): right so through the

[3:10:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): chair if i could just clarify recommendation number one what's everything that's in quotations

[3:10:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): starting from march 2020 okay to the end of ocp and lub amendments that would be

[3:11:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): uh for the deliverables in the work plan to really clarify what's happening between now and september

[3:11:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): and what's happening between september and um you know the inauguration of the next local trust

[3:11:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): committee um in january the remainder of the project charter can remain the same we just

[3:11:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): need to specify the actual deliverables and timeline for what can be achieved ideally

[3:11:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): and again this could be not feasible however staff feels strongly that this could be advanced

[3:11:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): given the time okay so if if there's a political will to advance that ocp bylaw as a discrete

[3:11:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): great separate um first step so this is a first stop it doesn't change the objectives of the

[3:11:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): overall project no okay those will all be subject to review after the elections anyway okay um

[3:11:59] Trustee Stamford: because that's good yeah i wasn't clear on that um okay and then the other thing um

[3:12:07] Trustee Stamford: Um, it, well, if we're going to keep going with it, I'm just really wanting to think

[3:12:19] Trustee Stamford: about how this is going to look to the community.

[3:12:22] Trustee Stamford: If there's, um, no matter how or how much we get done, it would really help if we had,

[3:12:30] Trustee Stamford: and it's just visual, is, is some kind of document that they're seeing as a draft, but

[3:12:38] Trustee Stamford: but it looks like something they could read.

[3:12:43] Trustee Stamford: So it has some formatting in it,

[3:12:45] Trustee Stamford: has some colors, has some photographs.

[3:12:47] Trustee Stamford: I'm not sure if I'm asking the world for this,

[3:12:50] Trustee Stamford: but right now, as soon as all this stuff comes out,

[3:12:55] Trustee Stamford: we lose a good percentage of our interested parties

[3:13:00] Trustee Stamford: just because they can't read it.

[3:13:01] Trustee Stamford: It's just not in a format that's readable.

[3:13:04] Trustee Stamford: And I think one of the goals of this OCP project

[3:13:07] Trustee Stamford: project has been a document that's readable and part of that is the visual presentation of it

[3:13:15] Trustee Stamford: so I'm hoping that there'd be some kind of formatting even if it's just the start of

[3:13:21] Trustee Stamford: the project in terms of delivering it to the community saying this is what it's going to

[3:13:26] Trustee Stamford: look like so they can sort of hook into it a little bit more easily um I I that is sort of

[3:13:33] Trustee Stamford: of a side issue but as i'm going through this um i i i need something to give them that they can

[3:13:42] Trustee Stamford: read um does that make sense kind

[3:13:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): of absolutely but in terms of how that's rolled out in terms

[3:13:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): of the amount of changes that the ocp would then need to be um you know to reflect just just the

[3:13:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): optics of what it looks like with the same text is one thing i'm suggesting literally these four

[3:14:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): for A1 through A5, five

[3:14:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): targeted areas of your existing OCP

[3:14:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): that need to be amended because I'm not sure how long it's going to take

[3:14:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): for that model OCP and land use by-law to come to fruition

[3:14:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): because this

[3:14:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): is taking much longer than anyone expected.

[3:14:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): So to show good faith to the nation that this engagement process

[3:14:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): that you invested so heavily in has resulted in at least those by-law amendments

[3:14:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): amendments in the OCP, to show that the language is there, the formatting and how that's going to

[3:14:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): look could change in that next rendition. Absolutely, we would want that, because

[3:14:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): we have some great ideas about the readability and how that could look for Gambier. But in the

[3:14:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): meantime, it seems premature to do that, because we have to incorporate all your existing text,

[3:14:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): because

[3:14:56] Voice 10: these

[3:14:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): five pieces are a significant amount of work to advance in just the next two months,

[3:15:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): in terms of a draft bylaw versus looking at all the other areas of your ocp that then need to sort

[3:15:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): of yeah tweak i'm

[3:15:09] Trustee Stamford: just really concerned this yeah sorry i'll follow it really quick i'm just really

[3:15:16] Trustee Stamford: concerned this goes out in isolation and this is going to be seen as the ocp out of story which

[3:15:22] Trustee Stamford: which will be very difficult to communicate in a structural way.

[3:15:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): Even though it's a bylaw amendment,

[3:15:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's an amendment to the OCP to include this.

[3:15:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): Yes.

[3:15:35] Trustee Stamford: I'll have to describe all that.

[3:15:36] Trustee Stamford: I think people are sort of at a trigger point right now.

[3:15:41] Trustee Stamford: So anyway,

[3:15:42] Trustee Stamford: I'll let trustee Bernardo do his comments and try and think about how this

[3:15:50] Trustee Stamford: could be presented.

[3:15:51] Trustee Stamford: So, yeah.

[3:15:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee Bernardo.

[3:15:57] Voice 2: Thank you.

[3:16:00] Voice 2: Comments, I don't know about that.

[3:16:02] Voice 2: Got questions, really.

[3:16:06] Voice 5: Kalana Zupanak, just so I can be clear about this, I'm looking at the first recommendation here, and I'm trying to follow your initial remarks here.

[3:16:15] Voice 5: here, and my understanding is that you're asking us to provide you with specific direction

[3:16:21] Voice 5: to do these things, fundamentally to acknowledge the Squamish nation that we've been listening

[3:16:30] Voice 5: to them and we've heard them, that this is what they would like to see.

[3:16:35] Voice 5: But as I understand that, and I'm following to some extent what Trustee Sanford is saying,

[3:16:41] Voice 5: um is that it appears to me this is making these specific changes the leading edge of

[3:16:53] Voice 5: the ocp revision and the other more traditional land planning adjustments if we can put it that

[3:17:03] Voice 5: way are um not being drafted at the moment apart from the shoreline development aspect of it

[3:17:10] Voice 5: have i ever got that right so

[3:17:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): yes to some extent you've got a you know draft development permit

[3:17:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): area uh the draft heritage conservation area those are pieces that require significantly more work to

[3:17:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): do and to implement than you have time for remaining in this this year this calendar year

[3:17:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): and so since the premise of this project originally was rooted in in ensuring that

[3:17:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): the project initiated with and led off with the engagement with the first nations and incorporated

[3:17:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): incorporated and framed their interests and concerns as the scope of amendments that would

[3:17:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): be considered, it feels prudent to ensure that the first bylaw amendment in terms of policy

[3:17:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): directives is grounded in that engagement summary that you received at bare minimum,

[3:17:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): so that this term ends with those pieces captured as perhaps it's just a proposed bylaw and it

[3:18:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): doesn't get to adoption before the elections, but it is out for referrals. Perhaps we've gotten as

[3:18:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): as far as a public hearing before September.

[3:18:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): It shows a clear commitment to follow through

[3:18:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): with how this project originally was initiated.

[3:18:20] Voice 5: So when you say there's additional work,

[3:18:23] Voice 5: quite a bit of work to be done with respect to the DPA

[3:18:26] Voice 5: and the heritage bits, pieces.

[3:18:31] Voice 5: With respect to the DPA, I'm assuming principally

[3:18:34] Voice 5: that means going through the whole public engagement process

[3:18:37] Voice 5: and review subsequent to that.

[3:18:40] Voice 5: have i got that right well

[3:18:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): until the local trust committee is comfortable with the draft it can't

[3:18:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): be embedded into a bylaw draft bylaw for amendments and based on what happened on keats island that

[3:18:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): was a significant chunk of work that took much longer than than staff or the community probably

[3:18:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): expected so we're not anticipating that this could be um you know simply put into a draft bylaw for

[3:19:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): an amendment to your land use bylaw for example

[3:19:07] Voice 8: right right and

[3:19:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): so if that level of certainty

[3:19:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): that the local trust committee needs you know a lot of certainty that the community is really

[3:19:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): embracing this and is on board and all the little tweaks and changes that need to be made to

[3:19:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): to reflect uh some level of comfort that could take a significantly longer period of time than

[3:19:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): we have for this year right

[3:19:25] Voice 5: so that's the exercise of weighing the you know weighing the existing

[3:19:28] Voice 5: draft text and going through that whole process of evolution with that where are we with the text

[3:19:33] Voice 5: with respect to the heritage designation stuff well

[3:19:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): it's presented to you today in the staff

[3:19:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): report you have a draft heritage conservation area you're seeing the actual draft language for

[3:19:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): what could be included in in a bylaw amendment right and

[3:19:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): your apc has not seen this yet this

[3:19:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): has gone to squamish nation because it's it's a it's a radically different approach for a local

[3:19:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): government to say non-archaeological um resources and um issues can be addressed through the local

[3:20:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): government acts provision of the heritage this heritage conservation area provision

[3:20:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): so this is really new for a local government to look at this and i like to think that it's

[3:20:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): exciting for you to see this and see that the first nation staff and planning staff have

[3:20:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): reviewed this we've had legal input we've had the heritage branch of the province staff look

[3:20:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): at this and go you know this is a great way to address this gap in the heritage conservation

[3:20:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): act which currently is heavily focused on archaeological resources only when we know

[3:20:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): We know that the entire island is of significant cultural importance to multiple nations and Squamish Nation has been the lead for us in terms of engagement to really clarify their, you know, their desire to see these cultural resources recognized, protected, and if possible restored through land use planning, which is your jurisdiction.

[3:21:04] Voice 5: And the restoration concept, that would apply to private land as well? Not just public land?

[3:21:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): all developments correct and

[3:21:13] Voice 5: um can you um explain to me how the draft heritage language intersects

[3:21:26] Voice 5: with a5 like um what does a5 actually mean i mean what is the you know you're asking us to sort of

[3:21:35] Voice 5: endorse drafting some language that sort of lays that all out but what's that going to be so i

[3:21:40] Voice 5: i appreciate that point but um after the discussions with scorners nation you must

[3:21:46] Voice 5: have some pretty clear idea about what this explicit recognition is going to say can you

[3:21:53] Voice 5: tell us what what that is

[3:21:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): i don't have the draft text ready yet however right now the gambier

[3:21:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): official community plan is absolutely silent yeah absolutely silent on this and so this a5 is simply

[3:22:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): saying that is no longer acceptable in 2026 we don't expect to have an official community plan

[3:22:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): adopted by a local trust committee or approved by the province or the island's trust executive

[3:22:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): committee that is silent on these issues so we don't have the draft text available to you but it

[3:22:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): was please recognize the impacts just own it that there have been significant impacts and on the

[3:22:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): the cultural and archaeological resources that remain due to industrial activity, residential

[3:22:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): activity, settlement patterns that were not thought out at the time in terms of, you know,

[3:22:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): how they impact access and hunting and fishing and gathering rights. So we would draft this text for

[3:22:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): you, present it in March. Squamish Nation staff are happy to look at that as a bylaw referral.

[3:22:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): You know, they've done a lot of work under the original capacity funding agreement,

[3:23:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): more than what the capacity funding agreement um you know we've exhausted those funds and we've

[3:23:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): still had to go back to them to say could you could you look at this still because so much time

[3:23:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): has lapsed and so this would as a bylaw referral once it got first reading it would go back to

[3:23:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): squamish nation for confirmation that this this language is um sort of hit the mark because that's

[3:23:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): what they're expecting to see they're saying to us as staff take this to your elected officials

[3:23:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): and then come back with the bylaw, actual language, right?

[3:23:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): But I have to do that with you first.

[3:23:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): I need to see if you're ready to see this

[3:23:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): and to focus on just this

[3:23:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): for the remainder of this calendar year.

[3:23:41] Voice 5: One of the challenges we face here

[3:23:43] Voice 5: on the Local Trust Committee is, among many challenges,

[3:23:46] Voice 5: is managing expectations, both from the general public

[3:23:51] Voice 5: and, of course, in particular, you know,

[3:23:55] Voice 5: I hear you when you talk about

[3:23:56] Voice 5: But there's been substantial engagement with Squash Nation, and they've put a lot of work into this effort as part of that.

[3:24:05] Voice 5: But in this exercise of managing expectations all around, I'm hearing some, you know, general language that doesn't seem particularly controversial.

[3:24:19] Voice 5: controversial. But as Trustee Sanford pointed out, I mean, you come up with any type of draft

[3:24:28] Voice 5: language, the way it's going to be, there's a risk that it's not going to be received

[3:24:33] Voice 5: in the nuanced way that you've explained. And we've got to do what we can to mitigate that risk.

[3:24:41] Voice 5: So what I'm asking is, I appreciate the text for A5 hasn't been prepared, but you must have

[3:24:50] Voice 5: some sense of what it would say um can you give us any suggestion or any indication of what it

[3:24:56] Voice 5: would in general terms what it's going to say i

[3:25:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): i don't have that ready yet that's what i if i if

[3:25:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): there's direction and interest in seeing that that's what i would be preparing for you for

[3:25:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): your march your next meeting um you know i'm going to just go back to the purpose of your whole

[3:25:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): project this was to you know address the first nations issues and concerns with development of

[3:25:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): all development not just um government lands and so christy stanford

[3:25:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): not putting

[3:25:39] Trustee Stamford: words in the planner's mouth because obviously this is something they have to work on

[3:25:45] Trustee Stamford: but I wouldn't be surprised if it's somewhere along the lines of the

[3:25:49] Trustee Stamford: definition of colonialism and the trust policy statement, you know,

[3:25:55] Trustee Stamford: it's recognizing what has happened potentially.

[3:26:01] Trustee Stamford: So that's the kind of language I'm expecting to see on this.

[3:26:06] Trustee Stamford: So I'm all the stuff that we're doing. I mean,

[3:26:12] Trustee Stamford: it's written in the report and it's when it's listed verbally,

[3:26:17] Trustee Stamford: that we really get the impact of what what is going to happen here i think this could work

[3:26:26] Trustee Stamford: with really like a big sort of front of this is where it sits in the bigger ocp project

[3:26:38] Trustee Stamford: um this is where we're going with it this is why like it just have to keep reiterating and if we

[3:26:44] Trustee Stamford: say oh this is an ocp amendment well that doesn't mean anything to anybody you know it's like so

[3:26:49] Trustee Stamford: much of our language that we use is not familiar outside of the committee so it's just how this is

[3:26:56] Trustee Stamford: all framed um um and the understanding that there's more to come but in terms of logic

[3:27:06] Trustee Stamford: and how this process has gone forward,

[3:27:09] Trustee Stamford: how we've supported it,

[3:27:11] Trustee Stamford: this really was the impetus

[3:27:15] Trustee Stamford: for opening the OCP up in the first place.

[3:27:18] Trustee Stamford: And I think it's just become more and more relevant

[3:27:22] Trustee Stamford: as the term has gone on,

[3:27:24] Trustee Stamford: is where this portion of the OCP

[3:27:31] Trustee Stamford: fits into how we move forward.

[3:27:33] Trustee Stamford: um this ocpu is hugely outdated um and stale and one of the critical factors was the lack of any

[3:27:44] Trustee Stamford: kind of of connection to uh first nations in the area and since the land use plan has come in from

[3:27:54] Trustee Stamford: the squamish nation that just fits in all the more and i think it needs to be acknowledged how

[3:28:01] Trustee Stamford: how impactful that can be on Gambier in a beneficial way.

[3:28:06] Trustee Stamford: So I'm hoping that we can frame this, again,

[3:28:10] Trustee Stamford: as communication is framing this in a positive way to move forward

[3:28:15] Trustee Stamford: because I know there is going to be potential for negative pushback

[3:28:22] Trustee Stamford: if this isn't done carefully.

[3:28:24] Trustee Stamford: But I do think it's the right structure as long as it's clearly stated

[3:28:30] Trustee Stamford: it there's more to come this is you know this is how we're moving forward i would love to see some

[3:28:37] Trustee Stamford: kind of structure that is readable um that's an answer explanation behind each of it and i'm sure

[3:28:46] Trustee Stamford: that'll come through the apc as well before

[3:28:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): i call on you uh trustee bernardo i just wanted to add

[3:28:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): dawned on me not of this local trust committee but others ago that last term we worked hard to

[3:29:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): changed the template for our staff reports with a kind of you are here pictorial yeah addition

[3:29:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): and that did show up and then they disappeared so i've been raising that i've raised it with our cao

[3:29:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): and planning director and others as to what happened because i think that's really what

[3:29:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): i'm hearing trustee stanford is our we're struggling to understand kind of where we

[3:29:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): are we're coming next and we know there's more coming and and you know we're learning to speak

[3:29:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): planneries as much as we can but our public are lagging further behind and i think just having

[3:29:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): that this is a long runway and you are here and there's all these other opportunities that are

[3:29:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): coming further down the road for the community to be involved in and so forth so i just think every

[3:29:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): one of our staff reports to some extent is it's a public it is a public document but it gets out

[3:29:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): there by itself and then what does it mean where is it in the context of the overall project but

[3:29:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): But go ahead, Trustee Bernard.

[3:29:58] Voice 5: Yeah, I've got a...

[3:30:00] Voice 5: I'm struggling because I think it's fair to say the response we received from the public,

[3:30:12] Voice 5: to the extent that public engagement yields any information that's useful,

[3:30:19] Voice 5: the response we've received from, I think, local trust area residents,

[3:30:24] Voice 5: but let's focus specifically on Gambier residents.

[3:30:27] Voice 5: Gambier residents, with respect to both the OCP project and the trust policy statement,

[3:30:37] Voice 5: There's definitely a very strong theme from residents that is, okay, fine, we get the First Nations consultation and engagement, that's sure.

[3:30:48] Voice 5: sure. What about the rest of us? Whether rightly or wrongly, and I want to right away say that

[3:30:58] Voice 5: there is not a terrific understanding out in the public about how the process works,

[3:31:08] Voice 5: the various stages of it. It's been a struggle to explain that, certainly with the trust policy

[3:31:14] Voice 5: statement that um you know the consultation process didn't stop with the first nation

[3:31:22] Voice 5: consultation it went on and it's still going on and we're still working with that and

[3:31:27] Voice 5: we're open to hear these things and hear the perspectives of the public

[3:31:31] Voice 5: um certainly part of my job has been explaining that to people that it's it's not um nothing's

[3:31:40] Voice 5: locked down you haven't been ignored but the reality is that there is this perception out

[3:31:46] Voice 5: there and you know i personally have learned the hard way more than once unfortunately that

[3:31:51] Voice 5: bullying ahead trying to do the right thing doesn't necessarily work it's not necessarily

[3:31:58] Voice 5: a recipe for success to sort of just tear ahead because the thing is the right thing to do

[3:32:05] Voice 5: and one of my concerns here and i really don't know where to go with it to tell you the truth

[3:32:09] Voice 5: is that what we are trying to do with updating the OCP to respect the history and the existing

[3:32:21] Voice 5: rights of Squamish Nation is that we are now find ourselves through no fault of our own in a pretty

[3:32:29] Voice 5: unsettled legal environment. And that is also affecting how whatever we do is going to be

[3:32:36] Voice 5: be received. So I confess to a certain amount of anxiety about dealing with what we have here

[3:32:50] Voice 5: in the first recommendation items, A through 1, 2, 4, and A5. A certain amount of anxiety about

[3:32:58] Voice 5: how that's going to be received and then how we can manage it so that it's actually received in

[3:33:05] Voice 5: the right spirit and the right spirit of understanding and um i think that whatever

[3:33:12] Voice 5: language um is used to elaborate the the a5 point i think that's gonna be pretty critical

[3:33:19] Voice 5: uh that's why i was kind of pestering you about that planner set uh because it's like um

[3:33:28] Voice 5: it's gonna that language has to be very careful uh otherwise it could land on the general public

[3:33:36] Voice 5: uh in a way that we don't want it to and we could have negative unintended consequences

[3:33:41] Voice 5: that could get in the way of advancing uh what we want to really achieve with this so

[3:33:49] Voice 5: um i wish i i wish i was in a better position to um provide some kind of insight or alternative

[3:34:02] Voice 5: direction or some suggestion on how to deal with it but where i am right now is i'm kind of

[3:34:08] Voice 5: I'm more preoccupied, frankly, with the risk of misunderstanding than anything else.

[3:34:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you. Trustee Stanford.

[3:34:18] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, in terms of A5, I don't think whitewashing it's going to help.

[3:34:31] Trustee Stamford: So I think it's going to land and we have the ability to adjust to a certain extent.

[3:34:42] Trustee Stamford: Um, but maybe that's part of reconciliation is, is also seeing that language and then

[3:34:50] Trustee Stamford: acknowledging it, um, to a certain extent, and then being able to say, okay, what,

[3:34:58] Trustee Stamford: how can we get the point across, um, without turning everybody away? Um, and, and I'm concerned

[3:35:06] Trustee Stamford: too, but I also think it's really important that we see the language publicly first, um,

[3:35:12] Trustee Stamford: because I do think it's going to be somewhere along the lines of what we've

[3:35:15] Trustee Stamford: got in the policy statement. It makes sense.

[3:35:19] Trustee Stamford: And by acknowledging that it helps us move this process forward.

[3:35:25] Trustee Stamford: And I

[3:35:25] Trustee Stamford: don't think it's going to be pretty,

[3:35:30] Trustee Stamford: but that one actually has personally,

[3:35:37] Trustee Stamford: well, how I see that the overall OCP and then the LUB,

[3:35:41] Trustee Stamford: be that has the least impact on the actual land use bylaws it's going to be how we um work with

[3:35:50] Trustee Stamford: the dpa it's going to be how we work the archaeological um aspects that's actually

[3:35:58] Trustee Stamford: going to be the far bigger impact um and so being again it you know somewhat similar it's how this

[3:36:07] Trustee Stamford: is framed and how we're willing to stand behind it. But I don't have as much concern about A5

[3:36:17] Trustee Stamford: as I do about how we introduce the DPAs. That's where it really has the impact.

[3:36:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Joe.

[3:36:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Thank you.

[3:36:35] Voice 5: I take your point that where the rubber hits the road in terms of

[3:36:39] Voice 5: of actual impact on property owners.

[3:36:44] Voice 5: It's going to be on the DPA and the heritage piece.

[3:36:48] Trustee Stamford: The

[3:36:49] Voice 5: actual bylaws that are going to affect the scope

[3:36:53] Voice 5: of how they can use and enjoy their properties

[3:36:55] Voice 5: and limitations on that,

[3:36:57] Voice 5: or any obligations that we put on people

[3:36:59] Voice 5: with respect to that.

[3:37:02] Voice 5: Yeah, I get that.

[3:37:03] Voice 5: I mean, the OCP or any provision OCP

[3:37:08] Voice 5: is kind of general by its nature.

[3:37:10] Voice 5: it's it's it's providing a direction more than it's not providing specific um obligations on

[3:37:16] Voice 5: anybody or it's not creating the real laws in the lub you know um or with changes like with dph and

[3:37:23] Voice 5: things like that you know i guess so i i take your point on that uh i think uh if i want to

[3:37:32] Voice 5: get really nitty-gritty about it um what makes me the reason i keep hovering around this point

[3:37:39] Voice 5: is the language that's in the recommendation right now

[3:37:44] Voice 5: with respect to A5 talks about rights and title right at the end.

[3:37:47] Voice 5: I'd feel a lot more comfortable about it

[3:37:48] Voice 5: if that sentence stopped on first, just said First Nations.

[3:37:56] Voice 5: Because, you know, I'm wary about wading into the debate

[3:38:06] Voice 5: about acknowledging what those rights are

[3:38:14] Voice 5: and what the title is or ought to be,

[3:38:19] Voice 5: if the OCP language with respect to that

[3:38:22] Voice 5: is normative in some respect

[3:38:27] Voice 5: in trying to prescribe a direction of recognition

[3:38:31] Voice 5: of what Aboriginal title or Aboriginal rights to the land

[3:38:36] Voice 5: should look like on Gambier,

[3:38:39] Voice 5: I would be very anxious about that because, frankly, that's way over our pay grade.

[3:38:46] Voice 5: I don't see that as part of our responsibility as a local trust committee.

[3:38:51] Voice 5: I can see acknowledging the history and committing to working with the First Nation,

[3:38:58] Voice 5: but to put our thumb on the scale in terms of saying we acknowledge title or right in some respect,

[3:39:07] Voice 5: especially when the law is so unsettled as it is right now.

[3:39:09] Voice 5: um i'm not sure we should be going there yeah

[3:39:14] Trustee Stamford: but that's not what a5 saying if i'm looking at this

[3:39:18] Trustee Stamford: it's it's a statement recognizing the impacts of patterns of settlement protected areas and

[3:39:26] Trustee Stamford: residential development on first nations rights and title yeah

[3:39:32] Voice 5: which is what

[3:39:32] Trustee Stamford: is on the ground

[3:39:33] Voice 5: but what does that mean uh how how well

[3:39:37] Trustee Stamford: i think until we see it we

[3:39:38] Voice 5: can't how do existing settlement

[3:39:40] Voice 5: patterns affect First Nations rights and title?

[3:39:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): I can give an example here, Patrick.

[3:39:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): Subdivision of the foreshore, lack of access public or for First Nations to, you know,

[3:39:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): environments that are still intact to support harvesting and collection of material, because

[3:40:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): you can't do that if it's a provincial park, you can't do that if it's a national park.

[3:40:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): So these areas, the settlement patterns that you inherited as the Islands Trust and the settlement patterns that you approved through decision making at the local trust committee.

[3:40:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): So that's typically subdivision, density, zoning, allocating specific areas for specific uses or intensification of uses.

[3:40:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): That all has impacts and they're irreversible. You can't go back.

[3:40:31] Planner Zupanec (probable): So acknowledging those impacts is an important progressive step towards actionable reconciliation. And if we're paralyzed by A5, I'm sorry, I don't think there's a chance that this OCP is going to reflect the engagement work that we've done with the nation to date.

[3:40:54] Voice 5: Well, I don't think we're paralyzed.

[3:40:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): What we're

[3:40:58] Voice 5: doing is asking some questions here.

[3:40:59] Voice 5: And I'd

[3:41:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): like to show you the language in March and present you with those drafts so that you can then debate the merits of the language that the nation is asking for you to consider.

[3:41:11] Voice 2: Yeah, I hear you.

[3:41:12] Voice 2: Okay.

[3:41:14] Voice 2: Trustee

[3:41:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): Stanford has her hand raised.

[3:41:16] Voice 2: Yeah, okay.

[3:41:17] Trustee Stamford: I mean, what I'm hearing, Joe, is in between all this, when the planner says we have all the work that we have done engaging with the Squamish Nation.

[3:41:31] Trustee Stamford: part of the difficulty that we have as trustees is we've done none of that so it's very hard for

[3:41:38] Trustee Stamford: us to stand behind the statements when we don't feel like we've engaged because it's been

[3:41:45] Trustee Stamford: definitely a staff to staff now that's just what is and and we have to try and work that out

[3:41:51] Trustee Stamford: ourselves um so it it's trying to take on that work without actually having done it ourselves

[3:41:59] Trustee Stamford: and and understand it ourselves we can see the results here but we don't have that ownership

[3:42:07] Trustee Stamford: of it because we haven't done that work ourselves so um i agree that um these five statements taken

[3:42:17] Trustee Stamford: together have to be done they they have to be part of this ocp um and we can't really debate

[3:42:28] Trustee Stamford: it until we get a better sense of the language um and just it has to fall where it does um in the

[3:42:37] Trustee Stamford: public process and so yeah i want it to be public so people can get their heads around it and um

[3:42:47] Trustee Stamford: yeah i think that's part of the difficulty that i'm having with it is i don't own it because i

[3:42:54] Trustee Stamford: I haven't done the engagement.

[3:42:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): I guess, Chair Patrick,

[3:42:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): if I might just ask the Local Trust Committee then,

[3:43:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): my question, I guess, to you is,

[3:43:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): despite the fact that this has been a staff-to-staff

[3:43:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement to collect this information

[3:43:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): and present it to you,

[3:43:07] Planner Zupanec (probable): when you read the engagement summary,

[3:43:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): does it resonate with the Local Trust Committee

[3:43:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): that these are outstanding and important matters to address,

[3:43:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): regardless of the fact that you weren't at the table

[3:43:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): collecting this information or hearing it firsthand

[3:43:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): hand when you read it and especially just a1 a2 a4 and a5 does it feel like you have a responsibility

[3:43:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): to ensure that this is done for me taking

[3:43:34] Trustee Stamford: it as a whole yes i mean it it just makes sense that

[3:43:39] Trustee Stamford: this has to be part of our ocp so

[3:43:41] Planner Zupanec (probable): we as staff definitely portray that in our engagement that

[3:43:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): there was a strong appetite towards implementing this type of example of work and rightly or

[3:43:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): or wrongly, staff had to make that leap in order to have the nation staff believe us when we said

[3:43:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): we actually need and want to do something. And this local trust committee has a strong appetite

[3:44:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): to do this, is to make sure that all the changes to the OCP reflect and are grounded in the reality

[3:44:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): of these issues. So if we misrepresented, that's really important for planning staff and as your

[3:44:18] Planner Zupanec (probable): project manager to know today whether or not that was a mischaracterization of the direction that

[3:44:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): you wish to go because if there isn't a strong willingness to say I can't wait to see this

[3:44:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): language because this is really important for us to include versus what I'm hearing is we're kind

[3:44:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): of afraid of seeing this language because it could really rub other people the wrong way when in fact

[3:44:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): we want to we want the nations to who are also watching this process to have some confidence

[3:44:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): and faith that this was worthwhile the capacity funding was a benefit but really was it worthwhile

[3:44:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): to hear this level of uh hesitation in in advancing even to the draft language stage

[3:44:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): i mean i i think um

[3:45:02] Trustee Stamford: we i always knew that this is where we were going to struggle

[3:45:08] Trustee Stamford: is is you know the ideas and the concepts and the principles great let's go knowing that

[3:45:15] Trustee Stamford: that when we got to the actual language it was gonna be gulp you know it's like wow we're going

[3:45:22] Trustee Stamford: there um and i think it's okay to be hesitant because it is a big jump in in working with our

[3:45:29] Trustee Stamford: communities and i don't want to dismiss the the fears and the concerns of the community

[3:45:36] Trustee Stamford: but i also don't want to be subject to it i still think we need to go there and it is a

[3:45:45] Trustee Stamford: a really important process and i think in the end it's going to be worthwhile and it already is

[3:45:51] Trustee Stamford: worthwhile seeing how what's happened on this island in terms of our central um uh protected

[3:45:58] Trustee Stamford: area now i mean i still don't know how to acknowledge that fully how that's going to

[3:46:05] Trustee Stamford: to change our future and that was all because of the nation so um it i i mean i'm okay with the

[3:46:15] Trustee Stamford: the like concern because we do have to try and work with this as part of what our job is we can't

[3:46:22] Trustee Stamford: just dismiss the concerns of our community but we also have to move through this and and as far as

[3:46:29] Trustee Stamford: i'm concerned this is what reconciliation is so

[3:46:33] Trustee Stamford: yeah

[3:46:34] Planner Zupanec (probable): i i hope i didn't come across as wanting you

[3:46:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): to dismiss any concerns um but i think it really helps when there's strong political confirmation

[3:46:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): for your constituents to see that confidence and that urgency to catch up and make sure

[3:46:50] Planner Zupanec (probable): that if we're going to do any kind of amendment that those first amendments really do address

[3:46:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): those outstanding issues that have been silenced

[3:46:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): for decades and need to be reflected

[3:47:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): if there is to be a law amendment.

[3:47:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay.

[3:47:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Bernardo.

[3:47:09] Voice 5: Yeah, to answer your question before Planner Zupanek

[3:47:13] Voice 5: about whether or not, irrespective of the fact

[3:47:17] Voice 5: that I wasn't present when this got underway,

[3:47:21] Voice 5: whether I've got an appetite for these things,

[3:47:23] Voice 5: um that's one of those yes but things of course i mean i you know believe it or not i'm actually

[3:47:30] Voice 5: an advocate for reconciliation but you know there's a big difference between talking about

[3:47:36] Voice 5: things in generalities and then when you start getting into the specifics when you start getting

[3:47:42] Voice 5: into the specifics including specific language in the ocp that's when the howling starts and

[3:47:47] Voice 5: And I want to keep the howling to a minimum by being as clear and transparent about this

[3:47:55] Voice 5: stuff from the get-go.

[3:47:57] Voice 5: So, so much depends on the specifics, which is why I kind of look at language like rights

[3:48:03] Voice 5: and title, and I ask myself, where is that going?

[3:48:06] Voice 5: Even at the draft language, when it comes to us to review, if it turns out for whatever

[3:48:12] Voice 5: reason, we or I or somebody on the trust committee feels that the language goes too far in

[3:48:20] Voice 5: acknowledging the scope of what aboriginal title ought to be on gambier then it's a no-win

[3:48:27] Voice 5: situation i mean it's like we we don't want us to get boxed into a situation where we're just

[3:48:32] Voice 5: going to make end up with draft language that is just going to make somebody mad unnecessarily

[3:48:40] Voice 5: you know because it seems provocative or it doesn't seem to go far enough so generally yeah

[3:48:47] Voice 5: yeah, sure, that stuff all does make sense,

[3:48:49] Voice 5: but how it is the specific language

[3:48:54] Voice 5: is what is going to condition the environment

[3:48:57] Voice 5: in which we're dealing with these things,

[3:48:58] Voice 5: and success depends on how we execute.

[3:49:02] Voice 5: You know, I really do wish our processes involved

[3:49:04] Voice 5: the local trust committee in the development

[3:49:07] Voice 5: and in the engagement of the First Nation earlier.

[3:49:11] Voice 5: I appreciate that that's not how it's structured,

[3:49:14] Voice 5: but I hope sometime in the future we can get there

[3:49:16] Voice 5: Because I think if we had a more intimate relationship with our counterparts and were able to communicate at that level, it would help us and the local trust committee be better communicators with the community at large about where this whole thing is going.

[3:49:36] Voice 5: As Trustee Stanford had said before, it's like, you know, we're way over here, you know, dealing with abstractions until you come to us with the nitty gritty.

[3:49:44] Voice 5: and where i'm sitting it's like okay the nitty-gritty is coming into let's call it what

[3:49:51] Voice 5: it is an explosive environment i'm not averse to having this language prepared what i really don't

[3:49:57] Voice 5: want to see is language that turns out to be a spark that blows things up that requires this

[3:50:03] Voice 5: language to be very nuanced and sensitive like whatever you guys draft and i can see where we're

[3:50:09] Voice 5: headed we're going to have this thing and i'll probably vote for it but the language really has

[3:50:14] Voice 5: has to be nuanced, so it takes into account where everybody is on the island.

[3:50:24] Voice 5: That may include, you know, following up in some of the discussion that we had before

[3:50:28] Voice 5: about the trust policy statement, you missed that, I guess, but qualifying language that

[3:50:36] Voice 5: says, you know, okay, we could acknowledge all these things about how First Nations rights

[3:50:41] Voice 5: and title have been affected, but we have to acknowledge the current status.

[3:50:45] Voice 5: if we do that we also have to acknowledge the current status of existing title holders and

[3:50:52] Voice 5: i was encouraged by one thing that you know um your direction you're going in this plan of

[3:51:00] Voice 5: which is i think the more specific the language i appreciate so the ocp but the more specific

[3:51:07] Voice 5: the language is about identifying the interests that have been trodden upon, to be blunt,

[3:51:21] Voice 5: the better. The more concrete the thing is that people see where the OCP direction is going.

[3:51:28] Voice 5: That's why I think I'd probably be a lot happier if instead it said, you know,

[3:51:33] Voice 5: protected areas and residential development on First Nations interests, I'd prefer that over

[3:51:40] Voice 5: the language says rights and title you know you can you can roll rights and title into it if you

[3:51:45] Voice 5: want but um i

[3:51:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): think language that came directly from our engagement process so that's why i'm

[3:51:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): just bringing it back to to link it back to you you've already seen this language you've already

[3:51:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): seen these recommendations from the nation i'm recycling them again and saying are you ready

[3:51:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): to i'm taking the recommendation as stated through our engagement process to say if what they're

[3:52:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): asking you is to implement this and this will help leverage that relationship building because

[3:52:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): you're taken seriously when you actually do something with some of these recommendations

[3:52:14] Planner Zupanec (probable): i think that's really important is to recognize if that exact wording from the nation is is

[3:52:22] Planner Zupanec (probable): wordsmithed on your part now um i don't think that's a great idea however you can do you can

[3:52:27] Planner Zupanec (probable): direct me however you like i'm just saying

[3:52:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): this is what came back from the nation i'd like to

[3:52:32] Planner Zupanec (probable): help you implement this as actual language that could form part of an amendment to your OCP

[3:52:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): as that framing language that then directs future policies and regulations with very

[3:52:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): you know honest perspective about grounding

[3:52:48] Voice 5: it back to this.

[3:52:50] Voice 5: I have a question but Planner

[3:52:51] Voice 5: Zupanek are you saying that because the First Nation has given us its recommendation and its

[3:52:59] Voice 5: preferences that's it our hands are tied we have to do everything they say no

[3:53:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): i'm saying this is

[3:53:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): what i'm reporting back to you here it is again this is the recommendation for your implementation

[3:53:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): i'm suggesting i can take that and i can help you draft language for your jurisdictional authority

[3:53:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): which is your official community plan to make sure it reflects the needs of your community as

[3:53:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): well as its historical obligations which were never met to address the nation's interests

[3:53:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): and i know that you don't like those other words but they're there because that is the original

[3:53:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): format that the recommendation came to you from this engagement process that you funded through

[3:53:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): this major project so i don't want to water it down in the recommendation stage let's get the

[3:53:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): draft language to you so that you can feel confident that it is not inflammatory but it is

[3:53:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): accurate because the ocp if nothing else should be an accurate representation of how did this

[3:53:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): community get here and where is it going because it is a new era this ocp has only recognized

[3:54:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): the rights of land title holders for the most part that is explicitly in the nature of this

[3:54:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): entire document it's policy directives for this uh settlement pattern that you currently have

[3:54:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): so this is a little bit different but

[3:54:19] Voice 5: okay let's put some meat on the bones here is guamish nation

[3:54:23] Voice 5: asking the LTC. That's the recommendation. And I take your point that in terms of managing the

[3:54:34] Voice 5: relationship, it's better to simply take the recommendation, work with it, and then deal

[3:54:39] Voice 5: with the concrete work product that you deliver us later. But this general direction is going to

[3:54:48] Voice 5: affect the content of that. And I've got a very specific question. In your engagement with

[3:54:55] Voice 5: with Squamish Nation and your understanding of what that language, the specific language should

[3:55:00] Voice 5: look like, do you anticipate the language is going to include some kind of acknowledgement

[3:55:06] Voice 5: of title over certain parts of the island or in certain aspects of life on the island,

[3:55:16] Voice 5: acknowledging title in that specific OCP language? No.

[3:55:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): I wanted to kind of answer your question.

[3:55:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): And I'm comfortable to understand this is foundational to the next steps of the OCP, that we're resetting the way we move forward.

[3:55:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm prepared to see that and support it.

[3:55:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): But I think, again, this pictorial or graphic, I think we need to have a bit more to show the community that this isn't it.

[3:55:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): And I understand this is just where we are in the process.

[3:55:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): This is the beginning still.

[3:56:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): um and that we should have some some way of communicating that when we receive this in march

[3:56:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): that there will be some thinking this is the ocp amendment that we've been talking about for the

[3:56:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): last what 10 years now 12 years here on this island that we're still only at the beginning

[3:56:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): um and so that's what's important to me from a context standpoint of where we are in the project

[3:56:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): so that we don't have miscommunication trustee stanford well

[3:56:26] Trustee Stamford: yeah i have um with the scrd

[3:56:30] Trustee Stamford: ocp project which i keep telling everybody is looks cool only because it's really expensive

[3:56:38] Trustee Stamford: but um they have on all our documents at the bottom is is a graphic with arrows that are

[3:56:47] Trustee Stamford: colored and that's what we've done and then the arrows continue and i can just forward that along

[3:56:52] Trustee Stamford: I'm sure it's standard in a way of putting in information but I really every single OCP document

[3:57:03] Trustee Stamford: has it so that people are always it's the it's the visual it's not even know what or what it says

[3:57:10] Trustee Stamford: it's how it's said in in that visual way and that's what I keep trying to go back to the OCP

[3:57:15] Trustee Stamford: this would be so much easier if we had a visual representation of what this is going to look like

[3:57:21] Trustee Stamford: absolutely and it

[3:57:22] Trustee Stamford: gets people reading and i know that's not always possible given our budget

[3:57:26] Trustee Stamford: um so um that aside um i think i think we've done this one to to death and i'm wondering if we're

[3:57:38] Trustee Stamford: ready to move forward on recommendations all right um

[3:57:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): is that okay i appreciate yeah i appreciate

[3:57:46] Planner Zupanec (probable): the reminders around some of this phasing out of where we're at we're we're just as you know

[3:57:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): your planner for this project keen to get the political direction on what it is you want to do

[3:58:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): with this next phase and then let us help you communicate that within the confines of the

[3:58:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): restricted and limited budgets but um right now we really need direction on what it is are you

[3:58:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): willing to do between now and september and then let's communicate that piece to the community

[3:58:16] Planner Zupanec (probable): This is nested within still the larger project, but there's a limited amount of time left, and we hope that you would echo the urgency to close this term with a reflection on this significant engagement that was done and making sure that you're echoing that those important aspects are willing to be implemented.

[3:58:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): If not, that's fine, too. I just need to know what we're doing.

[3:58:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): No, I'm prepared to ask for a motion to move forward, but I want to remind you, we did create the graphics to show the where we are. It was all done and it was implemented in templates. It just vaporized. And I'll be dealing with Director

[3:58:55] Trustee Stamford: Cermak on that.

[3:59:12] Trustee Stamford: deliverables and work plan march 2026 september 2026 one draft review consider reading for oc

[3:59:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): do i have to really go through all this no my

[3:59:23] Planner Zupanec (probable): understanding is you can say as stated in the

[3:59:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): staff report on page 66 correct the minute taker will capture the text exactly as written

[3:59:33] Trustee Stamford: yeah that makes way more sense this is really complex right

[3:59:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): so we're making this you're making

[3:59:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): Making the motion as presented for just one.

[3:59:42] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[3:59:43] Trustee Stamford: Recommendation one.

[3:59:44] Trustee Stamford: So

[3:59:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): we have not discussed.

[3:59:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): Is there something

[3:59:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): else that needs to be discussed?

[3:59:47] Trustee Stamford: Yeah.

[3:59:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): Bullets two and three have not been discussed.

[3:59:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): No, but we'll get there.

[3:59:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay.

[3:59:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[3:59:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): So you're making the motion as presented.

[3:59:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[3:59:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): In item one.

[3:59:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): Is there a second?

[4:00:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): into that motion second by trustee bernardo okay discussion go ahead oh i already seconded did you

[4:00:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): want to discuss trustee bernardo yeah sorry i

[4:00:10] Voice 5: shouldn't have done that i should peace man go

[4:00:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): ahead

[4:00:14] Voice 5: yeah peace that's that's the whole point um you know i you know i take what planners have

[4:00:22] Voice 5: been has said seriously that this is a stage in the process it's not definitive but i'm just going

[4:00:29] Voice 5: going to reiterate reiterate my point which is it's all fine and well to talk about that in the

[4:00:35] Voice 5: generalities but a great deal does depend on the specifics and um i await what the specifics will

[4:00:45] Voice 5: look like and um i hope squamish nation isn't if it turns out that the language is uh not something

[4:00:53] Voice 5: that i or some other trustees can't accept i hope that the fact that we're agreeing to this now

[4:00:58] Voice 5: isn't an occasion for disappointment later if it turns out that the language or the direction

[4:01:05] Voice 5: that we end up going doesn't go far enough as far as Suwannee's Nation is concerned

[4:01:10] Voice 5: because that might well be the consequence of this. I don't know but I just hope going forward

[4:01:18] Voice 5: everybody can be realistic about what this process is all about. Thank you.

[4:01:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any further

[4:01:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): further discussion I'll call the vote then all those in favor raise your hands and that carries

[4:01:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): are we ready to go on to the second item or is there more yeah um

[4:01:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): sorry sorry

[4:01:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): uh planner

[4:01:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): Zupanek was uh yeah

[4:01:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): go ahead because bullets i i and i i i weren't discussed I just wanted to

[4:01:44] Planner Zupanec (probable): confirm that that is still part of the resolution that you just passed that we are referring the

[4:01:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): As presented in the motion. So that was just passed. Yes.

[4:01:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): Okay. And so I would need a little bit of direction then.

[4:01:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): I mean, the referral is easy. It's the limited public engagement.

[4:02:02] Planner Zupanec (probable): I guess you will hear back from the advisory planning commission on what

[4:02:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): their preferences are for what that could look like.

[4:02:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): And then we could discuss that perhaps as early as your March meeting.

[4:02:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): But if there was any LTC preferences,

[4:02:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): if you could just forward those to me, that would be great.

[4:02:17] Planner Zupanec (probable): Can

[4:02:18] Voice 5: I take a clarifying question?

[4:02:19] Voice 5: I

[4:02:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): should

[4:02:21] Voice 5: have asked this before, I'm sorry, but what does limited public engagement mean?

[4:02:26] Planner Zupanec (probable): Well, exactly what it sounds like. There is not capacity or budget for an extensive summer of

[4:02:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): engagement on these drafts. So we'd need to understand what are your expectations? You've

[4:02:38] Planner Zupanec (probable): got the drafts attached in your staff report right now. What are your expectations for the

[4:02:43] Planner Zupanec (probable): scope of input that you're looking to receive? What mechanisms are you expecting would be

[4:02:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): be successful over the course of the summer how involved did you want your advisory planning

[4:02:52] Planner Zupanec (probable): commission to be and i can try to help manage that process

[4:02:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): trustee stamford yeah

[4:03:00] Trustee Stamford: well fortunately

[4:03:02] Trustee Stamford: for gambier it's it's always going to be limited it's always going to be so restricted to get

[4:03:07] Trustee Stamford: effective engagement because of the way the island is set up um so you know not worrying too much uh

[4:03:19] Trustee Stamford: outside of really specific, you know, Zoom meetings,

[4:03:24] Trustee Stamford: anything that I can do to facilitate and have smaller engagement sessions

[4:03:29] Trustee Stamford: and support the APC or they support me.

[4:03:34] Trustee Stamford: The bottom line is we can talk big engagement,

[4:03:37] Trustee Stamford: but we know it's not going to happen just because of the way Gambier is laid

[4:03:42] Trustee Stamford: out. So it will be by its nature limited.

[4:03:46] Trustee Stamford: it at least for that kind of like for public engagement any

[4:03:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): other questions yeah my question

[4:03:57] Voice 5: is for trustee stamford i mean um i'm sensitive after the experience you know the whole keats

[4:04:03] Voice 5: island experience you know the dpa the shoreline dpa we had you know that's the one thing we're

[4:04:10] Voice 5: dealing with and that you know dragged on for years in large part well not large part at least

[4:04:15] Voice 5: half that time is my fault because i thought it needed to be dragged out um but that's because

[4:04:22] Voice 5: i was receiving a lot of community input along those lines and i anticipate that

[4:04:29] Voice 5: the dpa contemplated for gambier or at least the draft um looks like it's going to be somewhat

[4:04:36] Voice 5: more rigorous plus there's a whole heritage conservation angle of it um i'm just anticipating

[4:04:43] Voice 5: anticipating i guess i'm anticipating you know i'm sensitive from the experience we had with keats

[4:04:50] Voice 5: that um this we may well end up the recipients of some very strong feelings and if trustee

[4:04:59] Voice 5: stanford satisfied that this level of engagement is sufficient for us to receive that information

[4:05:04] Voice 5: but i would hope that we'd actually deal with it you know when we if you know if we end up with

[4:05:11] Voice 5: with overwhelming amount of opposition to it. I don't, I, I am,

[4:05:15] Voice 5: I'm not one of those trustees who thinks, yeah, well, that's fine,

[4:05:18] Voice 5: but they don't know what they're talking about.

[4:05:19] Voice 5: We're just going to proceed that, you know, I take,

[4:05:21] Voice 5: even though public engagement is limited and I appreciate that it's not

[4:05:26] Voice 5: necessarily representative to the extent that we get pushed back.

[4:05:32] Voice 5: I think we're obligated to take it seriously.

[4:05:34] Voice 5: We don't have to agree with it, but we have to engage it like at our level,

[4:05:39] Voice 5: like we have to work it through.

[4:05:40] Voice 5: We have to sort of reason our way through it. And if, Trustee Stanford, you're satisfied this level of engagement, the limited scope of it will be sufficient for us to get the information we need. Great. I hope you're right.

[4:05:53] Voice 5: Well,

[4:05:54] Trustee Stamford: I'm not presupposing what's going to happen out of this. I can see this being an election issue. I can see this totally moving into the next term. But I just know the reality on the ground is we can make

[4:06:08] Trustee Stamford: all the plans we want for engagement, but we are just naturally very limited on how we can deal with it.

[4:06:15] Trustee Stamford: and um yeah it it will take a lot of thoughtful response back i can't necessarily change people's

[4:06:23] Trustee Stamford: minds but i certainly try and and pull back on on perspective each time you know i'm spending a good

[4:06:30] Trustee Stamford: lot of time on docs these days and going back over the same thing over and over but it's just like

[4:06:36] Trustee Stamford: one mind at a time you know

[4:06:38] Trustee Stamford: have you thought of this without judging this is more challenging

[4:06:42] Trustee Stamford: because it does have those elements to it that can fall into racism very easily,

[4:06:50] Trustee Stamford: can fall into old-fashioned tropes that have to be dealt with very delicately.

[4:06:57] Trustee Stamford: But they do have to be approached.

[4:07:00] Trustee Stamford: We can't just keep ignoring it.

[4:07:02] Trustee Stamford: Well,

[4:07:02] Voice 5: you're grasping the nettle when you say it could be an election issue.

[4:07:05] Voice 5: I think you're very right there.

[4:07:07] Voice 5: That is almost certainly going to be the case.

[4:07:10] Voice 10: Yeah.

[4:07:10] Voice 10: And

[4:07:11] Voice 5: I share your concern that we want to do everything we can to keep the debate when it comes at a level that's intelligible in the sense that it's not fomented by a lot of unreasoning emotional stuff that's disconnected from reality, but it's just people voicing a lot of fears.

[4:07:32] Voice 5: And from that, they're leaping on to all sorts of crazy conclusions.

[4:07:35] Voice 5: I mean, that's really where I'm coming from, which is

[4:07:38] Trustee Stamford: I don't want

[4:07:39] Voice 5: it to blow up on.

[4:07:42] Voice 5: and it's it's like it's volatile i

[4:07:44] Trustee Stamford: i know i i don't know about you but it's it's already there

[4:07:46] Trustee Stamford: i'm dealing with it all the time right now it this is our reality on this particular island is it

[4:07:53] Trustee Stamford: it's outrageous is it unexpected no but that's it's having to go back again over and over again

[4:08:01] Trustee Stamford: to place the policy statement to place the ocp in the greater context of what's going on in

[4:08:06] Trustee Stamford: British Columbia so well

[4:08:09] Voice 5: cross our fingers and hope for the best yeah

[4:08:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): well I think this is where

[4:08:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): communications and like I said graphics all of these things just help present that this is not

[4:08:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): we're not at the end and that so it helps to understand that we're talking you know shifting

[4:08:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): the way we do work but we're still a lot of work to yet to do okay so Planner Zupanek's video was

[4:08:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): just off due to her unstable internet so she is there um so we're going to move on um i don't

[4:08:44] Trustee Stamford: think we voted on that i

[4:08:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): thought we did did we

[4:08:48] Trustee Stamford: do on two

[4:08:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): i thought we voted on number one no just

[4:08:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): number one we have not number two has not gone forward so i'm quite certain we voted on number

[4:08:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): one i guess staff would yell at us if we did not um so we're on to number two are we ready that one

[4:09:03] Trustee Patrick (probable): or any further questions for staff.

[4:09:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): So go ahead then if you're ready for number two.

[4:09:09] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee

[4:09:10] Trustee Stamford: request staff to prepare draft bylaw language

[4:09:13] Trustee Stamford: for LTC consideration at the March 24th, 2026

[4:09:17] Trustee Stamford: regular business meeting to amend

[4:09:18] Trustee Stamford: the Gambier Island Local Official Community Plan

[4:09:21] Trustee Stamford: with First Nations Recognition Policy Directives

[4:09:25] Trustee Stamford: for protection of First Nations interests

[4:09:27] Trustee Stamford: in shorelines, ecosystems, cultural heritage

[4:09:30] Trustee Stamford: on the island.

[4:09:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): Is there a second to this one? Second by Trustee Bernardo. Discussion? Any discussion? All right, then.

[4:09:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well,

[4:09:45] Voice 5: a question for Planet Zupanek, which is, again, I know we're asking you to draft bylaw language, but can you give us some inkling of what that's going to look like in terms of how recognition of First Nations interest in shorelines, ecosystems, culture, heritage would look like, like broad areas at least, or something more specific?

[4:10:14] Voice 5: if i mean that's very general i'm just wondering necessarily it's general but i'm just wondering

[4:10:19] Voice 5: uh if you can put some meat in the bones there i

[4:10:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): have to use the existing official community plan

[4:10:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): framework to embed this text so i'm anticipating either amending the existing text and inserting

[4:10:36] Planner Zupanec (probable): some new paragraphs and areas where that could be standalone versus trying to wordsmith what's

[4:10:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): already there completely um or creating a completely separate um section that's then

[4:10:47] Planner Zupanec (probable): easy to embed into a future amendment you know that has a different bit of a different format

[4:10:53] Planner Zupanec (probable): and structure to it so there's a couple of approaches there and the text we're literally

[4:10:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): talking about uh explicit paragraphs and sentences to frame the policies that could be

[4:11:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): considered in the future so that policy directives right to allow for future amendments that are

[4:11:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): consistent with these sort of objectives. And yeah, we'll do our best to make sure that you've

[4:11:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): got some options to consider for the March meeting. But right now, I'm just gauging your

[4:11:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): interest in ensuring that this is an appropriate next course of action. I don't have any language

[4:11:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): prepared as an example, because I was not sure whether or not you would agree with this approach

[4:11:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): to radically pare down some deliverables so we can get something done before the end of the term.

[4:11:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): Is

[4:11:41] Voice 5: that change the OCP necessary in order to enable the Heritage Conservation Bylaw, that draft language?

[4:11:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): I mean, it's very

[4:12:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): helpful. It's not necessarily.

[4:12:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): Ideally, your OCP is implemented through the Land Use Bylaw.

[4:12:08] Planner Zupanec (probable): law. So if we're going to have some future changes in the land use by law, we look back to the OCP

[4:12:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): to make sure that it's consistent with that directive or we've got explicit direction.

[4:12:19] Planner Zupanec (probable): So right now, these are, regardless of what gets implemented, at least these are standalone

[4:12:24] Planner Zupanec (probable): recognition pieces and some policy directives, whether or not they're ever implemented is

[4:12:28] Planner Zupanec (probable): yet to be seen, but it's a necessary first step.

[4:12:32] Voice 5: Is the draft heritage change or the draft

[4:12:34] Voice 5: changes to the WUB

[4:12:37] Voice 5: that will be going to the

[4:12:39] Voice 5: advisory committee,

[4:12:42] Voice 5: if we didn't have these changes to

[4:12:44] Voice 5: OCP, could they be

[4:12:46] Voice 5: I mean,

[4:12:50] Voice 5: would they be changes

[4:12:51] Voice 5: that would be permissible under the

[4:12:53] Voice 5: existing OCP?

[4:12:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): No, I think as staff we would still recommend

[4:12:57] Planner Zupanec (probable): some introductory language because

[4:12:59] Planner Zupanec (probable): right now the glaring

[4:13:01] Planner Zupanec (probable): omission of any language in your OCP

[4:13:03] Planner Zupanec (probable): it just doesn't match. It's not a good fit.

[4:13:05] Planner Zupanec (probable): it okay so

[4:13:06] Planner Zupanec (probable): we would probably come back with something so

[4:13:08] Voice 5: the two pieces travel together

[4:13:10] Voice 5: they

[4:13:10] Planner Zupanec (probable): really should that's the idea

[4:13:12] Voice 5: okay all right thank you

[4:13:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): any further discussion

[4:13:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): all right then i will call a vote then all those in favor raise your hands

[4:13:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): and that carries so now we'd be on to number three i

[4:13:28] Trustee Stamford: move that the gambier island local trust

[4:13:30] Trustee Stamford: committee request staff to post the annotated draft shoreline development permit area heritage

[4:13:35] Trustee Stamford: Heritage Conservation Area documents and revised project charter dated January 2026 to the project

[4:13:41] Trustee Stamford: website.

[4:13:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): Second advice, I'm sorry, I was looking at the words. Second advice, Trustee Bernardo,

[4:13:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): is there any discussion? Trustee Stanford?

[4:13:54] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, now with the Heritage Conservation Area,

[4:13:58] Trustee Stamford: I can, one of the immediate questions that I'm going to get is the Heritage Conservation Act,

[4:14:06] Trustee Stamford: i think is being paused by the province how does that is there any impact is there any overlap how

[4:14:13] Trustee Stamford: do those two relate

[4:14:15] Planner Zupanec (probable): yeah that's a great question and i can have some statements prepared for that

[4:14:20] Planner Zupanec (probable): okay if i'm a part of the referral but um no there's not these are two separate things the

[4:14:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): heritage conservation act and its uh follow-through is separate from the local government act which

[4:14:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): which is where the heritage conservation areas

[4:14:35] Planner Zupanec (probable): are nested under for your authority.

[4:14:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): So these are things that you as a local government

[4:14:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): can use this HCA tool

[4:14:42] Planner Zupanec (probable): and it's nested under the Local Government Act.

[4:14:48] Planner Zupanec (probable): Trustee Bernardo?

[4:14:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): My understanding is there's no changes

[4:14:51] Planner Zupanec (probable): to that section of the Local Government Act pending.

[4:14:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): Thanks, that's very helpful.

[4:14:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): Thank you.

[4:14:56] Voice 5: Yeah, this is another annoying process question

[4:15:02] Voice 5: coming from me here.

[4:15:07] Voice 5: You know, there's nothing objectionable

[4:15:09] Voice 5: about obviously about making this stuff you know publicly available on the project website i what

[4:15:14] Voice 5: i don't understand is why do we need a resolution for this when it appears to be something that's

[4:15:19] Voice 5: necessarily consequential on the rest of the work that we're doing um i

[4:15:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): can answer that question

[4:15:27] Voice 5: thank you please

[4:15:29] Planner Zupanec (probable): go if the local trust committee did not feel that either of those two documents

[4:15:33] Planner Zupanec (probable): had any value i as a project manager would post all this stuff to the project website

[4:15:39] Planner Zupanec (probable): Because I don't have confidence that the local trust committee agrees with my staff recommendations, I need explicit resolution from you that yes, these documents are worthwhile, they're good work, and they deserve to be on the project website because they have a future.

[4:15:55] Planner Zupanec (probable): If they don't, they don't even show up there because they're just trapped. They're just pushed aside as interesting drafts. We're not headed in that direction.

[4:16:04] Planner Zupanec (probable): direction. So they're not on their website, they're not reflective of any future possible

[4:16:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): work, and they're not being referred to anybody for further comment because they don't have

[4:16:13] Planner Zupanec (probable): any longevity to them. So I have to gauge your level of, you know, compatibility with these

[4:16:21] Planner Zupanec (probable): drafts to say, do you still want to work with these? Because if you do, then we post them to

[4:16:25] Planner Zupanec (probable): the project website. If you don't, we don't post them there. I can't do that on my own. I need that

[4:16:30] Planner Zupanec (probable): confirmation from you well

[4:16:32] Voice 5: for future reference just speaking for myself um i think in the

[4:16:36] Voice 5: interest of transparency it makes no sense for us as a local trust committee to approve work

[4:16:42] Voice 5: on the pretext that you know we're going to pretend that we care about it and then spike it

[4:16:48] Voice 5: later no i mean uh if we approve stuff it's because it's serious like we mean it i mean

[4:16:57] Voice 5: we have no business approving things otherwise and the fact that we may have some severe

[4:17:04] Voice 5: reservations about what the content of the stuff looks like doesn't mean that we're not going to

[4:17:08] Voice 5: do it any

[4:17:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): further discussion all about then all those in favor raise your hands that carries

[4:17:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): so we're on to the fourth one i

[4:17:23] Trustee Stamford: move that the canberra local trust committee request staff

[4:17:26] Trustee Stamford: to refer the updated amended project charter to the newly appointed apc members for comment on

[4:17:31] Trustee Stamford: preferred public engagement priorities timelines and activities between march and september

[4:17:36] Trustee Stamford: 2026 reflected of the tentative budget to be approved by trust council in march 2026

[4:17:43] Trustee Stamford: all

[4:17:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): right is there a second second by trustee bernardo any discussion call the vote then all

[4:17:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): those in favor raise your hands and that too carries all right are there any other feedback

[4:17:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): that would be helpful at this time to you planners if anything um

[4:18:04] Trustee Stamford: i've just done been putting some

[4:18:06] Trustee Stamford: general notes of any way that i can help create a preamble before this goes out before these items

[4:18:16] Trustee Stamford: go out in terms of um england like plain language um from a gambier perspective i'm just you know

[4:18:27] Trustee Stamford: if there's any way i can provide a preamble like that or help provide a preamble um i think it'd

[4:18:35] Trustee Stamford: be really helpful great i can

[4:18:37] Planner Zupanec (probable): be in touch with you directly

[4:18:38] Trustee Stamford: great thanks okay

[4:18:40] Planner Zupanec (probable): thank you so much

[4:18:41] Trustee Stamford: thank you

[4:18:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): we are here map yeah

[4:18:45] Planner Zupanec (probable): don't worry the next report will definitely have that recycle

[4:18:49] Planner Zupanec (probable): timeline i know exactly what you're talking about this

[4:18:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): oh good because uh yeah no i i don't know

[4:18:54] Planner Zupanec (probable): not why that

[4:18:54] Trustee Patrick (probable): disappeared well no

[4:18:56] Planner Zupanec (probable): i know i've

[4:18:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): been harassing everybody it's

[4:18:58] Planner Zupanec (probable): planner specific and and

[4:19:00] Planner Zupanec (probable): definitely when projects are moving at a certain pace so those are just

[4:19:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): well if you it makes you

[4:19:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): give it was it got dropped across the

[4:19:09] Planner Zupanec (probable): entire so nice to have in there

[4:19:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): but we've been

[4:19:11] Planner Zupanec (probable): at the same

[4:19:12] Planner Zupanec (probable): stage for for over a year and a half okay okay any

[4:19:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): other questions okay thank you very much today for

[4:19:21] Trustee Stamford: for your support

[4:19:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): and your help today.

[4:19:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): Now I'm gonna jump back up.

[4:19:26] Trustee Stamford: I'm in it now.

[4:19:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[4:19:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): We're at item 13, the staff reports.

[4:19:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): So we're at 13.1.

[4:19:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): This is the draft 26-27 Gambier Island

[4:19:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): annual meeting schedule on page 97 of the agenda package.

[4:19:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): package if there are no changes to the presented meeting schedule up go ahead Lisa Millard

[4:20:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): thank

[4:20:04] Voice 8: you chair Patrick we do need the trustees to identify for the May and July

[4:20:11] Voice 8: meetings where they might like us to book a venue thank you all right trustees

[4:20:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): okay

[4:20:20] Voice 5: what page are we

[4:20:21] Voice 5: on here?

[4:20:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): This is page 99.

[4:20:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee

[4:20:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): Sanford.

[4:20:26] Trustee Stamford: Given what we've just talked about,

[4:20:29] Trustee Stamford: this could provide one opportunity for limited engagement

[4:20:33] Trustee Stamford: after March.

[4:20:38] Trustee Stamford: It would be to have the May

[4:20:41] Trustee Stamford: 26th meeting on Gambier.

[4:20:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): At the community hall?

[4:20:46] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, unless, you know, we often have one

[4:20:50] Trustee Stamford: one meeting on Gambier, one meeting on Keats.

[4:20:54] Trustee Stamford: Sometimes Keats is not available mid-July

[4:20:57] Trustee Stamford: just because of the camp's activities.

[4:20:59] Trustee Stamford: So, I mean, I am willing to switch that around

[4:21:03] Trustee Stamford: and just do my own meeting with the Gambier community.

[4:21:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, Trustee

[4:21:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): Bernardo, any thoughts?

[4:21:10] Voice 5: I think it would be, you know,

[4:21:12] Voice 5: it's been some time now since we've had a meeting on Keats.

[4:21:16] Voice 5: And at various times,

[4:21:19] Voice 5: especially with the dealing with the keats shoreline bylaws we've you know met gibson's

[4:21:24] Voice 5: and trust me i got a lot of complaints about the timing on that too i think july is frankly

[4:21:33] Voice 5: for the keats people there's no point having a meeting unless it is in july sometime okay um

[4:21:38] Voice 5: tuesday um a little tricky as always because even during the summer people do work but you know

[4:21:46] Voice 5: That is what it is, I guess.

[4:21:51] Voice 5: Having said all that, if we could have the July 21st meeting on the Keats, that would be great.

[4:22:00] Voice 5: But given the anticipated energy that is going to be in the debate around the Gambier OCP review and also the trust policy statement,

[4:22:17] Voice 5: i'm wondering if it would be of benefit for gambier to have that meeting on gambier as well

[4:22:23] Voice 5: that's a question from trustee yep

[4:22:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): i see plenty of gargers andries i

[4:22:33] Planner McCargar: was just gonna note that um

[4:22:36] Planner McCargar: i think it's not possible to meet on keats in july and august when we looked into it for the

[4:22:42] Planner McCargar: last couple of years the camp just isn't available so i think the options are more of a may june on

[4:22:49] Planner McCargar: May, June, or September on Keats, specifically.

[4:22:57] Voice 5: Well, there may be Keats residents who will tear a strip off me for saying this,

[4:23:03] Voice 5: but I don't view it as super essential that we actually have the meetings on Keats itself.

[4:23:12] Voice 5: I'd say otherwise, if we were in the same situation as we were in before with the Keats shoreline issues.

[4:23:19] Voice 5: issues but I I think the people the residents of Keats are as exhausted with uh that type of issue

[4:23:25] Voice 5: as I am and there's nothing really bubbling along that's particularly super relevant for my

[4:23:32] Voice 5: constituents on Keats to show up with their torches and pitchforks so um again if it's helpful

[4:23:38] Voice 5: for advancing the Gambier OCP project to meet on Gambier not just in May but in July I'm certainly

[4:23:47] Voice 5: be open to that okay

[4:23:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): your thoughts yeah

[4:23:51] Trustee Stamford: i think it would be a good way of finishing off the term

[4:23:55] Trustee Stamford: um because we do have a lot to talk about this is just one one aspect of of community

[4:24:06] Trustee Stamford: engagement is the um ltc business which i know that's why we meet but there's often a lot of

[4:24:12] Trustee Stamford: stuff around it that can be very useful as well so um if it's okay with trustee bernardo i would

[4:24:19] Trustee Stamford: like to suggest that both may 26th and july 21st meetings be um oh i just realized something okay

[4:24:30] Trustee Stamford: tentatively um that they be in person on gambier i may have a conflict july 21st for me being in

[4:24:45] Trustee Stamford: person but um we'll just work with that i can find out pretty quick i don't know for sure now

[4:24:53] Trustee Stamford: so i have to wait in the next couple weeks would

[4:24:56] Voice 5: it be a

[4:24:56] Trustee Stamford: problem if

[4:24:58] Voice 5: i'm sorry but it would it be a

[4:25:00] Voice 5: problem like i'm just uh thinking in terms of um community of receptive you know receptivity to

[4:25:09] Voice 5: uh changes and feeling that they're getting a full opportunity to make use of either delegation

[4:25:16] Voice 5: or the comment periods at the regular business meetings.

[4:25:20] Voice 5: I'm just wondering, even if you can't make it in person,

[4:25:24] Voice 5: would there be value of having the meeting in July on Gambier in any case?

[4:25:29] Trustee Stamford: There might be.

[4:25:31] Trustee Stamford: Yeah, like I absolutely, let's put it the way it is right now.

[4:25:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay.

[4:25:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[4:25:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): Planner McCarter?

[4:25:38] Planner McCargar: I was just going to add if you could also set a location

[4:25:41] Planner McCargar: for the February 23rd meeting,

[4:25:44] Planner McCargar: whether that's electronic, North Vancouver, on island.

[4:25:49] Trustee Stamford: So that's going to be one of the first meetings of the new term.

[4:26:00] Trustee Stamford: Why don't we put it in North Vancouver, just given that it's wintertime.

[4:26:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I'll look to staff.

[4:26:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): Do we need to make a motion to amend this table with those changes?

[4:26:17] Trustee Patrick (probable): And is that the process you'd like us to proceed with?

[4:26:24] Voice 2: I've

[4:26:24] Voice 5: got a question.

[4:26:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead.

[4:26:26] Trustee Patrick (probable): ahead um

[4:26:27] Voice 5: i see right now we are scheduled to have the meeting electronically on november 24th

[4:26:35] Voice 5: now i think um uh i should know better but isn't that the first meeting of the new

[4:26:42] Voice 5: um new local trust committee it

[4:26:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): is um i think they've moved a lot of the meetings those first

[4:26:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): meetings to electronic just because um they're trying to hold all local trust committee meetings

[4:26:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): between the first trust council meeting in November

[4:27:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): and the second trust council meeting in December.

[4:27:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): So it's compressing all 13 meetings

[4:27:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): or 12 meetings occurring within a three-week period.

[4:27:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): So I think they've moved them to electronic

[4:27:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): just to facilitate that schedule.

[4:27:16] Voice 5: Otherwise, it's impossible.

[4:27:18] Voice 5: You can't squeeze that meeting.

[4:27:19] Voice 5: Got it.

[4:27:20] Voice 5: Because I was going to suggest it would be nice

[4:27:22] Voice 5: and be better to have the first meeting in person,

[4:27:24] Voice 5: but I take your point.

[4:27:25] Voice 5: It won't work.

[4:27:26] Voice 5: I get it.

[4:27:27] Voice 5: We all agree.

[4:27:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): But yeah, we set ourselves up for an impossibility.

[4:27:30] Voice 5: That's it.

[4:27:31] Voice 5: All right.

[4:27:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): So do we need to amend this, Lisa, first amend this table by setting these locations?

[4:27:41] Voice 8: Yes, Chair Patrick, you do.

[4:27:43] Voice 8: All right.

[4:27:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): Go ahead, Trustee Stanford.

[4:27:47] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee amend the Gambier Local Trust meeting schedule.

[4:28:00] Trustee Stamford: to state May 26, 2026 meeting will be on Gambier Island, that the July 21, 2026 meeting

[4:28:14] Trustee Stamford: will be on Gambier Island, and that the February 23, 2027 meeting be in North Vancouver,

[4:28:25] Trustee Stamford: if available.

[4:28:30] Trustee Patrick (probable): Is there a second? Seconded by Trustee Bernardo. Any discussion?

[4:28:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): discussion call the vote then all those in favor that carries so now we would need to do the motion

[4:28:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): on page 97 to approve the schedule as amended i believe all

[4:28:53] Voice 5: right i'll move that recommendation

[4:28:55] Trustee Stamford: i was just

[4:28:55] Trustee Stamford: getting up there okay i

[4:28:57] Voice 5: uh moved that gambier and the local trust committee approved

[4:29:00] Voice 5: their april 2026 to march 2027 meeting schedule as amended is

[4:29:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): there a second seconded by trustee

[4:29:09] Trustee Patrick (probable): Stanford. Any discussion? I'll call the vote. Then all those in favor, raise your hands. And that

[4:29:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): carries. All right. Thank you. I'm going to keep proceeding through then. We have a public

[4:29:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): notification bylaw request for decision on page 103. Is there any, who's going to present this

[4:29:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): one or we just proceed with the resolutions?

[4:29:40] Voice 5: We have this explained to us again. I've lost

[4:29:42] Voice 5: lost track i'm afraid i think i know what it's about hi

[4:29:47] Voice 3: there i can speak to it uh through the

[4:29:49] Voice 3: chair if you like um uh this is presented trust council um they adopted their own

[4:30:00] Voice 3: bylaw alternative notification bylaw which all the notices that were legislated such as

[4:30:10] Voice 3: public hearing notice temporary use permit notices to instead of being in the newspaper

[4:30:18] Voice 3: to be on social media and our website and

[4:30:24] Trustee Patrick (probable): let me i think i want to clarify the trust council

[4:30:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): The Trust Council bylaw that was adopted was only pertaining to Trust Council nurses.

[4:30:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): So Trust Council also adopted a model bylaw that if you don't adopt the model bylaw, you stay with the status quo that the notifications would go as your current bylaws, which would be to the newspapers.

[4:30:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): Correct.

[4:30:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): So this would be your chance to modify, either adopt this with what's recommended in here, or you could amend it if you had other specific notifications that you felt were important other than the website and electronically in social media.

[4:31:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): Sorry, was I, is that it? Okay.

[4:31:10] Trustee Patrick (probable): That's absolutely correct.

[4:31:13] Voice 5: So I think I recall it now. We're basically being asked to approve the model bylaw for us.

[4:31:17] Voice 5: If

[4:31:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): you want, not every local trust committee has done so. Some have remained to keep the processes that they had in place going forward. So it's our, and I guess I'd look to you as local trustees electronically on the website and social media. Is that sufficient for your islands, Trustee Stanford?

[4:31:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well,

[4:31:39] Trustee Stamford: I'd just like to say I really welcome this for Gambier Island. I recognize it isn't always adequate for other island areas, but for us, the newspaper is not distributed well at all.

[4:31:54] Trustee Stamford: um it's a mainland newspaper that doesn't reach the islands uh with any consistency so having the

[4:32:02] Trustee Stamford: ability just to inform over social media or through our own um our email lists or at the

[4:32:11] Trustee Stamford: islands trust website um just makes it a lot more convenient and efficient and cheap so um i look

[4:32:20] Trustee Stamford: look forward to i would like to put the recommendation on the floor um as presented

[4:32:26] Trustee Stamford: on page 103 um the notification bylaw request for decision i

[4:32:36] Voice 5: second the motion of trustee

[4:32:38] Voice 5: stanford for the reasons given by her all

[4:32:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): right i'm going to look to staff can we uh do that as

[4:32:44] Trustee Patrick (probable): all those motions under one it's just one motion isn't it no it could be one two three four five

[4:32:54] Voice 3: i

[4:32:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): would need the five you want all five done separately all right then okay

[4:33:03] Trustee Stamford: i move the

[4:33:04] Trustee Stamford: gambria island

[4:33:04] Trustee Stamford: um local trust committee um give bylaw number 162 cited as gambria local trust

[4:33:14] Trustee Stamford: committee public notification bylaw number 162 2026 first reading

[4:33:19] Voice 2: second

[4:33:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): second by trustee bernardo

[4:33:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): any discussion all the vote all those in favor raise your hands that carries i

[4:33:28] Trustee Stamford: move the camera

[4:33:29] Trustee Stamford: local trust committee give bylaw number 162 site is gambier local trust committee public

[4:33:34] Trustee Stamford: notification bylaw number 162 2026 second reading second

[4:33:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): second by trustee bernardo any discussion

[4:33:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor raise your hands.

[4:33:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): That carries.

[4:33:47] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier Local Trust Committee give bylaw number 162 cited as Gambier Local

[4:33:51] Trustee Stamford: Trust Committee Public Notification bylaw number 162 2026 third reading.

[4:33:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): Seconded by Trustee Bernardo.

[4:34:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any discussion?

[4:34:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): Call the vote.

[4:34:02] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor raise your hands.

[4:34:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): That carries.

[4:34:05] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee forward bylaw number 162 cited as

[4:34:11] Trustee Stamford: Gambier Local Trust Committee, Public Notification Bylaw No. 162

[4:34:14] Trustee Stamford: 2026 to the Islands Trust Executive Committee for consideration

[4:34:18] Trustee Stamford: of approval.

[4:34:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): Seconded by Trustee Bernardo.

[4:34:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): I need to, sorry, go ahead

[4:34:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): Nadine.

[4:34:28] Voice 3: Oh, sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt, but there was

[4:34:31] Voice 3: an accessible, is it accessible, there was a resolution in there

[4:34:35] Voice 3: is it accessible, reliable, that one would need to be in there as well.

[4:34:39] Voice 3: okay

[4:34:40] Trustee Stamford: for some reason i thought it was outside of it but i'll add that we'll

[4:34:44] Voice 5: come back to it

[4:34:44] Voice 5: that's actually a preamble

[4:34:46] Trustee Patrick (probable): um i think they're still wanting that motion but okay we've got

[4:34:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): we've got

[4:34:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): this final motion has been on the ground and it was seconded i believe by trustee bernardo

[4:34:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): um is there any discussion i'll call the vote all those in favor and that carries i move that

[4:35:04] Trustee Stamford: the gambier local trust committee considers that the notification methods in draft bylaw 162 are

[4:35:09] Trustee Stamford: are reliable, suitable, and accessible

[4:35:10] Trustee Stamford: for the Gambier Local Trust Area.

[4:35:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, is there a second?

[4:35:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): Second by Trustee Bernardo.

[4:35:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any discussion?

[4:35:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think we had that earlier.

[4:35:18] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor?

[4:35:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): Carried.

[4:35:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay.

[4:35:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): Done.

[4:35:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): Took care of that one.

[4:35:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): We're going to move on to item 13.4.

[4:35:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): That's the application report.

[4:35:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Are there any questions about any of the applications?

[4:35:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): No, the trustee expense report is here on page 111.

[4:35:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): And then our adopted policies and standing resolutions are here on page 112.

[4:35:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): The next item we have really is under item First Nation Relationship Building Update under 13.71.

[4:35:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): Congratulatory letter to the New Squamish Nation Council.

[4:36:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Stanford, over to you.

[4:36:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): We had an earlier discussion too.

[4:36:07] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah,

[4:36:08] Trustee Stamford: I just thought that it would, this would be a great opportunity to reach out to the new Squamish Nation Council, provide a congratulatory letter to include our work with the OCP and acknowledgement of the land use plan.

[4:36:34] Trustee Patrick (probable): And did we want to request a meeting as well?

[4:36:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): And that we have

[4:36:38] Trustee Stamford: a meeting with the local trust committee

[4:36:42] Trustee Stamford: and the council and work towards that.

[4:36:48] Voice 5: Right.

[4:36:49] Voice 2: As we

[4:36:49] Voice 5: talked before, you know, and Planner McCarger had, you know,

[4:36:53] Voice 5: pointed out that the original resolution about meeting

[4:36:56] Voice 5: with Squamish Nation political leadership was really more sharply focused

[4:37:01] Voice 5: on the Gambier OCP side of it.

[4:37:06] Voice 5: And frankly, in that respect, events have passed us by in the sense that so much work has been done between the two staffs and we are moving in a tangible direction.

[4:37:20] Voice 5: So I think it does make sense to either amend or supersede the previous resolution that we asked staff to sort of move forward in terms of getting together with Squamish Nation.

[4:37:33] Voice 5: But I would certainly like us to do that before the end of term, if we could do that.

[4:37:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, I don't think we have to amend the previous motion.

[4:37:41] Trustee Patrick (probable): If this letter requests setting up a meeting, this becomes its own new action, I think.

[4:37:48] Voice 5: I suppose

[4:37:49] Voice 5: I've given up trying to figure out what resolutions are required and what aren't.

[4:37:55] Voice 5: Because for all I know, we can have a resolution to pass the letter, but we may need to have six other resolutions for what goes in it.

[4:38:03] Voice 5: So I don't know.

[4:38:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): Well, I'd look to staff.

[4:38:05] Trustee Patrick (probable): If we send a letter that requests a meeting, would that be captured in the follow-up action list?

[4:38:14] Planner McCargar: Correct, yeah.

[4:38:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): Okay, there we go.

[4:38:16] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right, so I guess, Trustee Stanford, did you want to try a resolution?

[4:38:20] Voice 5: Just to be clear about something,

[4:38:22] Voice 5: when we send in that request,

[4:38:24] Voice 5: I wouldn't want us to just have a letter that just blandly says we request a meeting.

[4:38:28] Voice 5: I think we should be very specific in the letter, and I guess we don't need a resolution for that,

[4:38:33] Voice 5: But I hope that we could be very specific about the purpose of it, which is we want to get we want to get to know you and we want to have a relationship with you as colleagues that have common interests to work through, that it really is about relationship building, you know, in appropriate official letteries, you know.

[4:38:57] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right. Trustee Stamford, did you?

[4:38:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): So

[4:39:00] Trustee Stamford: if we have a basic motion, Chair Patrick, would you be able to provide the appropriate flowery language to ensure our enthusiasm for a meeting?

[4:39:11] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah. And

[4:39:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think we can share the draft letter with you as generally we can just get everyone's feedback on the letter before it goes.

[4:39:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): Perfect. Thank you.

[4:39:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): I

[4:39:21] Trustee Stamford: move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to write a letter to the new Squamish Nation Council, congratulating them on their election.

[4:39:38] Trustee Stamford: Also, congratulating the Squamish Nation on the land use plan that Gambier Island Local Trust Area is a part of.

[4:39:52] Trustee Stamford: and request a meeting with squamish nation council as soon as possible to further our

[4:40:06] Trustee Stamford: relationship with the nation and speak to our official community plan process and other

[4:40:13] Trustee Stamford: issues or relationship building oh god i hate this stuff okay in that direction

[4:40:22] Trustee Stamford: all

[4:40:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): right let's let

[4:40:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): at least a pop it all up and it'll probably be some wordsmithing so yes

[4:40:27] Trustee Stamford: when lisa's ready

[4:40:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): maybe staff will have some saving words here right here we

[4:40:52] Trustee Patrick (probable): go would it be a letter from the chair

[4:40:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): um so i think we would prepare a letter from the chair staff would help write that anyway so

[4:41:20] Voice 5: yeah just looking at that um do we really need to go into the ocp business or could just say

[4:41:25] Voice 5: They just leave it at further relationship building with the nation.

[4:41:34] Trustee Stamford: Okay, I'm good with that.

[4:41:49] Voice 5: Because I really wouldn't want anybody to get the wrong impression

[4:41:53] Voice 5: that it's some kind of negotiating thing.

[4:41:55] Voice 5: It's not getting

[4:41:56] Voice 5: to know them and us.

[4:41:59] Trustee Patrick (probable): And this is a, it's a, oh, sorry.

[4:42:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): It's a letter to, would it be to write draft?

[4:42:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think it's to draft a letter for the chair or from the chair.

[4:42:09] Voice 5: Yeah, that's right.

[4:42:09] Voice 5: You request to have to draft a letter for the chair.

[4:42:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah.

[4:42:12] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah. I

[4:42:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): was looking to staff. Is this sufficient?

[4:42:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Yeah, it looks

[4:42:34] Planner McCargar: good to me.

[4:42:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): That looks good. All right. If you're okay with that, Trustee Stanford, you can go ahead and read that as wordsmithed.

[4:42:44] Trustee Stamford: I move that the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee request staff to draft a letter for the chair to the new Squamish Nation Council,

[4:42:54] Trustee Stamford: congratulating them on their election, congratulating the Squamish Nation on the land use plan.

[4:42:59] Trustee Stamford: land, the Canberra Island local trust area is a part of, and request a meeting with Squamish

[4:43:08] Trustee Stamford: Nation Council to further relationship building with the nation.

[4:43:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): Is there a second?

[4:43:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): I second the motion.

[4:43:15] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustee Bernardo, any discussion?

[4:43:19] Trustee Patrick (probable): If not, I'll call the vote.

[4:43:20] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor, raise your hands.

[4:43:22] Trustee Patrick (probable): That carries.

[4:43:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[4:43:28] Trustee Patrick (probable): Trustees, I think we're moving on.

[4:43:29] Trustee Patrick (probable): We have the active projects report and the future projects list here.

[4:43:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): I think we're pretty much where we are.

[4:43:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): There's no changes at this time.

[4:43:40] Trustee Patrick (probable): Our next meeting will be March 24th.

[4:43:43] Trustee Patrick (probable): That's going to be a much more meaty meeting.

[4:43:45] Trustee Patrick (probable): It will be held electronically.

[4:43:49] Trustee Patrick (probable): And if there's no further business, we'll be going into a closed meeting.

[4:43:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): I would rise and report.

[4:43:55] Trustee Patrick (probable): Oh, no, I will have to have a rise and report for this meeting potentially.

[4:43:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): So we won't close the meeting yet.

[4:44:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): but we'll be going into a closed meeting so that

[4:44:03] Voice 5: before we do that though um just if it's at all

[4:44:08] Voice 5: possible planner mccarger and you know unfortunately planner zupanek isn't here

[4:44:13] Voice 5: but you know there's going to be um so much substance really for us to sort of

[4:44:20] Voice 5: talk and think about at the next meeting with respect to the gambier ocp um if at all possible

[4:44:28] Voice 5: It would be very helpful to have the draft materials sent to the trustees directly before the agenda is formally prepared and all that stuff.

[4:44:38] Voice 5: I mean, because we always have, whether it's trust council, local trust committee meetings, we always have the same issue, which is everything just shows up in this big agenda all at once.

[4:44:46] Voice 5: And you're kind of under a time crunch to read it.

[4:44:51] Voice 5: As far as I'm concerned, it's OK if we get these things in bits and pieces and then the formal agenda comes later.

[4:44:57] Voice 5: later. So the earlier we could have access to those draft materials for us to review and think

[4:45:02] Voice 5: about, that'd be helpful. Does that require resolution?

[4:45:10] Planner McCargar: I can pass that along, but we are

[4:45:13] Planner McCargar: sort of subject to a series of approvals on our end. So it is based on manager availability to

[4:45:20] Planner McCargar: review, staff time to write them early. We're kind of beholden to a lot of deadlines on our end too.

[4:45:26] Voice 5: well do what you can thanks all

[4:45:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): right then with that we need a motion to close the meeting item

[4:45:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): 6.1 page 3 of the agenda package go ahead trustee stamperin oh

[4:45:41] Trustee Stamford: you want me to read it

[4:45:42] Trustee Stamford: i

[4:45:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): know go ahead just

[4:45:45] Trustee Stamford: let me get there sorry page

[4:45:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): 3 yeah

[4:45:53] Trustee Stamford: i'm just on the wrong

[4:45:58] Trustee Stamford: it's gone somebody

[4:46:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): else i can read it it's gone

[4:46:01] Trustee Patrick (probable): i'm happy to read it i move that the meeting be

[4:46:04] Trustee Patrick (probable): closed to the public in accordance with the community charter part 4 division 3 section 91

[4:46:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): a for the purpose of considering personal information about an identifiable individual

[4:46:14] Trustee Patrick (probable): who holds or is being considered for a position as officer employer agent in the local trust

[4:46:21] Trustee Patrick (probable): trust committee or other position appointed

[4:46:23] Trustee Patrick (probable): by the local trust committee

[4:46:25] Trustee Patrick (probable): and that the reporter recorder

[4:46:27] Trustee Patrick (probable): and the trust staff attend the meeting.

[4:46:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): Second.

[4:46:32] Trustee Patrick (probable): Seconded by trustee Bernardo.

[4:46:33] Trustee Patrick (probable): Any discussion?

[4:46:35] Trustee Patrick (probable): I will call the vote.

[4:46:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): All those in favor, raise your hands.

[4:46:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): And that carries.

[4:46:39] Trustee Patrick (probable): So we'll give staff a moment to put this into.

[4:46:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): All right.

[4:46:51] Trustee Patrick (probable): I'm going to rise and report from our in-camera meeting

[4:46:56] Trustee Patrick (probable): that the local trust committee

[4:46:58] Trustee Patrick (probable): city appointed the following members to a two-year term of the Gambier Advisory Planning

[4:47:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): Commission. That would be Jim Quayle, Carol Petroski, Steve McDonald, Camilla Berry,

[4:47:13] Trustee Patrick (probable): and Florence Koselich. And with that, if there's no further, go ahead, Trustee Stanford.

[4:47:21] Trustee Stamford: Super quick. I can't remember. Are these meetings available on YouTube or for streaming later on?

[4:47:27] Trustee Stamford: are they recorded so people can watch them later on

[4:47:31] Trustee Patrick (probable): apc meetings no

[4:47:33] Trustee Stamford: no um our our

[4:47:36] Trustee Patrick (probable): meetings yes

[4:47:37] Trustee Patrick (probable): regular

[4:47:37] Trustee Stamford: business meeting our

[4:47:38] Trustee Patrick (probable): meetings correct great

[4:47:40] Trustee Stamford: yes okay i'll just thank you i just

[4:47:42] Trustee Stamford: confirmed that

[4:47:42] Trustee Patrick (probable): yep all right i just need a motion then to adjourn our regular meeting

[4:47:48] Trustee Patrick (probable): i

[4:47:49] Voice 5: move that we need

[4:47:50] Trustee Patrick (probable): my trust trustee bernardo thank you seconded by trustee stamford

[4:47:53] Trustee Patrick (probable): all right we are adjourned thank you everyone and we'll see you at the next meeting on march 24th

[4:48:00] Trustee Patrick (probable): at 10 a.m which is electronically so goodbye everybody laura

[4:48:05] Voice 10: everybody thank

[4:48:06] Trustee Patrick (probable): you all right

[4:48:08] Trustee Patrick (probable): we'll see you we'll see you guys tomorrow yeah