Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, February 26, 2026

[0:00:02] Voice 7: Figure out about live streaming. As this is also a webinar, Chair, if the live stream, if I have technical issues with the live stream, since it's a webinar, the public is still able to attend. They can come into the office. I would say that the meeting can begin now with that one live stream piece missing, and I'll work on it in the background, sir.

[0:00:25] Voice 7: Okay,

[0:00:27] Voice 3: thank you very much. So welcome everyone to this joint meeting of the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee and the Local Community Commission.

[0:00:38] Voice 3: And I want to begin the meeting by acknowledging that we're fortunate to be able to gather in the territories of many Coast Salish peoples and for Salt Spring, including the St. Jotland and Hul'q'umi'num speaking peoples, stewards of these lands and waters since time immemorial.

[0:00:57] Voice 3: we do have an agenda which hopefully everyone has seen um really mostly just discussions but

[0:01:08] Voice 3: i will look to see if there's any uh amendments to the agenda desired not seeing any i'll take

[0:01:20] Voice 3: it by general consent we'll adopt it oh gail did you have something just

[0:01:26] Voice 1: gary's hand up and i'm not

[0:01:28] Voice 1: sure whether that has to do with the agenda oh

[0:01:31] Voice 3: okay thank you sorry i'll put that that panel

[0:01:35] Voice 3: up because i didn't notice that go ahead gary

[0:01:37] Voice 6: yeah just wondering um if in the housing section

[0:01:43] Voice 6: if we could talk about the ocp in general and um what are the uh opportunities for lcc crd input

[0:01:55] Voice 6: So just to suggest maybe housing could be housing slash OCP.

[0:02:00] Voice 6: I

[0:02:08] Voice 3: don't have a problem with that.

[0:02:11] Voice 3: So anything else?

[0:02:14] Voice 3: And your hand's still up, sir.

[0:02:16] Voice 6: Yeah, that's right.

[0:02:18] Voice 3: Okay, then I'll take it by general consent.

[0:02:20] Voice 3: We'll adopt the agenda as amended.

[0:02:25] Voice 3: And so the first piece is the protocol agreement update.

[0:02:30] Voice 3: And I'm going to turn that over to Regional Planning Manager Hutton to get us started.

[0:02:37] Voice 3: And I'm sure Stephen probably has something to add to.

[0:02:41] Voice 3: And before I forget, pardon me, just like to acknowledge also that we're being supported today by our Regional Planning Manager, Chris Hutton, and our recorder, Carly Blaney.

[0:02:56] Voice 3: me and

[0:02:59] Voice 3: appreciate that

[0:03:01] Voice 3: staff support for our meetings.

[0:03:04] Voice 3: Over to you, sir.

[0:03:06] Voice 8: My apologies. Are we starting

[0:03:08] Voice 8: on the protocol agreement?

[0:03:10] Voice 8: Correct.

[0:03:12] Voice 8: I think Stephen Henderson

[0:03:14] Voice 8: had this one.

[0:03:17] Voice 8: I might

[0:03:18] Voice 8: have some update on this. I don't currently have

[0:03:20] Voice 8: one.

[0:03:21] Voice 5: I could take this

[0:03:22] Voice 5: to Chris. CRD

[0:03:25] Voice 5: legal, we prepared a protocol

[0:03:26] Voice 5: agreement. We reviewed it

[0:03:28] Voice 5: at the lcc and we've forwarded that to islands trust um i believe it's with islands trust legal

[0:03:35] Voice 5: um they're doing a review of the protocol agreement and i haven't seen anything come back

[0:03:40] Voice 5: yet but i'm um i believe i'm waiting for something to come back from from islands trust on that

[0:03:47] Voice 5: not

[0:03:52] Voice 3: a whole lot to discuss today then um trustee patrick

[0:03:59] Trustee Patrick: i'm seeing we have not seen the protocol

[0:04:02] Trustee Patrick: call agreement, so we can't comment on what's in it. I know I've had some conversations with some

[0:04:08] Trustee Patrick: of the LCC commissioners on, as we move forward, the opportunity of how we can work more closely

[0:04:17] Trustee Patrick: together. And I know the Islands Trust Act itself has a requirement that the board of the regional

[0:04:24] Trustee Patrick: district, all or part of which is in the trust area, must not adopt a bylaw respecting the trust

[0:04:29] Trustee Patrick: trust area issue a permit respecting the trust area or undertake work respecting the trust area

[0:04:33] Trustee Patrick: if the bylaw permit is contrary to or at variance with the local trust committee or service

[0:04:38] Trustee Patrick: coordination agreement, which is types that are sped out. So what I see are, you know, the official

[0:04:44] Trustee Patrick: community plan and your service provision as being intimately linked and our policies intimately

[0:04:51] Trustee Patrick: linked and that we should have sort of reciprocal abilities to be able to identify to one another

[0:04:57] Trustee Patrick: other opportunities to improve going forward. So I'm not talking about the current OCB project,

[0:05:02] Trustee Patrick: but I mean, a mechanism in which we could have supporting policies that help each other. So I

[0:05:11] Trustee Patrick: don't know if that's in the protocol agreement. If it's not a protocol agreement, is that a memo

[0:05:14] Trustee Patrick: of understanding? What would be a tool that could really improve the legacy for our two bodies going

[0:05:22] Trustee Patrick: into the future.

[0:05:25] Voice 3: Thank you for that.

[0:05:26] Voice 3: Stephen, do you have any comments on what's in the protocol?

[0:05:31] Voice 3: So the

[0:05:31] Voice 5: protocol agreement, I could have gone into more detail on that, sorry, but it's

[0:05:36] Voice 5: kind of in draft stage with your legal, so I kind of hesitate to go too far.

[0:05:39] Voice 5: The protocol agreement was considered to be between the boards, and there would be a letter

[0:05:44] Voice 5: of understanding is what we had prepared.

[0:05:46] Voice 5: It's a slightly different name, so the protocol agreement would remain as is, but there'd

[0:05:50] Voice 5: be a letter of understanding between ourselves and the LCC and yourselves for this group so it's a

[0:05:56] Voice 5: different level that's not a we were not looking to revise the protocol we were looking to prepare

[0:06:02] Voice 5: a new letter of understanding thanks

[0:06:07] Voice 3: for that um Gary yeah

[0:06:16] Voice 6: yeah thanks uh thanks Stephen I've

[0:06:18] Voice 6: forgotten uh that was the approach to be taken because there is an existing protocol agreement

[0:06:25] Voice 6: agreement. Just one thing, I just wonder about the who communicates to who. So just recently,

[0:06:38] Voice 6: there was a referral of the trust policy issue to the CRD, and it went to the CRD in Victoria

[0:06:46] Voice 6: Victoria, somewhere. But I'm not sure that it didn't kind of come through to the LCC or me.

[0:06:56] Voice 6: And there was also a water district, there was a land use decision in the Cushion Watershed,

[0:07:05] Voice 6: which the Bettis Water District wanted to have input to. And again, they were informed that the

[0:07:13] Voice 6: The CRD was informed, but again, I think it went to Victoria somewhere.

[0:07:19] Voice 6: Just a comment, I think it would be useful, and I'm sure it happens the other way around as well,

[0:07:25] Voice 6: that we have an understanding, you know, there's kind of a formal information exchange,

[0:07:35] Voice 6: but I think either formally or informally, there should be a kind of a notification of elected officials,

[0:07:40] Voice 6: Just so we, you know, we have a heads up as well, just in case.

[0:07:48] Voice 6: The trust policy matter, my understanding is CRD staff indicated that there was no issue there or concern.

[0:07:58] Voice 6: And I'm not sure that reflected locally elected officials' views.

[0:08:03] Voice 6: In fact, the LCC just had a meeting where we passed several resolutions as input into the review.

[0:08:10] Voice 3: you gary can i just interrupt you for a moment because i just do want to note that the the local

[0:08:16] Voice 3: trust committee is post uh public hearing um it may like so if you can stick to the

[0:08:22] Voice 3: the the process piece which i agree is is important and and may need some delving into

[0:08:30] Voice 3: the

[0:08:32] Voice 6: okay the the cushion is post public hearing mr

[0:08:40] Voice 8: mr cheryl i'll just um reiterate go ahead

[0:08:43] Voice 3: The

[0:08:43] Voice 8: public hearing for 355 Blackburn was held on February 12th, so LTC is now in post-public hearing, and it is a requirement that they not hear any additional information, otherwise we would have to hold a new public hearing.

[0:09:01] Voice 8: So we would like to avoid that if we can today, and sometimes staff will be reporting back to LTC with advice on how to proceed next.

[0:09:15] Voice 8: So if there is any additional information, I would suggest that CRD, any body of the CRD could send that directly to SSINFO at isletrust.bc.ca.

[0:09:31] Voice 8: We'll be happy to work with your staff to determine next steps on that.

[0:09:37] Voice 6: Yes, sorry, I wasn't aware it was post-public hearing, but my comment isn't on the substance of the issue.

[0:09:42] Voice 6: My comment is on the process and the alerting.

[0:09:46] Voice 6: So what I'm saying is the alerting is going to Victoria, but it's not filtering through locally, is my point.

[0:09:54] Voice 6: So if we can, even just by simply copying referrals, say, to our local security staff or the chair of the LCC or myself, that's what I'm speaking to, not the substance of the issue.

[0:10:09] Voice 6: Yeah,

[0:10:12] Voice 3: fair enough. And we do understand there was something didn't go right in terms of the dissemination of that information.

[0:10:24] Voice 3: Go ahead, Mr. Hutton.

[0:10:25] Voice 8: Mr. Chair, if I may, I think what would maybe be a good note takeaway is that maybe Mr. Henderson and I can meet to discuss how we can better meet the referral needs of the CRD and ensure that we're in line with policy.

[0:10:39] Voice 8: policy. We want to make sure that we're, and we do with other agencies often, you know, if we're

[0:10:46] Voice 8: sending it here, we're sending it there. Our goal is to make sure that we keep a current

[0:10:51] Voice 8: referrals list and they do change from time to time. So it's something we're happy to work with

[0:10:56] Voice 8: staff on that. Yeah, appreciate that. Gail?

[0:11:03] Voice 1: I remember vaguely a lot of talk about a protocol

[0:11:07] Voice 1: call agreement. And to be honest, I don't remember a lot of the details, but my takeaway was, oh,

[0:11:13] Voice 1: how wonderful it'll be for the Islands Trust and LCC to be able to advocate on things related to

[0:11:19] Voice 1: local salt spring issues with the ministry, the province, whatever. And I'm not even sure that's

[0:11:24] Voice 1: there. Our LCC is having a real struggle with the rules around advocacy. And I know when I brought

[0:11:30] Voice 1: up, one of us brought up a co-letter on the speculation and vacancy tax, we were told that

[0:11:36] Voice 1: that was kind of out of the range of being able to work together.

[0:11:39] Voice 1: So I guess I would just ask that advocating together is really powerful

[0:11:45] Voice 1: and that as we're looking at this agreement,

[0:11:47] Voice 1: hopefully there will be ways for us to muddle through and be able to do this.

[0:11:54] Voice 3: Yeah, thanks, Gail. I appreciate that.

[0:11:56] Voice 3: And both of our organizations have their own guidelines

[0:12:01] Voice 3: that may not always intersect.

[0:12:04] Voice 3: act uh certainly the local um the local trust committee advocacy is uh i'd say it's a live

[0:12:10] Voice 3: issue at at islands trust um there's the policy doesn't always match what the local trust

[0:12:19] Voice 3: committees um feel uh they should be um able to engage in in terms of advocacy so i i take your

[0:12:29] Voice 3: point. And, you know, I think in the absence of any policy change, then some clarity for both

[0:12:38] Voice 3: our organizations on where we can work together is great. And that working together does have a

[0:12:43] Voice 3: lot of potential.

[0:12:48] Voice 9: Earl. Yes, I just want to ask, are we fairly confident that this issue is moving

[0:12:56] Voice 9: forward with reasonable progress. The original draft of the letter of understanding from Stephen

[0:13:04] Voice 9: came out in September. And it's been shared a few times. And I've got it in front of me on my

[0:13:12] Voice 9: screen. And I would feel better if I had a sense that either at the CRD or the trust

[0:13:19] Voice 9: council levels, legal levels, it was actually moving forward. It's very important.

[0:13:26] Voice 9: excuse me it's very important to both organizations i think and it seems to have gotten caught in a

[0:13:33] Voice 9: bureaucratic quagmire somewhere and i'm not exactly sure where or with whom yeah

[0:13:41] Voice 3: i appreciate that and

[0:13:44] Voice 3: i'm sure we can do some work on our end to see where it where where where it's at in in the

[0:13:51] Voice 3: island stress process and see if there's any way we can help speed it along uh brian yeah

[0:14:00] Voice 10: i i just

[0:14:01] Voice 10: want to acknowledge that, I mean, part of what we're talking about here is referrals. And part

[0:14:08] Voice 10: of what we're talking about is the protocol agreement per se. And they're related, but

[0:14:13] Voice 10: they're not the same thing. And I know that our local staff acknowledged that around the trust

[0:14:20] Voice 10: policy statement, they were aware of the referral from the trust. And it's simply what I put down

[0:14:27] Voice 10: down to kind of a groin pains issue on the CRD side of it.

[0:14:34] Voice 10: Our local staff apologized for not having recognized

[0:14:38] Voice 10: that it was an issue that elected people

[0:14:40] Voice 10: should have been involved with right from the start.

[0:14:45] Voice 10: So we do have multiple things to sort out.

[0:14:48] Voice 10: Obviously it would be really nice

[0:14:50] Voice 10: to get the protocol agreement and the letter resolved sooner

[0:14:56] Voice 10: sooner rather than later. But it's it's clear to me that the intentions are all good on both sides

[0:15:04] Voice 10: and that there have been maybe a couple little burps along the way of realizing, oh, yeah,

[0:15:09] Voice 10: just a minute. This is something that really does need to be referred to elected people.

[0:15:14] Voice 10: And I'm pretty confident that next time around with a referral, even in the absence of any other

[0:15:22] Voice 10: changes to letters or agreements, that things will go a little more smoothly.

[0:15:31] Voice 3: Yeah, thanks for that. Anything else on this topic before we move along?

[0:15:40] Voice 3: I'm not seeing a pile of hands coming up. So, next is the Salt Spring Island housing update,

[0:15:49] Voice 3: and Gary had some thoughts there. Anyone else?

[0:15:56] Voice 3: Can

[0:16:01] Voice 5: you provide an update on the integrated housing strategy as well?

[0:16:04] Voice 3: Right.

[0:16:06] Voice 5: The integrated housing strategy, we had our public engagement in the fall of 2025,

[0:16:12] Voice 5: several sessions in Ganges with several different groups, interest groups, stakeholders.

[0:16:21] Voice 5: And we have a What We Heard report coming back.

[0:16:25] Voice 5: That will be on our agenda in March at the LCC at our evening meeting.

[0:16:31] Voice 5: the What We Heard report, and then we hope to have a draft report in

[0:16:35] Voice 5: May. So that's where

[0:16:39] Voice 5: that, and there'll be, when we have come back with the draft report, we're looking to

[0:16:43] Voice 5: engage with Islands Trust and have discussions with Islands Trust

[0:16:47] Voice 5: before we take the draft report to a final report, and we expect there'll be

[0:16:51] Voice 5: some additional discussions along the way as well, before and after that draft report.

[0:16:58] Voice 5: Working together.

[0:16:59] Voice 3: Thank you for that. Yeah, thanks for that update.

[0:17:02] Voice 3: date. That's useful. Oh, there's Gary. Go ahead, Gary.

[0:17:16] Voice 6: Yeah, thanks. Yeah, my question was about

[0:17:18] Voice 6: the OCP review, which has obvious housing implications, and there will be some kind of

[0:17:29] Voice 6: recommendations in the LCC housing strategy around land use policy. But yeah, just wondering about

[0:17:36] Voice 6: the the status of the review but also uh in terms of

[0:17:41] Voice 6: lcc crd input what what formal provision is

[0:17:47] Voice 6: there for that is the is the window now open for crd input well i think

[0:17:57] Voice 3: yeah go ahead go ahead oh

[0:17:59] Voice 8: sorry i was

[0:18:01] Voice 3: i was just gonna call on you to give an update great

[0:18:04] Voice 8: yeah um i think um you know the

[0:18:08] Voice 8: The question around is there a formal opportunity, there's a requirement in the adoption process legislatively of an OCP or a referral to other government agencies.

[0:18:22] Voice 8: So that includes a number of provincial ministries, CRD, improvement districts, school districts.

[0:18:29] Voice 8: So we do that formal referral.

[0:18:32] Voice 8: We have to provide a 60-day referral after first reading and before third.

[0:18:38] Voice 8: As far as informal engagement, we can talk more about that, if you like.

[0:18:46] Voice 6: Yeah, thanks for that, Chris.

[0:18:48] Voice 6: So my understanding, and it may not be the understanding of the LCC, is that we were holding off on our comments because we weren't sure that it was an appropriate time for comment.

[0:19:06] Voice 6: And I guess the related question for me is, does the local trust committee see the OCP, you know, amendment process or whatever comes out of the review?

[0:19:23] Voice 6: Is that going to be happening before the end of this term or is final adoption of an amended OCP extending into the next term?

[0:19:33] Voice 6: And, yeah, just in terms of what's due, should the LCC now be actively considering recommendations?

[0:19:44] Voice 6: Should we wait for an invitation from you, from the LTC?

[0:19:51] Voice 8: I would suggest waiting.

[0:19:53] Voice 8: I mean, we're certainly happy to talk at any time about thoughts.

[0:19:57] Voice 8: thoughts. But in this meeting, certainly, you know, the kind of collaboration Trustee Patrick

[0:20:02] Voice 8: was referring to earlier is something, you know, on a wide range of topics that I hope this meeting

[0:20:07] Voice 8: can be a forum for. But I do have to share an important update with you this morning about the

[0:20:14] Voice 8: OCP. The project consultants have advised staff that they will not be renewing their contract for

[0:20:21] Voice 8: fiscal year 26-27. They'll complete their current work contract through to the end of March 2026

[0:20:29] Voice 8: and have committed to delivering key phases two and a part of phase three with phase one already

[0:20:36] Voice 8: being complete. Phase three draft deliverables will be coming by the end of March. The project

[0:20:44] Voice 8: does remain active um in in march the ltc will will receive and review those remaining draft

[0:20:50] Voice 8: materials and confirm next steps for project management uh and resourcing uh that'll be

[0:20:57] Voice 8: another staff report in march night in march um and we'll provide an updated timeline for

[0:21:03] Voice 8: completion of the ocp lub uh depending on options that don't that um that ltc wants to go with so

[0:21:12] Voice 8: So that's, it's a bit of a change, frankly, you know, in terms of giving you some certainty

[0:21:18] Voice 8: around timing.

[0:21:20] Voice 8: But we, you know, there's some options there.

[0:21:34] Voice 11: Yeah, thanks, Chris.

[0:21:35] Voice 6: So bottom line, the LCC should be waiting for an invite from the local trust committee

[0:21:42] Voice 6: before submitting any possible recommendations?

[0:21:51] Voice 8: Yeah, I think that's probably reasonable.

[0:21:53] Voice 8: I mean, I think it's also fair to say that I do have staff reach out from other government bodies, questions and comments at times that we do factor in as we go.

[0:22:04] Voice 8: We recognize that the ongoing capital programs and the work in the direction are good input.

[0:22:13] Voice 8: I've had a number of good conversations with the staff and the consultant on the integrated housing strategy over the past few months and came to an engagement session at the CRDs and, you know, those I'm looking forward to that product and reflecting on that.

[0:22:30] Voice 8: So those inputs are valid and valuable to have, and positions from the LCC, you know, ultimately, we want this OCP to be something that we're all working on.

[0:22:45] Voice 8: I don't think Islands Trust or any community can make their OCP work on its own.

[0:22:49] Voice 8: They need the community and other partners to make it work.

[0:22:52] Voice 8: And we would like to be more actively engaged with a technical working group to understand where other government groups are at, government partners are at, and move forward with something that, when we refer it out to you for formal comment, then we'll be in a position to, we hope that it'll be a better product for you.

[0:23:38] Voice 3: Not working? Can anyone else hear me?

[0:23:41] Voice 3: No, I can hear you.

[0:23:43] Voice 3: Oh, okay. Earl, I was

[0:23:44] Voice 9: calling on you.

[0:23:46] Voice 9: Oh, we lost your audio for some reason.

[0:23:48] Voice 9: Okay.

[0:23:49] Voice 9: Yeah, my question relates to timing.

[0:23:52] Voice 9: Given what Stephen has told us about the integrated housing strategy

[0:23:56] Voice 9: and when we expect to be nearing completion on that,

[0:24:00] Voice 9: is that timing going to work, that that will allow us time to use that as input into your process,

[0:24:07] Voice 9: or do we need to do something more formal with you prior to, say, May?

[0:24:15] Voice 8: I'm always

[0:24:15] Voice 8: happy to engage. I would suggest that we're always happy to engage with your project teams and provide input. If there's a formal referral, it's definitely something that we would want to bring forward.

[0:24:30] Voice 8: forward um not unlike the portlock master plan referral last year um we're we're happy to bring

[0:24:36] Voice 8: those forward to ltc for comment as well um so if you i think it's um you know housing policy may

[0:24:47] Voice 8: shift but i think if it was coming in may certainly i don't think you'll be late to the game in terms

[0:24:51] Voice 8: of informing policy development um in this in this at this point and

[0:24:58] Voice 9: is it correct to assume from

[0:25:01] Voice 9: from what you've said, that there might be opportunities for, you know, workshopping

[0:25:06] Voice 9: with LTC, LCC, farther on into the process where we can actually have discussions specific to the

[0:25:14] Voice 9: details and just talk about it? Or would that be something we'd have to incorporate into one of

[0:25:19] Voice 9: these meetings? Because I think it's more than just handing you a document and saying,

[0:25:25] Voice 9: here's what we've done. I think having some conversations might be helpful.

[0:25:31] Voice 9: Well, sorry

[0:25:32] Voice 8: to jump in there. If there's a desire to have some type of elected officials, you know, assembly about a specific topic, I think that's something that, you know, an invite, I would suggest that it's really up to the trustees to determine that.

[0:25:49] Voice 8: but I think it would be a request to the LTC to come to a session. And I think that would be,

[0:25:58] Voice 8: as we get to a point where we have an OCP that's, you know, we're talking about policy direction.

[0:26:04] Voice 8: I think what the IHS really does though is ideally the OCP and the IHS, the IHS should be,

[0:26:11] Voice 8: the OCP should facilitate the implementation of an IHS essentially. So it seems to go

[0:26:16] Voice 8: landing more into the into the implementation realm so um that's kind of the most direct i

[0:26:23] Voice 8: could i could probably say at this point given enough that we're we are at different stages

[0:26:28] Voice 8: right now um but i don't think we're at um we're at a difference in terms of our i haven't seen

[0:26:35] Voice 8: any kind of major fundamental difference in these policy sets um even you know what we have today

[0:26:41] Voice 8: in the ocp and what we might have tomorrow um there are there are always options there

[0:26:45] Voice 8: there all right

[0:26:48] Voice 9: thank you brian

[0:26:51] Voice 3: yes

[0:26:53] Voice 10: thanks um i guess just a little more on on the timing uh

[0:26:58] Voice 10: reading between the lines uh a little bit with the departing project consultant presumably there

[0:27:06] Voice 10: will be a new consultant required to see the process through to the end and you can correct

[0:27:11] Voice 10: me if that's wrong. And if that's the case, the timing, again, I know you're going to

[0:27:20] Voice 10: be reporting back on that at some point, but it seems pretty clear that the timing will

[0:27:26] Voice 10: be a little further down the line than had originally been anticipated. In some ways

[0:27:35] Voice 10: that might not be a bad thing.

[0:27:38] Voice 10: I mean, we talked about some of the maybe slight awkwardness

[0:27:42] Voice 10: around the integrated housing strategy being developed

[0:27:46] Voice 10: at the same time as the trust was dealing first

[0:27:51] Voice 10: with the policy statement and then the LTC with the OCP.

[0:27:56] Voice 10: And in fact, this potential gap, I guess you might say,

[0:28:03] Voice 10: in the OCP process might not be such a bad thing in the sense

[0:28:09] Voice 10: that the integrated housing strategy, you know, it looks now,

[0:28:16] Voice 10: likely will be completed before the OCP process has proceeded

[0:28:23] Voice 10: as far along as we would have anticipated earlier.

[0:28:27] Voice 10: And that may be a good thing.

[0:28:30] Voice 10: What I really wanted to avoid all the way along,

[0:28:32] Voice 10: And I certainly heard this from Trustee Patrick as well, is us developing an integrated housing strategy as our document and then you folks developing an OCP as your document and the two, you know, not really working together as coherently, clearly as they might.

[0:28:59] Voice 10: And the timing shift might actually provide an opportunity for us to at least be able to give, I don't know what the right word is, a bigger, stronger effort at making sure as much as possible that they are supporting each other

[0:29:27] Voice 10: and are aligned with each other

[0:29:29] Voice 10: as opposed to being two separate pieces

[0:29:32] Voice 10: on some pretty similar topics.

[0:29:42] Voice 8: Yeah, I guess on the consultant front,

[0:29:46] Voice 8: I think that's one of the topics

[0:29:49] Voice 8: that we'll have to talk about in March,

[0:29:52] Voice 8: you know, and on the alignment,

[0:29:53] Voice 8: I think, and just in general service

[0:29:55] Voice 8: to South Spring Island,

[0:29:57] Voice 8: we would want to do our best.

[0:30:00] Voice 8: find ways to to come together and align our policy um you know and i think that's you know

[0:30:06] Voice 8: we have to we're all we should be if we're talking to the same island the results should

[0:30:13] Voice 8: help us get to the same place um you know technical differences i think probably being

[0:30:18] Voice 8: the main challenge but um like the you know servicing and provide the provision of services

[0:30:24] Voice 8: and the provision of land use planning and the mandate it's those are the things that we have

[0:30:28] Voice 8: to find ways to weave together i'm

[0:30:37] Voice 1: just wondering i knew um the um question was raised as to whether

[0:30:43] Voice 1: we could have a meeting a joint meeting to really you know kind of dig down once we have our draft

[0:30:49] Voice 1: housing plan sending it to you doesn't seem to make as much sense as having a conversation and

[0:30:56] Voice 1: the same with you and the ocp and i'm just wondering we do meet every once in a while

[0:31:01] Voice 1: quarterly and could we have a meeting possibly that did nothing but that where we can talk about

[0:31:07] Voice 1: where we are in our draft integrated housing planning you can talk about where you are and

[0:31:12] Voice 1: you know face to face for a couple hours hash it out or is that not following protocols that

[0:31:19] Voice 1: need to be followed is

[0:31:28] Voice 8: is the question of um of a workshop like in my experience the best

[0:31:37] Voice 8: approach when we have a quorum of decision makers um and here we have two um is to have it be a

[0:31:44] Voice 8: workshop within an agenda um so if you wanted to have i mean these are all special meetings

[0:31:48] Voice 8: on both for the sake of both parties um and if there was a desire to make this meeting

[0:31:54] Voice 8: um a special meeting on um on a on on a specific topic on a single topic i think that's a

[0:32:02] Voice 8: a valid question um or for this group that

[0:32:07] Voice 1: that actually was my question is this rather than

[0:32:09] Voice 1: saying well we'll work it out and figure it out why or what would stop us from actually setting

[0:32:15] Voice 1: aside at least a couple hours if not more when we're all here we are all here um you know in a

[0:32:21] Voice 1: in some regular basis and just setting aside one agenda meeting so yes that was my

[0:32:27] Voice 1: I would say question slash suggestion.

[0:32:30] Voice 1: Brian,

[0:32:37] Voice 3: I see your hand go up maybe and then down again.

[0:32:39] Voice 3: Maybe Gail covered your thoughts there.

[0:32:45] Voice 3: Yep.

[0:32:47] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:32:49] Voice 3: So, yeah, that's – oh, I see Gary.

[0:32:53] Voice 6: Yeah, thanks.

[0:32:56] Voice 6: The idea of a workshop discussion makes sense to me,

[0:33:02] Voice 6: But I also wonder, given what we're hoping would be the timing of the LCC housing strategy, that it might be useful to have a workshop around that draft document.

[0:33:20] Voice 6: And then you've got like specific suggestions, recommendations, proposals to discuss.

[0:33:28] Voice 6: So that's a thought to maybe make that meeting a little more productive when you've actually got a document together that presumably will include some, not just land use, of course, but would include some land use proposals.

[0:33:47] Voice 6: So that's a thought.

[0:33:48] Voice 6: And just the last question I have on it, the LCC passed a motion a while ago regarding GIS kind of analysis on the properties legalized for suites and cottages.

[0:34:02] Voice 6: My understanding is that the trust indicated that at least at this time, or the last time we discussed it, you didn't really have the capacity, either the tools or the staff.

[0:34:17] Voice 6: I'm maybe both not sure which, to undertake that analysis.

[0:34:23] Voice 6: It does seem to me it's pretty important if you're considering land use changes to understand what the existing changes allow in terms of affordable housing development.

[0:34:36] Voice 6: So is there anything new on that, on dealing with that request?

[0:34:50] Voice 8: So, Mr. Chair, if I understand the question correctly, it's due on what we'd like to do with the suggestion that new housing should be primarily affordable or just to make it do a better job of accommodating affordable housing, if I could clarify.

[0:35:05] Voice 8: No,

[0:35:10] Voice 6: that's a policy discussion, which at some point we're going to get together and talk about and will presumably be addressed in the LCC housing strategy.

[0:35:24] Voice 6: What I'm referring to is just a simple data request to understand how many properties on the complicating factor there is the North Salt Spring water moratorium.

[0:35:39] Voice 11: So,

[0:35:40] Voice 6: but just to understand how many properties, both in the ALR and outside of the ALR that are legalized for suites and cottages, but then to overlay the North South Spring water moratorium, which is shifting as we speak, the Maxwell Lake service area, there has been a partial relaxation of that.

[0:36:02] Voice 6: that uh but just to have a better understanding of the number of properties currently um zoned

[0:36:11] Voice 6: for suites and cottages that are not impeded by the north salt spring water moratorium

[0:36:16] Voice 6: so that was a that was a data request from the lcc a while ago and my understanding was at the

[0:36:23] Voice 6: time anyway that uh the trust was saying that they weren't able to do that analysis i'm not sure

[0:36:31] Voice 6: because of staffing constraints or your GIS system wasn't able to do it or whatever.

[0:36:42] Voice 6: So, no, it's a data request.

[0:36:43] Voice 6: It's not a policy comment.

[0:36:46] Voice 8: So I think it's, as far as the question, you know, it's a substantial GIS analysis.

[0:36:57] Voice 8: And if our data sharing agreements don't provide CRD the ability to provide that

[0:37:03] Voice 8: analysis then um you know i note that you know our gis team has been you know rebuilt over the

[0:37:09] Voice 8: last few years there they are coming along really well now um and uh i know that as i work through

[0:37:16] Voice 8: that with with the planning staff here um the level of analysis is was becoming increasingly

[0:37:25] Voice 8: complex our cottage system is probably one of the one of the most um it's an area where

[0:37:32] Voice 8: where interpretation and execution are really hard to state.

[0:37:38] Voice 8: So I suppose that's really one of the challenges

[0:37:42] Voice 8: in the current policies that we have

[0:37:44] Voice 8: is that there's a lot of contemplation

[0:37:46] Voice 8: of a servicing structure

[0:37:49] Voice 8: that has shifted considerably since 2008.

[0:37:54] Voice 8: And it's where the interagency work,

[0:37:57] Voice 8: both with the services CRD provides

[0:38:01] Voice 8: as well as a number of other improvement districts needs to be aligned within the OCP.

[0:38:09] Voice 8: I've often said, and I think a lot of planners today say that,

[0:38:12] Voice 8: the historical practice of zoning everything is still giving us the situation we have today

[0:38:18] Voice 8: in terms of the housing outcome, so that potential is only potential.

[0:38:23] Voice 8: financial on paper if economies would recognize it then it would be there things would probably

[0:38:32] Voice 8: be a little better right so I think that's where the the consideration of what is the way to

[0:38:42] Voice 8: plan for land use that does get the housing we need on this island that goes back to sort of

[0:38:48] Voice 8: the fundamental questions um i guess it's kind of around about the same way of saying like um

[0:38:56] Voice 8: the value of zoning and analysis of zoning potential for density at this at the at the

[0:39:01] Voice 8: point when you started an ocp leb review is is kind of in the looking at what is the housing

[0:39:07] Voice 8: need right now and what do we need what what are we willing to zone and what would that that new

[0:39:16] Voice 8: OCP designations map

[0:39:17] Voice 8: and zoning map achieve

[0:39:19] Voice 8: in real terms

[0:39:21] Voice 8: in terms of the next

[0:39:22] Voice 8: five to ten years in terms of absorption

[0:39:25] Voice 8: rates. Stephen?

[0:39:34] Voice 5: Yeah, just looking at our schedule

[0:39:36] Voice 5: of our next time we meet, I think

[0:39:38] Voice 5: is May 26th.

[0:39:41] Voice 5: So as far

[0:39:42] Voice 5: as we should have our draft

[0:39:45] Voice 5: integrated housing

[0:39:46] Voice 5: strategy by May 26th, so we

[0:39:48] Voice 5: We should be able to have time to go back and forth with Island's Trust staff, as well as LCC will have a time to review it all in advance.

[0:39:56] Voice 5: So I think when we meet on May 26, we can potentially put some more time to discuss that if that's on this agenda.

[0:40:04] Voice 5: That might, I'm not sure that's enough time.

[0:40:07] Voice 5: However, we can definitely have extended time on that day for the housing discussion.

[0:40:21] Voice 3: Meeting schedule is the last item on today's agenda.

[0:40:24] Voice 3: So you might want to look at that. Anything else on this topic? Oh, I see Brian.

[0:40:31] Voice 3: Yeah,

[0:40:32] Voice 10: I just wanted to add the request for data that Gary was referring to.

[0:40:40] Voice 10: I don't think anybody on the LCC disagreed with that as being a legitimate question to ask.

[0:40:49] Voice 10: But I think Chris, in his careful professional way, essentially made the point that however many potential suites and cottages, however many hundred there are, we do know how many legal suites have been approved in recent and even more distant history.

[0:41:18] Voice 10: And it's quite a small number. And that being the case, whether we have the information or not on the potential, we know that in the current world, the number that have been created that are legal, at least, is quite modest. And that is at least as useful a piece of information as the potential is.

[0:41:45] Voice 10: More on

[0:41:55] Voice 3: this topic before we move along. I see Gary again.

[0:41:58] Voice 6: Yeah, Ed, Chair, it's just a simple data request. Of course, I understand that the take-up has been minimal.

[0:42:06] Voice 6: But for example, if the Local Trust Committee was considering legalizing more properties for suites and cottages, I think you'd want to understand how many properties are already legalized.

[0:42:18] Voice 6: Absolutely, I take the point that a small proportion, that's why I've always been suggesting that instead of legalizing more properties, we should be looking at incentives to encourage landowners to renovate or build suites.

[0:42:37] Voice 6: And that's exactly what's being proposed by the CRD and the Rural Housing Program.

[0:42:43] Voice 6: So, yeah, it's a simple data request just to understand how many properties are already legalized.

[0:42:48] Voice 6: End of story.

[0:42:49] Voice 6: There's no implication that that's a panacea by any means.

[0:43:02] Voice 3: Anyone else?

[0:43:09] Voice 3: Not seeing any more hands,

[0:43:11] Voice 3: so I'm going to suggest we move on to the next topic,

[0:43:16] Voice 3: which is short-term vacation rentals.

[0:43:18] Voice 3: And who would like to start us off?

[0:43:24] Voice 5: I can provide a quick update from the LCC.

[0:43:28] Voice 5: We did a short-term vacation rental workshop on January 15th.

[0:43:33] Voice 5: We did a roundtable meeting in Ganges.

[0:43:37] Voice 5: We had similar participation to the previous year.

[0:43:42] Voice 5: We reflected that there's quite a bit accomplished since 2025's meeting

[0:43:47] Voice 5: as far as the opting in to the Short-Term Vacation Rental Act by Islands Trust,

[0:43:54] Voice 5: Trust, as well as the province has instituted a registration process for short-term rentals

[0:44:04] Voice 5: to register.

[0:44:05] Voice 5: We had just received the provincial data from that on the number of short-term rentals on

[0:44:14] Voice 5: Salt Spring in January, and a report, a data analysis report was completed by Southern

[0:44:24] Voice 5: and gulf island tourism partnership they did an analysis of the data of the information not the

[0:44:29] Voice 5: provincial government data but the they could not access that at the time last summer but they did

[0:44:33] Voice 5: an analysis of the data i think they called air dna uh data that they had collaborated they had

[0:44:39] Voice 5: brought forward uh we did a presentation to the lcc um i guess a week ago of the outcomes of the

[0:44:48] Voice 5: workshop it's in the open agenda you can see the report in the outcome notes at the same time

[0:44:57] Voice 5: we were looking at we also had a discussion after that presenting that staff report we actually

[0:45:05] Voice 5: before presenting that staff report we also had a discussion about business licensing feasibility

[0:45:09] Voice 5: and we've put into the we're going to be putting a forty thousand dollars we're going to budget in

[0:45:17] Voice 5: the provisional budget for 2027 when we have our initial budget review in may or june when we have

[0:45:24] Voice 5: that discussion with the lcc we're talking about setting money aside to implement uh to do a study

[0:45:30] Voice 5: of the implementation of business licensing staff crd staff started to look at the implementation

[0:45:35] Voice 5: process for business licensing and after hearing um seeing the data and hearing back from the

[0:45:41] Voice 5: consultant it was suggested that the best way to manage short-term vacation rentals is to have

[0:45:51] Voice 5: the business licensing as well as land use

[0:45:56] Voice 5: regulations and enforcement all occurring at the same time realizing that the islands trust is

[0:46:01] Voice 5: updating their ocp and their zoning it didn't make sense to get out ahead of it with the business

[0:46:06] Voice 5: licensing and that the idea is that we will be looking at business licensing in 2027 which

[0:46:10] Voice 5: which ideally is when the new OCP and zoning is also ideally completed.

[0:46:15] Voice 5: And then we can look at business licensing, zoning, and OCP,

[0:46:18] Voice 5: and then consider whether additional enforcement is required.

[0:46:23] Voice 5: The other point that was made in the staff report is that because there is just the newly implemented,

[0:46:28] Voice 5: the registration process just started last, I believe it started in June of 2025.

[0:46:33] Voice 5: So it's only been going for a few months.

[0:46:35] Voice 5: and with the the opting into the short-term rental act the straa although it kind of was

[0:46:43] Voice 5: initiated in november but it really will start to take effect uh in the summer of this year

[0:46:48] Voice 5: so we'll be able to look at the it'll be better to look at the feasibility of business licensing

[0:46:53] Voice 5: after one full summer of having both the the regular you know the registration process running

[0:46:59] Voice 5: for the second summer and having the short-term vacation rental act having seen the impacts of

[0:47:04] Voice 5: that um in the summer of 2026 um so it's kind of it's a sequential kind of a pragmatic approach

[0:47:10] Voice 5: um and a timing thing lining things up at the same time so that's uh that's really so the lcc's next

[0:47:17] Voice 5: step is to consider um uh approving that an amount of to look at business licensing in 2027

[0:47:22] Voice 5: and that that process will occur over the summer provision of budget we consider in may june and

[0:47:29] Voice 5: And then we do final budget approval in August, September.

[0:47:33] Voice 5: Well, that's actually, so we do preliminary, preliminary budget review in May, June, provisional budget approval in August, September.

[0:47:42] Voice 5: And then final budget, of course, doesn't actually happen until March of 2027.

[0:47:50] Voice 5: But the process, it's in the process.

[0:47:57] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:47:57] Voice 11: I

[0:48:05] Voice 10: just want to acknowledge, because I know LCC, CRD people are sometimes pointing out where the trust or the LTC maybe seem to be proceeding not as quickly as in our dream world on certain things.

[0:48:24] Voice 10: And this is an example of the other way around, given that the LTC requested that CRD move forward on business licensing quite a number of years ago now.

[0:48:40] Voice 10: And in some ways, I find it a little disappointing that it's taking as long as it is.

[0:48:48] Voice 10: But on the other hand, we don't have either the sort of complete and up-to-date data, nor the in principle unanimous agreement on our group about business licensing at this stage.

[0:49:08] Voice 10: So it is taking longer to get to the point of the LCC, for example, even saying, hey, we should do it, or no, it's a dumb idea, let's not do it.

[0:49:19] Voice 10: We haven't even reached that yet.

[0:49:21] Voice 10: A little bit frustrating, but the process that Stephen has laid out is reasonable,

[0:49:30] Voice 10: And the information that will inform decisions ultimately on it will be much more substantial with the kind of timing that Stephen laid out.

[0:49:42] Voice 10: So, you know, I'm sorry it's taking as long as it is, but ultimately, I think it does make sense to do it this way.

[0:49:55] Voice 3: Stephen?

[0:49:57] Voice 5: What I should add, that the budget that we've, staff have proposed is intended to include some, a budget to do some consultation prior to progressing ahead.

[0:50:09] Voice 5: So it's, we wanted to, we realized that we need to do a bit more consultation, public engagement on the process before moving ahead.

[0:50:15] Voice 5: And that's why the budget is set, where it's set.

[0:50:20] Voice 5: That would occur in 2027.

[0:50:24] Voice 3: Thanks for that clarification.

[0:50:28] Voice 3: Gary?

[0:50:29] Voice 3: Thanks.

[0:50:32] Voice 6: A question for the trust. Have you, I guess it's still early days in terms of the Bill 35, the owner occupation aspect of the act, but maybe not.

[0:50:46] Voice 6: But has there been anything noticeable in terms of the ability to enforce as a result of the provincial registry, which applies province-wide, including the trust, and then the owner occupation aspect?

[0:51:07] Voice 6: aspect are there any uh it it has the has the experience uh indicated any any assistance there

[0:51:17] Voice 6: with uh enforcing the land use bylaw oh

[0:51:25] Voice 8: i can speak to the outcome of that what i've seen is

[0:51:28] Voice 8: that um and you know mr dingman is uh he's got his hand up there i was gonna just say he might

[0:51:34] Voice 8: be able to answer this just as well so uh he is i believe yeah he's an attendee so he can um speak

[0:51:40] Voice 8: So, Mr. Chair, if you don't mind, Mr. Dingman could answer that question.

[0:51:46] Voice 3: Yeah, no, that's great.

[0:51:50] Voice 3: Please allow Mr. Dingman to unmute.

[0:51:57] Voice 3: Morning, Chair.

[0:51:58] Voice 8: Thank you.

[0:52:00] Voice 3: Yeah, we hear you loud and clear. Go ahead.

[0:52:02] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So, we're using the data portal information to determine the total number of operations.

[0:52:11] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: We're also going, I have gone through all of the listings for the files that we do have to determine how many have resident owners.

[0:52:22] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: The majority do have resident owners, so they'll meet the principal residency requirement.

[0:52:28] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: However, there's still a couple of dozen where they do not have met the terms of the principal residency.

[0:52:35] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So those are files that we would proceed with enforcement against.

[0:52:40] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: Um, and so overall, uh, it's been very, a very helpful tool to determine those total

[0:52:46] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: number of operations and who is actually a resident owner.

[0:52:51] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And the most part will be complying with the regulations and our land use bylaw.

[0:52:57] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: Um, the next steps will really be up to the local trust committee.

[0:53:03] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: Um, in the future, they will, I believe at their next meeting, we will have a report

[0:53:10] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: regarding the current operations.

[0:53:12] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: and what they want to proceed as far as enforcement and for many of the operations if they have met

[0:53:19] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: the principal residency requirement the local trust committee will wish to close those files

[0:53:24] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: and then we'll continue to concentrate on those operations where there is no principal residency

[0:53:32] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: met and so they're not meeting the requirements within the provincial legislation and they are

[0:53:42] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: most likely not reading the requirements of the land use bylaw as far as being a lawful operation

[0:53:47] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: so overall it's been a very helpful tool although the registration data is slow to come to us it's

[0:53:56] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: not always current and for whatever reasons it's taking a considerable amount of time

[0:54:00] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: for us to see the complete list of operations and but also note that it's an important tool for us

[0:54:08] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: that even there are operations that are not registered and they must be.

[0:54:14] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So we'll be compiling a list of those operations that we find

[0:54:17] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: that are not registered or that are not lawful at all.

[0:54:22] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: They don't meet the principal residency requirement

[0:54:24] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: or the land use bylaw requirement.

[0:54:26] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And then the province can deregister them or have the platforms

[0:54:30] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: take down those operations that have not either properly registered

[0:54:35] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: or who are not operating lawful.

[0:54:39] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: And I can take any questions if you have them.

[0:54:45] Voice 6: Yeah, thanks for that.

[0:54:47] Voice 6: I really appreciate it, Warren.

[0:54:49] Voice 6: Can you, how many, at this point in time anyway,

[0:54:54] Voice 6: you're suggesting the data isn't necessarily complete

[0:54:56] Voice 6: or you're not getting the complete registry data.

[0:54:59] Voice 6: But at this point, how many legal short-term rentals

[0:55:05] Voice 6: are registered appropriately in your view, ballpark anyway?

[0:55:11] Voice 6: way so

[0:55:12] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: right now the data is that there's 226 operations registered with the data portal

[0:55:19] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: uh i'm not sure why this number has come down recently but they've updated their website and

[0:55:24] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: their information so the number is now at 226 operations and the majority of those will be

[0:55:33] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: lawful there may be not sure the number if you take our numbers what have we got 25 percent that

[0:55:43] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: are unlawful so if we go through all of these numbers and may find that 20 to 25 percent may

[0:55:49] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: not be meeting they may not comply with the land use bylaw and they may not have the principal

[0:55:53] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: residency requirement it's going to take more work of going through all of these listings

[0:56:00] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: listings and just ensuring that they have uh who's living where is what it really comes down

[0:56:06] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: to there are lots of um operators who have one they've they've claimed to be living on the

[0:56:14] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: property but when we go through the data portal registration information they have listed addresses

[0:56:20] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: the host address is being in eastern canada so they're all you know right now that should be an

[0:56:25] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: obviously obvious flag that they're not meeting the principal residency requirement but this is

[0:56:30] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: is what they're telling the province and some of them this is what they've told us in the past no

[0:56:33] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: we live here but you know it's quite obviously with some that they're not living here and that's

[0:56:38] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: going to take more work to go through all the information but those are the numbers that we

[0:56:43] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: have now the great majority are going to be compliant with the land use bylaw and the

[0:56:51] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: provincial regulations yeah

[0:56:55] Voice 6: again thanks for that and aside from potentially delisting a property

[0:57:00] Voice 6: that's not registered or registered inappropriately.

[0:57:06] Voice 6: You mentioned the delay in getting the data.

[0:57:10] Voice 6: Is the province being helpful, supportive?

[0:57:13] Voice 6: There was also, when Bill 35 was announced,

[0:57:16] Voice 6: there was an enforcement team that was announced as well.

[0:57:20] Voice 6: And are they playing a role at all?

[0:57:22] Voice 6: Just in terms of enforcement, is the province being helpful?

[0:57:28] Voice 6: And do you hope that they can be more helpful?

[0:57:33] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: So currently, so through the chair, I do find them helpful.

[0:57:36] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: They're providing with the information that they can provide us with at this time.

[0:57:41] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: The enforcement team, they're not receiving a lot of complaints,

[0:57:46] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: really any complaints from the Gulf Islands regarding operations.

[0:57:50] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: That may change over time.

[0:57:52] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: We're really into this less than a year.

[0:57:56] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: But I think what I reported to the Trust Council in December

[0:57:59] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: there was like one complaint for the gulf islands so they're not being inundated with

[0:58:05] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: a lot of complaints or tasks to complete when it comes to the public being concerned about

[0:58:11] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: the operations but overall the staff have been uh very helpful uh and you know i would say very

[0:58:20] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: confident they're very on top of uh the issue and um it'll just be matter of working through all the

[0:58:26] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: the data that we got because you know for the province i don't know how many thousands of

[0:58:30] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: operations that we have but for the gulf islands like there's 500 plus uh that you know any

[0:58:38] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: enforcement officer is going to have to go through if they want to go through all the data

[0:58:41] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: to try and determine compliance so it's going to take time yeah

[0:58:47] Voice 6: thanks for that and thanks for

[0:58:49] Voice 6: for attending today, Warren.

[0:58:51] Manager of Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement: You're welcome.

[0:58:57] Voice 10: Thanks.

[0:58:58] Voice 10: Useful information.

[0:59:00] Voice 10: I think what we've just heard

[0:59:05] Voice 10: reaffirms the value

[0:59:08] Voice 10: of the business licensing discussion

[0:59:10] Voice 10: essentially taking place

[0:59:12] Voice 10: once we have more complete information.

[0:59:16] Voice 10: 226 registered operations.

[0:59:19] Voice 10: Line that up against

[0:59:21] Voice 10: the work commissioned by the Southern Gulf Islands

[0:59:25] Voice 10: Tourism Partnership. Stephen will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe

[0:59:29] Voice 10: their count was roughly double that.

[0:59:33] Voice 10: And given where we are in the year with the principal

[0:59:37] Voice 10: residency requirement taking effect during

[0:59:40] Voice 10: essentially the off-season, and we're still in the off-season right now,

[0:59:45] Voice 10: the situation that we're looking at a few months from now

[0:59:50] Voice 10: just purely in terms of count

[0:59:52] Voice 10: could be quite different

[0:59:55] Voice 10: from what we're looking at today.

[0:59:58] Voice 10: And so the information that will be...

[1:00:00] Voice 10: available for a more thorough analysis, certainly from a business licensing point of view, but I

[1:00:05] Voice 10: think also just from an overall assessment of how effectively we, you know, sort of jointly

[1:00:16] Voice 10: as a community or regulating short-term rentals will be in a way better position to judge that

[1:00:24] Voice 10: and make appropriate decisions for the future once we've reached

[1:00:28] Voice 10: or even passed through the coming busy season.

[1:00:34] Voice 11: Thanks.

[1:00:35] Voice 11: Law

[1:00:44] Voice 3: Enforcement Manager or comments on this topic?

[1:00:54] Voice 11: I'm

[1:00:55] Voice 3: not seeing any, so I'm going to suggest we move on to the next item,

[1:01:01] Voice 3: which is harbor management.

[1:01:04] Voice 3: I know the LCC has held some events.

[1:01:08] Voice 3: Go ahead, Stephen.

[1:01:09] Voice 3: I can

[1:01:09] Voice 5: start this one. I'll start the discussion. LCC is planning on having another harbors workshop, similar to how we had one last year. The tentative date is April 16th. That is a Thursday.

[1:01:23] Voice 5: Thursday. We are going to be discussing this at a future LCC meeting. We're looking at

[1:01:31] Voice 5: getting, finding a provincial and federal government representation. And we're hoping

[1:01:36] Voice 5: the Islands Trust can also send representation to that. So if you can put that in your calendars,

[1:01:42] Voice 5: it's not, the invitations have not formally been sent out yet, but we're just putting

[1:01:48] Voice 5: it together. We're thinking about having a facilitator assist us this year. So yeah,

[1:01:53] Voice 5: Thursday, April 16th.

[1:01:55] Voice 5: It'll be an afternoon event, probably 90 minutes.

[1:02:01] Voice 5: And topics would be environment regulation, safety,

[1:02:09] Voice 5: similar to what last year's been.

[1:02:13] Voice 5: Thanks.

[1:02:19] Trustee Patrick: Are First Nations being invited to the roundtable

[1:02:22] Trustee Patrick: and will they be provided capacity funding?

[1:02:28] Voice 5: Last year, we invited First Nations to the meeting.

[1:02:33] Voice 5: I believe there is two or three different bands represent and four to six I don't have the precise

[1:02:41] Voice 5: numbers in front of me attended we did not provide capacity funding however we did have good

[1:02:45] Voice 5: attendance thanks

[1:03:01] Voice 10: I just want to to note at least based on what social media is telling me the

[1:03:09] Voice 10: The involvement of the federal government in actually supporting some cleanup just in the last few days in Ganges Harbor, collecting derelict floats, I would say is encouraging.

[1:03:25] Voice 10: And I know Stephen has been making a real effort to try to get provincial and federal representatives to participate in the workshop so that we're not viewing this entirely as a local government problem, because it most certainly is more than that.

[1:03:45] Voice 10: So I just wanted to acknowledge, one, that it's good that Stephen's making that effort and that we might have some success in getting participation.

[1:03:55] Voice 10: And two, the efforts that are going on to do some cleanup, supported by, funded by, I presume, the federal government, is encouraging as well.

[1:04:08] Voice 11: Wow.

[1:04:16] Voice 9: I was just curious if anyone in local government had any advance notice that the federal government was going to start supporting the cleanup in the harbor.

[1:04:24] Voice 9: It was great to see that it happened. Just took me completely by surprise.

[1:04:29] Voice 9: And I suspect that might have been the case for all of us not hearing any responses.

[1:04:39] Voice 9: So I think it came as a surprise across the board. Hope they can attend our session in April.

[1:04:46] Voice 9: It would

[1:04:49] Voice 3: be nice to

[1:04:50] Voice 9: get the feds to the table.

[1:04:55] Voice 3: Anyone else on this topic before we move on?

[1:05:02] Voice 3: Okay, not seeing any.

[1:05:07] Voice 3: Next, we have watershed protection.

[1:05:10] Voice 3: Who's going to lead us off?

[1:05:18] Voice 5: Chris, do you want me to?

[1:05:19] Voice 5: I can speak to that if you want.

[1:05:20] Voice 5: Yeah, great.

[1:05:25] Voice 5: The LCC and the CRD staff met to discuss the past SWPA report,

[1:05:34] Voice 5: and the action plan that was developed within that report and we discussed

[1:05:42] Voice 5: maybe some of the you know opportunities to improve the work that had been done

[1:05:47] Voice 5: but we also went through the list of actions that were in the report I'm

[1:05:52] Voice 5: thinking there was 16 actions and we had I think we identified a book almost all

[1:06:01] Voice 5: All of them had actions and activities going on, except the need to have a five-year update

[1:06:07] Voice 5: and a five-year meeting back together, where we get back together and discuss it again

[1:06:12] Voice 5: to review the actions and how things are progressing.

[1:06:15] Voice 5: In the review that we had, we had different members from the Adventist Trust and the CRD

[1:06:21] Voice 5: who have participated in the process going back several years.

[1:06:25] Voice 5: years. And we, through the water commissions, the CRD water commissions, North South Stream

[1:06:33] Voice 5: Water Works, the activities we're doing on stormwater, there's a lot of work that's being

[1:06:38] Voice 5: done that complements the action plan that had been identified. And we discussed having

[1:06:45] Voice 5: another group getting together again in the future. That would be something that would

[1:06:51] Voice 5: would be led by islands crd was suggesting it should be led by islands trust um because of

[1:06:57] Voice 5: their their um their lead that they've taken in this uh previously kind of legacy there

[1:07:03] Voice 5: and i know they're uh i was trusted a lot of staff have a lot of things going on and i think

[1:07:08] Voice 5: they have it in their i think it's in the queue but we didn't discuss that setting a date um the

[1:07:13] Voice 5: nice thing um the positive thing that i got out of the meeting was that there's a lot of things

[1:07:18] Voice 5: is going on that are complementary to what the work that had been done previously thanks oh i

[1:07:35] Voice 3: see gary again yeah

[1:07:39] Voice 6: thanks so could uh the trust comment on the possibility of reconvening uh a

[1:07:46] Voice 6: swipa like a group in the in the future

[1:07:59] Voice 3: laura well

[1:08:02] Trustee Patrick: i have nothing in particular it remains a priority

[1:08:05] Trustee Patrick: already identified project of the local trust committee but it is uh not resourced by staff

[1:08:10] Trustee Patrick: and it's uh it has been removed from the budget for 27 uh or 26 27 because it can't be resourced

[1:08:18] Trustee Patrick: by staff yeah

[1:08:24] Voice 3: for clarification it's uh it's it's about staff capacity at this point

[1:08:29] Voice 3: else on this topic today okay not seeing any hands shooting up uh so our final item

[1:08:52] Voice 3: um today is a future joint meeting schedule and just start start by seeing if staff have any

[1:09:06] Voice 3: thoughts they want to share ahead of any other discussion here i

[1:09:11] Voice 8: think mr henderson pointed out

[1:09:13] Voice 8: that we are uh meeting on the um we do have a meeting scheduled for the 28th um and uh it may

[1:09:22] Voice 8: be a question of what the agenda ought to be for that that meeting uh there's a desire to focus on

[1:09:28] Voice 8: workshop um but otherwise and then the i know the end of the year one um i don't know if we'll have

[1:09:34] Voice 8: much more clarity by may um on where that'll be so okay

[1:09:46] Voice 3: thanks for that um any thoughts

[1:09:51] Voice 11: earl

[1:09:51] Voice 9: yeah i think um we'll be hosting um almost certainly in person at sims and um i think we'll

[1:09:58] Voice 9: want to work with staff to try and see if it's feasible, given the progress at that time, to

[1:10:06] Voice 9: start talking more seriously between both groups about certainly the long-term integrated housing

[1:10:13] Voice 9: strategy, which should be well along by that point. And I think it'd be a good opportunity to

[1:10:19] Voice 9: discuss details that arise that might seem to be important or significant going forward.

[1:10:26] Voice 9: so I'm hoping we can incorporate

[1:10:30] Voice 9: a serious housing discussion into that meeting

[1:10:34] Voice 9: in a workshop format but we'll talk to staff about that

[1:10:38] Voice 9: and it's all predicated on us having enough material on hand

[1:10:42] Voice 9: I think we will on the LCC side and at least

[1:10:46] Voice 9: identify what might be issues that need further discussion

[1:10:50] Voice 9: Thank you.

[1:10:56] Voice 3: Thank you Earl

[1:10:57] Voice 3: Carol, any other thoughts on this today?

[1:11:05] Voice 3: And then I guess, go ahead, Gary.

[1:11:16] Voice 3: Go ahead, Gary.

[1:11:21] Voice 3: You're muted, sir.

[1:11:26] Voice 6: Sorry.

[1:11:28] Voice 6: Yeah, I do hope that at our next meeting,

[1:11:31] Voice 6: we'd be far enough along with the LCC housing strategy

[1:11:34] Voice 6: to have something to kind of chew over in a meeting.

[1:11:38] Voice 6: I think that would be good.

[1:11:39] Voice 6: I did forget to ask a question, Chair.

[1:11:42] Voice 6: there was another LCC motion

[1:11:45] Voice 6: regarding the speculation and vacancy tax.

[1:11:48] Voice 6: So I think everybody's aware

[1:11:50] Voice 6: that the CRT board has requested inclusion

[1:11:52] Voice 6: in the SVT for the electoral area,

[1:11:57] Voice 6: not the local trust area,

[1:11:59] Voice 6: which is defined differently.

[1:12:03] Voice 6: And the LCC passed a motion

[1:12:05] Voice 6: requesting the trust to consider advocacy.

[1:12:09] Voice 6: And it's a housing issue.

[1:12:11] Voice 6: It relates to the short-term vacation rental issue.

[1:12:15] Voice 6: Is that something the local trust committee could consider in the near future?

[1:12:21] Voice 6: We had a meeting, the LCC with MLA Botterill, who would be interested in forwarding a request,

[1:12:29] Voice 6: an updated request from Salisbury to the Minister of Finance.

[1:12:33] Voice 6: We've made requests to a couple of ministers of finance with no success at this point.

[1:12:40] Voice 6: So is joining with the LCC regarding inclusion in the SVT something the Local Trust Committee could consider?

[1:12:52] Laura, go ahead.

[1:12:58] Trustee Patrick: I'd have to get the date of it.

[1:13:00] Trustee Patrick: The motion that we had passed prior at the Local Trust Committee was structured per former Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs,

[1:13:11] Trustee Patrick: There's Ravi Kalan's instruction to request the province to look into the tax.

[1:13:16] Trustee Patrick: And we did pass that and that letter was put forward.

[1:13:18] Trustee Patrick: So due to Federation versus Local Trust Committee issues, we have been unable to move forward and say, you know, please tax us or have that discussion at the Local Trust Committee.

[1:13:34] Trustee Patrick: So we did go forward with that request as specified by Robbie Galen, but they've never answered it.

[1:13:48] Voice 6: So does Trust Council need to endorse a request by the local Trust Committee? Is that kind of the basic protocol?

[1:13:58] Voice 6: call yeah

[1:14:01] Voice 3: i would say oh do you have that thought there as i was just going to say that uh it's been

[1:14:06] Voice 3: a few years since trust council um uh weighed in on this issue um uh and so there may be opportunity

[1:14:18] Voice 3: for a sort of an updated position from trust council um as laura um mentioned there's

[1:14:27] Voice 3: There's a bit of a misalignment between the local trust committee and trust council on that particular issue.

[1:14:34] Voice 3: But that, again, hasn't been considered by trust council, I think, maybe even this term.

[1:14:40] Voice 3: Is that right, Laura?

[1:14:41] Voice 3: Do you recall?

[1:14:42] Voice 3: Was it last term?

[1:14:44] Voice 3: It was last term.

[1:14:45] Trustee Patrick: Three terms ago.

[1:14:46] Trustee Patrick: 2017.

[1:14:46] Trustee Patrick: Three terms ago.

[1:14:47] Voice 3: Okay.

[1:14:48] Voice 3: So it's been a considerable amount of time.

[1:14:51] Voice 3: So I think there's room certainly for Trust Council to reconsider how much of a priority

[1:14:57] Voice 3: that is, you know, for Trust Council is perhaps a different question. Gail?

[1:15:04] Voice 1: Just curious, if Trust Council weighed in, they would only be weighing in for Salt Spring,

[1:15:10] Voice 1: correct? Because for us, this is a pretty specific Salt Spring issue. We know that this

[1:15:16] Voice 1: This sentiment to be included in speculation and vacancy tax does not spread over the whole trust area, nor over the whole CRD.

[1:15:24] Voice 1: So is there a way to focus it down on Salt Spring rather than region wide for you?

[1:15:32] Voice 3: Yeah, and I think that subtlety, to my recollection, wasn't included in the previous conversations.

[1:15:39] Voice 3: I think there is room there, but I'll defer to Laura.

[1:15:49] Trustee Patrick: One of the challenges with the speculation of vacancy tax is it doesn't have an opt-inable feature like the principal residence clause did for this speculation and vacancy tax.

[1:16:02] Trustee Patrick: So an opt-inable feature allows for local government.

[1:16:06] Trustee Patrick: That was the power was given specifically to local trust committees to make that request in the legislation, whereas the speculation of vacancy tax does not have that.

[1:16:15] Trustee Patrick: So it is a general broad advocacy role that belongs at the federation level.

[1:16:23] Voice 11: yeah

[1:16:26] Voice 3: and and that said as i i think um again depending on the appetite of trust council to

[1:16:33] Voice 3: delve into this um i think there is room uh you know from a policy standpoint to have a more

[1:16:41] Voice 3: nuanced um a more nuanced position that isn't necessarily um federation wide without exception

[1:16:52] Voice 3: but just that the previous discussions again some years ago did not get into that more nuanced

[1:16:59] Voice 3: approach.

[1:17:02] Voice 9: Earl? So would it be helpful at all for the local community commission to formally request

[1:17:11] Voice 9: the LTC to step forward and join us in support of the speculation and vacancy tax as a method

[1:17:21] Voice 9: and for you to take it on to trust council or would that be not helpful i

[1:17:30] Voice 3: don't know what the

[1:17:31] Voice 3: staff perspective on that is but uh certainly if the local trust committee um uh wish to respond

[1:17:41] Voice 3: to such a request by bringing it to trust council for discussion i i don't see that there's any

[1:17:47] Voice 3: barrier to doing that just

[1:17:51] Voice 8: to clarify mr chair the yeah i think my answer would be that i don't

[1:17:54] Voice 8: have that information it's a bit of a nuanced question around advocacy and we'd have to um

[1:17:58] Voice 8: to go, we'd probably want to go back and make sure we give LCC a clear direction or

[1:18:03] Voice 8: interpretation on that. Clear analysis, sorry, no direction. Yeah, yeah, I appreciate that.

[1:18:10] Voice 6: So Tim, thanks for the discussion today. The LCC has passed a motion, but I guess the question for

[1:18:17] Voice 6: our own staff is, does that get, and has that been relayed to the local trust committee or local

[1:18:25] Voice 6: staff.

[1:18:30] Voice 6: Director Hall, I'm

[1:18:31] Voice 5: not sure if that letter has been sent yet.

[1:18:34] Voice 6: That would be a starting point.

[1:18:38] Voice 6: And for my part, I will forward the last correspondence we had with the Minister of Finance, the last,

[1:18:47] Voice 6: and that was Katrina Conroy.

[1:18:50] Voice 6: So a few years ago, 23, I think.

[1:18:53] Voice 6: And in her response to her previous request, she, in a very brief letter, laid out that, well, here's the criteria we consider.

[1:19:02] Voice 6: And so through the, and this is from the CRD board, but I basically drafted the response.

[1:19:10] Voice 6: So we went through each of the criterion that the minister indicated was what they considered for inclusion.

[1:19:19] Voice 6: So I will forward that. It basically provides the rationale. And the thought was, yes, we can renew, and particularly with LCC this time around, joining in on the request.

[1:19:34] Voice 6: But we thought it would be more productive if both the trust and the CRD could join together in a request.

[1:19:45] Voice 6: But I'll forward the latest, somewhat dated, but latest response, which provides the broad rationale.

[1:19:53] Voice 6: And just to the point about the CRD as a whole, all of the CRD, with the exception of the three electoral areas, are included in the SVT.

[1:20:03] Voice 6: I do know that the two other electoral areas are not interested in being included, so this is definitely specifically a Salt Spring request, but as everyone knows, we're a pretty unique community within the Trust in terms of size and the housing issue and all of that.

[1:20:25] Voice 6: Anyway, I will forward that latest correspondence to the local trust committee and staff for your information.

[1:20:33] Voice 6: I think

[1:20:36] Voice 3: that it occurs to me to wonder whether the province is interested in a more nuanced approach, as they did take with the principal residency opt-in, or whether they would continue to prefer an Islands Trust area-wide approach.

[1:20:59] Voice 3: And I think that's an open question from my perspective.

[1:21:01] Voice 3: Go ahead, Laura.

[1:21:03] Trustee Patrick: I just went back to read our letter.

[1:21:06] Trustee Patrick: We did reference the letter from Chair Plant that you referred to from 23, and we said we generally agreed with the rationale, I think is the wording that's in our letters, stretched it as far as we could.

[1:21:16] Trustee Patrick: We did ask that they consider Salt Spring as its own area rather than the trust area.

[1:21:24] Trustee Patrick: But like I said, we never had a response.

[1:21:27] Trustee Patrick: Thanks for that.

[1:21:34] Voice 3: Gail?

[1:21:34] Voice 3: um

[1:21:35] Voice 1: since you have done that and that's gone through trust council even though it was a while

[1:21:40] Voice 1: ago could you um kind of bring it up out of the dust and send it again if you got no response i

[1:21:46] Voice 1: think there's a possibility different minister trying it again i

[1:21:54] Voice 3: certainly think there's

[1:21:55] Voice 3: potential there and um uh and maybe that's something we can bring to a future local

[1:22:03] Voice 3: local trust committee meeting for consideration yeah

[1:22:06] Voice 6: tim if if the local trust committee was

[1:22:12] Voice 6: willing to uh communicate again it might be most effective to do that jointly with the alcc and

[1:22:22] Voice 6: and the crd as opposed to again just individual organizations uh so something to consider a joint

[1:22:31] Voice 6: a joint letter of some kind.

[1:22:39] Voice 3: The power of joint advocacy is worth leaning into a bit more.

[1:22:45] Voice 11: Yes.

[1:22:50] Voice 9: Earl, go ahead.

[1:22:51] Voice 9: Well, that gets back to the mechanism.

[1:22:53] Voice 9: Joint advocacy should be more powerful, especially on this issue.

[1:22:58] Voice 9: And I'd like to think we can work together with the trust on that.

[1:23:01] Voice 9: So again, as it's something that's going to go forward,

[1:23:05] Voice 9: Or does the LCC need to provide some impetus by passing another resolution, sending another letter, doing something to trigger a renewal of the process?

[1:23:24] Voice 8: Go ahead, Chris.

[1:23:26] Voice 8: Well, I certainly, I think the original suggestion to send something formal to the LTC, as Director Holman mentioned, would be inviting LTC to, it seems like this is something CRD is wanting to lead.

[1:23:41] Voice 8: And if there's a desire to invite them to a joint letter or, you know, to collaborate on sending a letter, I think that would be something that LTC ought to maybe want to discuss in a future regular meeting with some staff analysis on the practicalities of that.

[1:24:01] Voice 8: Maybe the best way forward at this point.

[1:24:05] Voice 8: Well,

[1:24:10] Trustee Patrick: I just also want to point out, I think it's important to understand some data and information as well, because we don't want to make the equity issue worse. And I think there's a definite need to understand the program, what its effects have been, and what it might look like if it were to occur around Salt Spring. And like I said, does it make houses just more expensive?

[1:24:50] Voice 3: Okay. So, and then as I was just looking at the calendar, best I can tell, we haven't scheduled meetings beyond the May meeting. So, I don't think it's imperative that we dig into that, but we can certainly ask our staffs to look into potential, other potential meeting dates, and we'd have some time to do that.

[1:25:20] Voice 3: So, anything else today?

[1:25:30] Voice 3: Not seeing a bunch of hands shooting up,

[1:25:33] Voice 3: so I would just want to thank everyone for this conversation today.

[1:25:43] Voice 3: I'm feeling like this has been a productive start

[1:25:49] Voice 3: to building a relationship between our two groups here

[1:25:53] Voice 3: and that we're laying a foundation, hopefully,

[1:25:57] Voice 3: for continued cooperation over the next many years.

[1:26:03] Voice 3: So I appreciate everybody's involvement and comments today.

[1:26:09] Voice 3: And so I guess with that, we will move to adjournment.

[1:26:14] Voice 3: Thanks, everyone.

[1:26:15] Voice 3: Thanks for hosting.

[1:26:17] Voice 10: Thank you.

[1:26:18] Voice 3: Bye.

Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee                                 ADOPTED                             1 
Special Meeting Minutes 
February 26, 2026 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee 
Minutes of Special Meeting 
 
 
Date: Thursday, February 26, 2026 
Location: Electronic via Zoom 
   
Members Present: 
 
 
Timothy Peterson, Chair 
Laura Patrick, Local Trustee   
 
Members Regrets: Jamie Harris, Local Trustee 
 
Staff Present: Chris Hutton, Regional Planning Manager  
Warren Dingman, Bylaw Compliance and Enforcement Manager 
Rob Pingle, Planning Technician   
Carly Bilney, Recorder  
 
Others Present: Earl Rook, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commission Chair  
Gayle Baker, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commissioner 
Brian Webster, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commissioner 
Ben Corno, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Local Community Commissioner 
Gary Holman, Capital Regional District Salt Spring Island  
Electoral Area Director 
Stephen Henderson, Capital Regional District Senior Manager 
Southern Gulf Islands and Salt Spring Local Community 
Commission 
 
There were seven (7) members of the public in attendance 
 
1. Territorial Acknowledgement – Call To Order 
  Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. He acknowledged that the meeting 
was being held in the territory of Coast Salish First Nations. 
 
2. Approval Of Agenda 
A suggestion was made to change Section 3.2 (SSI Housing) to SSI Housing/OCP Update. 
By general consent, the agenda was adopted as amended. 
  

 
 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee                                 ADOPTED                             2 
Special Meeting Minutes 
February 26, 2026 
 
3. Special Meeting Matters 
3.1 Protocol Agreement Update Verbal Discussion  
Commissioner Henderson provided an update on the Protocol Agreement that was 
prepared by the Capital Regional District. He explained that it is currently in the draft 
stage and undergoing review by the Islands Trust legal team, and that the aim is not to 
revise the protocol, but to prepare a new letter of understanding. Discussion ensued 
and the following comments were made: 
• A comment was made that policies between the Local Community Commission 
and the Local Trust Committee are intimately linked and there should be a 
mechanism for having supporting policies that help both organizations  
• Comments were made about the referral process and the need to ensure local 
elected officials are included in referrals 
• A comment was made that both organizations have their own guidelines that may 
not always intersect and clarity about where work can be done together would be 
useful 
 
3.2. SSI Housing/OCP Update Verbal Discussion 
Commissioner Henderson provided an update on the Integrated Housing Strategy. 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were made: 
• The Planner noted there is a legislative requirement in the adoption process to refer 
to other agencies, including the Capital Regional District, for a 60-day formal 
referral period, and he indicated the Local Community Commission could wait for 
an invite from the Local Trust Committee before submitting recommendations 
• The Planner reported that the project consultants for the Official Community Plan 
review will not be renewing their contract for the next fiscal year 
• A Commissioner commented that the Integrated Housing Strategy is expected to be 
completed in time to inform housing policy in the Official Community Plan review 
process; and the departure of the project consultant may provide an opportunity to 
better align the timing of the Integrated Housing Strategy, the Trust Policy Statement 
and the Official Community Plan review 
• A suggestion was made to have a joint meeting of the Local Community 
Commission and the Local Trust Committee to workshop specific details of the 
draft Integrated Housing Strategy and the Official Community Plan 
Discussion ensued about a request made for data related to legalized cottages and 
suites. The following comments were made: 
• A comment was made about the importance of understanding what current 
changes allow in order to effectively consider new land use changes, and the 
Planner indicated that is a substantial data analysis  
• The Planner noted the value of zoning analysis for density or potential is looking at 
what the current housing need is and what the community is willing to zone and 
designate, how much density, and where.  

 
 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee                                 ADOPTED                             3 
Special Meeting Minutes 
February 26, 2026 
 
• A comment was made that there is data about how many legal suites have been 
approved, and the number is quite small 
• A suggestion was made to look for incentives to encourage land owners to renovate 
or build suites 
 
3.3. Short Term Vacation Rentals Verbal Discussion  
Commissioner Henderson provided an update on short term vacation rentals since Salt 
Spring Island opted into the legislation and since the Province instituted a registration 
process. He outlined discussions held about the feasibility of business licensing and 
the proposed next steps including more consultation and public engagement prior to 
2027. 
In response to a question from a Commissioner about whether the provincial registry 
has assisted in the enforcement of the land use bylaw, Bylaw Compliance and 
Enforcement Manager Dingman made the following comments: 
• The provincial registry has been a very helpful tool to determine the total number of 
operations and who is actually a resided owner complying with the regulations 
• The Local Trust Committee will decide on next steps about how to proceed with 
enforcement at the next meeting 
• There are some operations that are not registered and should be, and some that are 
not lawful that the province can deregister or remove from online listings 
• There are currently 226 operations registered with the provincial data portal 
• Provincial staff members have been very helpful 
• The provincial enforcement team has not received any complaints from the Gulf 
Islands regarding operations 
A Commissioner expressed support for more thorough analysis of information and 
suggested the number of short-term vacation rentals will likely be much higher during 
the busy season.  
 
3.4. SSI Harbour Management Verbal Discussion  
Commissioner Henderson indicated the Local Community Commission is planning 
another Harbours Workshop for (tentatively) April 16 with the hope that federal, 
provincial and Islands Trust representatives will participate. In response to a question 
from a Trustee, Commissioner Henderson noted that First Nations were invited to the 
workshop last year and were in good attendance though capacity funding was not 
provided.  
A Commissioner commented on recent efforts by the federal government to clean up 
Ganges Harbour.  
 
 
 

 
 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee                                 ADOPTED                             4 
Special Meeting Minutes 
February 26, 2026 
 
3.5. Watershed Protection Verbal Discussion  
Commissioner Henderson reported on a meeting between Local Community 
Commission and Capital Regional District staff to discuss the Salt Spring Island Water 
Protection Authority (SSIWPA) report and actions that have since been taken. 
In response to a question about the possibility of reconvening a SSIWPA-like group in 
the future, a Trustee commented that while it remains an identified priority project of 
the Local Trust Committee it has been removed from the 2026-2027 budget because it 
cannot be resourced by staff.  
 
3.6. Future Joint Meeting Schedule Verbal Discussion 
Discussion was held about possible topics for the next meeting agenda, and the 
following comments were made: 
• A suggestion was made to incorporate a housing discussion into the next meeting in 
a workshop format  
• A comment was made that the Local Community Commission housing strategy 
should be far enough along for thorough discussion at the next meeting 
Discussion was held about advocacy of the Speculation and Vacancy Tax. The 
following comments were made: 
• Director Holman commented that the Capital Regional District Board requested 
inclusion in the Speculation and Vacancy Tax for the electoral area, and the Local 
Community Commission passed a motion requesting that the Trust considers joint 
advocacy 
• A Trustee noted that the Local Trust Committee passed a motion to send a letter to 
the former Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs to consider the tax, a letter was 
sent to the Minister of Finance and a response has since been received. 
• A Trustee noted the issue has not moved forward due to federation versus Local 
Trust Committee issues, and, as it has been years since Trust Council has weighed 
in on the issue (in 2017), there may be opportunity for an updated position from 
Trust Council 
• A Commissioner commented that the Speculation and Vacancy Tax issue is 
specific to Salt Spring Island and does not spread across the Trust Area 
• Director Holman indicated he would forward the last correspondence with the 
former Minister of Finance who outlined criteria to be considered regarding the tax 
• Some Commissioners expressed support of joint advocacy by the Local Trust 
Committee, the Capital Regional District, and the Local Community Commission 
• A Trustee expressed a need to understand data about how the tax would impact 
Salt Spring and to ensure it does not worsen the equity issue on the island   
  

 
 
 
Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee                                 ADOPTED                             5 
Special Meeting Minutes 
February 26, 2026 
 
 
4.  Adjournment 
  By general consent the meeting adjourned at 11:30 a.m. 
 
 
 
_________________________ 
Timothy Peterson, Chair 
 
 
CERTIFIED CORRECT: 
 
 
_________________________ 
Carly Bilney, Recorder