Saturna Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, April 30, 2026

[0:00:01] Voice 3: Oh, when

[0:00:02] Voice 10: you see there is a Wi-Fi network.

[0:00:05] Voice 10: There is, yeah.

[0:00:07] Voice 3: There's an open one.

[0:00:09] Voice 3: That one.

[0:00:10] Voice 9: Yeah.

[0:00:15] Voice 5: Good morning, everybody.

[0:00:18] Voice 5: I don't know what happened to everybody, but you two will do.

[0:00:23] Voice 5: Are they all online?

[0:00:27] Voice 9: They're probably online.

[0:00:29] Voice 9: Hopefully.

[0:00:29] Voice 9: So thank

[0:00:30] Voice 5: you for joining us today for this regular meeting of the Saturna Island Local Trust Committee.

[0:00:34] Voice 5: I want to begin the meeting by acknowledging the unfortunate reality of the patients across the territory of the Coast Salish people.

[0:00:40] Voice 5: I'm David Maud, elected from Main Island, and chair of the Saturna Island Local Trust Committee.

[0:00:45] Voice 5: I'm joined today by the two Saturna Island trustees, Mr. Bowman and Mr. Middleton.

[0:00:51] Voice 5: Together we make the Saturna Island Local Trust Committee.

[0:00:54] Voice 5: This meeting is being live-streamed and recorded.

[0:00:56] Voice 5: We also are unable to attend in person today,

[0:00:58] Voice 5: we recorded a proposal that I was pressed

[0:01:00] Voice 5: to accept for future viewing.

[0:01:01] Voice 5: We have some staff members joining today.

[0:01:07] Voice 5: Lots of staff members joining today.

[0:01:10] Voice 5: So we have your Island Planner, Brad Smith,

[0:01:16] Voice 5: Mary Goldsmith, who is our Regional Planning Manager.

[0:01:20] Voice 5: She's the new Robert Kijima,

[0:01:21] Voice 5: if you want to see where she is in the organization.

[0:01:24] Voice 5: She comes with a broad resume, and it's very friendly and very welcoming, so be kind to her, please.

[0:01:36] Voice 3: Saterna is never unkind to any person.

[0:01:39] Voice 10: Did

[0:01:40] Voice 3: you not go to the last meeting?

[0:01:41] Voice 10: We don't have the troublesome audience members here.

[0:01:46] Voice 5: And we also have Lisa Millard who is our recording secretary and our wonderful Zoom master, the

[0:01:53] Voice 5: manager that she performs behind the scenes. You have

[0:01:56] Voice 5: no idea, but it's very much appreciated and

[0:01:58] Voice 5: makes it so much easier for all of us. Brad, do we have anybody else joining us today?

[0:02:04] Voice 5: We don't

[0:02:05] Voice 6: have Warren. Warren usually listens in, but we're actually on the agenda.

[0:02:11] Voice 5: Fair enough. So this is an official forum for the local trust committee to make decisions

[0:02:18] Voice 5: about managers' planning matters and assessment of their business. I want to add this to place

[0:02:22] Voice 5: an appointment. Our staff are on their way to a safe and respectful workplace. So before

[0:02:27] Voice 5: us, we have an agenda. Trustees, is there any additions, deletions, concerns?

[0:02:35] Voice 5: I guess

[0:02:35] Voice 10: that's it. No, it wouldn't have been added because the agenda came out last week

[0:02:41] Voice 10: in it but um it would be i guess the minor bylaw amendments we could call it if we just

[0:02:50] Voice 10: put on the new business following that email you sent out basically yeah maybe technical

[0:02:58] Voice 5: amendments

[0:02:58] Voice 10: sure technical amendments project so

[0:03:02] Voice 5: we'll put that under 17.2 if we have enough

[0:03:06] Voice 5: time to get to it today yeah exactly thank you

[0:03:09] Voice 6: the chair can i also add uh you have a resolution

[0:03:12] Voice 6: that i emailed you yesterday uh to authorize a legal review of the covenant for judy meyer's

[0:03:19] Voice 6: property oh yeah

[0:03:20] Voice 6: and uh they're also uh uh staff would like to just have your

[0:03:26] Voice 6: preliminary thoughts

[0:03:27] Voice 6: around reviewing your project list uh uh and obviously it's difficult to kind of look forward

[0:03:34] Voice 6: to the next term uh but just for planning purposes if there you have any thoughts on what

[0:03:39] Voice 6: major projects you might be interested in pursuing uh so a review of the projects list

[0:03:48] Voice 6: so

[0:03:49] Voice 5: we'll just deal with that project this portion

[0:04:13] Voice 10: 16.1 i think work

[0:04:15] Voice 7: program okay yeah okay there we go

[0:04:20] Voice 5: no it's it's our fault it's the location

[0:04:23] Voice 5: so by general percent we'll adopt the agenda as amended

[0:04:26] Voice 5: yes our rating um and of course the person we have to do is we have a trustee reporting

[0:04:32] Voice 5: important. So, I turn it over to the trustees to report.

[0:04:39] Voice 3: So, Mairead Foland here. Two things I want to highlight. One was the March Trust Council

[0:04:50] Voice 3: budget discussion. I was not satisfied really, again, with the direction of the budget and

[0:05:01] Voice 3: And the fact that we're employing more staff, et cetera, et cetera.

[0:05:04] Voice 3: However, the budget was passed.

[0:05:06] Voice 3: But I would point out that nine trustees voted against the budget, against passing it, including your two Saturna trustees.

[0:05:15] Voice 3: The second thing I want to comment on is a general comment on regulation.

[0:05:23] Voice 3: So we have somebody on Saturna who, in all good faith, when she moved to her lot, investigated

[0:05:33] Voice 3: the use of composting toilets.

[0:05:36] Voice 3: She took advice.

[0:05:38] Voice 3: She installed one in her RV.

[0:05:40] Voice 3: She followed all the instructions rigorously.

[0:05:44] Voice 3: she is deeply committed to living with a low

[0:05:48] Voice 3: impact on the environment, deeply and

[0:05:51] Voice 3: inconveniences herself to that end. Due to

[0:05:56] Voice 3: an able complaint, she is now embroiled in

[0:06:00] Voice 3: having to get certification

[0:06:03] Voice 3: which involves terribly, terribly complex

[0:06:09] Voice 3: swimming on the river, although theoretically

[0:06:12] Voice 3: The province of British Columbia has legislation that supports the use of these alternative

[0:06:18] Voice 3: methods and there's plenty of evidence from other countries.

[0:06:22] Voice 3: There's a thicket of well-meaning perhaps, but poorly thought through legislation regulation

[0:06:31] Voice 3: that makes the provincial mandate to use theoretically all of these alternative things just about

[0:06:41] Voice 3: about impossible and it's so symptomatic of regulation in general I would like to say the

[0:06:47] Voice 3: trust but in British Columbia where theoretically things are possible and they're you know put in

[0:06:54] Voice 3: front of you as you know steps forward we're forward thinking but the actual practical fact

[0:07:00] Voice 3: we try to do it it's either financially or logistically impossible and I think in my three

[0:07:07] Voice 3: and a half years as a trustee, that's one of the things I've learned

[0:07:10] Voice 3: more than anything else. But lots of things that I write out

[0:07:15] Voice 3: of Bushydale for could be done, can't be done. And it's not that they

[0:07:18] Voice 3: can't be done for good reason. They can't be done for all sorts of really crappy

[0:07:23] Voice 3: reasons. And I feel that

[0:07:26] Voice 3: the population in general should rise up against

[0:07:32] Voice 3: inappropriate regulation that has

[0:07:35] Voice 3: no real benefit. All it does is cost people money, effort, peace of mind. And I leave it at that.

[0:07:46] Voice 10: Thank goodness there's only two people in the audience that you could be accused of fermenting.

[0:07:55] Voice 10: Well I will find it hard to top that but with my very pedestrian reporting

[0:08:02] Voice 10: that really the main activity has been sort of working behind the scenes just to

[0:08:07] Voice 10: verify what is our work program, what isn't our work program in terms of

[0:08:15] Voice 10: major projects, minor projects, what's doable, what's not doable to the other term. So I think

[0:08:20] Voice 10: we came to a kind of worked it through. We had kind of some mutual misunderstanding I think and

[0:08:26] Voice 10: then eventually talked to the final director Stefan and that was a good conversation. So

[0:08:34] Voice 10: you'll see the results of that on the agenda today in the new business which is relatively

[0:08:39] Voice 10: i think straightforward piece of work now so um that's about that's about all before all right

[0:08:48] Voice 5: well from the chair's perspective we did pass a budget disappointing for you guys i voted for it

[0:08:55] Voice 5: um it was it was a long i don't see it's a battle but it was a lot of discussion a lot of back and

[0:09:05] Voice 5: and forth. We landed at 8.1%. What's that the number?

[0:09:13] Voice 3: Oh, 8.9%.

[0:09:14] Voice 3: The

[0:09:15] Voice 5: numbers all become a blur after a while. We were well up in the double digits through

[0:09:21] Voice 5: the process. We did a lot to do our best to cut things down. The two dominating factors

[0:09:28] Voice 5: on the budget, our employees are all through BCG, BC Governors, who negotiated a new contract

[0:09:35] Voice 5: And if I remember correctly, 2.8% of our budget increase was due to that, but another 4.5%

[0:09:44] Voice 5: of the increase was due to lack of government funding, that we cut funding to programs for

[0:09:50] Voice 5: us.

[0:09:50] Voice 5: So an 8.1% increase, 7.3% of it was non-discretionary, things that sort of went on to our budget

[0:10:01] Voice 5: without the funding attached, so it bumped us up.

[0:10:05] Voice 5: uh these things are difficult um next term our next budget i don't know where we're going to

[0:10:12] Voice 5: land because it's um there's definitely concerns about how the budget's going up

[0:10:18] Voice 5: but when when you're on the inside up and out it's it's really hard to sort of keep things

[0:10:25] Voice 5: at status quo if the concept of cutting is really complicated um and your two trustees did fight

[0:10:33] Voice 5: and very verbally at the meeting, so they're representing you well, but it is what it is.

[0:10:41] Voice 5: The other thing that's sort of disappointing is the trust policy statement project is not

[0:10:46] Voice 5: going to get finished this term. It was always the goal, it was like up until even a couple

[0:10:53] Voice 5: of months ago. Yeah, we're going to get it landed, we're going to get it done and all

[0:10:56] Voice 5: that um but there were basically the there's two logistical factors um the last round of

[0:11:05] Voice 5: consultation is not going to get done in time especially because the minister said to us that

[0:11:11] Voice 5: we would have to have the the bylaws on his desk for june for approval and there's just there's

[0:11:17] Voice 5: no way that that can happen so we're we're going to keep going forward with it as much as we can

[0:11:24] Voice 5: but even now the most optimistic staff members don't think we're going to get the bylaws read

[0:11:29] Voice 5: in september which will be our last opportunity of course prior to election in october

[0:11:35] Voice 5: so it's uh even if the june deadline hadn't sort of happened um there was hope that we could get it

[0:11:43] Voice 5: adopted in september and at least get it to the ministry nothing would happen with it until after

[0:11:48] Voice 5: the election but at least it would be completed it does not seem that's going to be happening so

[0:11:55] Voice 5: We're very hopeful that we've landed in a good place, one that, post-election, the new

[0:12:03] Voice 5: trustees can embrace and sort of just put the final stages to it and get it done.

[0:12:09] Voice 5: Because if we have to start all over again, which I've been through now twice, it's going

[0:12:17] Voice 5: to cost a lot of money and a lot of time and a lot of energy.

[0:12:23] Voice 5: And it's going to be frustrating for people.

[0:12:25] Voice 5: so hopefully we've done a very good job this term and hopefully we can hand it off to the next term

[0:12:31] Voice 5: trustees and things will go well because it's been many many years since it's been updated

[0:12:38] Voice 5: it's supposed to be an active document that's constantly being updated done like your land

[0:12:43] Voice 5: Andrew's bylaws and we have was it 93 it was last updated at least so it's been a hacker so

[0:12:56] Voice 5: that's where that's at um otherwise I've just been a busy little beaver trying to

[0:13:01] Voice 5: make you kids happy I see two smiling faces in the audience so I guess I do good that they're

[0:13:09] Voice 5: thrilled you can tell all righty so we'll move on um uh electoral denture support i know is not

[0:13:16] Voice 5: going to happen because i saw a lot of very evident victoria so uh there'll be no uh director

[0:13:22] Voice 5: brett's report today we

[0:13:23] Voice 10: could say on his behalf that he has expressed an interest in running

[0:13:28] Voice 10: to be a saturn island trustee in the next election marie has done a valiant and noble job

[0:13:37] Voice 10: but it's decided that enough was enough.

[0:13:41] Voice 10: It

[0:13:42] Voice 3: might be a danger to the public if I continue.

[0:13:45] Voice 3: A danger

[0:13:46] Voice 10: to the financial planning committee members, that's for sure.

[0:13:49] Voice 3: But I think, yeah, that's great.

[0:13:50] Voice 3: So Paul is officially, yeah, well, could be better.

[0:13:56] Voice 10: Yeah, I mean, he's got a lot more experience now

[0:13:58] Voice 10: that he worked as a director.

[0:14:01] Voice 10: He obviously has two, three, three terms as a trustee, I think.

[0:14:06] Voice 10: prior to that so yeah anyway that that's all we know of david i believe you've decided that you'll

[0:14:14] Voice 10: be running again when we he's he needs convincing well

[0:14:19] Voice 5: there are some people that have put their

[0:14:22] Voice 5: names forward that are making me uncomfortable so okay so not

[0:14:25] Voice 10: all but there are other things

[0:14:27] Voice 10: jump as a chair i have to say we're very grateful that you were played this role for us

[0:14:32] Voice 10: the other stuff not that we're at the end but well i'm very grateful for

[0:14:36] Voice 5: you as trustees we're having

[0:14:37] Voice 5: a love fest today this is great it's the new setting you guys have made my job very easy

[0:14:42] Voice 5: i do appreciate that all right so now it's your turn it's public participation period

[0:14:49] Voice 5: so if you want to put your hand up say your name and i'll try not to shut you down john hutchinson

[0:14:57] Voice 8: and

[0:14:57] Voice 4: just

[0:14:58] Voice 8: this is just an observation read the budget and just that and more towards your report

[0:15:09] Voice 8: observation from me is that clearly a chunk of the budget was a 4.1 because government funding

[0:15:21] Voice 8: money. That would suggest to me that we've been spending past our means. 4.1% of our

[0:15:33] Voice 8: money was reliant upon money that could and did disappear, meaning that budgetary process

[0:15:43] Voice 8: somehow is really flawed. So to continue with that, it's the other observation regarding

[0:15:52] Voice 8: the official community plan, very wide reaching aspects of it that will see First Nations

[0:16:04] Voice 8: having to be referred with all of the information that comes through the Islands of Trust.

[0:16:12] Voice 8: And while I'm not opposed to that thought process, because I think everybody should

[0:16:18] Voice 8: be aware of everything, but what you have to do is buckle up your seat belt because

[0:16:23] Voice 8: because you've got a huge cost indicator coming forward.

[0:16:27] Voice 8: We may touch that now, when this comes online, because I know, or at least I believe it,

[0:16:35] Voice 8: that the current staff of the Iowa's Trust is managing to handle requests of tests.

[0:16:44] Voice 2: If

[0:16:45] Voice 8: we think that the trust is going to be this size next year

[0:16:53] Voice 8: and the year after, we're

[0:16:56] Voice 8: going to have to have more bodies to do lots of paper.

[0:17:00] Voice 8: And so it's difficult for the trustees.

[0:17:04] Voice 8: I've not, ours have tried, but I do wonder about the other islands, where they're thinking

[0:17:12] Voice 8: is about the future of taxation and X value. That's the only comment.

[0:17:19] Voice 8: Thank you. James?

[0:17:22] Voice 8: What can I say? One of my concerns, getting old and tired and my brain doesn't process

[0:17:33] Voice 8: minutiae as well as it once did, but one of the things that I find difficult about the

[0:17:39] Voice 8: the changes, the projected changes, is that I was a trustee in the very beginning, one

[0:17:51] Voice 8: of the committees, and we at that time had a very strong local trust committee autonomy.

[0:18:06] Voice 8: We did not deal with it as the overall principle to overrule people because they are in effect

[0:18:18] Voice 8: government management and it seems that that autonomy will be overridden if the change

[0:18:33] Voice 8: just go ahead and encourage you uh so that i think because these islands are and they need

[0:18:52] strong ability to speak for themselves as individual communities because they are all

[0:18:59] different

[0:18:59] Voice 8: uh everyone with numerous times um as a trustee in the past so uh and i think the other

[0:19:10] Voice 8: Another general comment I have, and it relates to budget, is I think that as Islanders, we

[0:19:18] have two levels of government

[0:19:19] Voice 8: to do what one level of government shouldn't be doing.

[0:19:23] Voice 8: That's very costly, and the trust area is a perfectly unmanageable district.

[0:19:35] It's spread from basically north to

[0:19:41] Voice 8: outside of here and trying to operate it from basically

[0:19:47] Voice 8: largely central base in Victoria is ineffective, totally ineffective.

[0:19:54] Voice 8: I know that's not going to change, but I think it needs to be .

[0:20:04] Voice 8: how we make it continue with this but make it so it's not usually costly to get local taxpayers

[0:20:22] Voice 8: unless the government is willing to step up and increase their subsidies of the daily operation

[0:20:29] Voice 8: to a much higher extent so i had a big problem with that so i got my mouth open

[0:20:41] Voice 5: well you're definitely patiently converted it's uh from a budgetary aspect you look in your day

[0:20:47] Voice 5: 100 funded by the province right now i think we're at 1.8 percent so you know it's there's

[0:20:56] Voice 5: been significant cutting cutting cutting cutting um and it it does make challenges and it does

[0:21:03] Voice 5: me let people into you and me pay more taxes so keep electing the right trustees because those

[0:21:11] Voice 5: are your voices and you know across the trust area the more people elected the stronger the voices

[0:21:20] Voice 5: are and we do our very best to represent the community so thank you all

[0:21:26] Voice 10: right shall we can

[0:21:28] Voice 10: Can we make just a general comment in response?

[0:21:31] Voice 10: I think that's quite insightful.

[0:21:33] Voice 10: And I think that is the challenge that trust faces now

[0:21:35] Voice 10: is it does represent disparate communities

[0:21:38] Voice 10: that have become very different through growth patterns.

[0:21:42] Voice 10: And so you have Salt Spring Island,

[0:21:44] Voice 10: which has significant social issues

[0:21:48] Voice 10: in the same federation as, say, Saterna Island,

[0:21:53] Voice 10: which has social issues that are much smaller

[0:21:57] Voice 10: and they're kind of managed by a still viable volunteer base and so that's what i've been very

[0:22:04] Voice 10: active in trying to see governance reform at the trust level in the past and put a lot of effort

[0:22:08] Voice 10: and energy over the past two terms into into it for whatever reason there's just not traction

[0:22:15] Voice 10: being gained and i think it's because the islands have such different needs trying to see a vision

[0:22:21] Voice 10: about the governance of a federation

[0:22:23] Voice 10: that represents these different individual islands.

[0:22:27] Voice 10: It's just not thought-fires, but very difficult.

[0:22:30] Voice 10: And so I am of the view,

[0:22:32] Voice 10: I think the trust largely well serves

[0:22:34] Voice 10: a place like Saturna in terms of land use planning.

[0:22:36] Voice 10: We've got some work to do with the remaining densities

[0:22:39] Voice 10: that we have, what I think was reported,

[0:22:41] Voice 10: something like 115 possible,

[0:22:43] Voice 10: and then we're at full build-out per the OCP.

[0:22:47] Voice 10: And so I think that that's going to be my focus

[0:22:50] Voice 10: certainly for the rest of this term,

[0:22:51] Voice 10: if elected again for the next term because I don't know how an organization like the Alice Trust

[0:22:56] Voice 10: can tackle the social issues on the island like Salt Spring. I have no idea and so I'm going to

[0:23:03] Voice 10: kind of keep you quiet on things like that in absence of anything to contribute and I'm not

[0:23:09] Voice 10: sure if some of the other smaller islands would have that same view but I think that that is a

[0:23:15] Voice 10: real challenge of the trust as a federation is is you know pender is not far behind gabriola is

[0:23:20] Voice 10: again not far behind and then you have of course mesquite uh south pender you know quite a few of

[0:23:29] Voice 10: the smaller islands which are probably doing okay in the sense of their the viability of their

[0:23:35] Voice 10: communities i mean there's always issues like generational change and affordability and things

[0:23:40] Voice 10: like that but anyway that's my kind of response to to i think your both your insightful comments

[0:23:45] Voice 10: you've been long time observers of the trust so i thought you know give you the benefit of my

[0:23:51] Voice 10: past somewhat defective wisdom in in uh response to your your diligence thank

[0:23:59] Voice 5: you all right so

[0:24:03] Voice 5: So, page three, we're just going through the agenda now.

[0:24:08] Voice 5: Local Custody Minutes dated January 29th, 26th for adoption.

[0:24:13] Voice 5: Did anybody manage to find some little Easter egg of deficiency in the minutes?

[0:24:17] Voice 5: Because I struggle, and I can't find these things.

[0:24:22] Voice 5: It's, it's, it's...

[0:24:24] Voice 10: I read starting.

[0:24:25] Voice 10: No, I thought the minutes that I'll last the longest while,

[0:24:28] Voice 10: and it's very well done, I think.

[0:24:30] Voice 10: I should thank staff, they've done an excellent job.

[0:24:33] Voice 10: I have not a thing to say about these minutes

[0:24:35] Voice 10: other than they're well-written and reflect what happened.

[0:24:39] Voice 11: Yeah.

[0:24:40] Voice 5: So another ringing endorsement.

[0:24:42] Voice 5: Thank you, Lisa.

[0:24:44] Voice 5: You're very much appreciated.

[0:24:47] Voice 5: So we go to page 13, we have section,

[0:24:51] Voice 5: oh, so by general consent, we're not in those minutes.

[0:24:53] Voice 11: So

[0:24:53] Voice 5: page 13, we have section 26 resolution

[0:24:56] Voice 5: without meaning report, just for your information.

[0:25:02] Voice 5: Page 1415, we have a follow-up action list, dated April 20, 2026.

[0:25:07] Voice 5: So, anything anybody want to highlight or ask questions about?

[0:25:13] Voice 3: Um, I'm just, we just checked what page we're on.

[0:25:18] Voice 8: We're on page 14.

[0:25:21] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:25:26] Voice 10: Oh, no, that's a resolution, so that would be the question, right?

[0:25:29] Voice 9: You know the column on the right?

[0:25:35] Voice 11: Okay.

[0:25:49] Voice 10: Can

[0:25:50] Voice 3: I make a note just that thank you for activity number seven staff to explore holding

[0:25:58] Voice 3: the April 30th and July 23rd meetings at the community hall so we have had a change of

[0:26:05] Voice 3: venue after a significant period of time without a change of venue so we should highlight that

[0:26:11] Voice 3: the next go-round i take full responsibility for my lack of noticing that but i do think we should

[0:26:19] Voice 3: highlight it when we put out minutes the agenda everything that it's a change of venue and

[0:26:26] Voice 5: i guess

[0:26:27] Voice 5: for trustees this is your preferred venue going forward uh well typically

[0:26:33] Voice 10: what had happened is

[0:26:34] Voice 10: it just alternated because there are two different community organizations that run each facility and

[0:26:40] Voice 10: because i think the trust pays for its use it was felt to share wealth between the two and that's

[0:26:47] Voice 10: but then this was not suitable during the pandemic and we didn't have enough social distancing

[0:26:52] Voice 10: um i think was the rationale i could be wrong and so we by default we always went to the

[0:26:59] Voice 10: the um

[0:27:00] Voice 9: yeah

[0:27:01] Voice 10: the restaurant we went in the big room we didn't meet in the lounge so we were all

[0:27:04] Voice 10: spread out the big facility and so obviously that's long behind us so i guess it's come back

[0:27:11] Voice 10: to past practice and i'll try to recommend it at the last meeting but uh

[0:27:15] Voice 3: there has also been um

[0:27:18] Voice 3: raised an issue that the acoustics in that lounge area and the rec center is difficult for some

[0:27:24] Voice 3: people so we should i think we should stick with the community holder a bit get feedback is it

[0:27:30] Voice 3: better yes or no because there were some people who really felt that the acoustics there didn't

[0:27:36] Voice 3: help them but go ahead john being

[0:27:39] Voice 8: here compared the heating system here is far worse for me than

[0:27:43] Voice 8: the acoustics in the lounge because as far as you get uh there the one that comes from the

[0:27:49] Voice 8: We're not going to be able to which is really what people do best.

[0:28:00] Voice 8: So from that point of view, it's not an advantage. The only other reason that winter

[0:28:07] Voice 4: meetings if

[0:28:10] Voice 8: there is a

[0:28:12] Voice 8: oh

[0:28:14] Voice 11: yeah yeah this

[0:28:15] Voice 8: hopefully happened here but currently it's not happening okay so that wasn't

[0:28:21] Voice 8: so we

[0:28:29] Voice 7: have pluses and minuses

[0:28:30] Voice 7: I actually think

[0:28:35] Voice 8: As I understand it, because I happen to know the other way that the local island of

[0:28:45] Voice 8: did wire for that generator.

[0:28:48] Voice 8: I understand that some of that's on the forum, but it actually kicked in .

[0:28:57] Voice 8: So I think that's all.

[0:28:59] Voice 8: One of the things, I actually do like the idea of back and forth between community operations

[0:29:06] Voice 8: and each one struggling financially, but here, what might help, because I've left John here

[0:29:15] Voice 8: long and eager, if the head table went that way, we were facing that way, then it might

[0:29:23] Voice 8: help a bit.

[0:29:25] Voice 5: okay so what would the what we've adopted which are just coming up thanks to our wonderful people

[0:29:32] Voice 5: who help us so much so lisa has said uh the elephant's adopted the meeting schedule community

[0:29:37] Voice 5: hall today and in july it'll be an electronic meeting in november which is the first meeting

[0:29:43] Voice 5: in the pivotal trust meeting and then january will be in the rec center so it sounds like status quo

[0:29:50] Voice 5: will be fine for now what you've adopted yeah the next

[0:29:54] Voice 10: term will

[0:29:54] Voice 10: adopt their schedule and they can deal with that then i'm sure

[0:30:00] Voice 10: Excellent. Thank you

[0:30:01] Voice 5: for that timely information from Lisa.

[0:30:04] Voice 5: All righty.

[0:30:06] Voice 5: So there's nothing else within our call-up action list.

[0:30:13] Voice 5: So we're going to respond.

[0:30:15] Voice 5: So applications and referral on page 16.

[0:30:19] Voice 5: North Pender Local Trust Committee referral for draft bylaws number 236 and 237.

[0:30:26] Voice 5: I

[0:30:28] Voice 7: just

[0:30:33] Voice 3: had a small question and it's just being slightly pedantic but I read it was storage of

[0:30:39] Voice 3: empty propane it's around page 21 of empty propane tanks up to a maximum of five tanks and I thought

[0:30:46] Voice 3: do you not need to say what size they are you know propane tanks can be like well we have

[0:30:53] Voice 5: I'm just

[0:30:54] Voice 3: maybe it is in the bylaw and it's not just in this quick summary it just caught my eye

[0:31:00] Voice 3: and i'm being pedantic so it doesn't really bother me yeah

[0:31:04] Voice 6: i mean no no maximum volume of tank but it

[0:31:08] Voice 6: would be for the industrial size tanks that would be connected to your house yeah but

[0:31:12] Voice 6: they're empty

[0:31:14] Voice 8: all right so

[0:31:16] Voice 6: that's that's that's not for this one that's for the

[0:31:19] Voice 11: yeah that's their concrete

[0:31:22] Voice 6: feedback proposal on north yeah

[0:31:26] Voice 3: i did jump ahead sorry it's

[0:31:29] Voice 6: on a rural uh building property that

[0:31:33] Voice 6: would need uh both uh ocp and land use by 11 which is why you have the two bylaws versus by

[0:31:39] Voice 6: a number 242 where the area proposed for the uh aggregate storage and contract yard business

[0:31:46] Voice 6: is already designated in the OCP, so it only needs to land use by law of consideration.

[0:31:52] Voice 6: So I'm very

[0:31:55] Voice 5: pleased to see now we have recommended motions on page 16, which makes it a bit easier

[0:32:03] Voice 5: for you to express your wishes.

[0:32:06] Voice 3: So, do you want me to go?

[0:32:08] Voice 3: Absolutely.

[0:32:08] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:32:09] Voice 3: You alright?

[0:32:10] Voice 10: Yes.

[0:32:12] Voice 9: There you go.

[0:32:13] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:32:14] Voice 3: Okay, so

[0:32:17] Voice 3: Sutera Local

[0:32:18] Voice 3: Island Local Trust Committee

[0:32:21] Voice 3: responds

[0:32:21] Voice 3: to North

[0:32:24] Voice 3: Pender Island Local Trust Committee that

[0:32:26] Voice 3: interests are unaffected by

[0:32:28] Voice 3: draft bylaws

[0:32:29] Voice 3: 236 and 237.

[0:32:32] Voice 3: Trustee Millingham, second?

[0:32:34] Voice 10: Second, yes.

[0:32:35] Voice 5: Any further discussion?

[0:32:37] Voice 5: Call the question all in favour?

[0:32:39] Voice 5: And that carries.

[0:32:40] Voice 5: So we have another one

[0:32:42] Voice 5: from

[0:32:44] Voice 5: North Penrith, North Penrith local trust may refer to draft bylaw number 242 for your response.

[0:32:50] Voice 12: Okay and that is on page 20.

[0:32:59] Voice 3: I'm getting lost where I am, here we are, page 20.

[0:33:06] Voice 3: That Caterina Island local trust committee responds to North Penrith Island local trust

[0:33:12] Voice 3: Committee that interests are unaffected by draft bylaw number 242?

[0:33:17] Voice 5: Second. Trustee Melton? Second.

[0:33:19] Voice 5: For the discussion, call the question all in favour? That carries. I'm waiting for the day

[0:33:26] Voice 5: that somebody is opposed to something. Well that day might come when Paul Brent shows up here again.

[0:33:36] Voice 10: are you able to comment just out of human interest was this a long time for

[0:33:43] Voice 6: this to happen

[0:33:44] Voice 10: it's

[0:33:45] Voice 6: been under tup since 2011 it's been operating and the site

[0:33:51] Voice 6: itself has been industrialized

[0:33:53] Voice 6: since the 70s

[0:33:54] Voice 10: right so

[0:33:55] Voice 6: it's a pretty big one yeah

[0:33:58] Voice 10: he went to high school with son oh yeah

[0:34:01] Voice 6: so he's very diligent in his willingness to collect whatever information is required

[0:34:09] Voice 6: yeah

[0:34:09] Voice 10: so this is a big win for him it's

[0:34:12] Voice 6: not there yet

[0:34:12] Voice 6: it will be if it gets there but a win for me is a yes or no yeah right fair enough

[0:34:23] Voice 3: So you're on to the next one, which is...

[0:34:25] Voice 10: Can I just ask, sorry to derail us too much here,

[0:34:28] Voice 10: but what is the next, the OCP amendment?

[0:34:32] Voice 10: This

[0:34:32] Voice 6: is a land use by-law amendment, so it's a designated...

[0:34:36] Voice 6: The land is designated there, and so it's just a zoning amendment

[0:34:39] Voice 6: to allow the industrial use, but it's still in a draft by-law.

[0:34:45] Voice 6: It's still just early in

[0:34:47] Voice 6: the statutory process.

[0:34:48] Voice 6: There are some concerns, but the

[0:34:50] Voice 8: media neighbour

[0:34:51] Voice 8: it

[0:34:51] Voice 6: has some certain uh we're working through some questions that first nations had because

[0:34:57] Voice 6: it's an industrial use the land base it gains a little more attention i think in our purposes

[0:35:03] Voice 10: yeah anytime you see a bullet one that says storage of 10 000 liters of diesel you think

[0:35:08] Voice 10: i wouldn't just fly about anything

[0:35:10] Voice 6: yeah so yeah

[0:35:11] Voice 10: so just human interest because i'm working through

[0:35:14] Voice 6: all of that the goal the nice thing is is that because it's designated industrial at some point

[0:35:20] Voice 6: the community has at least decided that that area is

[0:35:25] Voice 6: where industrial activity should be centered

[0:35:28] Voice 6: so it's more is the use appropriate and is the intensity of use appropriate versus

[0:35:38] Voice 6: a discussion where say it was a rural designation and then you know is this even appropriate for

[0:35:45] Voice 6: industrial right so uh so we won't need a minister's approval because there is no ocp

[0:35:51] Voice 6: versus the other

[0:35:54] Voice 6: one where because it's on rural zone and rural designated land they need the

[0:36:00] Voice 6: minister's approval which is i

[0:36:02] Voice 10: see uh

[0:36:03] Voice 6: often another so

[0:36:05] Voice 10: this was just not i have to understand

[0:36:08] Voice 10: this but just excuse you took time to explain it um this is currently rural and industrial zoning

[0:36:14] Voice 10: zoning on this property uh

[0:36:16] Voice 6: it's world industrial designation so that's the difference that's the

[0:36:20] Voice 10: OCP

[0:36:20] Voice 6: it's the OCP so it does it so so the designation says that the community interest

[0:36:27] Voice 6: in the future is for it to be uh for industrial use uh the bottom portion of the lot the top

[0:36:33] Voice 6: portion is is rural designated so the question now is the zoning is still rural on the bottom

[0:36:40] Voice 6: the zoning where he's industrialized it's it's it's zoned as a residential zone thank

[0:36:49] Voice 4: you thank

[0:36:51] Voice 5: you thank you okay so on to page 24 minor housing review project proposed by our number one four

[0:36:58] Voice 5: three sorry

[0:36:59] Voice 3: again do we not have to uh say something about so page 21

[0:37:08] Voice 6: were asked for comments

[0:37:09] Voice 3: I

[0:37:10] Voice 6: think he was

[0:37:11] Voice 6: did you not just ask that

[0:37:13] Voice 6: for both of them right

[0:37:14] Voice 10: did we do

[0:37:16] Voice 10: did we

[0:37:18] Voice 3: do this one as well

[0:37:19] Voice 3: page 21

[0:37:20] Voice 3: and

[0:37:20] Voice 6: then Lee had his questions

[0:37:25] Voice 3: book 21 was

[0:37:27] Voice 6: the

[0:37:27] Voice 3: response to the referral

[0:37:28] Voice 3: because there wasn't anything to be approved

[0:37:31] Voice 3: yeah

[0:37:31] Voice 5: so you read up the motion

[0:37:34] Voice 5: yeah

[0:37:35] Voice 5: it

[0:37:35] Voice 10: was on that first sheet before

[0:37:37] Voice 10: we used to just read out the

[0:37:39] Voice 10: the the checkbox as the motion okay that that's what's different analysis of the natural motion

[0:37:45] Voice 10: form drafted prior to the pilot okay sorry

[0:37:49] Voice 10: so i thought

[0:37:50] Voice 3: i know we did motions but i thought

[0:37:52] Voice 3: this was different that it was kind of very feral and that we just had to say no comment

[0:37:57] Voice 3: yeah i

[0:37:58] Voice 10: think we did but we

[0:38:00] Voice 3: did it by motion all right all right

[0:38:02] Voice 3: we said no

[0:38:02] Voice 10: comment but it was

[0:38:03] Voice 10: just put in a moment okay

[0:38:05] Voice 3: okay

[0:38:06] Voice 10: so over to you

[0:38:09] Voice 5: planer step uh

[0:38:10] Voice 6: just bringing back bylaw

[0:38:12] Voice 6: 43 for a final adoption now that's given bc uh approval so your minor housing project to manage

[0:38:21] Voice 6: your your uh secondary suites map to permit more secondary suites based on uh updated saltwater

[0:38:28] Voice 6: our committee mapping a few other

[0:38:31] Voice 6: minor amendments to clean up your sister language and a few other

[0:38:36] Voice 6: terminology pieces around water there

[0:38:41] Voice 10: was an email i don't think she sent it to the

[0:38:46] Voice 10: address and i didn't catch it in time to get it to send it to the um local trust committee's

[0:38:50] Voice 10: address and this was from janet lambs in regard for ongoing she's not in favor of the use of the

[0:39:00] Voice 10: word fresh water to replace any rainwater in reference to the system of the system capital

[0:39:09] Voice 10: system itself

[0:39:11] Voice 6: general change yeah

[0:39:12] Voice 10: so i don't i i always defer to my colleague who's got a lot more

[0:39:18] Voice 10: expertise and spend more time looking at the but

[0:39:21] Voice 3: i didn't get to email i don't know but

[0:39:23] Voice 10: just in that

[0:39:24] Voice 10: regard so it's that one word she thinks it should still say rainwater versus fresh water which it

[0:39:29] Voice 10: now it says in the pilot post

[0:39:32] Voice 8: -public hearing so you're not supposed to receive any new information

[0:39:35] Voice 8: okay

[0:39:36] Voice 6: well

[0:39:37] Voice 8: that's the answer that's the easiest

[0:39:38] Voice 6: way to deal with that okay unless you wanted to

[0:39:41] Voice 6: roll back but don't do that no

[0:39:42] Voice 3: you've seen it discussed a long time and you know it's been

[0:39:48] Voice 9: it's been a change

[0:39:54] Voice 5: So

[0:39:54] Voice 9: let's not go there and

[0:39:55] Voice 5: it's best practices certainly like this this change of verbiage

[0:40:00] Voice 5: um I've seen on main island on north bender island I believe and on them and island it's it's like

[0:40:06] Voice 5: we all talk about rainwater caching but it's too narrow of a word because they because some people

[0:40:13] Voice 5: refill their systems in the middle of summer with the truck yeah so

[0:40:17] Voice 5: if you're talking about

[0:40:17] Voice 5: rainwater catchment

[0:40:18] Voice 11: you're

[0:40:20] Voice 5: limiting how the application goes so yeah um

[0:40:23] Voice 5: which

[0:40:24] Voice 3: may be our

[0:40:25] Voice 5: best advice from the people no things so much better than us is to be broad on the

[0:40:31] Voice 5: term rather than narrowing the term we

[0:40:33] Voice 3: could just use the word water

[0:40:34] Voice 3: it could seem simpler but anyway yes let's not go back yes

[0:40:47] Voice 5: If somebody's willing to read the motion, we can proceed on page 24.

[0:40:54] Voice 3: I am so good at this.

[0:40:58] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:41:02] Voice 9: Talk a little bit more.

[0:41:03] Voice 9: Okay, here we go.

[0:41:05] Voice 3: Southerner Island Local Trust Committee By-law No. 143, cited as Southerner Island Land Use

[0:41:12] Voice 3: By-law No. 119-2018, Amendment No. 1-2024. I move that that be adopted.

[0:41:22] Voice 5: Seconded. Second. Any further discussion?

[0:41:25] Voice 5: Just smiles? Smiles.

[0:41:27] Voice 5: You like that? Call the question, all in favor? That carries, thank you.

[0:41:31] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:41:31] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:41:32] Voice 5: And then the goal

[0:41:33] Voice 10: was to branch out all the work on that, it was quite a long process.

[0:41:38] Voice 3: So that's it?

[0:41:39] Voice 3: All you do now is replace the map and the website?

[0:41:42] Voice 6: And the other language, so the Legitimate Jazz will now update

[0:41:47] Voice 3: the water language, we'll

[0:41:48] Voice 6: amend the Bayes' by-law to reflect the changes and post that on the website, and the project

[0:41:53] Voice 6: is complete.

[0:41:54] Voice 3: please stop

[0:41:55] Voice 6: us close out the bios is

[0:41:57] Voice 10: it is it just that man just ask a question of our planner

[0:42:03] Voice 10: because some of the minor stuff we're going to be doing will be opening up the same document

[0:42:08] Voice 10: but she'd do it in an omnibus fashion so she doesn't have to rename the bylaw

[0:42:14] Voice 10: process and then let's do the tech moment and then it gets another number and go through the

[0:42:19] Voice 10: process again so

[0:42:20] Voice 6: the base bylaws is bylaw 119 yeah and your amending bylaws have a separate

[0:42:26] Voice 6: number for incremental change and then she takes whatever changes from your amending bylaw and

[0:42:33] Voice 6: consolidates bylaw 119 so consolidate bylaw 119 if you if you look in the bylaws in the margin

[0:42:40] Voice 6: there's there's often bylaw reference

[0:42:43] Voice 6: numbers yeah and

[0:42:45] Voice 6: so those are the those are the those

[0:42:48] Voice 6: with how you can track the changes over time so you could go back to bylaw 132 in this case when

[0:42:55] Voice 6: you update the the the cistern language beside that she'll tag bylaw 143 and that's how you

[0:43:03] Voice 6: connect the consolidated base bylaw to the incremental changes so

[0:43:09] Voice 10: that has to would have

[0:43:10] Voice 10: to be done with the final one so

[0:43:11] Voice 6: it would be it would be a new bylaw number would be issued

[0:43:15] Voice 6: to file a 1.4.4, or whatever.

[0:43:18] Voice 6: Sure.

[0:43:19] Voice 6: And then it's

[0:43:20] Voice 10: got a nice ring to it.

[0:43:24] Voice 10: Thank you.

[0:43:25] Voice 10: Thank you,

[0:43:25] Voice 5: by the way.

[0:43:28] Voice 5: All right, so we are now whizzing along

[0:43:31] Voice 5: to page 29 of our agenda.

[0:43:34] Voice 5: Active Codex Report and our Future Codex.

[0:43:38] Voice 5: Again, any more questions?

[0:43:42] Voice 5: So

[0:43:42] Voice 6: I think, Seth, we're hoping to have a bit of a conversation

[0:43:45] Voice 6: decision here as RPM stores or has direction to at least do some project scoping for next fiscal

[0:43:52] Voice 6: some budgeting around that recognizing that new trustees might come in with with new ideas

[0:43:59] Voice 6: what's on your project list right now is a groundwater sustainability project which I think

[0:44:05] Voice 6: it's like a whole bunch of work was done with William and now it's kind of on hold whether

[0:44:11] Voice 6: you want to implement all of that travelable sustainability work or not you have a shoreline

[0:44:17] Voice 6: policy review and you have a review of land use bylaws subdivision regulations i think from my

[0:44:24] Voice 6: perspective the the luv subdivision regulations are probably would be a minor project that would

[0:44:30] Voice 6: be a review look like for example inserting water standards septic standards into your bylaws so

[0:44:38] Voice 6: so that you're not continuously running into this issue with the ministry because you don't

[0:44:47] Voice 6: have water standards. For example, for Mr. Gaines subdivision, you could have varied

[0:44:52] Voice 6: that standard to 500 liters per day or whatever. So that is one project you could take on.

[0:45:01] Voice 6: Shoreline policy review would probably be a major project because you would be one.

[0:45:06] Voice 6: I think there's a model bylaw created that would be a review of your shoreline policy and it would

[0:45:13] Voice 6: probably be more of a regional or it would be better I think as a regional project it's been

[0:45:17] Voice 6: presented as one anyways so that would probably be a major project and then I don't totally

[0:45:22] Voice 6: understand what implementing the groundwater sustainability project would mean but the

[0:45:27] Voice 6: difference

[0:45:28] Voice 1: between a minor

[0:45:28] Voice 6: project and major project is how much it will cost and I think

[0:45:33] Voice 6: I think major projects are multi-year.

[0:45:35] Voice 6: Is that how I understand it?

[0:45:37] Voice 6: Those are kind of the two criteria.

[0:45:40] Voice 6: But I think a major

[0:45:41] Voice 6: project is a minimum of $10,000.

[0:45:45] Voice 6: So do you have any ideas for major projects?

[0:45:48] Voice 10: Well, I think the groundwater sustainability project is kind of, in a sense, done.

[0:45:55] Voice 10: I think we took it with mind.

[0:45:57] Voice 10: Well,

[0:45:57] Voice 3: as far as we can.

[0:45:58] Voice 3: As

[0:45:59] Voice 10: far as we could actually take it, we realized there are things like with the ministry

[0:46:03] Voice 10: and larger forces that are kind of beyond the ability for us to influence with some of that

[0:46:09] Voice 10: work and because we did quite a bit of work as you say and so i i would say that we took that as

[0:46:16] Voice 10: far as we could take that and that now comes off the list also i could

[0:46:19] Voice 10: go back on for other reasons

[0:46:21] Voice 10: down the road but i think that's done i think that work is even though not all of it could be

[0:46:26] Voice 10: plus that's done it was done to the best of where we could do it shall we say so i i would say take

[0:46:34] Voice 10: that off as complete yeah um

[0:46:36] Voice 10: the shoreline policy could always there's always potentially work that

[0:46:41] Voice 10: could be done there with i guess sea level horizon and well and just that's the fact that our that's

[0:46:48] Voice 10: the reason it's on there our policy is actually two lines inherited from the crds precursor to the

[0:46:59] Voice 10: the official community plan that just that would never change and so that was the thought was do

[0:47:06] Voice 10: we want to change you know enhance do something differently than the the um the shoreline policy

[0:47:14] Voice 10: that we inherited in 1973, 75, whenever that would have been.

[0:47:19] Voice 10: I don't know if that would be the next term's decision, I suppose,

[0:47:23] Voice 10: but I think that's probably worth doing.

[0:47:28] Voice 3: Have you done work on other islands that you could bring to the table?

[0:47:34] Voice 6: On the Suriname,

[0:47:35] Voice 6: I think there is a model bylaw,

[0:47:39] Voice 6: which is just that.

[0:47:44] Voice 6: It's a bylaw that's created as like a model or a starting place template around shoreline view

[0:47:50] Voice 6: and that has been interested in other pilot areas.

[0:47:54] Voice 8: So yes,

[0:47:55] Voice 8: I think there is some work that could be used as a starting point.

[0:48:00] Voice 8: So

[0:48:01] Voice 3: the LUB subdivision regulations, the big issue there was the water requirement.

[0:48:09] Voice 3: But that, it wasn't just the volume, it was also the means by which you deliver it, because what happened with John's subdivision request was that Moti said it wasn't just how much water, it was the fact that you had to have water collection installed to prove that water in advance of building a house or anything, which was a bit mad, basically.

[0:48:39] Voice 3: but it gave them their get-out-of-jail card.

[0:48:43] Voice 3: So it is quite a complicated issue

[0:48:45] Voice 3: because it's not just a simple volume.

[0:48:48] Voice 10: It's

[0:48:49] Voice 3: the means by which you prove that.

[0:48:52] Voice 10: So that's one.

[0:48:53] Voice 10: But the genesis of that project, if you recall,

[0:48:56] Voice 10: was the community group.

[0:48:59] Voice 10: What is that community group?

[0:49:00] Voice 10: They used to call it Popple Opposition Alliance.

[0:49:05] Voice 10: But it's got a new name.

[0:49:08] Voice 10: residents and great players so

[0:49:10] Voice 10: they came um they're basically saying look we've got only

[0:49:17] Voice 10: so many lots before we're built out for the ocp because we have the density cap and they wanted

[0:49:24] Voice 10: to look at exploring different types of zoning that would increase the uh intensity of use shall

[0:49:32] Voice 10: we say on the remaining lots that would that was kind of the genesis i think the jingle about that

[0:49:37] Voice 10: so you know i'm sure that sentiment still exists it's

[0:49:41] Voice 3: the multi-family uh option that was one part

[0:49:46] Voice 10: of it yeah so

[0:49:47] Voice 3: i think calling it review of luv subdivision regulations is probably doesn't

[0:49:53] Voice 3: really describe it and we should write maybe a short like there were several things where we

[0:49:59] Voice 3: kind of pulled on one thread and it was connected to something else which was connected to something

[0:50:04] Voice 3: something else but there's this hardcore of you know can we have um you know higher density lots

[0:50:14] Voice 3: and and can we how do we do proof water and deliver water to those yeah

[0:50:21] Voice 10: I mean that's the

[0:50:22] Voice 10: same question probably come up during the election as we've got you know people respect the density

[0:50:28] Voice 10: cap there's been no desire to remove the density cap and it's been very substantial I would argue

[0:50:33] Voice 10: you on on uh saturnia for a lot of reasons including sustainable jobs for the families

[0:50:39] Voice 10: who build one of the intents i understood and seems to have done that job so there's no there's

[0:50:45] Voice 10: no real rebellion against the ocp other than their recognition we've got x number for sake of

[0:50:54] Voice 10: argument say 100 i don't think yes but just for the sake of argument we've got 100 densities across

[0:51:00] Voice 10: across the unsubdivided lots remaining.

[0:51:04] Voice 10: And the principle there is,

[0:51:07] Voice 10: can the intensity of use be elevated

[0:51:11] Voice 10: such that we don't just have five-acre-

[0:51:14] Voice 10: A

[0:51:15] Voice 3: hundred five-acre lot.

[0:51:16] Voice 10: Crawl in the sense that we had a concentration

[0:51:19] Voice 10: and right now, but currently with our zoning.

[0:51:23] Voice 10: So that was the idea is to look at what might be possible.

[0:51:25] Voice 10: So I wouldn't say leave it on there.

[0:51:27] Voice 3: I mean, I

[0:51:27] Voice 10: don't know exactly what-

[0:51:28] Voice 3: I would

[0:51:29] Voice 3: leave it on there,

[0:51:29] Voice 3: Yeah, but what I was thinking about, I would describe it as, so Ceterna LTC has no desire to increase the number of potential lots relative to the original OCP.

[0:51:44] Voice 3: It's the original OCP caps on lots continues, but is there a way to be more innovative and optimize how you develop those lots to make them better for the community?

[0:51:58] Voice 10: yeah so the density is done differently like you still have net undeveloped land

[0:52:03] Voice 10: the development

[0:52:04] Voice 3: is done differently the density number remains the same

[0:52:08] Voice 3: but you develop

[0:52:10] Voice 3: in a more optimal low sustained and sustainable way go ahead um

[0:52:17] Voice 8: it seems to me that we have one

[0:52:20] Voice 8: one local family, so it's just part of the service, so it's no other, so it's not just

[0:52:30] Voice 8: a, you know, if we're trying to, you know, the home sites, put it that way, some form

[0:52:38] Voice 8: of local accommodation needs to come into the by-law, because it solves a number of

[0:52:47] of

[0:52:47] Voice 8: all these problems that are created by requiring everybody to be involved.

[0:52:55] Voice 3: Yeah, so it's a bit of a tangled thing. It's kind of a

[0:53:00] Voice 3: ball of wool that you have

[0:53:01] Voice 3: to try and pull apart. John, sorry.

[0:53:05] Voice 8: If I could just get into that thought. I believe one of the

[0:53:12] Voice 8: a huge difference. Every community is afforded housing, which means free land. That's the

[0:53:22] Voice 8: only way to get affordable housing. Well, a number

[0:53:24] Voice 1: of other ways.

[0:53:25] Voice 8: If the land kills

[0:53:26] Voice 8: you before you can get started, then the rules of the nation still use your own process.

[0:53:32] Voice 8: I believe there's an opportunity here for maybe the Council to consider a new zoning

[0:53:39] Voice 8: of affordable housing, which in itself can attach separate rules that apply.

[0:53:51] I know over the course of years that we've had people

[0:53:55] Voice 8: on this island who own big tracts

[0:53:57] Voice 8: of land, who are more than willing to donate to the community a tract of land.

[0:54:04] Voice 8: then you run into every single hurdle that you yeah process if we could designate a section of

[0:54:12] Voice 8: area as a portable housing created within that area then allowing the subdivision to happen

[0:54:20] Voice 8: and maybe attach credit back to the landlord value the plan but something where the community

[0:54:28] Voice 8: the community, the government, all get on board, you get that land set up, now you've

[0:54:34] Voice 8: got the water, you've got everything else, but ought to be considered as an idea of the

[0:54:40] Voice 8: future. I think that's the only way to deal with the ocean.

[0:54:46] Voice 3: Maybe you could keep it as a bookmark that you apply, so somebody comes with, here's

[0:54:52] Voice 3: what I want to do, and you have kind of a stamp where you go, okay, this section of

[0:54:57] Voice 3: it would be designated affordable housing and the rest you know it's not locked down to a particular

[0:55:03] Voice 3: area which might be necessary in terms of services but maybe you could keep it as something that you

[0:55:11] Voice 3: could you know it could become affordable housing zoning on the fly or ad hoc it was found to be

[0:55:21] Voice 3: suitable yeah

[0:55:22] Voice 8: and all the cities have it yeah they have zero lots why not something where you could

[0:55:29] Voice 8: have 10 pounds yeah section of land away from

[0:55:35] Voice 8: about five acre limitations and all the rest of

[0:55:38] Voice 8: the stuff everybody has to fall i do think though that trust community if it is interested in that

[0:55:47] Voice 8: that kind of possibly dealing with all this probably half the point in place the mechanism

[0:55:54] Voice 8: for somebody to take the visual forward with the idea, you know, it's, it's all right,

[0:56:02] Voice 8: you have an idea, then you go to the government, you already want to do something, then you

[0:56:09] Voice 8: go to the government, you stumble over everything that's there. And now you're totally discouraged

[0:56:16] Voice 8: If you were to go after them, you would attract them.

[0:56:21] Voice 10: I think, yeah, so what we have is we've got, because of the displaced densities from the

[0:56:26] Voice 10: Parkland, which have not all been displaced yet, that's maybe some background piece of

[0:56:30] Voice 10: work for the remainder of the term is to work with the BC Parks Foundation.

[0:56:34] Voice 10: But their interest, of course, is they want to see those extra densities from the former

[0:56:38] Voice 10: Ron Hall property, which is what, 29 grand, I think?

[0:56:42] Voice 9: It's going

[0:56:42] Voice 9: to be quite a few.

[0:56:43] Voice 10: Yeah.

[0:56:44] Voice 9: yeah three years yeah

[0:56:45] Voice 10: so that's a significant like we realize that right there is almost

[0:56:51] Voice 10: the ability to have the number of families that was envisioned um through those those laws and

[0:56:59] Voice 10: as you know ben mabry has now purchased barry's former land and is very well aware of the

[0:57:04] Voice 10: potential of the densities that he has there as well as densities that could could be um

[0:57:10] Voice 10: attracted and i think his model is going to be a corporate um subdivision corporate shareholding

[0:57:19] Voice 10: uh you know that almost not not to kind of precede what he might do or might not do but that almost

[0:57:25] Voice 10: might be the route to affordability without necessarily involving the ministry um but what

[0:57:33] Voice 10: we have to do is kind of have that broader conversation when it comes to zoning because

[0:57:36] Voice 10: that's entirely the trust committee's purview um i mean he could

[0:57:43] Voice 10: like not to just focus on his lot

[0:57:45] Voice 10: he could actually do it with the amount of acres that he's got there but i think what we need is

[0:57:50] Voice 10: what you said is just have that broader kind of analysis and discussion about different types of

[0:57:56] Voice 10: zoning to potentially accommodate multi-families either with a sort of a clustered housing model or

[0:58:04] Voice 10: i mean because i i think especially paul can talk about the tremendous frustration

[0:58:10] Voice 10: of galliano green that's been in process for how

[0:58:15] Voice 3: many years and

[0:58:16] Voice 10: the funding ultimately after two

[0:58:19] Voice 10: and a half million additional injection from the crd fell through right it's a it's just it's a

[0:58:25] Voice 10: construction site right now that's soft and so you know i think the the idea being is what can we do

[0:58:31] Voice 10: here within the power of the local trust committee to facilitate uh investment in in multi-family

[0:58:39] Voice 10: housing and or i don't know what it is and

[0:58:41] Voice 3: we have that would

[0:58:42] Voice 10: be the nature of the program

[0:58:43] Voice 10: and

[0:58:43] Voice 3: we have the density bank we have a cap and we have the density bank and those are two things

[0:58:49] Voice 3: that other places don't necessarily have yeah which

[0:58:52] Voice 3: i think would allay the fears of people

[0:58:55] Voice 3: people who go this will turn it into soul spring you know we have the ocp total cap and we have

[0:59:02] Voice 3: the density amenity bank which is now well funded would be potentially so we have advantages we have

[0:59:11] Voice 3: the fact that galliano green and all those places have gone ahead of us so we're not

[0:59:15] Voice 3: you know we're not sort of needing the charge and making all the mistakes i mean i think there's an

[0:59:20] Voice 3: enormous opportunity if you got the whole community on board you know there's an issue with the

[0:59:27] Voice 3: you know the limitations of the number of senior housing that's down there there's that lot that

[0:59:35] Voice 3: goes beyond it that you know everybody says can't be developed could be developed as part of the

[0:59:40] Voice 3: multi-family residential then there's the Barry Crooks property which is right beside the store

[0:59:47] Voice 3: the school, the recreation center. So there are a lot of advantages on

[0:59:53] Voice 3: Saturna and then you have the in-depth knowledge that Paul would bring to the table.

[1:00:00] Voice 3: So I think it's a tremendous opportunity.

[1:00:04] Voice 3: You know, there are a lot of things that come together.

[1:00:07] Voice 3: I think

[1:00:07] Voice 3: what

[1:00:10] Voice 6: you're describing is not a review of your subdivision regulations.

[1:00:14] Voice 6: It's more like a housing, affordable housing project.

[1:00:17] Voice 6: I think that what you're talking about was in the original scope of the project that you just finished,

[1:00:22] Voice 6: and then you moved off of that in respect of subdivision regulations.

[1:00:26] Voice 6: So, most local governments, including most local trust areas, you have part 12 in your subdivision regulations.

[1:00:37] Voice 6: And so, when an applicant comes, like Mr. Gaines here, comes in, submits his subdivision application to the ministry, it then gets referred to local governments.

[1:00:49] Voice 6: In this case, it gets referred to the Islands Trust to review against our subdivision regulations.

[1:00:56] Voice 6: and so we review

[1:00:58] Voice 6: his proposal against our subdivision regulations and for example if

[1:01:03] Voice 6: one of the lots don't meet the requirement around or around lot versus width then that

[1:01:08] Voice 6: applicant would need to get a variance as part of their conditions for subdivision approval

[1:01:12] Voice 6: uh in the case of uh saturn island your subdivision regulations are two and a half pages

[1:01:22] Voice 6: they don't consider they're completely silent on water supply they're completely silent on septic

[1:01:29] Voice 6: they're completely silent on highway standards they're completely silent on drainage they're

[1:01:35] Voice 6: completely silent on a bunch of things that because your regulations are silent and then it

[1:01:41] Voice 6: falls to the ministry to decide if your regulations worked like the north pender bylaw has eight pages

[1:01:49] Voice 6: of subdivision regulations they have standards for all of those things including detailed water

[1:01:55] Voice 6: supply standards that take up three pages of the bylaw so uh that would be what staff would

[1:02:03] Voice 6: recommend is that you review your subdivision regulations and make updates so that you can

[1:02:09] Voice 6: make them more one modern and two more comprehensive so that you're not relying on

[1:02:15] Voice 6: the ministry to make all your decisions in the absence

[1:02:18] Voice 6: of you having no authority because your

[1:02:21] Voice 6: bylaws silence but that would be a subdivision regulation review project that that's what the

[1:02:28] Voice 6: scope of it in my mind then that that would i think uh give significant benefit to your

[1:02:36] Voice 6: bylaw to have those standards so that you have that authority it doesn't mean that you could

[1:02:43] Voice 6: could just do rainwater catchment because you want to you'd have to have a method a proven method

[1:02:48] Voice 1: and

[1:02:48] Voice 6: staff would recommend in fact that well there would be have to be a lot of work to get the

[1:02:55] Voice 6: rainwater catchment but it would for example allow you to vary your standard to not require

[1:02:59] Voice 6: 2 000 liters per day on a lot that just will never use that like judy myers there's a perfect

[1:03:08] Voice 6: example instead of having to go through all this process of getting the ministry to finally agree

[1:03:14] Voice 6: to this covenant approach to restrict development until they demonstrate proof of water 2 000

[1:03:21] Voice 6: liters per day you could have varied that standard to 250 liters per day and met it through her

[1:03:27] Voice 6: system and reduce all of those

[1:03:31] Voice 6: hurdles that you were relying

[1:03:36] Voice 6: on another agency to address because

[1:03:40] Voice 6: your bylaw is silent. I

[1:03:44] Voice 3: have mixed feelings

[1:03:45] Voice 3: about that because it means we are

[1:03:49] Voice 3: taking on a burden of regulation

[1:03:53] Voice 3: increasingly. We're now going to rule everything

[1:03:57] Voice 3: thing from the center of saturn and we don't necessarily have the capacity going forward

[1:04:04] Voice 3: to do the work needed to keep those like we're struggling with the fact that we have

[1:04:11] Voice 3: ocps and lubs that are not necessarily fit for purpose in some ways you know the multi-family

[1:04:17] Voice 3: residential being a case in point um and we're not able to uh adapt those quickly

[1:04:25] Voice 3: quickly it takes an enormous amount of work to change them and what we're saying now is we're

[1:04:31] Voice 3: going to expand the regulations into other areas and those will require updating and may have

[1:04:40] Voice 3: unforeseen consequences and the effort to try and flex them will be even bigger than it is right now

[1:04:48] Voice 3: I don't know what the answer is to be honest but I'm just fearful of like sucking all of this

[1:04:55] Voice 3: regulatory material into a small group of people.

[1:05:01] Voice 3: I

[1:05:02] Voice 6: would say that it's more work in the absence of standards around water.

[1:05:06] Voice 6: I've spent an enormous amount of staff time trying to work with the Ministry on Judy Meyer's

[1:05:13] Voice 6: simple approval, for

[1:05:15] Voice 6: example. That's just one example. Mr Gaines, same thing around

[1:05:21] Voice 6: rounds, the back and forth with, I mean, rainwater catchments is a bit of a different beast because

[1:05:27] Voice 6: I think I don't have

[1:05:28] Voice 6: the same concerns with applying rainwater catchment without having

[1:05:32] Voice 6: some demonstration of build-out or like you have to prove water, you can't just say we're

[1:05:40] Voice 6: going to do rainwater catchment there. But it would give you more leverage in my, and

[1:05:47] Voice 6: And just to add, I would say just about every other local government

[1:05:53] Voice 6: has at a minimum a water supply and a septic supply standard in their bylaws.

[1:05:58] Voice 5: And I think the important thing, too, is this gives the island control.

[1:06:04] Voice 5: Rather than going cap in hand to an outside bureaucracy

[1:06:07] Voice 5: to sort of do what you want to do, you're doing what you want to do.

[1:06:12] Voice 5: And I think Judy Myers is a really good example.

[1:06:15] Voice 5: You know, there's been an imposition of a standard there

[1:06:18] Voice 5: there, that is, in my opinion, ridiculous, like absolutely ridiculous. And, so I never

[1:06:29] Voice 5: would have allowed that.

[1:06:30] Voice 3: Yeah. But does that not fly in the face of the Trust Policy Statement Directive policies?

[1:06:36] Voice 3: Like we're flipping backwards and forwards, we've built it all into our own LUBs and then

[1:06:42] Voice 3: we put in a Trust Policy Statement that says, by the way, this is how you have to do LUBs.

[1:06:48] Voice 3: So anyway, I'll be quiet.

[1:07:19] Voice 8: if there's any large community in here, and in the interest of the community, I think

[1:07:25] Voice 8: there actually would be, for somebody to do a little project called, what does this all

[1:07:32] Voice 8: mean?

[1:07:33] Voice 8: How could it work?

[1:07:34] Do the runt nuts and bolts work?

[1:07:39] Ad

[1:07:39] Voice 8: hoc committee, because by God, we don't want to manage the rest of it, that could

[1:07:45] Voice 8: could bring forward suggestions to the trustees working on tragedy again, and all of the things

[1:07:58] Voice 8: that happen, who have some inside knowledge of having to deal with all of this bureaucracy

[1:08:04] Voice 8: through their careers, they might be able to come together, encompassing a direction

[1:08:11] Voice 8: direction for you folks to go, because as it is right now, it's quite a bit.

[1:08:17] Voice 5: So I'll ask really stupid questions, so I should know the answer. Is there an APCM term

[1:08:23] Voice 5: that's been set up?

[1:08:24] Voice 5: No,

[1:08:25] Voice 3: it's not active.

[1:08:28] Voice 5: Is that something you might want to consider?

[1:08:31] Voice 10: Yeah, I mean, we've done basically the community forums at the start of each term to kind of

[1:08:37] Voice 10: get

[1:08:37] Voice 12: ideas

[1:08:38] Voice 10: and direction on some of these.

[1:08:41] Voice 10: um topics um see no reason why that couldn't happen again and yeah if

[1:08:49] Voice 8: i could just make a

[1:08:50] Voice 8: comment going back to the possible multiple family density um which seems he suggested

[1:08:59] Voice 8: in the bylaws and possibly the density that came on from paul's property because it went to the

[1:09:07] Voice 8: They feel that any density would have to be used.

[1:09:13] Voice 8: But I think there is some density potential in the bivalve that could be better used than

[1:09:23] Voice 8: a bivariate average by utilizing a portion of a parcel to densify in a house or some

[1:09:33] Voice 8: some other form, more economic form of living construction, and I think there's a market

[1:09:42] Voice 8: for it because every few years we have a long-time Saturna resident that gives up.

[1:09:51] Voice 8: They can't get their bedding, they can't get their lawns mowed, they can't do it themselves,

[1:09:56] Voice 8: they can't find a roof, they go to Sydney, they go somewhere else.

[1:10:02] Voice 8: But they would not go into the OAE because that's not an obligation that the better or

[1:10:10] Voice 8: worse meets their former lifestyle requirement.

[1:10:14] Voice 8: So if there was something that they could go to where they came from, they made it to

[1:10:21] Voice 8: a team, they could keep up, they could stay here for potentially another 10 years of living.

[1:10:28] Voice 8: And I'm fortunate to think my two kids and probably they will be able to help to the extent that we can stay here and keep you open, hopefully.

[1:10:43] Voice 8: But that's not the case for very many people.

[1:10:47] Voice 8: And so I think that some of the density on this island could go into multiple buildings.

[1:10:57] Voice 8: things there are a number of parcels that are potentially on the market that could accommodate

[1:11:04] Voice 8: that to the street um to everybody's benefit so i think that needs to be looked at

[1:11:13] Voice 8: and the whole water problem is an idea you can't a good source and do a small

[1:11:24] Voice 8: water system on four or five blocks. They tell me, I looked at it, they tell me it's not worth even

[1:11:31] Voice 8: considering it's crazy. So the only other avenue is the rainwater catchment for drilling holes in

[1:11:42] ground, which is expensive and problematic.

[1:11:45] Voice 8: But the rainwater catchment is so costly that every

[1:11:50] Voice 8: every system engineer seems to me there's some ratio of this regional history in the building

[1:12:01] department to control that aspect of

[1:12:04] Voice 8: a building project and not at the block development stage

[1:12:10] Voice 8: but at the end stage when you need it um would need to have some sort of formula for these ways

[1:12:18] Voice 8: that plumbers could meet the standards of this catchment system.

[1:12:27] Voice 8: It's a matter of catching it, primarily flushing it, building what you can.

[1:12:33] It's not about expense, but it's a $10,000 to $15,000 bill for every lot that wants to do it.

[1:12:41] And that is a reasonable and

[1:12:45] Voice 8: necessary cost to the order of what we're still doing.

[1:12:51] Voice 8: And until other bodies look at some of the reality of why things cost so much,

[1:13:01] Voice 8: and put up their hands and say, well, we are responsible for some of that.

[1:13:06] Voice 8: What can we do about it?

[1:13:08] Voice 8: It's never going to get better.

[1:13:11] Voice 8: i

[1:13:12] Voice 3: i think water probably is one of the big ticket items that is a constraint so i agree with you

[1:13:21] Voice 3: respect to that brad but i suppose my only issue is uh i think review of nub subdivision

[1:13:28] Voice 3: regulations to me there there's a lot of things beyond that what you described tangled up in our

[1:13:35] Voice 3: discussion here for instance if you say affordable housing i don't think that captures it when you

[1:13:41] Voice 3: think about what john has said because uh you know affordable has you know people's heads it's for

[1:13:48] Voice 3: young families etc etc and that's another angle on how we could just think about the remaining lots

[1:13:57] Voice 3: the remaining land how to kind of develop it in an optimal way which isn't necessarily the

[1:14:04] Voice 3: way that's laid out right now like be innovative and imaginative about how we do it so is there

[1:14:13] Voice 3: a way we could change the title or add on something to the back of that so that somebody

[1:14:18] Voice 3: doesn't read this and go okay

[1:14:19] Voice 6: so what you're describing is not something it's not a sum

[1:14:23] Voice 6: division regulation it's it's reviewing your zoning to enable affordable housing which was

[1:14:30] Voice 6: the project you just had i

[1:14:33] Voice 10: guess we can just change shoreline policy review for the time

[1:14:37] Voice 10: being

[1:14:37] Voice 6: you could add a project is what i would recommend so what i heard so far is that you

[1:14:42] Voice 6: want to remove your your ground your

[1:14:44] Voice 6: groundwater sustainability project from the list uh i would

[1:14:49] Voice 6: recommend that uh you have a project that's more like review of affordable housing policies and

[1:14:56] Voice 6: zoning i think that's that's what you're describing to me yeah

[1:15:00] Voice 10: i i think it's perhaps even more

[1:15:03] Voice 10: precisely multi-family housing options that's

[1:15:06] Voice 3: a good idea yeah that's a good way to describe it

[1:15:10] Voice 10: because that's what we don't have and that and we may not like it it's a big deal but that that's

[1:15:16] Voice 10: what that group came and presented to us that that's what their interest was i imagine it's

[1:15:22] Voice 10: going to be an election issue so it's relevant to to put there yeah

[1:15:31] Voice 3: back in as a because it kind of floundered or foundered because it was bigger than

[1:15:39] Voice 3: something very simple yeah you

[1:15:41] Voice 3: know it seemed as though it was very simple then it became

[1:15:44] Voice 3: obvious that it was very simple so why don't we stick it back in instead of groundwater

[1:15:48] Voice 3: motor sustainability. That sounds right to me. Explore options for multi-family residential

[1:15:58] Voice 5: developments. So now you've identified three projects. What

[1:16:06] Voice 5: do you want?

[1:16:07] Voice 10: Well, one's done.

[1:16:08] Voice 10: We're removing one and then we'll replace it with this multi-family. What do you want

[1:16:14] Voice 10: to your exact project to be part of that level three but we'll put that as number one because

[1:16:20] Voice 3: we should have well i won't be here but we should have a kind of community forum to discuss

[1:16:25] Voice 10: it's up

[1:16:27] Voice 10: to yeah yeah but thanks okay

[1:16:28] Voice 3: that seems

[1:16:29] Voice 10: unreasonable it's what's been expressed by the

[1:16:32] Voice 10: community right to look into and that interest would still be there so and

[1:16:38] Voice 3: they may cross

[1:16:38] Voice 3: I suppose fertilize. I'd say number two is probably number three, because we should look at, yeah, okay.

[1:16:46] Voice 9: Sure, yeah.

[1:16:47] Voice 3: All right.

[1:16:47] Voice 9: If you

[1:16:48] Voice 9: want a motion.

[1:16:49] Voice 9: Brad,

[1:16:50] Voice 3: we've come to a landing.

[1:16:51] Voice 3: All right, perfect.

[1:16:52] Voice 9: It

[1:16:53] Voice 3: can make you happy.

[1:16:54] Voice 6: I'm not happy

[1:16:55] Voice 6: or unhappy at all.

[1:16:57] Voice 6: So

[1:16:58] Voice 3: the number one project for us, and I'm going to make a motion for the title, which is,

[1:17:04] Voice 3: So, Saturn Island future projects list number one will be explore options for multi-family

[1:17:12] Voice 3: residential development on the island.

[1:17:21] Voice 3: Is that a motion?

[1:17:22] Voice 3: That's a motion.

[1:17:23] Voice 2: You need to second it.

[1:17:24] Voice 5: Yeah.

[1:17:24] Voice 5: Or just wait for Paraskev to confirm the wording.

[1:17:28] Voice 6: Yes.

[1:17:29] Voice 6: So, the wording from your previous project was review multiple family residential zoning

[1:17:34] Voice 6: restrictions and associated OCP policies. Do you want that to carry forward to your project list?

[1:17:42] Voice 3: That's good. With a few to change. That sounds like, okay, we're just going to review them and

[1:17:49] Voice 3: stop. What do you think?

[1:17:51] Voice 6: I would be wary of committing to change before you review anything.

[1:17:57] Voice 6: No,

[1:17:58] Voice 3: that's not my way.

[1:18:00] Voice 6: Fire away your project

[1:18:01] Voice 5: title and I won't grab it.

[1:18:03] Voice 5: No, but the thing is, it changes the outcome of the review, so that's the goal.

[1:18:12] Voice 5: Do

[1:18:12] Voice 10: you want to?

[1:18:13] Voice 10: Yeah, no, just review, I guess, the shorthand that we have here.

[1:18:17] Voice 10: Review multi-family housing options, period.

[1:18:25] Voice 12: Yeah.

[1:18:27] Voice 12: Okay.

[1:18:27] Voice 12: Whatever you have there, Bradford.

[1:18:29] Voice 10: It's the zoning implications, it's the cost implications,

[1:18:33] Voice 10: this is yeah a

[1:18:34] Voice 10: bunch of stuff that we get into with the project charter which would be probably

[1:18:39] Voice 10: four years long do you

[1:18:43] Voice 6: want to review multiple family and affordable housing auctions i would

[1:18:47] Voice 10: prefer to keep the affordable yeah

[1:18:48] Voice 3: yeah yeah

[1:18:51] Voice 10: and it kind

[1:18:52] Voice 3: of constrains what people think

[1:18:53] Voice 3: they immediately go oh i know what that means yeah yeah multi-family yeah okay that's number one

[1:19:05] Voice 3: and then number two is currently number three and number two

[1:19:13] Voice 2: becomes number three.

[1:19:17] Voice 2: That's simple. So

[1:19:25] Voice 5: we have somewhat of a motion on the floor.

[1:19:30] Voice 3: I don't know the language.

[1:19:36] Voice 9: So what's your question?

[1:19:39] Voice 9: Do

[1:19:40] Voice 3: we have to make a motion to put that title in as number one project list?

[1:19:46] Voice 8: um so i think you need a motion to remove your groundwater sustainability

[1:19:51] Voice 6: project

[1:19:51] Voice 6: okay that would be one motion uh do you need a motion to add uh review multiple family

[1:19:59] Voice 6: residential zoning and policies that's what it is what i called you sure what do you call it

[1:20:07] Voice 6: do you need to prioritize right now i think both i think that would be a minor project i don't see

[1:20:12] Voice 6: that as a major project so we're moving the groundwater sustainability project you're left

[1:20:16] Voice 6: with shoreline policy review reviews land use by the subdivision regulations and review of multiple

[1:20:22] Voice 6: family residential zoning policies i'd say those last two are minor projects so the only major

[1:20:27] Voice 6: project that you will have on your list which is really the direction we're seeking because the

[1:20:31] Voice 6: next step would be for us to uh to to drop some kind of business case around that work as an

[1:20:40] Voice 6: exercise in budgeting really given there's going

[1:20:45] Voice 3: to be new trustees what do you think is the only

[1:20:48] Voice 3: major one the

[1:20:49] Voice 6: shoreline policy review because that would be multi-year it would require funding over

[1:20:53] Voice 6: ten thousand dollars it would it would probably require like consultant work to actually do some

[1:21:00] Voice 6: assessment of your shoreline i think the other two could be done as minor projects

[1:21:09] Voice 3: do you really think they can be done as minor projects this year this term i felt that

[1:21:18] Voice 3: i i feel that they would require the two of them together would be a major project and they do

[1:21:25] Voice 3: overlap with each other you

[1:21:28] Voice 6: mean that the land use bylaws subdivision regulation review and

[1:21:32] Voice 6: this other piece yeah i would see those as two separate pieces okay

[1:21:39] Voice 3: well we don't have to decide

[1:21:42] Voice 3: that now let's just

[1:21:43] Voice 10: make a list of

[1:21:44] Voice 3: three things yeah

[1:21:45] Voice 10: yeah and i think going to a business case

[1:21:47] Voice 10: on shoreline policy review would be a mistake because we know mr brent has very defined ideas

[1:21:53] Voice 10: about what he'll support and not support it if he is elected i'm afraid any work that might have

[1:21:59] Voice 10: been done to that end without his input would be wasted effort yeah and

[1:22:05] Voice 10: so you know he may not get

[1:22:07] Voice 10: elected but i was envisioning the future local trust committee and its ways of doing business

[1:22:16] Voice 10: i could say be so cautious about any pre

[1:22:21] Voice 5: -work done so the low-hanging fruit right now it's removing

[1:22:25] Voice 5: number one yeah okay

[1:22:27] Voice 5: so let's do the motion on that okay okay i

[1:22:30] Voice 3: move that saturn of future

[1:22:32] Voice 3: your projects report list and that sorry that groundwater sustainability project be removed

[1:22:42] Voice 3: from the future projects report list and to

[1:22:46] Voice 10: make the clean motion you could say and replaced with

[1:22:49] Voice 10: even though it's a minor project i think it's

[1:22:52] Voice 10: as good as we're going to get right now yeah and

[1:22:54] Voice 10: replaced

[1:22:54] Voice 3: with the review of the multi-family residential whatever comes after that right

[1:23:03] Voice 3: uh options and just a review

[1:23:12] Voice 6: of multiple family residential zoning and policies

[1:23:17] Voice 6: future projects list yeah and then

[1:23:20] Voice 6: depending on what you do in the next

[1:23:21] Voice 6: new business your active project will be this minor tech deployment

[1:23:26] Voice 6: yeah okay so

[1:23:29] Voice 5: i'm just going to ask lisa if she actually caught that because we've talked around

[1:23:35] Voice 5: on a surface here here

[1:23:39] Voice 1: ma this is what i have so far the saturn island local trust committee

[1:23:44] Voice 1: requests staff remove groundwater sustainability from the future projects list and replace it with

[1:23:51] Voice 1: a review of multiple family residential zoning and policies project

[1:23:55] Voice 5: outstanding thank

[1:23:58] Voice 1: you so much

[1:23:59] Voice 5: thank

[1:23:59] Voice 3: you for that

[1:24:00] Voice 5: second by trustee middleton any further discussion all the question all the

[1:24:05] Voice 5: favor that's carrier it is magic what happens over there it is

[1:24:11] Voice 3: thank you lisa yeah thank you

[1:24:16] Voice 3: so

[1:24:17] Voice 5: have we dealt enough with the active future projects list so

[1:24:23] Voice 3: can i just ask a question brad

[1:24:25] Voice 3: were you thinking that if we uh gave the okay you would start work on a charter scope of work for

[1:24:35] Voice 3: the shoreline policy because as lee said we we don't want that but if there was capacity in the

[1:24:42] Voice 3: system i would love to see prep work done on the multi-family one you know if you did have do you

[1:24:50] Voice 3: need direction for the next six months or

[1:24:52] Voice 10: whatever the one active project which will become oh the

[1:24:55] Voice 10: technical amendments okay so there's kind of no point really let's wait until that's done okay

[1:25:02] Voice 5: So we'll move on to 16.2, the applications report, page 31, pretty

[1:25:08] Voice 7: straightforward.

[1:25:13] Voice 5: So we just will go through, we've got the trustee movement sense of corporate information,

[1:25:19] Voice 5: adopted policies to say resolution-strained information, Island's Trust Conservancy Report,

[1:25:25] Voice 5: another interesting report for the Conservancy, I'm sure you've all read it, it's all good.

[1:25:30] Voice 5: Good. So we'll move on to new business. So first thing we have 17.1 on page 39,

[1:25:37] Voice 5: Annual Report with Request for Decision. So you have this length of story of what

[1:25:47] Voice 5: Central America has done this year on page 41.

[1:25:56] Voice 5: The only thing I just, I have not been paying attention apparently because I caught this on May,

[1:26:02] Voice 5: I don't like the acronyms personally. The S-A-L-T-C is just reasonable to me,

[1:26:15] Voice 5: but it's up to you guys if you want to recommend something.

[1:26:19] Voice 3: I suppose it means that if you take the sentence out of this context, you know which LTC it is.

[1:26:27] Voice 3: But

[1:26:27] Voice 5: the thing is, SA doesn't really say anything. If you don't know, you don't know.

[1:26:32] Voice 5: So, to me, if you go down, if it just said the LTC, the LTC,

[1:26:40] Voice 5: that's the LTC, because it reads awkwardly to me.

[1:26:44] Voice 3: It is a bit awkward, but it does convey

[1:26:46] Voice 5: a bit of it.

[1:26:48] Voice 5: But this didn't come from our communication staff

[1:26:50] Voice 5: who know how to communicate properly.

[1:26:52] Voice 5: But I just find that it's stunning.

[1:26:55] Voice 3: so do we not need to record anything about um all the effort that went into um the wetland

[1:27:07] Voice 3: meetings etc is that just nothing happened so it doesn't go into the annual report

[1:27:14] Voice 3: or no conclusion there was no conclusions if

[1:27:19] Voice 6: you wanted to have the annual report say something

[1:27:25] Voice 6: I'm guessing Morgana didn't even know that work was occurring because there is really

[1:27:28] Voice 6: an application that it's more just up to now discussion, community discussion.

[1:27:41] Voice 3: But the work that the Conservancy did, I mean, that, you know, if you're looking at the point

[1:27:48] Voice 3: of view of like, how do they spend their time, we spent a lot of time and you spent a lot

[1:27:53] Voice 3: of time on that.

[1:27:54] Voice 3: What do you think Lee?

[1:27:56] Voice 5: Yeah, by all means. I would kind of agree with that. So

[1:28:02] Voice 5: there were some significant lands that were conserved through the advent

[1:28:09] Voice 2: of this LPC.

[1:28:10] Voice 2: Actually

[1:28:11] Voice 10: that is a good point. Outcome of this term in many ways, really.

[1:28:18] Voice 3: So the parks conservation plus the Judy Myers conservation and then the work on the wetland

[1:28:25] Voice 3: which is just okay a lot of time was spent in was invested in considering those options it was also

[1:28:32] Voice 10: the uh virtual amulets were right at the beginning of the term they brought out and this

[1:28:39] Voice 6: is an annual

[1:28:40] Voice 6: report oh yeah

[1:28:41] Voice 10: yeah but

[1:28:42] Voice 3: the parks uh ron ron halls and judy's both happened this year didn't they

[1:28:50] Voice 3: that they

[1:28:51] Voice 5: did yeah so it makes it just something like a statement yeah work in cooperation with

[1:28:56] Voice 5: others to preserve yeah numbers

[1:28:59] Voice 10: yeah working with the bc parks foundation today um and some

[1:29:06] Voice 3: of the community meetings were to consider the the wetland option but brad maybe you and megan

[1:29:13] Voice 3: could come up with something or do you want us to draft morgana

[1:29:16] Voice 3: morgana

[1:29:17] Voice 6: sorry uh i think uh

[1:29:19] Voice 6: some direction on what you wanted to say is what is being asked for here so a resolution on

[1:29:27] Voice 6: on on what topics you wish at the least to cover and which you

[1:29:31] Voice 8: can go back and create some more

[1:29:33] Voice 8: different amount of stuff because

[1:29:39] Voice 5: you've been a long time yeah it's never by the ltc never mind

[1:29:43] Voice 5: staff yeah

[1:29:45] Voice 11: so

[1:29:46] Voice 5: i would think of last year i think those those lands is probably the biggest

[1:29:53] Voice 11: Yeah, huge.

[1:29:54] Voice 11: Yeah, very big.

[1:29:57] Voice 10: So I see Lee.

[1:29:59] Voice 10: Wow.

[1:30:00] Voice 10: i'm putting one more sentence in while we're on the roll here um

[1:30:03] Voice 6: here's the sentence i would

[1:30:05] Voice 6: be the easiest yeah

[1:30:09] Voice 9: it's

[1:30:16] Voice 5: preserving protect it's in the band-aid and you guys have done an

[1:30:19] Voice 5: outstanding job doing that so um you've held your hand to the earth some of the stuff so

[1:30:28] Voice 5: we is incorporated the

[1:30:35] Voice 10: only thing we need to know is that we should name the number of hectares

[1:30:38] Voice 10: preserved yeah that offhand i don't know i don't know we can find that out but we could yeah that

[1:30:45] Voice 10: good till we dropped in to the motion will

[1:30:48] Voice 9: it be in the parks it

[1:31:00] Voice 2: was in various uh staff reports

[1:31:02] Voice 2: et cetera so it was

[1:31:20] Voice 3: money creek and fisher but that was said nature trust as well again so

[1:31:26] Voice 7: to the

[1:31:27] Voice 6: chair i think the resolution should first uh that the uh ltc uh requests that staff amend the

[1:31:34] Voice 6: uh annual report we're going to include and then whatever you want and then that's uh

[1:31:41] Voice 6: uh approves the wording as amended as a second resolution

[1:31:55] Voice 2: um

[1:31:56] Voice 10: so i got two sentences maybe i'll just read them out that we can capture

[1:32:00] Voice 10: because we did do this work and it took quite a bit of time but

[1:32:05] Voice 6: and lisa's going to try to capture them as you go so okay

[1:32:08] Voice 10: so the first one is

[1:32:09] Voice 10: is Saturna Local Trust Committee modernized and updated its bylaw enforcement policies

[1:32:15] Voice 10: and governing bylaws through community input.

[1:32:19] Voice 10: And the next one, Saturna Local Trust Committee worked with the Nature Trust of B.C.

[1:32:35] Voice 10: and the B.C. Park Foundation to preserve X hectares of critical ecosystems

[1:32:41] Voice 10: on Saturna Island in perpetuity.

[1:32:52] Voice 1: trustee middleton could you repeat after uh preserve x yes

[1:32:58] Voice 10: hectares of critical ecosystems

[1:33:02] Voice 10: on saturn island in perpetuity right

[1:33:17] Voice 5: do you want to read that back please asap

[1:33:19] Voice 5: yes

[1:33:23] Voice 1: chairman i have that the saturn island local trust committee requests staff amend the annual

[1:33:28] Voice 1: report to include

[1:33:31] Voice 1: Saterna Local Trust Committee modernized

[1:33:33] Voice 1: and updated its bylaw enforcement

[1:33:35] Voice 1: policies and governing bylaws

[1:33:37] Voice 1: through community input

[1:33:38] Voice 1: and Saterna Island Local Trust Committee

[1:33:41] Voice 1: worked with Nature Trust

[1:33:43] Voice 1: of BC and BC Parks Foundation

[1:33:45] Voice 1: to preserve x hectares

[1:33:47] Voice 1: of critical ecosystems on

[1:33:49] Voice 1: Saterna Island in perpetuity

[1:33:51] Voice 1: Perfect, thank you

[1:33:54] Voice 5: Magic I say, magic

[1:33:55] Voice 5: Thank you Lisa

[1:33:57] Voice 5: So the legislature makes a motion

[1:33:59] Voice 5: Yes,

[1:34:00] Voice 10: I so move.

[1:34:02] Voice 10: I second that.

[1:34:03] Voice 10: For the discussion.

[1:34:04] Voice 10: A note to state that the axe, it can be simply understood that that will be replaced with the correct value.

[1:34:11] Voice 10: Okay.

[1:34:12] Voice 6: I'll put a note in the post and I'll look with organic.

[1:34:15] Voice 6: So that's for Judy's property portion. That's the portion that's transferred as well as Ron's two lots as well.

[1:34:23] Voice 6: Correct.

[1:34:24] Voice 6: Yeah, correct.

[1:34:25] Voice 10: It's

[1:34:26] Voice 3: over 210 hectares.

[1:34:28] Voice 10: It's significant for sure.

[1:34:31] Voice 10: Okay, so yeah.

[1:34:32] Voice 5: All in favor?

[1:34:34] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:34:37] Voice 5: That is outstanding.

[1:34:39] Voice 5: That's a good accounting of our activities.

[1:34:45] Voice 5: That was the meat of what you guys did, and it was wonderful work.

[1:34:49] Voice 5: And I think it needs to be recognized and broadcast widely.

[1:34:53] Voice 5: to me and this is how you do it and

[1:34:57] Voice 10: you're recording a bunch of time on on both those

[1:35:00] Voice 10: just to help the comfort of the the purchaser and talk about the implications

[1:35:06] Voice 10: for the community and

[1:35:07] Voice 10: so yeah it's all definite work we did as a group for sure so

[1:35:13] Voice 5: next part of the business is the minor

[1:35:33] Voice 1: I require the resolution for the annual report as amended.

[1:35:39] Voice 5: Okay, thank you very much.

[1:35:42] Voice 5: So let's flip back to where we were.

[1:35:45] Voice 5: So you have a recommended motion at the top of page 39.

[1:35:52] Voice 11: Yeah.

[1:35:53] Voice 5: Yeah.

[1:35:57] Voice 3: Yeah.

[1:35:58] Voice 3: Okay.

[1:35:59] Voice 3: I move that the

[1:36:01] Voice 3: Saterna Island Local Trust Committee

[1:36:03] Voice 3: approves the attached

[1:36:04] Voice 3: text as amended

[1:36:07] Voice 3: for inclusion in the

[1:36:09] Voice 3: 2025-26 annual

[1:36:11] Voice 3: report for approval by

[1:36:13] Voice 3: Trust Council and submission to the Minister

[1:36:15] Voice 3: of Housing and Municipal Affairs.

[1:36:17] Voice 5: I second.

[1:36:18] Voice 5: For the discussion, call the question.

[1:36:21] Voice 5: All in favour? And again,

[1:36:23] Voice 5: magic at work. Thank you very much for

[1:36:25] Voice 5: catching up, Lisa. Thanks, Lisa.

[1:36:27] Voice 3: said so now we are

[1:36:31] Voice 2: oh i don't know the minor

[1:36:42] Voice 5: bylaw amendments okay new business oh

[1:36:47] Voice 9: yeah um

[1:36:49] Voice 10: so

[1:36:51] Voice 10: um i can do well i mean do you want to speak your email first rather you want me to respond

[1:37:08] Voice 6: So, you've been given the green light to establish a new minor technical amendments project.

[1:37:16] Voice 6: Your primary desire is to amend your land use by-law and associated administrative by-law

[1:37:26] Voice 6: to reflect the 30 days notice for your file enforcement policy.

[1:37:34] Voice 6: You could just

[1:37:36] Voice 1: have that as your

[1:37:36] Voice 6: minor project and just pursue that one amendment.

[1:37:40] Voice 6: Staff did provide the technical amendments list with a few other technical amendments

[1:37:44] Voice 6: that could be done at the same time as cleanup.

[1:37:47] Voice 6: There's probably a few others that staff took time to review,

[1:37:51] Voice 6: which is typically what we would do in a technical amendments project

[1:37:54] Voice 6: to clean up any of the bordering. We did do a pretty extensive technical amendment last term,

[1:38:00] Voice 6: cleaned up a lot of that stuff, so I'm not sure if there's a lot of that left.

[1:38:04] Voice 6: The other pieces of work that I think would be considered technical amendments would be

[1:38:13] Voice 6: updating your zoning and designation maps to reflect these land transfers, in particular

[1:38:19] Voice 6: particular ILEOs, the zoning shows the new site-specific zone, but the designation is

[1:38:28] Voice 6: still rural. It's not wilderness reserve. Same with Mr. Hall's, both the zoning and

[1:38:37] Voice 6: land use designations still reflect the rural zoning. And then the other one is Judy's property.

[1:38:50] Voice 6: So, scope of work could be the single bylaw amendment around the 30 days, a broader list

[1:38:59] Voice 6: of changes just with land use bylaw, or you could also pursue OCP amendments, which would

[1:39:07] Voice 6: take additional time.

[1:39:09] Voice 6: If you did that, you could have two land use bylaws, so you can move your technical amendments

[1:39:15] Voice 6: limits that are straightforward in one land use by-law, like your 30-day one, to get that

[1:39:21] Voice 6: work done quicker, and then have a second land use by-law, amending land use by-law,

[1:39:25] Voice 6: an OCP by-law that carries through those other pieces to clean up your zoning and designation

[1:39:31] Voice 6: maps.

[1:39:32] Voice 6: I guess staff are seeking direction from LTC as to what the scope of that will be, and

[1:39:37] Voice 6: then the next step for us would be to draft a public charter, and you could either receive

[1:39:43] Voice 6: that charter by rwn if you don't want to discuss it or at your next meeting which is until july

[1:39:52] Voice 6: or you can have a special meeting yes to receive that charter i think you could also direct staff

[1:39:57] Voice 6: given their technical minutes and they're pretty straightforward you could also direct staff to

[1:40:01] Voice 6: begin drafting an amending bylaw and so when you do adopt your charter you also have given

[1:40:08] Voice 6: direction for us to that so perhaps in July we could actually bring a draft bylaw back which is

[1:40:16] Voice 6: usually quicker than what the process would normally play out to try to move this forward

[1:40:20] Voice 6: as quickly as possible recognizing that you don't have another meeting after July

[1:40:26] Voice 6: that's your last meeting so really in my point mainly to you Trustee Middleton was just around

[1:40:32] Voice 6: timing and the real challenge of trying to get all those statutory process steps completed in

[1:40:38] Voice 6: this term as well as a mandatory 60-day referral uh which needs to fit in somewhere so in july you

[1:40:46] Voice 1: can

[1:40:46] Voice 6: receive the draft bylaw and we can initiate referrals then but then i think you'd be more or

[1:40:51] Voice 6: less picking up this work in the next turning to the shingle yeah

[1:40:56] Voice 10: i think would be um from

[1:41:00] Voice 10: so just kind of working backwards i think just because technically the bc parks foundation and

[1:41:09] Voice 10: nature trust of bc lands are technically private land holdings they would need to sort of be

[1:41:15] Voice 10: consulted and be uh moving ahead shall we say with the project to be some um i think that would

[1:41:24] Voice 10: be the most particularly but we don't actually have we have not yet received the densities from

[1:41:30] Voice 10: wrong false property into the committee of investors so i'd just like to tread a little

[1:41:34] Voice 10: more gently shall we say with them on that so there's nothing there's

[1:41:38] Voice 6: no implication of your

[1:41:40] Voice 6: designation not being out of line it just doesn't necessarily i

[1:41:45] Voice 10: i think it's a great idea and i'd

[1:41:47] Voice 10: say for next term let's do it in concert with them i'm sure they would be very much open to

[1:41:55] Voice 10: to that particularly if we have a conversation regard uh i mean we heard actually in here

[1:42:01] Voice 10: They had a meeting and they were asked that question.

[1:42:05] Voice 10: It was about 70 people here.

[1:42:07] Voice 10: It was very well attended.

[1:42:08] Voice 10: And they were very much of the view that they wanted to work in partnership

[1:42:12] Voice 10: with the community.

[1:42:14] Voice 10: So I see no issue with that.

[1:42:15] Voice 10: It's just when we kind of have the space and time to kind of move along

[1:42:19] Voice 10: with this and put the work in.

[1:42:21] Voice 10: So I appreciate you bringing it up,

[1:42:23] Voice 10: but I think there will be a time and place for that.

[1:42:25] Voice 10: And I would put Judy's property into that same envelope as well.

[1:42:30] Voice 10: you know would not cross the line yet technically i suppose and and um and likewise it would then go

[1:42:36] Voice 10: to the nature trust of bc and um and we could work in partnership with them for all of their

[1:42:43] Voice 10: land holdings now including the what we call globally the money mountain i'm not sure what

[1:42:49] Voice 10: it's actually called you know

[1:42:51] Voice 10: all of that is down nature trust of bc and it's probably not zoned

[1:42:56] Voice 10: correctly for their purposes um so so great um so i'm saying that from my view you guys may differ

[1:43:04] Voice 10: to not proceed with that this term unless there's some right near the end tremendous surplus of

[1:43:10] Voice 10: prior time which i can't imagine would happen but you never know um and so so then going to

[1:43:17] Voice 10: the next point i do think obviously restricting the amendments to be as time efficient as possible

[1:43:25] Voice 10: not have any ocp implications that would of course draw things out um i see you know your points here

[1:43:31] Voice 10: about the cistern and the accessory building definition um they're all great suggestions

[1:43:37] Voice 10: but would they slow things down and that we opened up areas that perhaps should have more

[1:43:43] Voice 10: consultation than they had or are they just true technical amendments where you change the world

[1:43:48] Voice 10: yeah

[1:43:48] Voice 6: i mean i think the first with the first step of the project charter would be to review the

[1:43:52] Voice 6: bylaw and the technical women's list and decide you're right

[1:43:56] Voice 6: there's probably more

[1:43:57] Voice 6: workaround systems than just treating wording whereas i think one of those on there is like

[1:44:02] Voice 6: just truly uh uh uh clarifying the system like this one that's just clarifying so that that

[1:44:17] Voice 10: doesn't benefit over it

[1:44:19] Voice 9: would be truly technical

[1:44:20] Voice 10: but it really isn't so i would i would say i mean

[1:44:23] Voice 10: because if we could make the motion now to direct staff i think we have we did vote on wording for

[1:44:33] Voice 10: the um the two um the two relevant bylaws that dictate notice period and they're in the minutes

[1:44:42] Voice 10: um so my suggestion would be to task and you could you know if it needs to be in our part

[1:44:48] Voice 10: that we want to confirm that scope of work and that we can respond to it would be great if then

[1:44:55] Voice 10: in july we could actually have an l an amended lub with the technical amendments that we could

[1:45:00] Voice 10: do probably all three readings on in in that july meeting we

[1:45:04] Voice 6: still need to do a 60-day referral

[1:45:06] Voice 6: which is typically done with draft bylaws so like so uh i i think that the the furthest you can get

[1:45:17] Voice 6: is to get a draft by-law in front of you in July or to schedule a special meeting to receive

[1:45:24] Voice 6: that draft by-law so that you can kick off that referral period.

[1:45:30] Voice 6: That's

[1:45:30] Voice 3: too special, isn't it?

[1:45:31] Voice 6: Sure, yeah.

[1:45:32] Voice 3: Between now and July.

[1:45:34] Voice 10: How are referrals of technical amendments generally received?

[1:45:38] Voice 10: I would think that if I were a nation or another local trust, first of all, it would be hard

[1:45:45] Voice 10: to understand the context about what the technical method is because by definition it's a technical

[1:45:49] Voice 10: amendment like what happens there because it's it seems to be something that people might feel is

[1:45:58] Voice 10: sort of beneath their attention and then irritant more than so their statutory rules

[1:46:02] Voice 6: so i think

[1:46:03] Voice 6: we're our policy requires that we give a 60-day referral period to first mentions right so that's

[1:46:09] Voice 6: the approach that we take and so regardless

[1:46:12] Voice 6: of whether they have comments or not we would give

[1:46:15] Voice 6: them that full 60-day window to provide any response or to clarify platform dimension and so

[1:46:24] Voice 6: i

[1:46:24] Voice 9: would

[1:46:26] Voice 6: say that that 60 days is fixed regardless on the scope of the changes and whether you think

[1:46:33] Voice 6: comments will come back or not that it means you have to complete that 60 days so

[1:46:38] Voice 3: we could have

[1:46:39] Voice 3: a special meeting between now and the 23rd or we could have one between the 23rd of july and

[1:46:46] Voice 3: the end of term depending on how you schedule the preparation of the item and the 60 days

[1:46:54] Voice 3: referral or do we need both if you you would say to

[1:46:59] Voice 6: get to the end of this term

[1:47:01] Voice 6: so to get completed by the end of this term you would need so uh we're at may we're at may 1st

[1:47:07] Voice 6: now, so say in

[1:47:11] Voice 6: two weeks you have an

[1:47:12] Voice 6: approved project charter, you could schedule

[1:47:14] Voice 6: a meeting for

[1:47:16] Voice 6: say the end of

[1:47:18] Voice 6: May or mid-June

[1:47:20] Voice 6: or the

[1:47:21] Voice 6: well, how old is time?

[1:47:29] Voice 6: We

[1:47:30] Voice 2: can change the date of the meeting.

[1:47:32] Voice 2: So if you had a meeting

[1:47:33] Voice 6: before May,

[1:47:35] Voice 6: well, I don't know.

[1:47:36] Voice 6: The window starts to get pretty narrow.

[1:47:38] Voice 3: But what if the 23rd

[1:47:40] Voice 3: could be changed, the 23rd of July,

[1:47:42] Voice 3: so you have time

[1:47:44] Voice 3: to prepare we have a meeting you go out to referral and we have a meeting after the referral period

[1:47:50] Voice 3: so that's two meetings one of which is the 23rd like

[1:47:55] Voice 5: a June meeting in a September meeting

[1:47:56] Voice 3: something like that it depends we take advice from Brad on how long it would take him but so

[1:48:02] Voice 3: we have to fit in the 60 days after we have approved it so the approval date depends on

[1:48:09] Voice 3: on your ability to create it, Brad,

[1:48:12] Voice 3: and then we immediately go into the 60-day period

[1:48:16] Voice 3: and we have another meeting at the end of that.

[1:48:19] Voice 6: So the easiest, the quickest and easiest way

[1:48:22] Voice 6: if you really are just

[1:48:23] Voice 6: hung up on the 30-day by-law

[1:48:25] Voice 6: is to just do something from that

[1:48:27] Voice 6: and then draft a really simple by-law

[1:48:30] Voice 6: and bring it back to you.

[1:48:32] Voice 6: You could even receive the draft by-law by RWM

[1:48:35] Voice 6: and then we could initiate a referral.

[1:48:37] Voice 6: So we could do that, if that's what you want to know,

[1:48:39] Voice 6: the scope of the work i

[1:48:40] Voice 10: think just yeah just to be fair to not you know yeah bite

[1:48:45] Voice 10: off more than

[1:48:45] Voice 10: we kind of agreed to do with stephan there that's basically it it's implementing the lub

[1:48:53] Voice 10: by putting the 30 days notice in place of the 24 hours and i would suggest the wording as we voted

[1:48:59] Voice 10: on that and then it gives the fall so for the bylaw staff to you know say hey we need we need

[1:49:08] Voice 10: to do make another arrangement here um and and warren in fact put his input into the wording

[1:49:15] Voice 10: i remember if you change the wording and so uh so i would say that that would be great and it's

[1:49:20] Voice 10: um i

[1:49:21] Voice 6: can share that wording the draft wording reports in the bio yeah

[1:49:25] Voice 12: yeah

[1:49:26] Voice 6: with ltc like here's

[1:49:28] Voice 6: your so uh so if you want to narrow the scope to that that would be the easiest and quickest way

[1:49:34] Voice 6: to get it going uh project charter you understand we need it because that's our tool to then secure

[1:49:39] Voice 6: funding for your statutory process which is either notice of first reading or a public hearing

[1:49:46] Voice 6: in this case you could i think uh not hold a public hearing because it's consistent with the

[1:49:52] Voice 6: yes ocp um uh and so we

[1:49:57] Voice 3: have two thousand dollars i noticed in our minor projects unspent

[1:50:02] Voice 6: uh so uh so uh i would say by a couple weeks i could have that too you might want to move

[1:50:11] Voice 6: your july meeting so that you know

[1:50:12] Voice 3: definitely don't wait 60

[1:50:15] Voice 6: day yeah window so if you move

[1:50:19] Voice 6: your july meeting to like well i mean honestly if you just moved it to september yeah you could

[1:50:26] Voice 6: receive and do first second and third reading then and then ncc approval and then you could

[1:50:32] Voice 6: adopt by the ww because

[1:50:34] Voice 10: it's a technical amendment that you go through the minister is that right

[1:50:37] Voice 6: it's because it's a land use file not because it's a

[1:50:40] Voice 6: technical amendment but it's because it's

[1:50:42] Voice 10: a minor amendment so

[1:50:43] Voice 6: minor amendments are values by law changes major amendments are when you

[1:50:47] Voice 6: require an ocp change well

[1:50:49] Voice 6: that seems the fairest that sounds great

[1:50:51] Voice 10: yeah that you um you could do

[1:50:54] Voice 10: the the project charter that would have the draft wording that allows that you get rdb

[1:51:02] Voice 9: yeah

[1:51:02] Voice 10: and then and then the 60 days happens and then we come back to a consolidated bylaw to

[1:51:10] Voice 10: adopt in september you

[1:51:12] Voice 6: can address any of your i mean you have no applications uh pending like

[1:51:16] Voice 6: tvps or dps or anyone that needs a decision quicker so yeah okay because those other

[1:51:23] Voice 3: things are valid and important but they're not

[1:51:29] Voice 3: and

[1:51:30] Voice 10: the community hasn't heard about any of them

[1:51:32] Voice 3: and i read them and i'm not sure

[1:51:34] Voice 10: they have right

[1:51:35] Voice 10: because it's in the minutes from last meeting we discussed it we've had two three sections on it

[1:51:40] Voice 10: like that's well the other

[1:51:43] Voice 3: ones i read them and i need to go dig around yeah so we're going to do

[1:51:50] Voice 5: motions to move the

[1:51:52] Voice 5: meeting but also what what the project is going to be do you want a resolution

[1:51:58] Voice 5: yeah i

[1:51:59] Voice 5: think that would be an excellent

[1:52:00] Voice 6: idea so that the saturn island local trust committee

[1:52:03] Voice 6: directs staff to uh draft a project charter a project charter uh to amend uh the land use bylaw

[1:52:15] Voice 6: and associated administrative by-law enforcement by-law to reflect 30-day notice requirements.

[1:52:33] Voice 6: Okay, yeah. And then you

[1:52:36] Voice 6: don't need to stay.

[1:52:38] Voice 6: And to draft a amending by-law.

[1:52:42] Voice 6: Okay, so moved.

[1:52:45] Voice 5: move?

[1:52:48] Voice 10: Yes, I will. Do we want to make sure the wording was captured? Lisa,

[1:52:55] Voice 5: I confirm if you have

[1:52:57] Voice 5: that wording?

[1:52:59] Voice 1: I do, Chair Bode. Would you like it read back?

[1:53:02] Voice 5: Sure, what the heck. We'd like to

[1:53:05] Voice 5: pass in your sunshine.

[1:53:08] Voice 1: That's Saterna Island Local Trust Committee direct staff to direct.

[1:53:13] Voice 1: I'll start again that Saturna Island local trust committee direct staff to draft a project charter

[1:53:20] Voice 1: to amend the land use bylaw an associated administrative bylaw enforcement bylaw

[1:53:25] Voice 1: to reflect 30-day notice requirement and draft an amending bylaw

[1:53:31] Voice 1: be

[1:53:32] Voice 6: considered by resolution without meeting okay

[1:53:39] Voice 1: um planner smith did you say to be considered by

[1:53:44] Voice 1: resolution without meeting yes okay

[1:53:46] Voice 1: thank you okay

[1:53:49] Voice 10: so this i will not repeat that but i will

[1:53:52] Voice 10: still move second interest

[1:53:54] Voice 10: of all second any other

[1:53:56] Voice 5: discussion or the question excellent and then we

[1:54:00] Voice 5: need a motion to be so so brad should we broadcast that because we don't have to move to september

[1:54:13] Voice 6: Why don't we do that at 18, for your next regular meeting, and

[1:54:19] Voice 9: then

[1:54:20] Voice 6: you have one other

[1:54:22] Voice 6: item in your business, which is the approval of the legal expense for Judy Meyer's covenant.

[1:54:30] Voice 6: So because staff or legal counsel had not seen that covenant until it showed up, we

[1:54:36] Voice 6: were directed as just as proven sure uh to have that review prior to prior to signing

[1:54:42] Voice 6: i think this is

[1:54:43] Voice 6: what we would do thanks for

[1:54:45] Voice 3: helping us sort that other one out brad

[1:54:47] Voice 3: with the timing and everything yeah um

[1:54:50] Voice 10: so i'll move that we approve the legal expenditure to

[1:54:55] Voice 10: review the covenant on uh 2d virus property

[1:55:01] Voice 5: i second that do we do we need a dollar amount

[1:55:04] Voice 5: on that brad or just as i said uh

[1:55:06] Voice 6: the estimate was 300 so i think it'll be a lot more than that

[1:55:11] Voice 6: i

[1:55:11] Voice 10: think we can leave it i don't think they're in the habit of i was surprised

[1:55:15] Voice 6: at the little

[1:55:16] Voice 6: practice actually it seems like you've already survived spell people five minutes

[1:55:21] Voice 6: it's

[1:55:21] Voice 3: like have you understood the question but so

[1:55:25] Voice 5: yes it seems like it's pretty simple

[1:55:27] Voice 5: so that's moved and seconded i'm assuming at least scott she's still making support so

[1:55:32] Voice 5: So all the questions, all in favor?

[1:55:33] Voice 5: That's carried.

[1:55:37] Voice 5: So that's it for the business of upcoming meetings.

[1:55:39] Voice 5: Next regular meeting, we would like to move to September.

[1:55:45] Voice 5: But the question is, what type of motion do you take?

[1:55:48] Voice 5: Can we do a broad-based request of staff moving to September and leave it blank?

[1:55:53] Voice 5: Yeah,

[1:55:53] Voice 6: I think we should do that.

[1:55:54] Voice 6: I don't think we should try to choose a date.

[1:55:56] Voice 6: We need probably to work with Lisa to look at our schedules.

[1:55:59] Voice 6: goals. In the absence of that, you could just pass a resolution that staff to explore

[1:56:08] Voice 6: alternative dates in September for the July 23rd meeting. Then we can go ahead and do that. And

[1:56:13] Voice 6: then when we land on the date, you can do that by RWA. Do

[1:56:18] Voice 5: we directly need to reference

[1:56:19] Voice 5: cancelling the July meeting?

[1:56:22] Voice 6: I think we would do that in a subsequent RWA. We have a resolution

[1:56:27] Voice 6: that says that the LTC cancels or moves the July meeting to whatever date we want.

[1:56:34] Voice 6: Okay.

[1:56:34] Voice 6: And then we'll get staff to arrange the whole rental,

[1:56:37] Voice 6: make sure that all of those things are lined up.

[1:56:40] Voice 10: It's, I think, understood that the meeting would allow the passage of the bylaw at the LTC

[1:56:48] Voice 10: with sufficient time for it to then go for approval to executive.

[1:56:51] Voice 10: Yeah.

[1:56:52] Voice 6: That might be

[1:56:52] Voice 10: one of the last executive meetings.

[1:56:54] Voice 10: Right.

[1:56:55] Voice 6: Right, and then we can adopt immediately after by RWN.

[1:56:58] Voice 10: So as long as,

[1:56:59] Voice 6: like, we'll try to pick a date where there's,

[1:57:01] Voice 6: like, there has to be EC meetings every two weeks, I think.

[1:57:05] Voice 6: So there will have to be one.

[1:57:08] Voice 6: And then as soon as it's approved by EC,

[1:57:10] Voice 6: we can immediately adopt by RWN.

[1:57:12] Voice 6: So technically, you would have to, like, October 20th.

[1:57:14] Voice 6: Well, November 4th, really, because you actually don't,

[1:57:19] Voice 6: you don't be vanquished until a new meeting.

[1:57:25] Voice 6: right so you have a pretty long window okay

[1:57:29] Voice 10: well that's great but but and

[1:57:32] Voice 6: worst case scenario

[1:57:34] Voice 10: yeah it has to be yeah yeah

[1:57:37] Voice 6: but i don't i'm pretty sure we can get that work done

[1:57:39] Voice 6: and then what

[1:57:40] Voice 6: that leaves is a fresh slate for the new trustees to create

[1:57:43] Voice 6: a new minor project

[1:57:44] Voice 10: yes and then i think that completes our work for the term okay

[1:57:49] Voice 5: so did you get enough of a

[1:57:51] Voice 5: motion out of that chair

[1:57:54] Voice 1: mod i have that the saturn island local trust committee request staff

[1:57:58] Voice 1: explore an alternative meeting date in september 2026 to replace the july 23rd meeting excellent

[1:58:07] Voice 1: i think

[1:58:09] Voice 3: we shouldn't have meetings at all we should just let lisa yeah right what probably

[1:58:14] Voice 3: would happen

[1:58:15] Voice 5: so moved by trustee middleton second by trustee poland yeah for a discussion

[1:58:20] Voice 5: got a question on paper that carries so we do not know what we're meeting again or where or where

[1:58:27] Voice 5: probably we've done well all right so the conclusion is you guys public participation so

[1:58:34] Voice 5: i'm

[1:58:35] Voice 8: posting for advice

[1:58:39] Voice 8: sorry no posting for the parties yeah are they illegal

[1:58:50] Voice 3: They, well, they are legal in as of themselves, but the disposal of the waste is a minefield.

[1:58:59] Voice 3: But if you carry it somewhere else,

[1:59:01] Voice 8: are you all right?

[1:59:02] Voice 3: Yeah, if you carry

[1:59:02] Voice 8: it, yeah,

[1:59:03] Voice 3: if you take it to a proper disposal, blah, blah, blah.

[1:59:14] Voice 9: And

[1:59:14] Voice 3: it's one of those horrible quagmires where

[1:59:19] Voice 3: it forces people to do things that aren't actually commonsensical

[1:59:23] Voice 3: to kind of fake comply with the restrictions.

[1:59:28] Voice 3: Okay, thank you.

[1:59:31] Voice 5: That would be right for the audience.

[1:59:33] Voice 5: Okay, so with that, we have a closed meeting, so we can adjourn.

[1:59:38] Voice 3: Holy smokes.

[1:59:40] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:59:41] Voice 3: Thank you, Lisa, for doing such an excellent job, as usual,

[1:59:46] Voice 3: are very quickly formulating what we say.

[1:59:51] Voice 5: Magic.

[1:59:54] Voice 2: Thank you, Lisa.

[1:59:55] Voice 2: Thanks, everyone.

[1:59:56] Voice 2: Thank you.

[1:59:57] Voice 2: Thank you.

[2:00:00] Oh

Islands Trust  
A D O P T E D  

Saturna Island Local Trust Committee  
Minutes of Regular Meeting  

Date: April 30, 2026  
Location: Saturna Island Community Hall  
105 East Point Road, Saturna Island, BC  

Members Present:  
David Maude, Chair  
Lee Middleton, Local Trustee  
Mairead Boland, Local Trustee  

Staff Present:  
Mary Storzer, Regional Planning Manager  
Brad Smith, Island Planner  
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator / Recorder (electronic)  

Others Present:  
There were approximately 2 members of the public present.  

1. CALL TO ORDER  
Chair Maude called the meeting to order at 11:41 a.m.  

2. TERRITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  
Chair Maude acknowledged that the meeting was held on the territory of the Coast Salish First Nations.  

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA  
The following additions to the agenda were presented for consideration:  
17.2 Minor Bylaw Enforcement Technical Amendments Project  
17.3 Authorize Legal Review of Proposed Covenant 185719-0593256  

By general consent the agenda was adopted as amended.  

4. TRUSTEE REPORT  
Trustee Boland reported attendance at March Trust Council and noted the budget passed with nine trustees in opposition including both Saturna Island Trustees and challenges with government regulations that complicate ability for members of the public to do things that should not be difficult.  

Trustee Middleton reported that he has been looking at the work program to determine what work can be done during the remainder of the term.  

Saturna Island Local Trust Committee  
Regular Business Meeting  
April 30, 2026 ADOPTED  
Page 1 of 6


5. CHAIR'S REPORT

Chair Maude reported attendance at March Trust Council and highlighted budget discussions and challenges noting non-discretionary expenditures and funding decreases which resulted in the bulk of the tax increase and that the Trust Policy Statement Amendment project will likely not complete this term.

6. ELECTORAL AREA DIRECTOR'S REPORT - None

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD

A member of the public spoke to the budget and stated the reduction of provincial funding shows that Islands Trust spending is more dependent on taxpayer funding; therefore, expenditures need to be reduced with staffing levels cut back accordingly.

A member of the public spoke to concerns of autonomy of Local Trust Committees being overridden, residents paying for two levels of government when only one is required, and decreased Provincial funding for Islands Trust resulting in increased taxes.

8. COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETING - None

9. PUBLIC HEARING - None

10. MINUTES

10.1 Local Trust Committee Minutes Dated January 29, 2026 (for Adoption)

By general consent the Saturna Island Local Trust Committee meeting minutes of January 29, 2026 were adopted.

10.2 Section 26 Resolutions-without-meeting Report Dated April 2026

Received for information.

11. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

11.1 Follow-up Action List Dated April 2026

Received for information.

12. DELEGATIONS - None

13. CORRESPONDENCE

Correspondence received concerning current applications or projects is posted to the LTC webpage

Saturna Island Local Trust Committee  
Regular Business Meeting  
April 30, 2026  
ADOPTED  
Page 2 of 6


14. APPLICATIONS AND REFERRALS

14.1 North Pender Island Local Trust Committee Referral for Draft Bylaws 236 and 237 (for Response)

SA-2026-014  
It was MOVED and SECONDED,  
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee respond to the North Pender Island Local Trust Committee that interests are unaffected by Draft Bylaws 236 and 237.  

CARRIED

14.2 North Pender Island Local Trust Committee Referral for Draft Bylaw No. 242 (for Response)

SA-2026-015  
It was MOVED and SECONDED,  
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee respond to the North Pender Island Local Trust Committee that interests are unaffected by Draft Bylaw No. 242.  

CARRIED

15. LOCAL TRUST COMMITTEE PROJECTS

15.1 Minor Housing Review Project - Proposed Bylaw No. 143 - Consideration of Adoption - Staff Report

Proposed Bylaw No. 143 has been given second and third reading by the Local Trust Committee and has been approved by the Executive Committee.  

SA-2026-016  
It was MOVED and SECONDED,  
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee Bylaw No. 143, cited as “Saturna Island Land Use Bylaw No. 119, 2018, Amendment No. 1, 2024”, be adopted.  

CARRIED

16. REPORTS

16.1 Work Program Reports

16.1.1 Active Projects Report Dated April 2026

Received for information.

16.1.2 Future Projects Report Dated April 2026

The Local Trust Committee discussed the projects listed on the Future Projects List to determine priorities and scope for the next fiscal year and the following comments were noted:  
• Groundwater Sustainability Project work has been completed  
• Shoreline Policy Review would be considered a major project  
   o There is a model bylaw that could be used as a starting point  

Saturna Island Local Trust Committee  
Regular Business Meeting  
April 30, 2026  
ADOPTED  
Page 3 of 6


o The current policy is scant and was inherited from the Capital Regional District prior to the development of the first Official Community Plan
• Review of Land Use Bylaw Subdivision Regulations as the current regulations are silent on water supply, septic requirements, highway standards, drainage etc.
  o this leaves the Ministry to make the decisions in the absence of local regulations and standards

The Local Trust Committee noted they have no desire to increase the number of potential lots relative to the Official Community Plan but would like to optimize how undeveloped lots are developed in a sustainable way without increasing density by undertaking an analysis of different types of zoning that could accommodate multiple family housing.

SA-2026-017
It was MOVED AND SECONDED,
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee request staff remove Groundwater Sustainability Project from the Future Projects list and replace it with Review of Multiple Family Residential Zoning and Policies Project.
CARRIED

16.2 Applications Report Dated April 2026

Received for information.

16.3 Trustee and Local Expense Report Dated Feb 2026

Received for information.

16.4 Adopted Policies and Standing Resolutions

Received for information.

16.5 Local Trust Committee Webpage - None

16.6 Islands Trust Conservancy Report Dated Feb 2026

Received for information.

17. NEW BUSINESS

17.1 2025/26 Annual Report - Request for Decision

SA-2026-018
It was MOVED and SECONDED,
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee request staff amend the Annual Report to include Saturna Local Trust Committee modernized and updated its bylaw enforcement policies and governing bylaws through community input and Saturna Local Trust Committee worked with Nature Trust of BC and BC Parks Foundation to preserve 163.4 hectares of critical ecosystems on Saturna island in perpetuity.
CARRIED

Saturna Island Local Trust Committee
Regular Business Meeting
April 30, 2026 ADOPTED Page 4 of 6


SA-2026-019
It was MOVED and SECONDED,
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee approves the attached text as amended for inclusion in the 2025/26 Annual Report for approval by Trust Council and submission to the Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs.
CARRIED

17.2 Minor Bylaw Technical Amendments Project

Island Planner Smith noted the minor project has been approved to proceed and project scope options include amending the Land Use Bylaw to reflect the thirty-day notice period prior to investigation, looking at other technical amendments to the Land Use Bylaw such as updating maps and zoning designations to reflect land transfers, or pursue amendments to the Official Community Plan. He identified timelines relevant to each option including the development of a project charter and draft bylaw language and requirements for a sixty-day referral response period.

Discussion ensued and the following comments were noted:
• Updating maps should not be done prior to consultation with the BC Parks Foundation and Nature Trust BC
• Restrict the number of amendments in consideration of timelines and to those that do not have Official Community Plan implications

SA-2026-020
It was MOVED and SECONDED,
that the Saturna Island Local Trust Committee direct staff to draft a Project Charter to amend the Land Use Bylaw and associated Administrative Bylaw Enforcement Bylaw to reflect a thirty-day notice requirement and draft an amending bylaw to be considered by Resolution Without Meeting.
CARRIED

17.3 Authorize Legal Review of Proposed Covenant 185719-0593256

Island Planner Smith noted staff have been directed to complete a legal review of the draft covenant and, as the estimated cost of the review is approximately $300, it is advisable to cover costs internally rather than enter into a cost recovery agreement with the applicant.

SA-2026-021
It was MOVED and SECONDED,
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee directs staff to undertake legal review of proposed covenant on Judy Meyer’s property, subdivision application SA-SUB-2024.1, and to cover costs of the legal review through the Saturna Island legal general account.
CARRIED

Saturna Island Local Trust Committee
Regular Business Meeting
April 30, 2026                                                                             ADOPTED                                                      Page 5 of 6


18. UPCOMING MEETINGS

18.1 Next Regular Meeting Scheduled for July 23, 2026 at the Saturna Community Hall, Saturna Island

SA-2026-022  
It was MOVED and SECONDED,  
that Saturna Island Local Trust Committee request staff explore an alternative meeting date in September, 2026 to replace the July 23 meeting.  
CARRIED

19. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD

A member of the public spoke asked if composting toilets are legal and a Trustee replied they are but disposal of waste is complicated.

20. CLOSED MEETING - None

21. ADJOURNMENT

By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m.

_________________________  
David Maude, Chair  

Certified Correct:

_________________________  
Lisa Millard, Meeting Administrator/Recorder  

Saturna Island Local Trust Committee  
Regular Business Meeting  
April 30, 2026  
ADOPTED  
Page 6 of 6