North Pender Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, May 12, 2026

[0:00:03] Voice 5: And we are streaming. Great. Welcome, everybody.

[0:00:08] Voice 5: Good morning, everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order today.

[0:00:11] Voice 5: This is the Islands Trust Conservancy regular business meeting for Tuesday, May 12th.

[0:00:17] Voice 5: And the time is 10 o'clock.

[0:00:20] Voice 5: I'd like to start by acknowledging the land that we're meeting on today is the unceded and ancestral territory to many Coast Salish nations.

[0:00:29] Voice 5: and I would like to particularly honor the passing of Musqueam elder Shane Point. Dr. Point

[0:00:36] Voice 5: has been a giant, an absolute giant in the community housing sector. His insight and his

[0:00:43] Voice 5: humor helped shape how we understand the housing crisis today. He wrote, we are one with all

[0:00:52] Voice 5: living beings and their spirits and their ancestors sacred beings such as a

[0:00:59] Voice 5: Thunderbird and the lands and the waters and the skies of Mother Earth so take

[0:01:06] Voice 5: care of yourself thank you nice words my name is Lisa

[0:01:12] Voice 5: Goberl I'm the Island Trust elected trustee for Galeano Island and I have

[0:01:18] Voice 5: the absolute honor of being the chair of the Island Trust Conservancy. I am zooming in from

[0:01:24] Voice 5: beautiful Galliano Island, core territory to the Penelakut tribe. Now, we'll start with some

[0:01:31] Voice 5: introductions first, and I'll hand it over to our vice chair.

[0:01:36] Voice 12: Hello, everyone. Can you hear my mic

[0:01:38] Voice 12: okay? Yes.

[0:01:39] Voice 12: Okay, wonderful. Yeah, so good morning, everyone. My name is Tanner Timothy. I'm from

[0:01:44] Voice 12: the Amun First Nation as well as Weebakai Nation and I'm calling in from the unceded territory of

[0:01:50] Voice 12: Tsleil-Waututh First Nation in North Burnaby. I was provincially appointed to the Islands Trust

[0:01:56] Voice 12: Conservancy Board in August of 2024 and it's been an honor working with everyone here and

[0:02:03] Voice 12: lovely to meet some new faces so thank you very much. I'll pass it to Trustee Yates.

[0:02:08] Voice 12: Thank

[0:02:11] Voice 20: you, Nankum. And thank you, Chair Govro, for your beautiful opening and your acknowledgement of Shane Point, someone whose work I've been following for a long time and a greatly respected elder in the community and far ranging beyond his own community, too.

[0:02:32] Voice 20: So thank you for that.

[0:02:34] Voice 20: I'm chiming in from Snuneymuc territory for the Gabriola local trust area, which includes

[0:02:40] Voice 20: Gabriola, Mudge and the Corsi Islands.

[0:02:46] Voice 5: And then over to you, Trustee Elliott.

[0:02:50] Voice 6: Hello.

[0:02:50] Voice 6: Good morning, Nightsquale, everybody.

[0:02:53] Voice 6: My name is Toby Elliott, and I'm also calling in from Snuneymuc First Nation territory on

[0:03:00] Voice 6: Gabriola Island, looking at the lush gardens and listening to the birds.

[0:03:06] Voice 6: It just cannot be a better place in springtime.

[0:03:09] Voice 6: So grateful to all the Indigenous stewards who have cared for these lands

[0:03:14] Voice 6: and those that are working to preserve and protect going forward.

[0:03:18] Voice 6: Happy to be with you all.

[0:03:20] Voice 5: Thank you. Thank you. And Trustee Smith.

[0:03:23] Voice 5: Hi,

[0:03:27] Voice 3: everybody. My name is Risa Smith.

[0:03:29] Voice 3: I'm speaking to you from the north end of Galliano Island,

[0:03:32] Voice 3: which is the core area of Penelakut,

[0:03:34] Voice 3: um and also incredibly grateful to be here um living in this amazing place i think every day

[0:03:43] Voice 3: um i'm amazed yesterday i was listening to and trying to identify all the bird calls with my

[0:03:50] Voice 3: three-year-old grandson realizing what a rich world they live in the little kids who get to

[0:03:57] Voice 3: grow up here and experience all this nature so and great to see everybody here um it somebody's

[0:04:04] Voice 3: missing is um oh sorry i missed that okay sorry um and welcome to carolyn i'm really happy to have

[0:04:13] Voice 3: you i hope it's not just four months but i guess you never know and uh also to see carly here who

[0:04:19] Voice 3: i've known for many years uh from galliano but she sadly doesn't live here anymore so thanks everybody

[0:04:26] Voice 3: thank

[0:04:27] Voice 5: you thank you yes we have regrets from uh trustee georgia who joined us a little bit later

[0:04:32] Voice 5: today. And then I'll turn over to Manager Tyrrell. Do you want to introduce the staff joining us

[0:04:38] Voice 5: today?

[0:04:39] Voice 8: Absolutely. Thank you so much. My name is Wendy Tyrrell and I am gratefully the manager of

[0:04:45] Voice 8: the Islands Trust Conservancy and we have an amazing team and we have a very strong support

[0:04:51] Voice 8: system team with us today. And I'd like to start by having, well, I should mention also, sorry,

[0:04:58] Voice 8: that I am coming in from and joining from the Coast Salish lands of the Coast Salish people,

[0:05:03] Voice 8: specifically the Lekwungen speaking people, the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations,

[0:05:08] Voice 8: on this beautiful unceded territories and lands that have been stewarded and were stewarded in

[0:05:14] Voice 8: a very good way for many, many thousands and thousands of years. I'd like to ask Joe Elliott to

[0:05:22] Voice 8: to come on and introduce himself.

[0:05:28] Voice 17: Yeah, aitskweil, kōmoks'nāt tawākaw,

[0:05:32] Voice 17: kōmoks'nāt tā s'nēmok,

[0:05:35] Voice 17: tēneits tē kōmachin,

[0:05:39] Voice 17: CIS Indigenous Advisor for Island Stress.

[0:05:44] Voice 17: So I'm calling in from Kowtchen.

[0:05:45] Voice 17: My First Nations name, my family name,

[0:05:48] Voice 17: comes from s'nēmok,

[0:05:49] Voice 17: and I'm looking forward to participating in the meeting today.

[0:05:53] Voice 17: Thank you very

[0:06:03] Voice 8: much, Joe. Thank you for attending with us and being a part of this meeting.

[0:06:10] Voice 8: Next, I would like to have Gemma Green introduce herself.

[0:06:16] Voice 18: Good morning, everyone. My name is Gemma Green. I'm the team lead for protected area management

[0:06:21] Voice 18: here on staff, and I'm zooming in from the territory of the Lekwungen speaking people

[0:06:26] Voice 18: here at the Victoria Office of Violence Trust. Glad to be here. Thank you.

[0:06:33] Voice 8: Thank you, Gemma. And if I could have Catherine Martel introduce herself.

[0:06:42] Voice 10: Hey, Squachel, everyone. Oh, look at that. My video was actually working today.

[0:06:47] Voice 10: That's a miss these days. I'm sometimes invisible.

[0:06:52] Voice 10: So good morning. Catherine Martel. I'm the ecosystem protection specialist with Islands Trust Conservancy.

[0:06:58] Voice 10: and i am joining today uh from the victoria office um just nearby to emma on uh

[0:07:08] Voice 10: in posalish territory sorry my brain is a little bit um caught up today i was thinking this morning

[0:07:13] Voice 10: about how the connection that these peoples have and the the bonds are something i can't even

[0:07:19] Voice 10: comprehend and my brain is still it's trying to wrap around that and my words haven't started yet

[0:07:26] Voice 10: at today, which is good because I get to sit back in silence and let you guys all have words.

[0:07:32] Voice 8: Thank you,

[0:07:33] Voice 8: Catherine. We have, let's see, Caroline Kichiru joining us today, our

[0:07:42] Voice 8: admin assistant. Caroline, can you introduce yourself?

[0:07:46] Voice 1: Good morning, everyone. I'm Caroline Kichiru. I'm taking the meeting from the Victoria office

[0:07:53] Voice 1: and I'm an admin assistant

[0:07:57] Voice 1: supporting the Conservancy team

[0:08:00] Voice 1: and I'm glad to meet you all

[0:08:03] Voice 1: after typing your names for a really long time.

[0:08:06] Voice 1: Now I can match the name to a face.

[0:08:09] Voice 1: So glad to meet you all.

[0:08:11] Voice 1: Thank you.

[0:08:12] Voice 1: Thank you, Caroline.

[0:08:14] Voice 8: And we have Rob Croker

[0:08:16] Voice 8: administering the meeting today.

[0:08:19] Voice 16: Morning, everyone.

[0:08:20] Voice 16: Always very pleased to be able to support

[0:08:22] Voice 16: the amazing endeavors of Violence Trust Conservancy

[0:08:24] Voice 16: I'm the Planning Services Admin Assistant at Islands Trust, and as ever, I'm humbled and grateful to be joining you from the beautiful territory and home of the Lekwungen-speaking peoples, where the Kamas is in bloom and their stewardship is so evident. Thank you.

[0:08:42] Voice 8: Thank you, Rob. Rob is here supporting us and also training Caroline on running the meetings. And we have Carly Bilney, who is our minute taker today.

[0:08:56] Voice 19: Hi, I'm Carly, and it's so great to be here. I'm really excited to be part of the meeting.

[0:09:01] Voice 19: I'll be taking minutes. I've been with the Islands Trust since about 2020,

[0:09:05] Voice 19: and I'm working from home, which is in the Coast Salish Territory in Lankford on Vancouver Island.

[0:09:11] I think

[0:09:14] Voice 8: that's it. Chair, go roll.

[0:09:17] Voice 5: Good morning, everyone. Fantastic. Good morning, everyone. A little housekeeping first today,

[0:09:22] Voice 5: before we move into the meeting. I have lunch scheduled for about 11.55 today, or noon,

[0:09:29] Voice 5: and then we have a break scheduled in the afternoon. All right. I also want to remind

[0:09:36] Voice 5: everyone that this is an inclusive and safe workspace for all participants, and that work

[0:09:41] Voice 5: is led with intention and attention and all the good things I've seen from the ITC board in the

[0:09:49] Voice 5: the past. Good job, guys. Let's move on to item number three, which is the approval of the agenda.

[0:09:56] Voice 5: Has everyone had a chance to look over the agenda today? Are there any additions? Seeing none,

[0:10:10] Voice 5: are there any hands up? Nope, seeing none, then we can approve the agenda as presented by general

[0:10:17] Voice 5: consent. And we should move on to item number four, which is the RISEN report, which I shall

[0:10:27] Voice 5: readout at march 17th 2026 islands trust conservancy board meeting the islands trust

[0:10:34] Voice 5: conservancy board has signed a trail license agreement with the capital regional district

[0:10:39] Voice 5: allowing the capital regional district to build and maintain a small section of a public trail

[0:10:47] Voice 5: within the conservancy's medicine beach nature reserve north on north pender island along canal

[0:10:54] Voice 5: Mall Road as part of their active transportation trail system. Thank you. And now we should move

[0:11:02] Voice 5: on to item five, 5.1, draft minutes, draft, yeah, the minutes from the last meeting on March 17th.

[0:11:13] Voice 5: Has the board had a chance to read over the minutes? Are there any additions or amendments

[0:11:20] Voice 5: to it. We're looking for accuracy. Any comments from the board? Trustee Elliott.

[0:11:30] Voice 6: Hi, thank you, Chair. I just had a little question on page two of the minutes, page four of our

[0:11:37] Voice 6: agenda. So this is a discussion on the follow-up action list. And so we've got a discussion on AI

[0:11:47] Voice 6: and then emotion and then investment fund options this is this just seems sort of out of

[0:11:57] Voice 6: um a context i guess i guess it was referring to a fuel item uh but without

[0:12:10] Voice 6: yeah it leaves me wondering like where the discussion came from and what it's actually

[0:12:14] Voice 6: referencing oh you mean the whole section itself like all the bullets no just section um investment

[0:12:22] Voice 6: of fund options ethical requirements governing the investments of itc funds these ethical funds

[0:12:28] Voice 6: also have high yield options i guess it was just discussion on a fuel item oh

[0:12:41] Voice 5: sorry i was looking

[0:12:42] Voice 5: down i

[0:12:43] Voice 8: understand i understand i'm sorry if i may yep please i hear what you're saying um

[0:12:50] Voice 8: Yeah, that is out of place. I'm just noticing it. Thank you, Trustee Elliott. I'm not sure how that got put in there. So that should be actually a part of the discussion ensued.

[0:13:09] Voice 8: so it's what's odd about it is that the motion after the first discussion yeah should be indented

[0:13:16] Voice 8: so that you can see

[0:13:18] Voice 8: it's part of the first discussion and then the second discussion

[0:13:22] Voice 8: for the fuel was investment of fund options so it's it's confusing it's in the right place it's

[0:13:28] Voice 8: just that that motion seems out of place okay

[0:13:32] Voice 6: yeah because it looks like like the motion normally

[0:13:34] Voice 6: concludes the discussion and then yes then yeah but thank you yeah i

[0:13:40] Voice 8: think what would make more

[0:13:41] Voice 8: sense is to move that motion to the to the end of the fuel discussion and

[0:13:49] Voice 6: just investment of funds

[0:13:50] Voice 6: options that discussion if i recall is probably about the um the donation and what it would be

[0:13:58] Voice 6: be invested in um or is it was it a general discussion of funds and sort of the strategy that

[0:14:06] Voice 6: we've asked staff to develop and

[0:14:10] Voice 8: this discussion was based on the the bigger picture of the funds

[0:14:16] Voice 8: and we are to come back to the board there's a resolution for us to come back to the board

[0:14:21] Voice 8: to um to provide that's a previous resolution to provide information on the different funds

[0:14:28] Voice 8: through the Ministry of Finance Authority, the MFA.

[0:14:33] Voice 6: Okay, and it's just, to me, it's just unclear when I read,

[0:14:36] Voice 6: like for the future, if I read this, investments of funds,

[0:14:39] Voice 6: which funds, you know, it's just unclear what it's referring to.

[0:14:43] Voice 6: So I don't know if there needs to be some clarity.

[0:14:45] Voice 6: Is anybody else having trouble with this or it's just me?

[0:14:49] Voice 6: Sorry.

[0:14:50] Voice 7: I'll just leave it.

[0:14:52] Voice 20: I

[0:14:52] Voice 7: noted that too.

[0:14:53] Voice 7: Thanks, Trustee Elliott.

[0:14:57] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:14:58] Voice 5: Do you, Manager Sherrill, are the amendments that need to be made clear?

[0:15:04] Voice 5: Not exactly.

[0:15:05] Voice 5: Right.

[0:15:06] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:15:07] Voice 5: We're going to indent the motion or are we going to move it to the bottom of the paragraph?

[0:15:15] Voice 8: It works either way for me.

[0:15:17] Voice 8: I'm happy to indent it or move it to the end.

[0:15:21] Voice 8: If it does follow the fuel item discussed, it might make more sense to stay where it is in place but be indented so it's clearer.

[0:15:29] Voice 8: and then if there is a way that i could clarify the second bullet discussion um i'm happy to do so

[0:15:40] Voice 5: was it yeah i'm trying to recall was it a very targeted conversation we had or were they more

[0:15:44] Voice 5: of the funds in general for the future there

[0:15:49] Voice 8: were questions around um go ahead i'm sorry

[0:15:53] Voice 8: yeah jesse smith go ahead had

[0:16:01] Voice 3: to unmute did i unmute yes i did sorry i'll just make a suggestion

[0:16:05] Voice 3: It says follow-up action list, it says discussion ensued on, and the first was use of artificial intelligence.

[0:16:12] Voice 3: Completely different discussion was on the investment of funds.

[0:16:18] Voice 3: So I really think there should be, after discussion ensued on, first year of artificial intelligence,

[0:16:24] Voice 3: and then the motion on that, and then you might say discussion ensued on the investment of funds.

[0:16:33] Voice 3: should i mean has nothing to do yeah is

[0:16:35] Voice 6: that what you meant yeah yeah i agree with that but

[0:16:38] Voice 6: investment of funds options is just so brief i don't know what it's referring to is it

[0:16:44] Voice 6: conservancy funds broadly is it how are those funds i don't know i'm just

[0:16:54] Voice 5: i don't know what it means yeah i i totally see your point um any advice from staff

[0:17:00] Voice 5: My

[0:17:03] Voice 8: understanding is that the conversation was around the ethical requirements governing the investments of ITC funds, and that the ethical funds should also have high yield options. That was the discussion regarding the funds. So I could add investment of Islands Trust Conservancy, all of Islands Trust Conservancy funds, and would that help clarify?

[0:17:27] Voice 8: I

[0:17:29] Voice 6: think that would help, because we have a number of different funds. And yeah,

[0:17:35] Voice 5: absolutely. Thank you.

[0:17:37] Voice 5: How does that sound? So we're going to indent the motion, and then tie up the wording around the first bullet in that section for clarity.

[0:17:50] Voice 5: Yes. Thank you. Thank you for that.

[0:17:54] Voice 5: Trustee Nankum. Advice Chair Nankum.

[0:17:57] Voice 12: thank you yeah i just want to thank trustee elliott for for raising that as well because

[0:18:01] Voice 12: i think in the moment we uh had a good understanding of what we were discussing but

[0:18:05] Voice 12: it's helpful for later on if if uh folks or or uh community members want to look at minutes

[0:18:11] Voice 12: and then there's no um context around what we're discussing so that's that's helpful

[0:18:18] Voice 5: absolutely thank you all right then i'll be looking for a motion to unless there's

[0:18:23] Voice 5: Is there any more comments on the minutes?

[0:18:25] Voice 5: I'll take a moment to pause.

[0:18:29] Voice 5: Any other comments?

[0:18:32] Voice 5: Then I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes as amended.

[0:18:41] Voice 5: Trustee Yates.

[0:18:44] Voice 20: Thank you, Chair Govro.

[0:18:45] Voice 20: I move that the Islands Trust Conservancy Board adopt the draft minutes of March 17,

[0:18:54] Voice 20: 2026 as amended.

[0:18:57] Voice 20: Thank you.

[0:18:58] Voice 20: looking for a seconder?

[0:19:06] Voice 6: Sorry, I'm holding up my fingers, but I guess that doesn't work. I'll

[0:19:08] Voice 6: second.

[0:19:09] Voice 5: Thank you. Thank you. All right. We have a seconder in motion. Then I shall call the question

[0:19:14] Voice 5: all in favor. Excellent. Thank you. And motion carried. Moving on to item number six,

[0:19:27] Voice 5: follow-up action list. Over to you, Manager Tyrrell.

[0:19:35] Voice 8: We are presenting the follow-up action

[0:19:38] Voice 8: list um to the board and happy to answer any questions you might have on these items thank you

[0:19:46] Voice 5: thank you any questions from the board trustee smith okay

[0:19:56] Voice 3: i just have a few questions the first

[0:19:57] Voice 3: is number four uh staff to cooperate with sarlat first nations blah blah blah um and then at the

[0:20:05] Voice 3: end it says director fraser meets with wasonic leadership um but at the beginning it says an

[0:20:12] Voice 3: an agreement for ITC board consideration was to be developed.

[0:20:16] Voice 3: Is that now off the table?

[0:20:18] Voice 3: Because we have Director Frater is meeting with Sonica and with Sonic

[0:20:24] Voice 3: leadership, but we don't have any like agreement.

[0:20:32] Voice 3: I'm just curious the way this is written with the update on a meeting that

[0:20:37] Voice 3: are we still going to have a,

[0:20:38] Voice 3: a agreement to be considered by the board?

[0:20:44] Voice 3: conrad from staff absolutely

[0:20:46] Voice 8: um yes so as part of the five-year plan the the goal is to meet with

[0:20:52] Voice 8: nations and nations that are working together such as the ho sanich leadership council nations

[0:21:02] Voice 8: it's a it's a it's a process in some situations and in this situation i think the process has been

[0:21:08] Voice 8: is unfolding where Director Frater and others have been meeting with the nations and having

[0:21:15] Voice 8: discussions and we're working towards having a more specific meeting with these nations.

[0:21:25] Voice 8: Sometimes we'll meet as a working group where multiple staff are meeting with the nations and

[0:21:31] Voice 8: we discuss all of the different things that we have. And right now we're in the part of the

[0:21:36] Voice 8: the process where we haven't um chief and council hasn't invited the conservancy into the conversation

[0:21:44] Voice 8: but it is being discussed okay

[0:21:48] Voice 3: thanks for that i have a few other questions on this should i

[0:21:51] Voice 3: continue um chair or should i just wait for my other questions go ahead please okay so the next

[0:21:59] Voice 3: one is um it says number one follow oh wait that's the follow-up yeah i am in the follow-up action

[0:22:06] Voice 3: and the numbers are

[0:22:07] Voice 3: what page uh yeah it says it's on page 14 it's funny that it's number one

[0:22:17] Voice 3: because before that is number five i'm not sure i understand that but anyways i'll comment on the

[0:22:23] Voice 3: point um not on the numbering um it says staff will invest a million dollars of the opportunity

[0:22:30] Voice 3: fund no new update but then you say we need ministerial approval so are these funds invested

[0:22:36] Voice 3: as we don't have ministerial approval yet?

[0:22:42] Voice 7: It

[0:22:43] Voice 3: says staff invest $1 million of the opportunity fund

[0:22:46] Voice 3: in a high-yield fund.

[0:22:48] Voice 3: But then you go on to say that we need the minister's approval

[0:22:51] Voice 3: to do that.

[0:22:52] Voice 3: So I'm just curious if we have already invested those funds

[0:22:56] Voice 3: or received ministerial approval or, you know.

[0:23:00] Voice 8: Yes, thank you.

[0:23:01] Voice 8: That is a confusing point.

[0:23:03] Voice 8: At our last meeting, our understanding was that we would

[0:23:07] Voice 8: require ministerial approval which we do however it was no we were notified that that would be

[0:23:14] Voice 8: moving forward at this point so we had already placed the million dollars of the anonymous

[0:23:22] Voice 8: donation into the high yield investment so it is currently in that and moving forward for any

[0:23:29] Voice 8: Any change in investments, specifically moving to another investment company or combining investments or anything that we do in the future, goes to the minister for approval.

[0:23:41] Voice 8: However, we can reallocate funds.

[0:23:44] Voice 8: We just need to notify the minister in those cases.

[0:23:48] Voice 8: So only when it comes to investment of funds do we need to go to the minister prior to.

[0:23:54] Voice 8: Otherwise, it's just notification.

[0:23:58] Voice 8: Thank

[0:23:59] Voice 5: you for that.

[0:23:59] Voice 5: Any follow-up, Dorothy Smith?

[0:24:01] Voice 5: Nope, that's great. Thanks a lot.

[0:24:03] Voice 5: Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from the board on the follow-up action notes?

[0:24:12] Voice 5: Seeing none, then we shall move into business. I have number seven. In particular, we'll move into 7.1.1, which is the referral form from North Pender on their draft bylaw 242. And turn this over to Team Lead Green.

[0:24:37] Voice 18: Thank you, Chair Govro.

[0:24:40] Voice 18: So this referral is regarding a rezoning application for a portion of a property immediately south of the Lisa Bale Nature Reserve on North Pender.

[0:24:51] Voice 18: The subject area has been designated as industrial in the official community plan for many years.

[0:24:58] Voice 18: However, the zoning has not been updated to match this designation.

[0:25:02] Voice 18: and an industrial works yard has been operating on the site since 2011 under temporary use permits.

[0:25:10] Voice 18: And although the rezoning will not increase the area of land that's currently being used for industrial purposes,

[0:25:17] Voice 18: additional buildings may be placed on the land and industrial uses of this area may intensify in the future.

[0:25:25] Voice 18: Certain concerns typically associated with industrial use are not anticipated to impact the Nature Reserve

[0:25:32] Voice 18: and other nearby protected areas because the activities are located hundreds of meters down

[0:25:37] Voice 18: slope. However, there are some concerns associated with the industrial activities, such as noise and

[0:25:44] Voice 18: vibrations, and these are expected to impact wildlife activity and habitat quality to some

[0:25:50] Voice 18: degree, both in the Lisa Bale Nature Reserve and in other permanent protected areas in the vicinity,

[0:25:57] Voice 18: community, including five ITC covenants and Pender Island Conservancy's new Vulture Ridge

[0:26:04] Voice 18: Nature Reserve and Forest Wetland Nature Reserve.

[0:26:07] Voice 18: And these are shown in the map in figure two of the report.

[0:26:18] Voice 18: Thank you.

[0:26:21] Voice 18: So, though ITC has not yet conducted its own species at risk inventories, a number of species

[0:26:28] Voice 18: at risk have been confirmed on adjacent properties, namely by Pender Island Conservancy

[0:26:34] Voice 18: Association and their colleagues. And these same species can be expected to occur in ITC's protected

[0:26:41] Voice 18: areas. Because of the environmental sensitivity of the area, the North Pender Local Trust Committee

[0:26:48] Voice 18: required the proponent to obtain an environmental impact assessment as part of the referral

[0:26:55] Voice 18: application. However, the EIA did not conduct an in-depth analysis to measure noise and vibration,

[0:27:03] Voice 18: exploration which in turn may deter species from using the area or negatively impact nesting success

[0:27:10] Voice 18: of bird species that do attempt to nest in the area etc. Regarding the EIA staff are also left

[0:27:18] Voice 18: with questions about how invasive species are to be managed that might get introduced with the

[0:27:24] Voice 18: industrial activities or how fire risk will be mitigated and we also had some questions about

[0:27:31] Voice 18: about whether the newest ecological community information and species at risk data was even

[0:27:36] Voice 18: considered and the preparation of the EIA. So in the end, we found that we did not have enough

[0:27:43] Voice 18: information to confidently advise the board that species at risk and other wildlife known or

[0:27:48] Voice 18: expected to occur in ITC's own Lisa Bale Nature Reserve and the proposed Doris McCarty NAPTEP

[0:27:56] Voice 18: covenant on the adjacent property won't be negatively impacted by the proposed industrial

[0:28:01] Voice 18: rezoning on the subject property. So consequently, we've recommended that the ITC board

[0:28:10] Voice 18: respond to the referral that our impact, our interests will be impacted and approval of the

[0:28:20] Voice 18: the rezoning is not recommended. We also recommend that if the rezoning is approved, that the ITC

[0:28:30] Voice 18: board encourage the placement of Covenant further up in environmentally sensitive areas on the

[0:28:38] Voice 18: subject property as a sort of compensation. So that's the gist of it. Please let me know if you

[0:28:45] Voice 18: you have any questions thank

[0:28:47] Voice 5: you very much um i saw trustee smith's hand up earlier did you have a

[0:28:52] Voice 5: yeah

[0:28:53] Voice 3: i i i did have one uh one comment and one small error i so enjoyed reading this report i

[0:29:00] Voice 3: really have to thank um i guess you're called team lead green and nula as well who wrote this

[0:29:09] Voice 3: it's just so clear, so helpful, so thoughtful, and I enjoyed reading it, and I also have to,

[0:29:20] Voice 3: just because of who I am, had to point out that the climate change section is so much better

[0:29:26] Voice 3: than we used to do in those sections, so thank you so much for this. It was just great. There's

[0:29:33] Voice 3: a tiny error in figure two. I think it says potential proposed Doris McCarty-Nabtec covenant.

[0:29:41] Voice 3: You probably want to put in brackets in there, orange lines or something, because there's no

[0:29:47] Voice 3: identification of what that orange part is.

[0:29:49] Voice 18: Okay. I'm

[0:29:51] Voice 3: sure that's what it is. Yeah. Yes,

[0:29:53] Voice 18: that's exactly what it is. Yeah.

[0:29:54] Voice 3: Thank you so much. I really enjoyed this. Thanks for the feedback.

[0:30:00] Voice 3: And also, I personally would definitely support your recommendations. Thanks.

[0:30:06] Voice 3: Excellent. Thank

[0:30:07] Voice 5: you. Trustee Elliott, go ahead.

[0:30:10] Voice 6: Thank you, Chair. And yes, I concur with Trustee Smith. This is an excellent report, and I do agree with the recommendations.

[0:30:17] Voice 6: I did a little bit of research on sort of the application side of things and the more the activity of the the company itself.

[0:30:33] Voice 6: And I noted they have they'd submitted a circularity report for sort of doing an energy audit.

[0:30:41] Voice 6: it and i just wanted to read out what is um encompassed in their their own report they have

[0:30:50] Voice 6: five dump trucks four crew cabs 11 industrial loaders excavators and tractors it owns a range

[0:30:57] Voice 6: of specialty equipment such as mowers compactors rock crushers screening plants pressure washers

[0:31:01] Voice 6: and more and the majority of the fleet is a water source from local wells and ponds for dust

[0:31:10] Voice 6: suppression, compaction, and vehicle equipment washing. There was also a recommendation in the

[0:31:15] Voice 6: report that had to do with the chemicals used for dust suppression, and there was a recommendation

[0:31:27] Voice 6: to not use a specific, I can't remember what the compound was, but I do have concerns about

[0:31:35] Voice 6: This type of activity continuing and especially with the sort of the part of the report that says historical imagery shows that the industrial use of the area has increased significantly since 2011 under TUPs.

[0:31:51] Voice 6: So what this rezoning proposes is to enshrine, you know, a gradually increasing level of activity in the zoning and allow it to continue, you know, in perpetuity and without really considering what are the impacts.

[0:32:11] Voice 6: And so I do support the staff recommended directions to, you know, not approve it and request that a covenant be placed on the sensitive areas or to recommend that a conservation covenant be placed.

[0:32:31] Voice 6: It's just, you know, it's sort of giving forgiveness after the fact if activities like this are encoded in the zoning bylaw.

[0:32:43] Voice 6: So, yeah, I have concerns about the activity itself, but I think just where it's placed in the proximity to all the sensitive ecosystems and the protected areas is just not an appropriate activity for this particular piece of land.

[0:32:59] Voice 6: thank you thank you thank you

[0:33:02] Voice 20: trustee yates thank you um and thank you everyone for your

[0:33:08] Voice 20: really good comments i certainly agree with them and i definitely agree with the staff

[0:33:14] Voice 20: recommendations particularly the first one because the second one is oh well if it is approved then

[0:33:20] Voice 20: we need to do this which we do um if i were uh doris mccarty and having gone through all of the

[0:33:28] Voice 20: all of the work and costs of of placing that knap tap covenant i would be so unhappy about

[0:33:36] Voice 20: legitimizing this um i actually know the area when i was last on north pender about a year ago

[0:33:42] Voice 20: i went by there not knowing about this and i and i know that this has been operating for a long time

[0:33:50] Voice 20: it's like wow how could they not have even noticed that um the adjacent properties

[0:33:57] Voice 20: all of those properties were put there in protection to protect critical habitat for species at risk.

[0:34:08] Voice 20: And how is the North Pender Local Trust Committee not wanting to move this operation to a more appropriate site?

[0:34:18] Voice 20: Clearly, the community needs these activities. I don't dispute that.

[0:34:21] Voice 20: But there is surely a better place to, as Trustee Elliott has pointed out, to enshrine them.

[0:34:29] Voice 20: So I was, and thank you, staff, for this amazing report.

[0:34:36] Voice 20: I thought you were very gracious in this report, as well as very detailed.

[0:34:43] Voice 20: Gracious in the sense that this is kind of, to me,

[0:34:48] Voice 20: this just seems like an outrageous thing that you would want to legitimize in this particular area

[0:34:54] Voice 20: with these three adjacent protected properties. And one of the things that I really was upset

[0:35:02] Voice 20: about is that the environmental assessment report was talking about, you know, the activities not

[0:35:11] Voice 20: not expected to result in further environmental impacts over existing conditions, but we know

[0:35:20] Voice 20: that there will be way more activity if this is legitimized, and how could it not have some very

[0:35:28] Voice 20: negative effects on the nearby ecosystems? So that's a real concern of mine, and I'm just going,

[0:35:37] Voice 20: sorry, it's a bit disjointed here, but I'm going through all the notes that I made

[0:35:41] Voice 20: from the staff report and from the excellent letter from pender islands conservancy

[0:35:47] Voice 20: um so i if i received this letter from pender islands conservancy if i were the local trust

[0:36:00] Voice 20: committee i would be paying such close attention to what they're asking for and to what they're

[0:36:06] Voice 20: are suggesting as a solution, which is to move it to a different area. I understand that there

[0:36:17] Voice 20: could be more staff time needed from Islands Trust Conservancy. And I'm fine with that,

[0:36:27] Voice 20: because that's the work that we need to do. If we need to talk to the donors of the Lisa Bale

[0:36:32] Voice 20: nature reserve if we need to talk more with penderala conservancy um that's great anything

[0:36:40] Voice 20: that we can do to try to get this activity moved to a different place is would be a good thing so

[0:36:50] Voice 20: to make a long story short i definitely support recommendation number one thank you thank you

[0:36:58] Voice 5: you very much. My own comments as well. I've read a lot of the correspondence on the North

[0:37:04] Voice 5: Pender website. I think I stopped reading after 25 and there must have been at least

[0:37:10] Voice 5: maybe I would say probably about 80 letters written from the community and many of them

[0:37:14] Voice 5: citing about finding a new location for the site. So that is definitely an effort that's

[0:37:20] Voice 5: happening on the island. But for now for us, we're in favor of these recommendations as

[0:37:26] Voice 5: well i understand it's probably a really tough place to be for staff the way that report like

[0:37:31] Voice 5: this um but it's it's what we do this is good management thank you um yeah i'll be in support

[0:37:38] Voice 5: of the recommendations are there any more comments from the board i see some recommendations there

[0:37:50] Voice 5: trustee yates yeah

[0:37:53] Voice 20: i guess if this wasn't clear i don't think i've ever seen an application for

[0:37:58] Voice 20: a rezoning, even though the activity has been there since 2011. I don't think I've ever seen

[0:38:03] Voice 20: an application for a rezoning for industrial activity that is going to increase so close to

[0:38:10] Voice 20: three protected areas. So that alone just made my eyes pop when I started to read and when I

[0:38:17] Voice 20: looked at the map. Thank you. Justy

[0:38:21] Voice 6: Elliott. Yeah, I'd be happy to move the motion. But I just want

[0:38:27] Voice 6: I want to ask the board to keep this case study in mind as we consider the topics for discussion at our ITCEC meeting, because this one piece of work reveals some real gaps in how our agencies across the trust area are working together.

[0:38:51] Voice 6: The fact that the Conservancy has, you know, as much as planning staff, I know, draw on the Conservancy's work, it's not informing enough of the local trust committee's work under consideration.

[0:39:07] Voice 6: So there is some, I just see this widening gap between what the conservancy can provide. And anyway, I don't want to go on to it, but this is an example of how the different arms of the trust counts of Islands Trust are not working together to actually protect biology and ecological areas in planning.

[0:39:31] Voice 6: planning. And the fact that this is coming so late to us is or late in the process is a real

[0:39:38] Voice 6: problem that this is a systemic issue that we really need to look at. So I would be happy to

[0:39:43] Voice 6: move the motion, but I see other hands going up.

[0:39:46] Voice 5: Thank you. I'm going to go to Manager Tyrell first

[0:39:49] Voice 5: and then Trustee Yates.

[0:39:52] Voice 8: Thank you, Chair Gavreau. I just wanted to add that the the Conservancy

[0:39:58] Voice 8: team and the planning team have worked fairly closely and transparently on this. So we have

[0:40:06] Voice 8: been in conversation with the planning team directly on our concerns and we've been working

[0:40:12] Voice 8: really well together. So I just wanted to add that, that that communication has been really

[0:40:18] Voice 8: good and clear and that they have taken our recommendations and concerns to the author of

[0:40:26] Voice 8: of the report and we'll be presenting the LTC

[0:40:29] Voice 8: with updated environmental impact assessment addendum

[0:40:33] Voice 8: or somehow, yeah, thank you.

[0:40:36] Voice 20: Thank you, thank you for that.

[0:40:38] Voice 20: Trustee Yates.

[0:40:39] Voice 20: Yes, thank you for that Manager Tirrell,

[0:40:42] Voice 20: that's encouraging.

[0:40:43] Voice 20: And just to add to the business of how we support each other

[0:40:48] Voice 20: in our different agencies and departments,

[0:40:51] Voice 20: this is just one more good reason

[0:40:53] Voice 20: why we really need a biologist on staff um not not just for the conservancy but of course for

[0:41:01] Voice 20: planning staff at council too thank you thank

[0:41:05] Voice 5: you all right then i would entertain a motion

[0:41:10] Voice 5: thank

[0:41:14] Voice 6: you i move that the islands trust conservancy board request staff to notify the

[0:41:19] Voice 6: north pender island local trust committee that approval of proposed bylaw number 242

[0:41:25] Voice 6: is not recommended for the reason that there is insufficient information to confirm

[0:41:31] Voice 6: that rezoning a portion of the subject property to industrial use will not negatively impact

[0:41:38] Voice 6: wildlife in adjacent protected areas, including ITC's Lisa Bale Nature Reserve and the proposed

[0:41:44] Voice 6: Doris McCarty Naptip Covenant. I

[0:41:53] Voice 5: see something in the chat from Manager Turrell.

[0:42:02] Voice 5: Does that have anything to do with this motion?

[0:42:04] Voice 11: No.

[0:42:05] Voice 5: Nope.

[0:42:06] Voice 5: Well, thank you.

[0:42:06] Voice 5: Sorry.

[0:42:07] Voice 5: My apologies.

[0:42:07] Voice 5: I will be looking for a seconder, please.

[0:42:12] Voice 5: Second by Trustee Yates.

[0:42:15] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:42:15] Voice 5: Then I shall call the vote.

[0:42:18] Voice 5: All in favor?

[0:42:21] Voice 5: That is carried.

[0:42:22] Voice 5: Unanimous.

[0:42:22] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:42:24] Voice 5: And we have a second motion.

[0:42:33] Voice 20: Trustee Yates?

[0:42:36] Voice 20: I think of this as the backup motion and hope that we don't need to use it.

[0:42:40] Voice 20: But here goes.

[0:42:41] Voice 20: I move that the islands trust conservancy board request staff to notify the

[0:42:45] Voice 20: North Pender Island local trust committee that if draft bylaw number 242 is

[0:42:51] Voice 20: approved, it is recommended that a concert.

[0:42:54] Voice 20: Looks

[0:43:00] Voice 5: like the email or the wifi is glitched on. Oh,

[0:43:05] Voice 5: did we lose trustee Yates?

[0:43:08] Voice 20: I'm here, but my, my connection's unstable.

[0:43:12] Voice 20: I might need to turn my camera off.

[0:43:14] Voice 20: Okay. We only got about half the motion from you.

[0:43:17] Voice 20: Yeah. Let's try again. And I'll turn my camera off.

[0:43:22] Voice 20: Thank you.

[0:43:24] Voice 20: I move that the Islands Trust Conservancy Board request staff to notify the North Pender Island Local Trust Committee that if draft bylaw number 242 is approved,

[0:43:34] Voice 20: it is recommended that a conservation covenant be placed on the ecologically significant portion of the property upslope of the area proposed for rezoning.

[0:43:46] Voice 20: Thank

[0:43:46] Voice 5: you. Looking for a seconder.

[0:43:50] Voice 5: Trustee Elliott, thank you.

[0:43:52] Voice 5: I shall call the vote.

[0:43:53] Voice 5: All in favor?

[0:43:57] Voice 5: Excellent.

[0:43:58] Voice 5: That carries.

[0:43:59] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:44:01] Voice 5: Thank you very much.

[0:44:03] Voice 5: Moving on to item 7.1.2, Management Plan for Manzanita Ridge.

[0:44:09] Voice 5: And that is over.

[0:44:11] Voice 5: Back to you.

[0:44:14] Voice 18: Thank you.

[0:44:15] Voice 18: Thank you, Chair.

[0:44:16] Voice 18: So this item is regarding the submission of an updated management plan for Manzanita Ridge Nature Reserve on Salt Spring Island.

[0:44:24] Voice 18: The landholder, Salt Spring Island Conservancy, is required to update the management plan every 10 years

[0:44:30] Voice 18: and submit the proposed management plan to the covenant holders for approval of consistency with the covenant agreement.

[0:44:37] Voice 18: And the covenant holders are Islands Trust Conservancy and the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee.

[0:44:43] Voice 18: Staff have reviewed the management plan and identified a number of proposed activities

[0:44:47] Voice 18: which have not been approved in previous management plans or in other ITC protected areas

[0:44:54] Voice 18: and which technically violate the covenant terms.

[0:44:58] Voice 18: And these are summarized in the table in the report.

[0:45:02] Voice 18: These management activities include the return of Indigenous hunting and cultural burning to the land

[0:45:10] Voice 18: and the introduction of ladder fuel reduction and ecological thinning for wildfire risk mitigation.

[0:45:17] Voice 18: And while the proposed activities are still not commonplace in protected area management, including in ITC's protected areas, they are widely becoming recognized as important components of reconciliation and the movement towards co-management and also adaptation and mitigation in the face of climate change.

[0:45:37] Voice 18: change. Unfortunately, the management plan does not provide sufficient detail for the covenant

[0:45:43] Voice 18: holders to understand what exactly these activities will entail. Therefore, the recommendation is that

[0:45:50] Voice 18: the ITC board approve the management plan on the condition that Salt Spring Island Conservancy seek

[0:45:55] Voice 18: permission for specific work plans as they're developed under their proposed long-term restoration

[0:46:01] Voice 18: restoration pathways.

[0:46:05] Voice 5: Thank you. Open it to the board. Any questions or comments?

[0:46:11] Voice 20: Trustee Yates. I just want to thank staff for once again, a really excellent report

[0:46:17] Voice 20: and recommendations. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. Trustee

[0:46:23] Voice 3: Smith. Yes, thanks. I would echo that as

[0:46:25] Voice 3: well. Oh, can you hear me? Yes,

[0:46:28] Voice 7: we can. Yeah.

[0:46:29] Voice 3: Okay. I want to just make a comment. It's in,

[0:46:33] Voice 3: It's on page 45 of our package.

[0:46:38] Voice 3: And they have – no, sorry, that's not what I wanted to – sorry.

[0:46:44] Voice 3: I'm sorry, it's not there.

[0:46:45] Voice 3: It's somewhere else.

[0:46:46] Voice 3: Ah, here.

[0:46:46] Voice 3: It's on page 47.

[0:46:48] Voice 3: Sorry.

[0:46:51] Voice 3: It says, number two, the ITC board provide the following comments.

[0:46:55] Voice 3: And it does say that the ITC board encourages Salt Spring Island Conservancy

[0:47:01] Voice 3: to request BC Hydro to manage Scotch Broom in their right-of-way.

[0:47:06] Voice 3: And I just want to raise here that leaving

[0:47:10] Voice 3: or even encouraging Scotch Broom under its lines

[0:47:14] Voice 3: is actually a policy of BC Hydro.

[0:47:17] Voice 3: They like it because it's low-growing.

[0:47:20] Voice 3: And although I agree with this recommendation,

[0:47:24] Voice 3: I think it would be useful for ITC staff to engage with BC Hydro

[0:47:30] Voice 3: with a wider discussion on the impacts of their encouragement of scotch broom

[0:47:37] Voice 3: under their hydro lines impact on invasive species in general

[0:47:42] Voice 3: and on our protected areas.

[0:47:44] Voice 3: Because we can ask them not to do that for this one,

[0:47:50] Voice 3: but it's kind of their policy.

[0:47:52] Voice 3: So it would be useful to open up that discussion if it's possible.

[0:47:57] Voice 3: I realize our staff is limited and et cetera,

[0:48:00] Voice 3: But sometimes rather than specific, you know, it's a bigger issue with BC Hydro.

[0:48:06] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:48:08] Voice 5: Yeah, that policy came up at an LTC meeting on Galliano as well.

[0:48:11] Voice 5: I was surprised.

[0:48:13] Voice 5: Trustee Elliott.

[0:48:19] Voice 6: Thanks.

[0:48:21] Voice 6: Also concur.

[0:48:22] Voice 6: I really enjoyed this report.

[0:48:24] Voice 6: Um, so the, are there any other nature reserves or concert conserved areas that staff are aware of, whether they're held by ITC or some of our partners and you've learned of it through our, through our connections that have or include indigenous hunting and ecological thinning and ladder fuel reduction for wildlife risk mitigation as part of their management plan?

[0:48:52] Voice 6: Is this sort of a first, and that's why we're recommending sort of covenant holder approval?

[0:49:02] Voice 6: Would this sort of set a precedent?

[0:49:07] Voice 18: Yes.

[0:49:07] Voice 18: To my knowledge, there is no management plan on any of the nature reserves on which we hold covenants, or any of our own nature reserves, where these activities are described in the management plan.

[0:49:24] Voice 18: So this would be setting a precedent in the nature reserves and covenants

[0:49:31] Voice 18: that ITC is involved with.

[0:49:35] Voice 5: Any follow-up, Trustee Elliott?

[0:49:43] Voice 5: Whenever should we want Trustee Smith?

[0:49:45] Voice 3: Yes, the Galliano Conservancy and its management plan for Quadra Hill,

[0:49:50] Voice 3: one of our new properties, has these two points as well.

[0:49:54] Voice 3: Indigenous hunting and also the possibility of prescribed burns and thinning.

[0:50:01] Voice 3: so just so that you know that and also we're considering that in other management plans as

[0:50:08] Voice 3: they're revised there's some properties we don't have management plans for yet but that'll be in

[0:50:13] Voice 3: there as well so just thought i'd raise it uh i realize it might not be in itc plans but it is in

[0:50:20] Voice 3: plans management plans for conservation properties in the islands trust area particularly in galliano

[0:50:27] Voice 3: but I suspect elsewhere as well.

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

[0:50:31] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:50:31] Voice 5: Thank you for those comments.

[0:50:32] Voice 5: Manager Tirrell.

[0:50:34] Voice 8: Hi, thank you.

[0:50:35] Voice 8: I was going to also make mention

[0:50:38] Voice 8: that outside of the island stress area,

[0:50:41] Voice 8: and even within, there are other organizations.

[0:50:45] Voice 8: The Gary Oak Reserve up north

[0:50:48] Voice 8: does practice cultural burning.

[0:50:51] Voice 8: And I believe there are harvesting also,

[0:50:54] Voice 8: Also, nature reserves that allow for harvesting.

[0:50:58] Voice 8: I believe Salt Spring Island Conservancy might have one or two of those.

[0:51:02] Voice 8: So definitely happening.

[0:51:05] Voice 8: Definitely nations are requesting these things.

[0:51:08] Voice 8: And I think that's the important conversation to have is that these are not only innovative.

[0:51:17] Voice 8: They're not even innovative.

[0:51:19] Voice 8: Sorry.

[0:51:19] Voice 8: These are stewardship practices that are necessary in order to mitigate climate change and the lack of frequent fire, etc. So, thank you.

[0:51:32] Voice 5: Thank you. This is very exciting. There's a note in the chat here. The Cowichan Gary Oak Preserve in Duncan. Is that the one, Manager Cheryl?

[0:51:44] Voice 18: That's the one Wendy was referring to.

[0:51:45] Voice 18: They've done

[0:51:46] Voice 18: burning in the past for meadow restoration.

[0:51:52] Voice 5: Oh, fantastic.

[0:51:53] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:51:54] Voice 5: Thank you for that.

[0:51:55] Voice 5: Any more comments from the board?

[0:52:01] Voice 5: Then we have a lengthy motion of recommendation in front of us.

[0:52:06] Voice 5: Would any of the board care to make the motion?

[0:52:08] Voice 5: Trustee Yates, go ahead.

[0:52:11] Voice 20: Thank you.

[0:52:12] Voice 20: Great discussion, too.

[0:52:13] Voice 20: I move that the Islands Trust Conservancy ITC Board approve Salt Spring Island Conservancy's proposed Manzanita Ridge Nature Reserve Land Management Plan dated 30 September 2025 provided that proposed activities, which are inconsistent with the covenant agreement,

[0:52:35] Voice 20: agreement are subject to prior covenant holder approval of specific work plans with approval

[0:52:41] Voice 20: not to be unreasonably withheld.

[0:52:45] Voice 5: Thank you. Do you want to do two motions? Sure. Thank you.

[0:52:52] Voice 5: Looking for a seconder. Vice chair now come. Thank you for seconding and I should call the vote.

[0:53:04] Voice 5: All in favor. And that motion carries. Great. Thank you.

[0:53:12] Voice 20: Do you want me to read the second one?

[0:53:16] Voice 20: Yes, please.

[0:53:16] Voice 20: I move that the ITC Board provide the following comments with their approval of the Manzanita

[0:53:22] Voice 20: Ridge Nature Reserve Land Management Plan dated 30th September 2025.

[0:53:28] Voice 20: A. The ITC Board acknowledges and is supportive of Salt Spring Island Conservancy's intentions

[0:53:35] Voice 20: to engage in meaningful reconciliation work with First Nations.

[0:53:39] Voice 20: b. The ITC Board encourages Salt Spring Island Conservancy to request BC Hydro to manage Scotch Broom in their right-of-way for the protection of the Arbutus hairy manzanita provincially red-listed ecosystem, and

[0:53:55] Voice 20: c. The ITC Board should be notified of any changes to the management plan arising from review of monitoring data in accordance with Section 4.1 of the Covenant Agreement.

[0:54:09] Voice 20: Thank

[0:54:09] Voice 5: you. Looking for a

[0:54:11] Voice 5: seconder. Trustee Elliott, thank you. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I shall call the vote. All in favor? Thank you. Motion carried.

[0:54:35] Voice 5: Excellent. Moving on. We're moving on to, oops, I see some hands up. So, trustee

[0:54:42] Voice 20: Yates, did you have a comment?

[0:54:43] Voice 20: Yes, just a question. I'm just listening to what Trustee Smith mentioned earlier about BC Hydro wanting the Scotch Broom along their rights of way. I actually remember that. And I'd sort of forgotten about it.

[0:54:58] Voice 20: I wonder would it do we need a motion to ask staff to ask BC Hydro generally you know about this

[0:55:07] Voice 20: or would that come out of our would that come out of a B from from the second recommendation

[0:55:14] Voice 20: which is more specific um over to staff you call

[0:55:19] Voice 5: it I think capacity is a is an issue to take on a

[0:55:24] Voice 5: new uh new endeavor manager yes

[0:55:29] Voice 8: i i i fully 100 agree with the standard of uh you know the standard

[0:55:39] Voice 8: of not managing broom um by bc hydro and that that is an issue all over the islands and on the you

[0:55:47] Voice 8: know and on vancouver island as well i have worked with bc hydro personally um on issues such as this

[0:55:53] Voice 8: And there is not a lot of room for change in that. And I think if we are going to consider jumping into that, I think that is quite, yes, that would be a big adventure and not one that I would be against the team, you know, but I think some thought behind that and what exactly we're asking for.

[0:56:16] Voice 8: and it's not just scotch broom there are other invasives that are not managed and so there's

[0:56:20] Voice 8: impact to bc hydro right-of-ways to to protected and to ecologically sensitive lands in general

[0:56:28] Voice 8: they break up corridors they provide habitat that isn't conducive to our local species there's

[0:56:34] Voice 8: there's all kinds of things we could talk about with bc hydro right-of-ways um thank you uh over

[0:56:44] Voice 5: Number two, Jemma?

[0:56:46] Voice 18: It's just further to Manager Tyrrell's points.

[0:56:49] Voice 18: We do have a number of points of potential discussion

[0:56:54] Voice 18: if we ever have an opportunity for a meeting with BC Hydro

[0:56:58] Voice 18: about these general management topics.

[0:57:00] Voice 18: And we can definitely add that to the wish list of agenda items

[0:57:05] Voice 18: if that opportunity arises.

[0:57:09] Voice 20: Excellent.

[0:57:10] Voice 20: Trustee Yates?

[0:57:11] Voice 20: That is a lovely recommendation or possibility.

[0:57:14] Voice 20: Thank you.

[0:57:16] Voice 20: Thank you, Gemma. And I'm hoping that maybe just this one little teensy-weensy nudge in the right direction will be enough at this point. Thank you.

[0:57:27] Voice 20: Thank

[0:57:27] Voice 5: you. All right, we shall move on. Moving on to item 7.1.3, which is the annual report, the draft. Has everyone had a chance to read it over? Any comments from the board? Let me get this off to the printers. Trustee Elliott.

[0:57:44] Voice 5: Thank

[0:57:46] Voice 6: you. Just one comment in the Reconciliation Declaration. Is our Reconciliation Declaration actually say, will strive in the second paragraph? And so we're just quoting that directly? Because I was like, I paused and goes, oh, well, we are striving. Why do we, why will we strive?

[0:58:12] Voice 6: strive we are striving to create opportunities for knowledge sharing um so if this is quoting

[0:58:20] Voice 6: from our regular reconciliation declaration we can't change it but i just think that that could

[0:58:25] Voice 6: be a much more active verb thank you more

[0:58:29] Voice 5: of an active word uh comment from staff on that

[0:58:31] Voice 5: just

[0:58:33] Voice 8: double checking um yes it does say we'll strive to create opportunities so this is on

[0:58:41] Voice 8: on our website, if the board would like to amend the reconciliation declaration, that is of

[0:58:52] Voice 8: discussion, but you may want to review the entire declaration and take that under consideration.

[0:59:00] Voice 5: Good advice. Maybe at a future meeting? Sounds like a little tweak. Sounds like something we

[0:59:06] Voice 5: can put on a future agenda. Any follow-up, Trustee Elliott?

[0:59:14] Voice 6: Not on this. I think this would be more appropriate after we've concluded or as we go through engagement with First Nations on the five-year plan. We sort of will be receiving information about, you know, what's a more appropriate declaration. So not at this point. Thanks.

[0:59:32] Voice 6: Thank you. Thank you. Trustee Smith.

[0:59:34] Voice 3: this yeah there's a couple typos i won't mention them here i'll just send them to

[0:59:39] Voice 3: um manager tyrell uh separately but i do want to make two small comments one is on page 99

[0:59:46] Voice 3: it's under um uh the ruby alton the second last paragraph the conservancy manages an

[0:59:55] Voice 3: endowment fund blah blah blah it says the endowment is a permanent fund established

[0:59:59] Voice 3: Establish to.

[1:00:00] Voice 3: support the ongoing maintenance of the house and management of the ruby alton nature reserve

[1:00:04] Voice 3: and i suggest that we take out maintenance of the house considering our decisions and just say

[1:00:12] Voice 3: ongoing management of the ruby alton nature reserve on south spring island which includes

[1:00:17] Voice 3: a lot of things including even like the demolishing of the house but just to not

[1:00:24] Voice 3: highlight the maintenance of the house here because the board has had so many decisions about

[1:00:29] Voice 3: about demolishing the house so that's one question that's on page 99 should I stop to see if there's

[1:00:36] Voice 3: comments

[1:00:37] Voice 5: on that yeah let's get cover from staff yeah I'm

[1:00:39] Voice 3: sure we can take

[1:00:40] Voice 5: about maintenance of

[1:00:41] Voice 5: house and just put the management uh yeah just trim those words out and so it's just ongoing

[1:00:46] Voice 3: management of the group yeah take out maintenance of the house yeah yeah okay uh manager I

[1:00:53] Voice 11: am

[1:00:56] Voice 8: happy

[1:00:57] Voice 8: happy to take that out, minding the board that we do not have direction for demolition of the house

[1:01:03] Voice 8: at this point. Thank you.

[1:01:07] Voice 3: Thank you. Trustee Smith? On page 99, 91, sorry, this is also small,

[1:01:15] Voice 3: the second last paragraph changes to the ICT board. At the end, it says, and myself as chair,

[1:01:22] Voice 3: And I just suggest after myself, we put in brackets, Lisa Gauvreau, just because I realize that Lisa's writing this, but when you're reading it, you might not know who the chair is.

[1:01:36] Voice 3: So it's just putting in brackets and myself, brackets, Lisa Gauvreau, brackets, as chair.

[1:01:45] Voice 5: I like it.

[1:01:47] Voice 5: Any comments from staff?

[1:01:48] Voice 5: There's nothing there.

[1:01:51] Voice 5: Okay, that sounds good.

[1:01:52] Voice 5: Anything else, Dorothy Smith?

[1:01:55] Voice 11: No, thanks. No.

[1:01:56] Voice 11: Thank

[1:01:56] Voice 5: you. Thank you. Any other comments from the board?

[1:02:03] Voice 5: As amended, this will end up in the actual report.

[1:02:09] Voice 5: All right. And do we have a motion for that?

[1:02:16] Voice 7: Rolling up.

[1:02:26] Voice 5: Fantastic. Yes, we do have a motion.

[1:02:29] Voice 5: All

[1:02:29] Voice 6: right. Tressie Elliott.

[1:02:32] Voice 6: Sorry, just one more little change before we move to a motion.

[1:02:36] Voice 6: It's just got my eye on page 93 after the, in the second, well, one, two, three, fourth

[1:02:49] Voice 6: paragraph.

[1:02:51] Voice 6: So five-year, it starts with a five-year plan logic model.

[1:02:56] Voice 6: So, you know, I understand this is from 2025, but we are currently reviewing policies and

[1:03:04] Voice 6: And is planning to launch a policy renovation project in 26, 27?

[1:03:15] Voice 6: Is it, is, can we just say is launching or will launch?

[1:03:22] Voice 6: I just, there's a lot of like planning to, but we're actually, you know, as of 2025, we haven't, we've been working on that since.

[1:03:38] Voice 6: Manager Carol.

[1:03:40] Voice 8: Absolutely.

[1:03:41] Voice 8: um for the reason this was worded that way is because we're going to take a more strategic

[1:03:47] Voice 8: approach with a with a business maybe not a business case but a project charter that allows

[1:03:53] Voice 8: us to go a little deeper into a bigger renovation but yes we have been doing policy drafting and

[1:04:01] Voice 8: updating since 2025 so i'm happy to remove planning and just mention that um we don't

[1:04:11] Voice 8: even need to have it say launch we can say is in the process of yeah

[1:04:16] Voice 6: um although if we haven't

[1:04:19] Voice 6: approved a charter for it um that has not effectively been launched so i don't think we can

[1:04:26] Voice 6: say that i

[1:04:29] Voice 8: think a project charter is a good idea for this it's it's a quite a large project and

[1:04:34] Voice 8: is requiring a lot of staff resources and time um and also funds for a contractor so i think

[1:04:41] Voice 8: um we could say is launching a policy renovation project i

[1:04:48] Voice 6: would almost say proposes because

[1:04:50] Voice 6: you know if something hasn't been approved by the board and it's still in in the works and it's

[1:04:56] Voice 6: quite a big project um yeah i just be cautious because i thought we were talking about policies

[1:05:04] Voice 6: we've already undertaking but if this is quite a big project then let's make sure it you know

[1:05:11] Voice 6: is supported by board direction before we actually launch something all

[1:05:18] Voice 5: right so you're suggesting a

[1:05:19] Voice 5: rewording uh so like in addition a proposed project charter no

[1:05:29] Voice 6: or well that's too that's too

[1:05:32] Voice 6: um you

[1:05:33] Voice 5: know what i

[1:05:34] Voice 6: think the i think the wording is fine now that you've you've clarified wendy

[1:05:40] Voice 6: what the project is planning to launch is probably the most appropriate because

[1:05:47] Voice 6: because you know we can plan to do something maybe it hasn't been approved yet but that's

[1:05:52] Voice 6: still accurate okay forget all everything that that's

[1:05:56] Voice 5: great thank you for that yeah it's very

[1:05:59] Voice 5: important because this is going to be read by many others and uh trustee smith yeah

[1:06:05] Voice 3: this is just a

[1:06:05] Voice 3: clarification for me because i actually highlighted that too but i didn't say anything about it

[1:06:09] Voice 3: because i i didn't see a resolution but um maybe this would be for trustee elliot i thought in the

[1:06:17] Voice 3: the budget discussion that no new projects were going to be allowed? And would this be a new

[1:06:26] Voice 3: project? Or maybe I'm misunderstanding that decision?

[1:06:32] Voice 6: That is a fair question. And I will

[1:06:35] Voice 6: have to ask Wendy if that conversation has been had with the CAO, because there's been quite a

[1:06:40] Voice 6: lot of discussion as LTCs. So for example, South Pender, which I chair, had not endorsed a project

[1:06:47] Voice 6: charter, then the resolution came from council not to start new projects, but it had been in

[1:06:53] Voice 6: the works for a while. And then the CAO deemed that a new project, so it is not advancing. So

[1:06:59] Voice 6: this is actually quite an important point. Thanks.

[1:07:03] Voice 5: Yeah, thank you for that. It was my impression

[1:07:05] Voice 5: that we started policy revisions under Carolyn Stewart when she was acting manager, I thought.

[1:07:11] Voice 5: But this work was a long time coming, but I could be wrong.

[1:07:15] Voice 5: I hand it over to Manager Tiro.

[1:07:19] Voice 8: I thank you.

[1:07:21] Voice 8: Yes, this is a continuing project that is, in my opinion,

[1:07:28] Voice 8: we're putting more organization and strategy around.

[1:07:31] Voice 8: So there probably should have been a business case

[1:07:35] Voice 8: and project charter written when this first started,

[1:07:38] Voice 8: which would have helped to organize the flow.

[1:07:41] Voice 8: it's really impingent upon our five-year plan process. Policies need to be updated because

[1:07:48] Voice 8: they're old and outdated and we have new policies that the board has given us direction. Those are

[1:07:55] Voice 8: the ones we have been working on recently are the ones we have board direction to update or create.

[1:08:00] Voice 8: And given the scope of the project looking at decolonizing policy,

[1:08:09] Voice 8: It does need to, I think, come back to the board for a broader discretion with a project charter recommendation from staff on how we move forward with updating policy as an organization.

[1:08:25] Voice 8: I have not spoken directly to CAO Brony, but I was not considering this as a new project, just an organization of one that we staff have been given direction to do through the five-year plan and through board resolution.

[1:08:41] Voice 8: Director Frater has joined us in the meeting, and it's possible that she might have more to add to that.

[1:08:50] Voice 4: um certainly it's a it's a good point i think some of this work could certainly be considered

[1:08:55] Voice 4: ongoing but that's something we'll look at as we bring you the charter um and some of it is

[1:08:59] Voice 4: connected to the five-year plan project so as we look at the scope of what comes forward we'll make

[1:09:03] Voice 4: clear what's connected to that work and what could be considered separate and new if any component of

[1:09:08] Voice 4: it could be viewed that way and we'll just make that really transparent for the board and have

[1:09:12] Voice 4: those conversations with the cao um but yes we do and i would note council strategic plan also does

[1:09:18] Voice 4: us have sort of policy updates and those are continuing on the Trust Council side. So I think

[1:09:23] Voice 4: it's reasonable that they also continue on the Conservancy side. Thank you and good morning

[1:09:28] Voice 4: Director Frater. Would you like to introduce yourself? Yeah be pleased to thank you. So I'm

[1:09:33] Voice 4: Claire Frater, Director of Trust Area Services and I'm pleased to be joining this morning from

[1:09:38] Voice 4: the territory of the Wissanage peoples and good morning board.

[1:09:42] Voice 5: Good morning, good morning, good

[1:09:43] Voice 5: Good to see you.

[1:09:44] Voice 4: Thank you.

[1:09:47] Voice 5: Manager Tyrrell.

[1:09:48] Voice 8: Hi.

[1:09:49] Voice 8: We also have Trustee Georgeson has joined us.

[1:09:52] Voice 8: Yay.

[1:09:53] Voice 8: Excellent.

[1:09:54] Voice 5: Good morning, Trustee Georgeson.

[1:09:57] Voice 5: Would you like to introduce yourself?

[1:10:00] Voice 9: Hi.

[1:10:01] Voice 9: I'm Janine Georgeson.

[1:10:03] Voice 9: I am joining you from Galeano Island, where I am appointed trustee for the

[1:10:10] Voice 9: on the Trust Conservancy Board and on the shared, asserted, and unceded territories of

[1:10:18] Voice 9: Penelaket, Sartlip, who are a part of Cowichan, and Sartlip, part of the Senex Nations.

[1:10:25] Voice 5: Thank you. Great to have you here today. We are, we're into Section 7, the business,

[1:10:31] Voice 5: and we're at item 7.1.3 on page, I've lost my page, 85, and we're discussing the annual report.

[1:10:44] Voice 5: The board's made a few comments already. Did you have any comments? Did you get a chance to read

[1:10:47] Voice 5: over our annual report?

[1:10:52] Voice 9: I have no comments at this time. Thank you. Thank

[1:10:54] Voice 5: you. Thank you very much.

[1:10:56] Voice 5: Then we were getting to the point, I believe, if there was no more discussion, I was looking for

[1:11:01] Voice 5: perhaps a mover for the recommendation. Vice Chair Namkum.

[1:11:13] Voice 12: Thank you, Chair Gavro. I'm happy

[1:11:16] Voice 12: to move this motion. I'd like to move the motion that the Islands Trust Conservancy ITC Board

[1:11:23] Voice 12: approve the draft 2025-2026 ITC Annual Report for inclusion in the Islands Trust 2025-2026

[1:11:33] Voice 12: Annual Report for approval by Islands Trust Council at its June 2026 quarterly meeting.

[1:11:39] Voice 12: and submission to the minister of housing and municipal affairs thank

[1:11:43] Voice 5: you uh looking for a

[1:11:45] Voice 5: seconder trustee eight seconds and i shall call the vote

[1:11:52] Voice 6: uh

[1:11:53] Voice 5: there's a one small

[1:11:54] Voice 3: minute yep it

[1:11:57] Voice 3: should say approve the draft and report as amended because we have amendments of course thank you

[1:12:04] Voice 3: thank you as

[1:12:06] Voice 5: amended and that motion was seconded i think that's a friendly amendment i believe i

[1:12:15] Voice 5: would accept it as a friendly amendment amendment um and then i shall call the vote all in favor

[1:12:20] Voice 5: hey uh fantastic that carries unanimous thank you and now we're moving into item 7.2

[1:12:33] Voice 5: items for discussion namely 7.2.1 and we have a briefing here and director marler was going

[1:12:42] Voice 5: going to join us for this and have a briefing on artificial intelligence

[1:12:47] Voice 4: and the balance trust

[1:12:49] Voice 4: i am remiss i was meant to text him in advance i will do so now chair

[1:12:52] Voice 15: i'm here

[1:12:53] Voice 4: perfect ah good

[1:12:55] Voice 5: morning good morning dr muller perhaps you'd like to introduce yourself as well let

[1:13:00] Voice 14: me just get my

[1:13:01] Voice 14: page up here i

[1:13:02] Voice 8: apologize i believe we're on 7.2.1 the tax exemption program briefing prior to

[1:13:10] Voice 8: 7.2.2 is that right that's not

[1:13:13] Voice 5: what it says on my paper but i can definitely do that

[1:13:16] Voice 8: nope i both are here to present i believe well jason was here but he is gone so let's move

[1:13:26] Voice 8: forward with i apologize my agenda says something different okay everybody else's does too is my

[1:13:32] Voice 5: agenda that i made for myself that i mixed up apologies um but we do have dr marler present

[1:13:37] Voice 5: So let's proceed. We're going to move the order. We're going to do 7.2.2, which is the briefing, and then we'll go back to 7.2.1.

[1:13:46] Voice 5: Thank you. Please proceed, Dr. Marler.

[1:13:50] Voice 14: Yeah, thank you. This is just a verbal briefing I don't have written for you.

[1:13:55] Voice 14: I think the question was the use of artificial intelligence at the Islands Trust.

[1:14:01] Voice 14: Trust. And so in the Atlas Trust, we have adopted a management policy that follows on

[1:14:09] Voice 14: the provincial policy. So the provincial policy essentially says that staff can use the use

[1:14:19] Voice 14: of artificial intelligence, but there's some things you have to consider. One of them is

[1:14:26] Voice 14: that you as the author are the owner of that particular product so if you use

[1:14:34] Voice 14: artificial intelligence to generate a response you need to make sure that

[1:14:40] Voice 14: that response is 100% correct so it's up to staff to do that just as if a staff

[1:14:47] Voice 14: person asked an assistant to write a report for them the person signing it

[1:14:54] Voice 14: would want to make sure that everything in that report was correct so that's the

[1:14:59] Voice 14: same principle here the other is the making sure of course that the the tone

[1:15:06] Voice 14: and the form of the response is appropriate for the Alam's Trust so that

[1:15:11] Voice 14: is that it doesn't have any derogatory language in there for example or

[1:15:17] Voice 14: something that could be considered racist so it keeps with the Alam's Trust

[1:15:21] Voice 14: standard for writing reports and letters. The other piece is that the chatbots that are available

[1:15:32] Voice 14: like ChatGPT, they are public. So anything that you put in there essentially becomes public. It's

[1:15:41] Voice 14: not private. It's not only being used for the question that you have. It will actually keep

[1:15:48] Voice 14: that information and learn from it going down the road so you have to be very careful what you enter

[1:15:54] Voice 14: into the chatbot so that's something else that the policy covers saying that you would not put

[1:16:01] Voice 14: something in there for example that is confidential whether that's or something that's been provided

[1:16:07] Voice 14: to you by the public um and under freedom of information and protection of privacy

[1:16:13] Voice 14: privacy was not expected to be put out into the public generally, such as through a chat box.

[1:16:19] Voice 14: So we've kind of provided some examples of the types of things that should not go in there.

[1:16:25] Voice 14: For example, you wouldn't put an entire letter that somebody wrote to you with all the personal

[1:16:31] Voice 14: information in it, but you might want to extract out some of the thoughts that they had that you

[1:16:37] Voice 14: would like to respond to and ask the AI to provide that response. That would be okay.

[1:16:41] Voice 14: But putting in the person's name and address and things like that would not be okay because that could be a potential privacy breach.

[1:16:51] Voice 14: And there's a few other items like that.

[1:16:54] Voice 14: And then generally, the policy just ends with anything that is generated by the AI,

[1:17:04] Voice 14: you have to make sure that you are satisfied with it and that you are

[1:17:10] Voice 14: signing off on your own behalf. In other words, you treat the AI as an

[1:17:15] Voice 14: assistant that you don't really trust. You have to go in there and make sure

[1:17:20] Voice 14: that it's correct. And you may want to go in and actually verify where the AI was

[1:17:25] Voice 14: taking that information from. For example, if you asked it to provide a response in

[1:17:33] Voice 14: in regard to say zoning and it just generated something and it's like yeah okay that looks good

[1:17:38] Voice 14: but you might want to go in and make sure that it's actually picking out the right zoning

[1:17:43] Voice 14: the right bylaw and the right nuance the right actual context to make sure that it's responded

[1:17:50] Voice 14: correctly so the policy covers all of that and like i said puts the onus on the staff

[1:17:57] Voice 14: staff to make sure that they are 100% in agreement and certain that the information that they've

[1:18:07] Voice 14: provided to you is accurate.

[1:18:13] Voice 14: It doesn't address consultants and it only addresses staff that are working directly

[1:18:20] Voice 14: with us.

[1:18:20] Voice 14: That could be staff that we have, there may be a consultant working with us and like in

[1:18:27] Voice 14: our office we have some usual contracted staff to help us with work so it would cover them

[1:18:35] Voice 14: but if it was a consultant that we hired through say bc bid through a request for a decision

[1:18:42] Voice 14: it wouldn't cover them but the request for a decision would and all of the requirements

[1:18:49] Voice 14: in Schedule A, which is their requirements of the contractor to provide

[1:18:56] Voice 14: information to the Allen's Trust. In there it does say that the contractor has to be,

[1:19:02] Voice 14: is responsible for all of the information that they provide. So whether

[1:19:07] Voice 14: they subcontract, whether they have an assistant write it and they just put the

[1:19:12] Voice 14: signature on it, or whether AI writes it and they put the signature on it, it's all

[1:19:16] Voice 14: the same they have to essentially by signing it by submitting it to the island's trust they're

[1:19:23] Voice 14: saying that this is 100 and i'm in 100 agreement with this so i'll stop there and um see if i can

[1:19:33] Voice 14: answer any questions thank you thank

[1:19:39] Voice 5: you um they are on the edit yes thank you trustee

[1:19:45] Voice 6: elliott go

[1:19:51] Voice 6: and so I'm happy to see this information brought to this board.

[1:19:57] Voice 6: So your last point about contractors is actually the one that gives me the greatest concern.

[1:20:02] Voice 6: I have absolute confidence in our staff and everyone who works at Islands Trust

[1:20:08] Voice 6: to abide by the standards that are set out for content and for privacy.

[1:20:18] Voice 6: What I really have trouble with, and I always have, is that there is no process to check back on the work of a contractor. Because once the report is submitted, and it's accepted as final, then what happens if subsequent to that, there is, you know, a large issue?

[1:20:40] Voice 6: We don't have any, like, say the information was generated and it's false, you know, the technical terms were not accurate.

[1:20:54] Voice 6: But because of haste and, you know, especially end of year, end of fiscal year, getting contracts in or signed and contractors paid, is there a way that they are, like if the work, if the quality of the work rests on the contractor and the quality is poor, but then the contract is finished, like what happens then?

[1:21:25] Voice 6: We have a report that is not, you know, perhaps there was AI used in the generation of the report and it's now an Islands Trust product and there is no follow up then with contractors.

[1:21:38] Voice 6: There is with staff. They continue to work with Islands Trust. So how do we close that loop from a management perspective?

[1:21:46] Voice 14: Yeah, I think that's more of an issue. It's not really an AI issue. That's just an issue generally with any contract as to the quality of the work.

[1:21:55] Voice 14: and the only way that can be handled is making sure that when we write the contract that it has

[1:22:00] Voice 14: those checks and balances in there so quite often we'd write a clause in there that a draft of the

[1:22:07] Voice 14: preliminary report would be provided to staff in advance so that we can review it and we can

[1:22:12] Voice 14: provide feedback to the consultant that review could just be by staff or it could be built in

[1:22:20] Voice 14: there that it would be by a committee for example but create an opportunity to

[1:22:26] Voice 14: review the final document against what we've asked for to make sure that it's

[1:22:32] Voice 14: meeting the standards and then give the consultant the opportunity to go back

[1:22:36] Voice 14: and edit areas where there could be something missing it's quite common

[1:22:42] Voice 14: actually because contractors might not always get it right on the first go so

[1:22:47] Voice 14: So we'd like to build that in there.

[1:22:49] Voice 14: So that would be probably the best approach to doing it.

[1:22:53] Voice 14: And that would deal with it regardless of how it was generated,

[1:22:57] Voice 14: whether a consultant used the person or maybe a document that was out of date

[1:23:03] Voice 14: or AI did and relied on that.

[1:23:07] Voice 14: But that's how that could be captured.

[1:23:10] Voice 14: And then, of course, the payment schedule in the contract would cover off that as well.

[1:23:15] Voice 14: So there could be a withhold until any final discrepancies have been created, fixed, I guess is the word, to the satisfaction of the Allens Trust.

[1:23:33] Voice 7: Thank you. Trustee Elliott, any follow up to that?

[1:23:43] Voice 8: If I could, sorry, if I may, David, maybe you could also speak to E&O errors and emissions insurance for errors found later.

[1:23:51] Voice 8: Yeah,

[1:23:53] Voice 14: so we do require as part of contracts that contractors hold insurance, the general commercial liability, and professional errors and omissions.

[1:24:04] Voice 14: And the errors and omissions would cover any liabilities with respect to things discovered after the finalization of the contract.

[1:24:15] Voice 14: To my knowledge, we haven't had to go that route, but it is an opportunity available.

[1:24:20] Voice 14: available.

[1:24:22] Voice 5: Thank you. Thank you. On to Trustee Yates.

[1:24:26] Voice 20: Thank you. And thank you, Director Moore,

[1:24:31] Voice 20: for that report. I'm sort of laughing to myself, but one seems as though having to treat AI as

[1:24:40] Voice 20: though it was sort of an urge that you go back and make sure everything was okay. It's like,

[1:24:49] Voice 20: like, wow, is this really worth all the trouble of employing this, what I think of as a dangerous

[1:24:56] Voice 20: tool, in some cases, not all. But it certainly has its dangers and its costs. We never talk about

[1:25:05] Voice 20: the cost to humans and the cost financially to be using these tools. So that's one comment.

[1:25:13] Voice 20: And so just recently looking at, so I'm thinking about what Trustee Elliott said about contractors, while I'm thinking about environmental impact assessments, and two that I've looked at recently, one for a development variance permit, one for rezoning, I started to ask myself, did an AI write this?

[1:25:33] Voice 20: I guess it would be the same as if you had an unreliable contractor write it or if you had

[1:25:40] Voice 20: someone paid for by the developer you know the the applicant to to give you this report probably

[1:25:47] Voice 20: no worse than that but that really caused me to question the results and then all the

[1:25:53] Voice 20: all the work that you have to do to to go back and say well you're missing this or you're missing

[1:26:01] Voice 20: that, or, you know, we have to get our staff to look at all of this anyway. So I guess my general

[1:26:09] Voice 20: overview is to be very suspicious of why we need to use AI. Thank you.

[1:26:18] Voice 3: Thank you for that. Trustee Smith.

[1:26:21] Voice 3: Yeah, thanks. Thanks, Director Marlowe, for that summary. I really appreciated it.

[1:26:26] Voice 3: um i we're all concerned about ai i'm sure that many of us myself included have been playing with

[1:26:33] Voice 3: it looking at how you get errors and if it's possible to correct those and i have noticed

[1:26:40] Voice 3: because i'm involved in uh several other organizations that it's now a requirement

[1:26:46] Voice 3: that in every briefing note if ai has been used to just identify it and so um so that we would

[1:26:54] Voice 3: know as a board if a briefing is um is provided it would say at the end like who the authors and that

[1:27:02] Voice 3: uh something to the effect that artificial intelligence has been used as a component

[1:27:08] Voice 3: of this analysis and that just alerts you to that it's been used it doesn't tell you if it's useful

[1:27:14] Voice 3: or not all the things that director marlo just highlighted would have to be um addressed but it

[1:27:21] Voice 3: It does alert us as the reader that the component of this is AI and you can take that.

[1:27:27] Voice 3: And I actually wanted to propose a motion like that.

[1:27:31] Voice 3: So I'll wait till the end of the discussion, see what people think of that.

[1:27:34] Voice 3: But to me, everything that Trustee Yates said is important.

[1:27:39] Voice 3: Everything that Trustee Elliott said is important and even more because the thing that we've discovered is you can use AI.

[1:27:49] Voice 3: AI, you can ask it a question and get an answer and it's accurate. But you didn't ask a deep

[1:27:55] Voice 3: enough question. And if you go back and ask it another question, say, but did you consider this?

[1:28:01] Voice 3: Suddenly you get a different answer. And also, AI can only use publicly available information.

[1:28:11] Voice 3: And so if there's key information that's in a, say, published journal that's behind a paywall,

[1:28:18] Voice 3: it's not accessed because it's not publicly available so there's a lot of it's it's complex

[1:28:24] Voice 3: as other speakers before me have said but i think as a starting point um it would be useful for us

[1:28:31] Voice 3: as a board to just know ai has been used um as a component of this analysis so if people would

[1:28:38] Voice 3: entertain that i would propose a motion to that effect thank

[1:28:46] Voice 5: you very much any more comments from

[1:28:48] Voice 5: on the board. Vice Chair, Trustee Jorgensen, how does AI affect your world?

[1:28:56] Voice 12: Yeah, thank you,

[1:28:58] Voice 12: Chair Gavro, and thank you, Director Marler as well for walking us through this. Yeah, I personally

[1:29:04] Voice 12: don't use AI generative tools other than maybe Siri on my phone asking for directions. But I

[1:29:14] Voice 12: I think one of the, well, first, I think the comments shared here are really helpful and

[1:29:21] Voice 12: I do agree with them.

[1:29:22] Voice 12: And even with Trustee Smith just shared as well, I think that would be a helpful, you

[1:29:26] Voice 12: know, caption to have included in reports or works that are utilizing AI generative

[1:29:31] Voice 12: tools.

[1:29:33] Voice 12: And I think my greatest concern with AI is, you know, its use and intended use.

[1:29:40] Voice 12: I think it's helpful for certain processes like data processing, doing specific tasks in a very controlled environment.

[1:29:51] Voice 12: I think that's what AI can be useful for in terms of modeling or a very controlled environment.

[1:30:00] Voice 12: degenerative tools uh it's something that i have an ethical issue with and don't support

[1:30:07] Voice 12: also for for ai we need more data centers to help support ai as a function um ai is a service and

[1:30:16] Voice 12: it's concerning that ai data centers consume so much water and they also have other kind of

[1:30:25] Voice 12: indirect effects as well in terms of like electromagnetic radiation noise and it disrupts

[1:30:33] Voice 12: the environment around them and so there's data centers coming across all over north america and

[1:30:38] Voice 12: and in canada um but i don't know it's it's not really for for me to say but personally i just

[1:30:45] Voice 12: have concerns about their use and their impact to the environment and to uh citizens as well

[1:30:51] Voice 12: I've seen some studies in the States of AI data centers impacting neighborhoods, people's sleep patterns, people's biology.

[1:30:59] Voice 12: And so there's all these other kind of things.

[1:31:02] Voice 12: And I think that's, I guess, more of a greater community concern or, I guess, something that has to be discussed at a larger level.

[1:31:12] Voice 12: But I just have some apprehensions when it comes to AI.

[1:31:15] Voice 12: and also if more people support it there's going to be more demand for data centers i also think

[1:31:21] Voice 12: there's a lot of um in this world this digital world that we live in um you know information is

[1:31:28] Voice 12: so important and of value and so when us humans are interacting with digital applications

[1:31:37] Voice 12: interfaces uh engines ai engines you know we're sharing our knowledge we're sharing our thoughts

[1:31:43] Voice 12: thoughts um and those things are used to you know um influence commerce uh to understand people's

[1:31:51] Voice 12: thought patterns interest in in um you know different topics and purchasing and you know

[1:31:57] Voice 12: e-commerce is is uh is a huge industry so um it's very extractive and a lot of people don't realize

[1:32:05] Voice 12: that a lot of their information is being extracted through these other means and having a value

[1:32:10] Voice 12: you attributed it to it. So as I digress, because I'm getting off topic, I think it's helpful for

[1:32:17] Voice 12: us as an organization to just be mindful of these things, to have a disclaimer about it. And I think

[1:32:22] Voice 12: it's helpful that there's a policy in place for us to just understand the concerns around it and

[1:32:27] Voice 12: just ensuring that information is safe within the organization, that we're not sharing private

[1:32:32] Voice 12: private information or information regarding, you know, our constituents or even information about

[1:32:40] Voice 12: project work that we're doing. So I think these are very basic, good common sense structures to

[1:32:47] Voice 12: have in place and just kind of wanted to share my perspective on AI as well. So thank you for

[1:32:51] Voice 12: the time to let me speak.

[1:32:53] Voice 5: Thank you for that. Fantastic. Any more comments from the board?

[1:33:03] Voice 5: Trustee Elliott?

[1:33:06] Voice 6: I always have these last minute thoughts, just as you're calling for last

[1:33:09] Voice 6: last minute, but I know Trustee Smith has a motion. But so just considering what Trustee

[1:33:16] Voice 6: Nuncombe said about the ecological and community impacts, is this something the board wants to

[1:33:24] Voice 6: consider taking a position on? And so rather than, you know, we've been thinking internally about

[1:33:33] Voice 6: staff use of AI and that's what our the conversation is about but um and I'm looking

[1:33:43] Voice 6: for advice on this because I don't know if a conservancy is an appropriate body to you know

[1:33:48] Voice 6: state we take a position on this sort of social environmental ecological um or trend that has all

[1:33:59] Voice 6: all these impacts and if so what would that look like good

[1:34:07] Voice 5: question any comment dr marler

[1:34:15] Voice 14: not really i

[1:34:17] Voice 5: know it's kind of a big one yeah i

[1:34:19] Voice 14: mean i think there's a board you can take whatever

[1:34:21] Voice 14: position you want um the other thing i'm thinking about is you know the board can't really tell

[1:34:27] Voice 14: staff what tools to use or not to use i think that's something maybe would be more of a council

[1:34:33] Voice 14: issue if they wanted to have more you know they had some concerns about that

[1:34:37] Voice 14: they wanted to provide some policy around that that would be up to them so

[1:34:44] Voice 14: that yeah that'd be really the only limitation but when it comes to

[1:34:49] Voice 14: contractors I don't know how well that would go over if you said to contractors

[1:34:54] Voice 14: no AI in your responses though they they would just kind of ignore it and maybe

[1:34:59] Voice 14: be fidget like well we'll use ai anyway but we just won't actually you know rewrite it and so

[1:35:05] Voice 14: the report is actually not using ai but all of our research was done by ai if you understand what i'm

[1:35:11] Voice 14: saying so again i don't know how much you can really influence the contractor that's working

[1:35:16] Voice 14: for you either so yeah so i think you can take whatever position i'm just not sure what the

[1:35:21] Voice 14: consequences would be of such a position would

[1:35:26] Voice 5: it be decent value for the board to make a

[1:35:29] Voice 5: recommendation to trust council about doing some further work on a policy at this stage

[1:35:36] Voice 14: yeah you could always through the chair you could always uh ask you know make some recommendations

[1:35:41] Voice 14: to trust council of uh you know taking a position on ai and then um council if it wanted to do that

[1:35:50] Voice 14: i could probably ask staff to come back with what what would the implications be so for example

[1:35:54] Voice 14: For example, would council have the ability to say no to AI or no to using AI tools by

[1:36:01] Voice 14: contractors and staff, and what would the implications be and staff could report back

[1:36:07] Voice 14: on that.

[1:36:08] Voice 14: First of all, yes or no, you can or you can't do it, and if you can do it, then these are

[1:36:13] Voice 14: the implications of taking such a position, and then beyond that, whatever policy or position

[1:36:20] Voice 14: is required.

[1:36:22] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:36:22] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:36:23] Voice 5: you uh trustee smith over to you i just wanted

[1:36:26] Voice 3: to propose my motion which doesn't uh i did send it

[1:36:30] Voice 3: to i didn't know who to send it to i sent it to carol wendy and rob so they could put it up um

[1:36:36] Voice 3: is that possible

[1:36:37] Voice 3: for them to do yeah uh

[1:36:40] Voice 5: perhaps they sent it to carly oh i should have sent it

[1:36:42] Voice 5: to carly uh

[1:36:43] Voice 8: i can forward it to carly right now that'd

[1:36:48] Voice 3: be great oh rob has forwarded to carly

[1:36:51] Voice 3: okay beautiful so i guess when she puts it up i can uh i can read it somehow or i could read it

[1:37:03] Voice 3: anyways and then just for people to think about should i do that or wait for

[1:37:08] Voice 3: it to be posted

[1:37:08] Voice 5: yeah

[1:37:09] Voice 3: we can read it out

[1:37:09] Voice 5: for sure uh

[1:37:11] Voice 3: the islands trust conservancy board requests staff to identify

[1:37:15] Voice 3: if artificial intelligence has been used in the generation of briefings discussion notes

[1:37:22] Voice 3: or requests for decision so there we go it's just simple we're not saying use it or don't use it

[1:37:30] Voice 3: we're just saying let us know when you used it it should be requests for decisions carly there

[1:37:41] Voice 3: should be s at the end of decision director

[1:37:46] Voice 5: freighter i see your cameras on

[1:37:47] Voice 4: hi um as trust

[1:37:50] Voice 4: council is the employer that sort of sets standards for staff for this sort of thing

[1:37:53] Voice 4: i would recommend that it read something like that the conservancy board requests that trust

[1:37:57] Voice 4: trust counsel request staff, and then trust counsel can consider it sort of corporate-wide

[1:38:02] Voice 4: as a new standard.

[1:38:05] Voice 5: Understood. Trustee Elliott?

[1:38:10] Voice 6: Yeah, I support the intent of this motion. I'm

[1:38:13] Voice 6: just wondering if we need to clarify if it's generative artificial intelligence,

[1:38:20] Voice 6: because AI tools that are not generative, or do you mean anything that is AI? I mean,

[1:38:29] Voice 6: it's just so integrated with you know iphones and microsoft and there's a lot of things so

[1:38:36] Voice 6: sort of maybe clarifying what is the the scope of the ai and you're missing the generation of

[1:38:45] Voice 6: briefings discussion notes or requests for decision oh

[1:38:49] Voice 3: you say that again i'm just adding

[1:38:52] Voice 3: word yeah if that helps generative artificial intelligence i i mean i don't

[1:39:02] Voice 5: um is this that

[1:39:05] Voice 5: you want the briefings that are now being generated for us uh you want to know what their

[1:39:10] Voice 5: ai or if it's been used in

[1:39:12] Voice 5: the past yeah

[1:39:13] Voice 3: in the signature you know you have who wrote it who's

[1:39:16] Voice 3: responsible for it it's all good and

[1:39:18] Voice 5: then at the

[1:39:19] Voice 3: end you say you know um artificial intelligence

[1:39:22] Voice 3: has been used as a component of this analysis.

[1:39:25] Voice 3: Just a simple statement.

[1:39:26] Voice 5: So this would be separate than

[1:39:27] Voice 3: our current AI policy?

[1:39:30] Voice 3: Well, just so that every briefing you get tells you.

[1:39:33] Voice 3: Yeah,

[1:39:33] Voice 5: that's what I

[1:39:34] Voice 3: get from IUCN, for example.

[1:39:37] Voice 3: They just tell you.

[1:39:39] Voice 3: It doesn't judge it or anything.

[1:39:41] Voice 3: It's just telling you that it's been used.

[1:39:44] Voice 3: So

[1:39:44] Voice 5: you just know.

[1:39:45] Voice 5: A comment from Dr. Muller?

[1:39:48] Voice 14: Yeah, sorry.

[1:39:49] Voice 14: We have been talking about generative AI,

[1:39:52] Voice 14: so that my comments were limited to generative AI not just AI so I would

[1:39:57] Voice 14: recommend that you do change this to say if generative AI yeah thank you thank

[1:40:05] Voice 5: you and I saw a manager Tyrell's hand up sorry vice chair I wanted to check in

[1:40:10] Voice 5: with the manager Tyrell comment yeah it was addressed thank you thank you very

[1:40:16] Voice 5: much and then back to vice chair Nedcom

[1:40:20] Voice 5: Thank

[1:40:21] Voice 12: you, Chair Gabriel. I was just kind of curious, you know, in the example that Trustee Smith is mentioning, like if it was a briefing or some sort of document, just a statement either in the footnotes or somewhere, would it be helpful to have like an example in this motion?

[1:40:38] Voice 12: or do we need to expand more on like how we'd want the staff to identify use of AI or is that

[1:40:45] Voice 12: kind of is that something that would just be understood to

[1:40:54] Voice 3: me yeah sorry go ahead yeah I just

[1:40:58] Voice 3: want it to be very general you know just like you have all the signatures it's great you know

[1:41:04] Voice 3: who wrote it you can ask them you know who's responsible that's great I don't want it to be

[1:41:09] Voice 3: too prescriptive they can do it however they want but um one thing that i don't understand is i do

[1:41:15] Voice 3: think this should be uh the trust council should ask this but i don't see why the itc board can't

[1:41:24] Voice 3: request this for its briefings like well i agree that it's a good idea for trust council to request

[1:41:31] Voice 3: this for all staff briefings that have used generative AI, I can't see why the

[1:41:39] Voice 3: Islands Trust Conservancy can't request this. We're not asking for a lot of work.

[1:41:43] Voice 3: We're just asking for a statement somewhere in a report so that we know.

[1:41:49] Voice 3: Like I'm not sure I understand Director Frater why we wouldn't be able to do

[1:41:54] Voice 3: that. The reason I raised that is it can take Trust Council a long time to get

[1:41:59] Voice 3: things going and i think we just want to know it's a learning experience for everybody thank you i

[1:42:06] Voice 3: see director marla there

[1:42:10] Voice 14: sorry i was just going to respond to that the uh the honest trust we try to

[1:42:15] Voice 14: be uh consistent with reporting between bodies so um you know so that staff understand what's

[1:42:22] Voice 14: required what's not required so we have standardizations i guess so if the itc was to

[1:42:29] Voice 14: require something more specific like this it could just just create more

[1:42:35] Voice 14: administrative work for staff remembering to do this for ITC but not

[1:42:40] Voice 14: do it for other committees so I think the intent is that council sets the

[1:42:47] Voice 14: standard for what is being reported to the different committees the templates

[1:42:53] Voice 14: templates that we're using. And this to me is a little bit different than just adding

[1:42:59] Voice 14: a section in it. It's more about transparency in how a report was generated. We've never

[1:43:09] Voice 14: done this before. So it'd be completely new at the Allens Trust. So I think that is the

[1:43:16] Voice 14: rationale for saying take it to Trust Council and get them to say, yeah, this is the way

[1:43:22] Voice 14: should be done thank

[1:43:25] Voice 5: you trustee smith back to you okay

[1:43:30] Voice 3: i'm i'm willing to accept that i don't

[1:43:34] Voice 3: you know it doesn't matter if i agree with it or not um but i would like to read the motion if

[1:43:39] Voice 3: that's okay as it stands now thank you go ahead the honest trust conservancy board requests that

[1:43:47] Voice 3: trust council requests that staff identify if generative artificial intelligence has been used

[1:43:53] Voice 3: in the generation of briefings, discussion notes,

[1:43:56] Voice 3: or requests for decisions.

[1:43:59] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:44:00] Voice 5: Looking for a seconder.

[1:44:03] Voice 5: Motion is seconded by Trustee Yates.

[1:44:05] Voice 5: Any discussion?

[1:44:10] Voice 5: Vice Chair Namkum?

[1:44:12] Voice 12: Sorry, that was just for the vote.

[1:44:14] Voice 5: Thank you.

[1:44:15] Voice 5: No, I'm actually going to vote in favor of this motion myself.

[1:44:19] Voice 5: Not that I'm opposed to it,

[1:44:20] Voice 5: but I don't think we have all the information we need

[1:44:22] Voice 5: to be making a decision like this at this time.

[1:44:24] Voice 5: And I don't think I've ever suspected in my years

[1:44:27] Voice 5: of the ITC here that they've used generative AI or would I think they do their own work and

[1:44:35] Voice 5: they're very thorough at doing their own research and I so I won't be voting in favor of the motion

[1:44:41] Voice 5: thank you but I shall call the vote if there's no more discussion all in favor oh trustee Smith

[1:44:48] Voice 5: sorry no no I'm just voting in favor I'll get to it all right raise your hand if you're in favor

[1:44:54] Voice 5: one two three i see three hands four hands four hands fantastic and all opposed that would just

[1:45:11] Voice 5: be me sorry opposed so the motion

[1:45:15] Voice 9: is carried i had

[1:45:16] Voice 9: my hand up i just didn't have the emoji thing

[1:45:18] Voice 9: thank you thank you motions

[1:45:21] Voice 5: carry thank you um right on so then we shall be moving on and thank

[1:45:28] Voice 5: Thank you, Dr. Marla, for his time today.

[1:45:30] Voice 5: We have Trustee Elliott.

[1:45:33] Voice 6: Yeah, we were scheduled for a break.

[1:45:36] Voice 6: I don't know if you want to break now or we should have this briefing next.

[1:45:41] Voice 6: I'm not sure how extensive it is.

[1:45:44] Voice 6: Where are we at?

[1:45:45] Voice 6: We're almost at lunch break.

[1:45:46] Voice 5: Manager Turrell.

[1:45:50] Voice 8: Yes, I believe there could be some discussion on the next agenda item.

[1:45:54] Voice 8: So if there are rumbly stomachs, we may want to break for lunch.

[1:45:58] Voice 5: we may um we do have i think a few minutes i was wondering because of the ordering of the agenda

[1:46:05] Voice 5: here i have lunch at um 11 55 if we can wait 10 minutes if we just go right to lunch then come

[1:46:13] Voice 5: back but i thought in that time that perhaps there's a i had an issue with my letter my

[1:46:18] Voice 5: numbering my agenda and we skipped over something we skipped over 7.1.4 do you think that we could

[1:46:25] Voice 5: probably finish that and clear it off and then go for lunch we can certainly try

[1:46:34] Voice 5: excellent then we're going to go to 7.1.4 which is the scheduling of a special meeting

[1:46:40] Voice 5: and that's over to you manager terrell now

[1:46:55] Voice 8: i'm a little lost sorry

[1:46:57] Voice 5: special meeting yeah where's the

[1:47:01] Voice 5: page number on that i'm sorry normally i keep better notes for my

[1:47:05] Voice 5: agenda.

[1:47:07] Voice 8: Okay. I apologize. I thought we were going to go back to 7.1, 7.2.1.

[1:47:18] Voice 5: No, I thought

[1:47:19] Voice 8: we would take- We can go back to 7.1.4.

[1:47:22] Voice 5: Yes. I think, yep. The, the NAPTEP, I can

[1:47:27] Voice 5: do a longer discussion.

[1:47:28] Voice 8: This is a verbal briefing. My apologies. I do understand where we are at now. Thank you very

[1:47:35] Voice 8: much for your patience yes we did we did miss another agenda item um so we have proposed um

[1:47:45] Voice 8: a late meeting or excuse me a special meeting for the board so staff can present the the auditors

[1:47:53] Voice 8: um the audit and financial statements and the auditors can present to the board

[1:47:57] Voice 8: The reason for the special meeting was because this meeting and our next meeting, this meeting is too early because the financial statement and audit hasn't been completed, and the next meeting, July 28th, is too late.

[1:48:14] Voice 8: It already needs to be approved by the board.

[1:48:18] Voice 8: So we're recommending a special meeting for that purpose and also for staff to bring the 2027-28 budget request overview to the board at that time as well.

[1:48:32] Voice 8: And we have a motion available if the board would like to consider that.

[1:48:38] Voice 8: Okay.

[1:48:38] Voice 8: Where's the motion?

[1:48:40] Voice 8: It's on the agenda.

[1:48:42] Voice 8: On the agenda.

[1:48:43] Voice 8: It's on page two.

[1:48:44] Voice 8: I can go back up

[1:48:46] Voice 7: here page

[1:48:48] Voice 8: two right

[1:48:50] Voice 7: there do you see that not yet apologies coming your way

[1:49:06] Voice 5: there we are all right trustee

[1:49:08] Voice 20: Yates I see your hands up yes I was just going to read the motion

[1:49:14] Voice 20: ah thank you thank you hey

[1:49:16] Voice 5: any other comments

[1:49:18] Voice 5: actually let's see if there's any other comments

[1:49:20] Voice 5: from the board do we understand what's happening here we're going to schedule this meeting for

[1:49:23] Voice 5: June 2nd, we'll be receiving the Otters report. KPMG will be there as well, I believe.

[1:49:34] Voice 5: And yes, we'll have an overview of the next year's budget. If everyone understands,

[1:49:41] Voice 5: then Trustee Yates, please

[1:49:42] Voice 20: proceed. I move that the Islands Trust Conservancy

[1:49:46] Voice 20: Board schedule an electronic special meeting for June 2nd, 2026 at 1 p.m. to consider the

[1:49:54] Voice 20: the 2026-27 budget request overview

[1:49:57] Voice 20: and receive the 2026 auditor's report and presentation.

[1:50:02] Voice 20: Thank you, looking for a seconder.

[1:50:07] Voice 5: Trustee Elliot, oh, we have a question in the chat.

[1:50:12] Voice 5: What is the anticipated duration of the special meeting?

[1:50:16] Voice 5: We currently have it scheduled from one to three.

[1:50:18] Voice 8: From one to three.

[1:50:21] Voice 8: The auditor's report is no longer than a half hour,

[1:50:24] Voice 8: their presentation, allowing for discussion

[1:50:28] Voice 8: and also the budget discussion thank you thank

[1:50:31] Voice 5: you uh trustee elliot you had your hand raised

[1:50:34] Voice 5: to um well second i did

[1:50:37] Voice 5: yeah that was a that was all thank you thank you all right then i shall

[1:50:44] Voice 5: call the vote all in favor and that carries thank you very much i thought we can get through that

[1:50:53] Voice 5: one quickly great that brings us to 11 55. oh trustee sorry

[1:51:03] Voice 20: um i was very happy to read that

[1:51:06] Voice 20: motion but i did want to mention that i will be in transit on june 2nd and i will not be able to

[1:51:13] Voice 20: attend this meeting but i just figured everyone else would be able to attend well thank you for

[1:51:18] Voice 20: that i'll make note of that

[1:51:19] Voice 5: thank you vice chair namco great so this takes us to uh 11 51 i think

[1:51:29] Voice 5: we shall adjourn for lunch now we'll come back at what half 30 minutes for lunch sound good

[1:51:36] Voice 5: yep great um fantastic remember to turn off your cameras and your microphones

[1:51:44] Voice 5: phones. And we'll see, maybe we can put the sign up stating that we'll be back at what time is that

[1:51:53] Voice 5: then? We'll say 1230. Make it easy. Nice round number. 1221. I like that even better. Great.

[1:52:01] Voice 5: Have a good lunch, everyone. Thank you. Thank you.

[2:22:12] Voice 11: Hope everybody had a nice lunch. See in the chat, Vice Chair and MCOM will be five minutes.

[2:23:09] Voice 5: And Trustee

[2:23:09] Voice 11: Elliott is coming.

[2:23:11] Voice 5: I see Trustee Smith, myself and Janine. Well, noting the time

[2:23:27] Voice 5: is 12.23. We do have an in-camera session scheduled for 1pm today. I anticipate that

[2:23:36] Voice 5: meeting being about 30-35 minutes long. So that gives us time for the rest of our agenda.

[2:23:44] Voice 5: Um, to recap, we're at item 7.2.1, which is the Natural Areas Protected Tax Exemption Program.

[2:23:56] Voice 5: And we have Senior Policy Advisor Jason Eumanns here to introduce the briefing.

[2:24:04] Voice 13: Thank you, Chair GoPro.

[2:24:05] Voice 5: Thank you. Where are you zooming in from today?

[2:24:08] Voice 13: I'm zooming in from the big office in Victoria.

[2:24:11] Voice 5: Nice, nice. Nice and sunny over there too?

[2:24:15] Voice 13: It is, though not as sunny as it was looking on Gabriola, where Trustee Elliott's located.

[2:24:21] Voice 5: Absolutely. Has she been able to join us? There she is. Oh my gosh. Hey, look at that. That's

[2:24:28] Voice 5: wonderful. Great. Please proceed.

[2:24:31] Voice 2: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Thank you,

[2:24:33] Voice 2: Trustees, for the invitation to join you all this afternoon.

[2:24:36] Voice 13: I can assure you that I think

[2:24:38] Voice 13: all of the intelligence used in the commission of this next report was authentic and carbon-based,

[2:24:43] Voice 13: although generous use will have been made of Microsoft Excel. I'm not sure how that fits into

[2:24:49] Voice 13: the whole paradigm. The matter before you has been referred to you by the Islands Trust Council,

[2:24:57] Voice 13: which is looking for your guidance on whether Islands Trust should approach the province with

[2:25:01] Voice 13: a request to increase the property tax exemption rate offered through the Natural Areas Protection

[2:25:05] Voice 13: Tax Exemption Program, which we all know is NAPTEP. So NAPTEP is offered through the Islands

[2:25:12] Voice 13: Trust Conservancy with the support of the province to allow participating landowners to

[2:25:16] Voice 13: receive a 65% property tax exemption that they would otherwise pay on the portion of the land

[2:25:22] Voice 13: that they instead decide to put under a protective covenant. The report before you came about as a

[2:25:28] Voice 13: result of conversations between Conservancy staff and NAPTEP participants and prospective NAPTEP

[2:25:34] Voice 13: participants over the years that with all the costs that are associated with registering a

[2:25:39] Voice 13: covenant, that maybe the 65% tax exemption rate isn't necessarily sufficient incentive

[2:25:44] Voice 13: to entice people to want to participate in the program. And so the underlying thought is that

[2:25:50] Voice 13: perhaps if the exemption that were available were higher through NAPTEP, maybe that would persuade

[2:25:54] Voice 13: more people to participate in the program. For reference, there are currently 29 NAPTEP covenants

[2:25:59] Voice 13: covering a total of 144 hectares in the Islands Trust area. I guess probably the most important

[2:26:07] Voice 13: thing to note for the purposes of this conversation is that when a property receives a tax exemption

[2:26:12] Voice 13: under NAPTEP, the taxing authorities, those being the Islands Trust, regional district,

[2:26:17] Voice 13: school district, the province, they don't forego that revenue. Rather, that sort of lost tax revenue

[2:26:24] Voice 13: gets spread around to other taxpayers. So for provincial services that are provided on a subject

[2:26:30] Voice 13: island where a NAPTEP covenant might be put in place, such as roads or healthcare, right,

[2:26:37] Voice 13: Right. Some proportion of your property taxes goes to paying for those sorts of things where there is a NAPTEP covenant.

[2:26:42] Voice 13: That portion of lost revenue is then recouped by the province from minutely higher taxes on everybody else in the province.

[2:26:50] Voice 13: So there's a redistributive effect that happens when a property enters the NAPTEP program for regional district services that are provided on a given island.

[2:26:59] Voice 13: that portion of lost revenue through NAPTEP is then shifted to all other rate payers in that

[2:27:05] Voice 13: regional district and so on for all the different services that are funded wholly or in part through

[2:27:10] Voice 13: property taxes. Same is true of school districts and for the Islands Trust as well. In order to

[2:27:17] Voice 13: change the NAPTEP exemption rate, the Islands Trust would need to request that of the province

[2:27:22] Voice 13: as the exemption rate is spelled out in a provincial regulation and chief among the

[2:27:28] Voice 13: province's concerns, if it were to consider increasing that tax exemption, is what the

[2:27:33] Voice 13: impact would be on other taxpayers of increasing that tax rate or potentially through that increased

[2:27:39] Voice 13: tax rate spurring greater NAPTEP uptake. If all potential NAPTEP candidate properties were to

[2:27:48] Voice 13: enter the NAPTEP program, that would result in a significant redistributing of taxes that would

[2:27:53] Voice 13: need to take place. I mean, I think we can all generally agree it is unlikely that all potential

[2:27:58] Voice 13: Canada properties would choose to enter NAPTAP, but that just is what the province has in mind

[2:28:02] Voice 13: as it considers changing the exemption rate, is what impact that is going to have on other

[2:28:06] Voice 13: taxpayers. So that's what this report seeks to answer, that question of what would the impact

[2:28:12] Voice 13: be on those other taxpayers, and would underpin any request to the province that Islands Trust

[2:28:16] Voice 13: Council may make. The report itself was funded through a provincial grant that was available

[2:28:21] Voice 13: for projects that were about ecosystem protection on private land, which of course that is NAPTEP's

[2:28:27] Voice 13: bread and butter. The headline findings of the report, which are attached to the briefing,

[2:28:33] Voice 13: are that if you were to increase the NAPTEP exemption from its current 65% to 100%,

[2:28:39] Voice 13: that would save the average participating property in NAPTEP about an additional $760 annually.

[2:28:46] Voice 13: annually, with the total average annual property tax exemption for a participating property

[2:28:52] Voice 13: totaling about $2,200 a year.

[2:28:55] Voice 13: Or looked at from the other end, if you were to increase the exemption from 65% to 100%,

[2:29:02] Voice 13: that's an additional $758 that would need to be absorbed by other taxpayers, either

[2:29:08] Voice 13: in the province or the regional district or the Islands Trust area, depending on which

[2:29:11] Voice 13: taxing authority you are looking at.

[2:29:14] Voice 13: If one were to increase the tax exemption rate to 100%, and that had the excellent outcome of increasing NAPTEP participation to 1% of potentially eligible properties, which is about 15 new NAPTEP covenants, that would result in a $0.01 impact for each taxpayer in the province, a $0.29 impact.

[2:29:39] Voice 13: And these are all averages. It's a bit of a speculative exercise because different regional districts have different tax rates, different school districts have different tax rates. So there's an averaging out that occurs here. But an additional $0.29 for each property taxpayer in the regional district where the subject island is located.

[2:30:00] Voice 13: for each taxpayer in the Islands Trust area as a whole. And just to note that the tax shift

[2:30:07] Voice 13: implications for any NAPTEP covenant that gets approved on Bowen Island are significantly greater

[2:30:13] Voice 13: for Bowen Island residents than anywhere else in the trust area because Bowen Island is a

[2:30:17] Voice 13: municipality. So services like roads, which on Bowen Island are paid for only by Bowen Island

[2:30:25] Voice 13: taxpayers, elsewhere in the Islands Trust, our roads are subsidized by the provincial government.

[2:30:29] Voice 13: So, for each NAPTEP tax exemption that gets introduced on Bowen Island, that redistribute effect is much smaller in that only Bowen Island taxpayers really are absorbing the cost of that missing road maintenance revenue or whatever the particular revenue is that's being foregone.

[2:30:47] Voice 13: on. The report that's attached to the briefing has been provided to the Provincial Ministry of

[2:30:53] Voice 13: Finance, who were generally satisfied with the methodology, though they did note that if a request

[2:30:59] Voice 13: to change the NAPTEP exemption were to come from Islands Trust, they would probably look a little

[2:31:05] Voice 13: more forensically at it just to make sure we really did get our numbers right. But I think

[2:31:09] Voice 13: I think, as a high-level estimate of projected impacts of playing around or varying the exemption rate for NAPTEP in a number of ways.

[2:31:20] Voice 13: I think this report captures well, and really the headline finding is that if a small number of new NAPTEP covenants were incentivized by this change in the exemption rate, the impact on other taxpayers is quite minor.

[2:31:39] Voice 13: I don't mind saying that. Anyways, happy to answer any questions that you may have.

[2:31:47] Voice 13: I'm not sure the extent to which I will be able to answer sort of technical questions about the

[2:31:53] Voice 13: quantitative analysis that the consultant undertook. I will certainly do my best.

[2:31:58] Voice 13: And then the question for you really is, if you are confident that raising the exemption rate

[2:32:06] Voice 13: would incentivize more participation in NAPTEP, is that something that you want?

[2:32:11] Voice 13: knowing your organization's current and future plans, your capacity, the resources you have

[2:32:19] Voice 13: available to put towards that. So that's kind of the question before you, I think, is do you want

[2:32:24] Voice 13: to incentivize more participation? Thanks.

[2:32:31] Voice 5: Unmute myself. Thank you very much. All right,

[2:32:34] Voice 5: Trust Council is looking for recommendations. Open up to the board, Trustee Yates.

[2:32:39] Voice 5: Thank

[2:32:40] Voice 20: you very much, Jason Yeomans, for that report. I really appreciate it. And I also really appreciated reading the Brentwood Advisory Group's report from our last council meeting for a couple of reasons.

[2:32:55] Voice 20: I've been asking for this for a very long time before I became a trustee I remember asking at

[2:33:03] Voice 20: a council meeting if if this could be done and so in the last couple of years I have met two people

[2:33:10] Voice 20: on Gabriola two landowners who both said if the returns were greater for them that is if the

[2:33:18] Voice 20: the exemption was greater than 65%, they would consider a NAPTAP. Part of the reason is that

[2:33:27] Voice 20: they're older, they're even older than I am, and they did not think they would realize the benefits

[2:33:32] Voice 20: from a NAPTAP, you know, perhaps even before they died. But if it were a larger amount,

[2:33:40] Voice 20: out, it would be worth passing on. So I think this is wonderful news. It's even better news

[2:33:49] Voice 20: than I expected because I didn't realize that for such potential large benefits, the cost is really

[2:33:56] Voice 20: very minimal. And I do mean the financial cost. I know there is a staff cost, recognizing that

[2:34:04] Voice 20: There would obviously be a lot more work to do if we take on more NAPTEPs, and I know how much work goes into a NAPTEP application, many, many pages of very detailed work, so I do appreciate that.

[2:34:18] Voice 20: I'm also really glad to recognize that the Minister of Finance said that the methodology is sound, and they seem to be okay with this so far, which is really encouraging.

[2:34:35] Voice 20: I think really there's just one other statement I had and and that is it's in the Brentwood

[2:34:41] Voice 20: Advisory Group report on page eight of their report and it's it's just statement when compared

[2:34:49] Voice 20: to the cost of buying land with public funds NAPTEP at either the 65 percent or the 100 percent

[2:34:57] Voice 20: continues to be a very cost-effective approach to land conservation.

[2:35:03] Voice 20: So I just love that sort of bottom line statement there.

[2:35:08] Voice 20: And I do appreciate they looked at different numbers between 65% and 100%.

[2:35:13] Voice 20: And I think if we are to recommend this, we simply go for the 100%.

[2:35:17] Voice 20: So thank you.

[2:35:20] Voice 20: Thank you.

[2:35:21] Voice 5: Thank you.

[2:35:21] Voice 5: That's conservation on Be Simple Land.

[2:35:25] Voice 5: Trustee Smith.

[2:35:27] Voice 5: Oh, you're muted.

[2:35:32] Voice 3: There you go. First of all, Jason, this report blew me away. It actually blew me away. I had no idea that they did this cost shifting with NAPTEPs. I had no idea that the government doesn't ever lose its taxes. It just recoups them what it's lost by adding on to other categories.

[2:35:55] Voice 3: so that maybe everyone else knew that i did not and i'm very familiar with the concept of this um

[2:36:04] Voice 3: attack shifting because it's used in many different areas so i thought this was really

[2:36:11] Voice 3: you brought this to our attention it blew me away um i i i liked the results that it didn't make a

[2:36:19] Voice 3: a big difference. But I will say that I think the analysis, which is true for most of these

[2:36:28] Voice 3: cost-shifting exercises, is very wanting because it doesn't include what is the benefit financially

[2:36:36] Voice 3: to the province for people protecting land with forests on it, which replenishes the groundwater

[2:36:43] Voice 3: water at a time when we are worried about water what is the financial benefit from keeping a

[2:36:52] Voice 3: resilient forest which is way less fire prone than one that is not saved so you know we were only

[2:37:01] Voice 3: looking at a little tiny picture i don't criticize you for this because i know this is how this is

[2:37:06] Voice 3: done but when you look at cost shifting i think if you really did the full analysis you would

[2:37:13] Voice 3: would realize that the cost shift was actually onto the owner

[2:37:16] Voice 3: who has the NAPTEP because of the benefits they're providing

[2:37:25] Voice 3: and they also are getting a reduction in their property value

[2:37:29] Voice 3: because if you have a NAPTEP covenant, your property value goes down.

[2:37:33] Voice 3: So anyways, having said all that, I really appreciated this.

[2:37:37] Voice 3: I don't know what my recommendation is.

[2:37:39] Voice 3: I have to really get my head around this report,

[2:37:41] Voice 3: port. But I noticed that I can't look at chats at the same time I'm talking, but somebody said

[2:37:47] Voice 3: something about full cost accounting. I really think we need to do that when we do these kinds

[2:37:53] Voice 3: of analyses. But I appreciate that you did this in the way that the province would expect you to

[2:38:00] Voice 3: look at cost shifting in the sort of narrowest way. But as ITC board, I think we would like to

[2:38:07] Voice 3: to look at this in a broader way anyways um and then the other thing i want to say is that

[2:38:13] Voice 3: although i am incredibly supportive of the value of napteps i will note that we have been told

[2:38:22] Voice 3: often that we do not have the capacity to accept more napteps takes a long time to do the analysis

[2:38:29] Voice 3: for a naptep you know it's a responsible thing you have to see that there really is value

[2:38:34] Voice 3: you ecological value so i would just ask the board and i don't have the answer myself i just

[2:38:41] Voice 3: started pondering this when i read this report and was so blown away um if we increase the the

[2:38:48] Voice 3: tax exemption are we going to get more applications that we then actually don't have the capacity to

[2:38:55] Voice 3: uh to address that worries me

[2:38:59] Voice 5: anyway that's all i want to say thank you very much trustee elliott

[2:39:03] Voice 5: Well,

[2:39:06] Voice 6: I don't know if there's a question there that could be answered before I say what I was

[2:39:15] Voice 5: going to say. Any comments from the staff? I'll just add that Trustee Yates put connected with

[2:39:26] Voice 5: comments that Trustee Smith was saying about the full cost analysis and the task shift and the

[2:39:32] Voice 5: benefits of healthy ecosystems. And what is the financial outcome of that? Any other comments

[2:39:40] Voice 5: this from staff at this time. Go ahead there, Policy Advisor.

[2:39:45] Voice 13: Sorry, this doesn't actually

[2:39:47] Voice 13: relate to the Conservancy's capacity, but since Trustee Smith seemed interesting in the sort of

[2:39:52] Voice 13: accounting principle of the tax shift, I will note that the one item that the province noted was

[2:39:58] Voice 13: missing from this, and it has nothing to do with full-cost accounting, but rather the one aspect

[2:40:04] Voice 13: of taxation that isn't recouped is that there is evidently some sort of special tax that the

[2:40:11] Voice 13: the province has imposed on properties that are worth $3 million or more in the province.

[2:40:15] Voice 13: There's like a special school levy that they've put on top of your regular taxation if your

[2:40:23] Voice 13: property is worth $3 million or more. And so they noted that that was not reflected

[2:40:28] Voice 13: in this analysis, but they could run those numbers quite easily. And of course,

[2:40:33] Voice 13: since the Conservancy is interested in large, you know, high value properties from an ecological

[2:40:38] Voice 13: ecological standpoint, it stands to reason that many of those may actually be worth over $3

[2:40:43] Voice 13: million because they're going to be vast swaths of island land. Anyways, I just wanted to add that.

[2:40:49] Voice 7: Thank

[2:40:50] Voice 6: you. Thank you. Trustee Elliott.

[2:40:54] Voice 6: Yeah, thank you for this report. And I've enjoyed it for the second time now having seen it at Trust

[2:41:00] Voice 6: Council. So on the point that NAPTEP acquisitions take a long time, some of them do seem to,

[2:41:09] Voice 6: but so do public acquisitions of lands. I guess the advantage of the NAPTEP program is that the

[2:41:15] Voice 6: landowners, you know, are still living with the land and are engaged in the conservation rather

[2:41:24] Voice 6: than a parcel of land is donated. And I would say those take at least as long as a NAPTEP covenant

[2:41:31] Voice 6: to secure. I think if we do see a lot more, so if this 100% recoup or 100% tax exemption goes ahead

[2:41:41] Voice 6: and we do see a significant number of applications coming in, which would be great, we would have to

[2:41:51] Voice 6: sort of increase staff capacity or resourcing so that we can handle the number of applications.

[2:42:00] Voice 6: But once they're approved and on the land, I don't think it's any more work than the monitoring that happens for the reserves that we have. Is that a fair assessment, would you say, Wendy or Gemma?

[2:42:17] Voice 6: I

[2:42:22] Voice 8: think that's a fair assessment. Absolutely. And something that would be worthwhile regardless.

[2:42:26] Voice 8: regardless well

[2:42:28] Voice 6: yeah and so just continuing on that thought i think this program is of incredible

[2:42:36] Voice 6: value in the trust area we've noted many many times how much of the lands here are held privately

[2:42:43] Voice 6: um you know i hope there will be lots more reserves created um but this is a way for

[2:42:51] Voice 6: landowners to still see the benefit um as they're living with the land and um you know before it

[2:43:00] Voice 6: becomes a bequest or something different and i really think we're going to see a lot more requests

[2:43:06] Voice 6: in the next decade um so i i hope we make a recommendation to support the hundred percent

[2:43:18] Voice 6: tax benefit for the NAPTEP program. And then we'll just see how we need to staff up

[2:43:24] Voice 6: to deal with a flood of applications. Anyway, it's a great report. Thank you so much, Jason.

[2:43:30] Voice 6: And I'm really happy with the results. Thanks.

[2:43:33] Voice 5: Thank you. I see EP Specialist Martel.

[2:43:37] Voice 5: You have some comments to help us?

[2:43:40] Voice 10: I do. Thank you. And I wasn't certain whether I should wait

[2:43:44] Voice 10: for the end until all trustees have had a chance to comment I but go ahead okay

[2:43:52] Voice 10: um I think

[2:43:56] Voice 10: trying to organize my thoughts there are a number of layers here and I think my suggestion to the

[2:44:03] Voice 10: board would be that you ask staff to put together a more detailed package of information for you to

[2:44:10] Voice 10: consider before replying to trust counsel because um i think first and foremost we need to remember

[2:44:18] Voice 10: that covenants we all know they're great for many reasons they are an encumbrance on land and the

[2:44:24] Voice 10: nations that we're working with have asked us to really deeply consider that and i think that it's

[2:44:32] Voice 10: also important to recognize that i don't know how many new applicants we would get but probably

[2:44:40] Voice 10: Probably everyone that we already have a covenant with that doesn't have a NAPTEP covenant will want to convert it to a NAPTEP covenant if they can. And that's 50-odd covenants. And I think there would be an impact on our partner conservancies, where people that have covenants with other conservancies will want to switch to have a NAPTEP covenant.

[2:44:58] Voice 10: And so those are capacity questions, but they're also, I think, communication and sort of ripple effect implications that our board should seriously consider, but also that I think it's important for Trust Council to be aware of.

[2:45:16] Voice 10: It's not as simple as, it would be great to see the 100% increase on NAPTEP, but there will be, I think it would be helpful for Trust Council to see, perhaps,

[2:45:29] Voice 10: perhaps, in terms of numbers, what those capacity implications for the conservancy might be,

[2:45:34] Voice 10: as well as some of the other concerns.

[2:45:36] Voice 5: Thank you very much for that insight.

[2:45:39] Voice 5: Yes,

[2:45:42] Voice 20: thank you very much, Staff Specialist Martel, because that was one of my questions was,

[2:45:48] Voice 20: what about people who have other covenants? Are they going to want to switch them?

[2:45:53] Voice 20: And in my mind, that might be quite wonderful, but the workload would increase quite dramatically.

[2:45:59] Voice 20: keeping in mind however the sad fact that we value land the financial worth of your land

[2:46:11] Voice 20: is less apparently when you have a covenant on it to protect all of those wonderful services

[2:46:19] Voice 20: that the land provides free for us so then there's less people applying because they feel it would

[2:46:26] Voice 20: you know devalue um their land so it's just a strange juxtaposition in my mind that you know

[2:46:35] Voice 20: financially your land is worth less if you have these amazing covenants that will protect your

[2:46:41] Voice 20: neighbors and your community and everything else but that's the way it is thank you thank you

[2:46:47] Voice 5: great discussion um so i guess i'm hearing that maybe um the board is perhaps

[2:46:53] Voice 5: perhaps, maybe a suggestion here that we return this briefing back to staff and have them return

[2:46:59] Voice 5: a report to us at a later date. Manager Tyrrell.

[2:47:04] Voice 8: Thank you, Chair Gavreau. We do have a similar

[2:47:08] Voice 8: motion standing by if you would like to consider that. We can put that on the screen. Would that

[2:47:15] Voice 8: be okay? Okay. Might help the discussion. I will stop sharing so that Carly can put

[2:47:23] Voice 8: the resolution document. Yeah,

[2:47:38] Voice 5: 7.2.1, because everybody can see that.

[2:47:59] Voice 5: Christy Elliott, go

[2:48:00] Voice 6: ahead. Totally agree. I was trying to draft a motion that included the words

[2:48:06] Voice 6: considerations and implications, and I'm like, yes! The one who knows what needs to be asked

[2:48:12] Voice 6: has already gone ahead, so I'm happy to make the motion if you'd like.

[2:48:16] Voice 5: Thank you. Any other

[2:48:17] Voice 5: comments from the board, then

[2:48:22] Voice 6: proceed with the motion. I move that the Islands Trust Conservancy

[2:48:27] Voice 6: Board request staff to review the hypothetical tax shift analysis report referred by Trust Council

[2:48:33] Voice 6: and return to the board with an analysis of considerations and implications of the Trust

[2:48:38] Voice 6: Council proposal to advocate for an increase in the Natural Area Protection Tax Exemption Program

[2:48:44] Voice 6: program tax exemption, isn't it? Okay. Increase. Yes. To inform the board's recommendation to

[2:48:52] Voice 6: trust counsel. Thank you very much. Looking for a seconder.

[2:48:58] Voice 5: Trustee Yates, seconds.

[2:48:59] Voice 20: I have a question, Chair Govro. Just before it's seconded, I was actually wanted to ask a question.

[2:49:06] Voice 20: So I'm wondering if we all agree that the hypothetical tax shift that we'd like to see

[2:49:13] Voice 20: is is 100 percent like why bother with 75 or 90 or whatever let's go for the 100 percent because

[2:49:23] Voice 20: a it makes sense in the way that it costs so little to other taxpayers and if you're going

[2:49:30] Voice 20: to make that shift anyway the same work has to be done so let's make it worthwhile so do we need

[2:49:36] Voice 20: to put anything in there about the 100 percent i

[2:49:40] Voice 5: refer to managed material is that apparent from

[2:49:42] Voice 5: our discussion, whereas do you need it in the motion itself?

[2:49:52] Voice 8: I'm very familiar with what was

[2:49:58] Voice 8: presented. So in my mind, it's clear, but it doesn't hurt to clarify in a motion that other

[2:50:05] Voice 8: people are reading that don't have that background, because the board could consider returning back

[2:50:11] Voice 8: to trust council recommending, you know, something between 65 and 100. So if the board is in

[2:50:18] Voice 8: agreement that 100% incentive is something you would like staff to bring back comments, otherwise

[2:50:24] Voice 8: staff could bring back comments to the board of, you know, alternatives to 100%.

[2:50:30] Voice 8: Yeah,

[2:50:32] Voice 5: some robust spectrum of costs that would probably affect different things at different

[2:50:39] Voice 5: rates so so

[2:50:40] Voice 8: we would be happy to bring you back um the analysis on the 100 or if um or otherwise

[2:50:47] Voice 8: um recommended what

[2:50:50] Voice 5: say you trustee yates did you want to make an amendment to the motion or

[2:50:55] Voice 8: shall we

[2:50:55] Voice 20: let it well i'm not sure um staff specialist martel had a comment there about

[2:51:00] Voice 20: that what might come later when we

[2:51:02] Voice 20: make our recommendation to the board to trust council

[2:51:06] Voice 20: board or test council so maybe it's best just to leave it general here that

[2:51:13] Voice 5: sounds good to me

[2:51:14] Voice 5: then we have a proposed motion on the floor and i'm looking for a seconder

[2:51:19] Voice 5: i had a question before you second it sure thing go ahead trustee smith i

[2:51:24] Voice 3: just wanted to hear from

[2:51:25] Voice 3: manager tyrell about capacity like this seems like a lot of work i want to see this work but

[2:51:32] Voice 3: but I just wanted to get a sense of capacity to do this work.

[2:51:36] Voice 3: Is this something that will take a year to do or three months to do?

[2:51:42] Voice 3: Like, what's the capacity?

[2:51:44] Voice 3: Can we do this work?

[2:51:45] Voice 3: Or is it just not possible?

[2:51:50] Voice 8: If I could clarify by this work,

[2:51:52] Voice 8: do you mean the analysis and bringing back to the board?

[2:51:54] Voice 8: Yes.

[2:51:55] Voice 8: Okay.

[2:51:56] Voice 8: Yes, I think it's feasible.

[2:51:58] Voice 8: I think it's a good exercise, as I was mentioning earlier,

[2:52:02] Voice 8: are regardless of an incentive increase looking at current capacity and how that would change

[2:52:08] Voice 8: given given a potential increase in proposals so it is feasible timeline i haven't given enough

[2:52:16] Voice 8: thought to really respond to that um and i not quite sure i'm ready to to give a timeline at

[2:52:27] Voice 8: this point if the board would prefer it at a particular time that would be helpful for staff

[2:52:32] Voice 8: have to know, if you would like. Actually, I should go back to Jason Eumanns and ask if

[2:52:42] Voice 8: the response when it is expected to go back to Trust Council, a June meeting?

[2:52:50] Voice 13: I would likely defer to Director Frater if she's online. But my understanding is that there's no

[2:52:55] Voice 13: particular political urgency to this at the moment. There's no deadline that Trust Council

[2:53:00] Voice 13: is trying to meet, it can approach the province at any time with this request if it decides to

[2:53:06] Voice 13: make it. And in fact, even just the production of this report has been sort of a year's long

[2:53:13] Voice 13: desire that has finally been fulfilled.

[2:53:17] Voice 5: And I would wonder with the election coming up too,

[2:53:20] Voice 5: how much the time the province would have to pay attention here.

[2:53:24] Voice 5: Yes,

[2:53:24] Voice 13: from what we've heard from the province on a number of other topics,

[2:53:27] Voice 13: i wouldn't anticipate that the province is going to have any interest in weighing in on this until

[2:53:33] Voice 13: after the the next round of local government elections in october yeah

[2:53:37] Voice 7: any

[2:53:39] Voice 3: follow-up trustee

[2:53:39] Voice 3: smith how are you feeling no uh no it's not urgent so then it doesn't matter all

[2:53:46] Voice 5: right i see manager

[2:53:46] Voice 5: hands up and down any further comment nope all right then i will i will for sure for sure

[2:53:55] Voice 5: ask for a seconder trustee eight seconds excellent and then now i shall call the vote

[2:54:05] Voice 5: all in favor and miami as well that is unanimous motion carried thank you thank you very much

[2:54:16] Voice 5: jace it's very good to see you thank

[2:54:20] Voice 13: you trustees good afternoon all

[2:54:23] Voice 5: right we're turning to our

[2:54:24] Voice 5: agenda what time are we at now we are at 12 54 and i was our in camera is scheduled for one

[2:54:31] Voice 5: I think we could probably launch into 7.2.3 and finish off the items for discussion and direction

[2:54:39] Voice 5: and then have our in-camera. Does that sound agreeable to the board? Excellent. All right,

[2:54:47] Voice 5: then we are on to 7.2.3, which is the ITC-EC liaison meeting for July 28th. And this is our

[2:54:54] Voice 5: two-hour meeting that we'll be having with the EC. And we'll turn this over to Manager Terrell.

[2:55:10] Voice 8: So staff have put together a briefing for the board to consider agenda topics for

[2:55:19] Voice 8: the next liaison meeting, which is July 28th. And the purpose of this is we are providing a

[2:55:29] Voice 8: list of agenda topics that had been discussed at previous meetings and had been prioritized

[2:55:36] Voice 8: for discussion and also a list of agenda topics that have been highlighted in previous discussions

[2:55:43] Voice 8: and additional staff recommendations for consideration for the board to consider and

[2:55:51] Voice 8: I'm happy to answer questions or sit back and listen to good discussion.

[2:55:56] Voice 5: I know this should

[2:55:58] Voice 5: should be a good one. So let's say you board, we have a two hour meeting coming up. I'm looking

[2:56:03] Voice 5: at where we've been in our history of conversations with the EC. What do we think would be the most

[2:56:10] Voice 5: appropriate themes for this next upcoming meeting? I personally myself have actually struggled with

[2:56:16] Voice 5: what what is the most important thing that we want to knowing as well that some of us may not be at

[2:56:21] Voice 5: at the next EC-ITC joint meeting

[2:56:24] Voice 5: because of due to the election.

[2:56:27] Voice 5: What do we want to bring?

[2:56:30] Voice 5: Open it up to the board.

[2:56:35] Voice 5: Any suggestions for themes?

[2:56:37] Voice 5: Trustee Smith.

[2:56:40] Voice 3: Yeah, since we just passed this motion

[2:56:43] Voice 3: about like two trust council

[2:56:46] Voice 3: to just ask for an identification of the use of AI,

[2:56:51] Voice 3: I'd like to discuss that if it's possible

[2:56:54] Voice 3: at this next

[2:56:55] Voice 3: meeting yeah just

[2:57:00] Voice 5: yell it i

[2:57:04] Voice 6: do not want to discuss ai at this next meeting

[2:57:07] Voice 6: um i think this is our last itc ec board meeting and we need to

[2:57:15] Voice 6: we've been circling around the topic of how how can we better embed

[2:57:21] Voice 6: um consideration for biology and ecological integrity into decision making um

[2:57:29] Voice 6: And particularly land use planning and OCPs.

[2:57:36] Voice 6: And one piece that I keep going back to is a presentation by the Bowen Island Conservancy on their Caring for Nature initiative.

[2:57:51] Voice 6: I spoke about this at the last ITC meeting, and I know some of you are following that.

[2:57:57] Voice 6: But the key was they developed a biodiversity plan over, you know, a long period of time. They've got open source tools. They've assessed the biodiversity values across Bowen Island, and that was shared with the council with the intention to attach it to their official community plan.

[2:58:20] Voice 6: And that's what the board did. So that their plan reflects the findings of where is biodiversity most intact and really needs to be protected?

[2:58:38] Voice 6: Where are the connected corridor or the corridors for connection for wildlife that need to be considered so that we stop doing this fragmented, you know, application by application consideration.

[2:58:55] Voice 6: We don't seem to have the whole picture when we look at biodiversity and conservation and then through the lens of with our planning functions.

[2:59:06] Voice 6: And I feel like that conversation keeps getting started and lost in a way. And maybe the point or the topic that sort of most lands it for me at this point is actually staff suggested item four, ecological integrity across the islands, tools, trends, and data gaps.

[2:59:36] Voice 6: You know, all of these things are incredibly important. How are we considering and undertaking cultural heritage protection that's moving at different places in different areas, reconciliation, engagement, we've had lots of conversation about that. I think until the

[3:00:00] Voice 6: We've got the five-year plan engagement more, you know, behind us.

[3:00:08] Voice 6: I'm looking forward to hearing feedback on that.

[3:00:12] Voice 6: Provincial funding requests for ITC work.

[3:00:15] Voice 6: I think there's some work to be done in not about a funding request,

[3:00:21] Voice 6: but the long-term sustainability of the Conservancy's operations.

[3:00:27] Voice 6: If we just keep growing and growing.

[3:00:29] Voice 6: We had a brief discussion at our last EC meeting.

[3:00:34] Voice 6: But how are we protecting biodiversity in the trust area?

[3:00:41] Voice 6: How could we even begin to create a plan that is understood by all of our partners and LTCs

[3:00:48] Voice 6: and that isn't chipping away at the ecological integrity of the trust area application by

[3:00:56] Voice 6: application?

[3:00:57] Voice 6: So the tools and the trends, and I'm wondering if staff can give some advice on, do we know what's needed? Can we see ourselves attaining some sort of, you know, what the Bowen Conservancy has done with their indicators report?

[3:01:18] Voice 6: support. And, you know, there's, there's so much that we could do. And I just, yeah, so I think it

[3:01:30] Voice 6: maybe AI would be a topic for like, you know, 20 minutes, but I think this is the core of

[3:01:38] Voice 6: how do we work together to protect and preserve the trust area? Like, these are the two bodies

[3:01:44] Voice 6: that that have to do the hard thinking on this so i'll leave it there thank

[3:01:51] Voice 5: you very much for that

[3:01:52] Voice 5: uh trustee smith i see your hand still up did you have another comment oh i'm sorry

[3:01:55] Voice 5: forgot to put it down sorry i open it up to the rest of the board you see on page 134 there's

[3:02:01] Voice 5: some recommendations from staff as well we have two hours i agree with trustee elliot i think

[3:02:07] Voice 5: that sometimes that conversation gets lost and here's a good opportunity to really kind of bite

[3:02:12] Voice 5: into it with a two-hour meeting how would we um kind of scope out what that conversation would

[3:02:21] Voice 5: look like um yeah any any comments from the board ecological integrity across the islands tools

[3:02:35] Voice 5: trends and data gaps manager cheryl thank

[3:02:43] Voice 8: you chair gavro um one thing i would um like to

[3:02:47] Voice 8: suggest is with this topic that we're clear and when we go into a meeting with Trust Council

[3:02:54] Voice 8: that the conversation if it is going to be about ecological integrity which

[3:03:01] Voice 8: we specify whether we're talking about looking at the protected lands that we have and how we

[3:03:08] Voice 8: how we would model and evaluate the integrity of those lands that are already protected in

[3:03:13] Voice 8: in order to improve and enhance management moving forward

[3:03:17] Voice 8: and working with First Nations

[3:03:18] Voice 8: and Indigenous peoples moving forward?

[3:03:21] Voice 8: Or are we wanting to speak to Trust Council specifically

[3:03:25] Voice 8: about ecological integrity across the islands

[3:03:29] Voice 8: looking at unprotected land?

[3:03:30] Voice 8: So that would be a suggestion that that's clear

[3:03:34] Voice 8: what the discussion topic is evolving around.

[3:03:39] Voice 8: Thank you.

[3:03:41] Voice 5: Any comments, Trustee Elliot?

[3:03:43] Voice 5: Well,

[3:03:48] Voice 6: you know, I guess ITC is hosting this meeting. So if we want executive committee's input, this isn't a conversation with Trust Council, it's just executive committee, and we chair all the LTCs.

[3:04:04] Voice 6: So our knowledge base is how does planning in community work out? It's not so much like how, so what executive committee can contribute to that discussion is really from the planning function.

[3:04:22] Voice 6: I think if you wanted to inform executive committee that, you know, whatever baseline indicators or whatever we're looking at in terms of our protected areas and we need more resources or something to do it.

[3:04:39] Voice 6: you know we had a conversation about gis that's that is a conversation but it's not going to

[3:04:48] Voice 6: it's not a dialogue with executive committee we could just you know we're informed by that

[3:04:55] Voice 6: whereas what we can contribute is like how is like what's the bigger picture of how we're

[3:05:05] Voice 6: conserving lands and how is that working through the planning function and are we actually like

[3:05:15] Voice 6: do we have an indication that we're getting better at protecting and preserving or is is the

[3:05:23] Voice 6: you know our lands can i don't know like so i guess thinking about what can each body contribute

[3:05:28] Voice 6: to that my my leaning would be a more generative discussion about where are we going what do we do

[3:05:35] Voice 6: what are we actually accomplishing the function and upholding the objects in um you know with

[3:05:46] Voice 6: regard to into ecological integrity what do we need to measure that what is needed yes um trustee

[3:05:57] Voice 6: uh

[3:05:57] Voice 3: smith go ahead please yeah um i like this topic too i just in response to manager terrell's

[3:06:06] Voice 3: comments i would hope this discussion would be about the whole trust area where are the areas

[3:06:13] Voice 3: that we really need to protect whether we're protecting them or not and what do we need to

[3:06:19] Voice 3: identify that it's my understanding this is what i heard at the last trust council meeting i went to

[3:06:26] Voice 3: that the previous biologist did a report for each island on the state of that environment state of

[3:06:34] Voice 3: the environment for that island we have not seen that that it's a planner's tool so from my way of

[3:06:41] Voice 3: thinking it would be useful for a joint meeting where we all looked at those and do they provide

[3:06:49] Voice 3: the right information if that's what the planners are using to assess ecological integrity across

[3:06:57] Voice 3: the islands if they don't what are they missing if they do what should we really be using more of

[3:07:03] Voice 3: so that's so i think that's a tool that unless for some reason those aren't being distributed

[3:07:12] Voice 3: that's a tool that the trust conservancy doesn't have the planners do might be using if they do

[3:07:21] Voice 3: have the tool i hope they would be using it um then we can all look at that as a as a starting

[3:07:27] Voice 3: point for identifying what we need to do across the whole trust area what are the priorities

[3:07:33] Voice 3: for preserving ecological integrity.

[3:07:41] Voice 5: Manager Terrell.

[3:07:46] Voice 8: Thank you, Chair Griffith.

[3:07:48] Voice 8: I was just in my mind thinking the regional conservation plan

[3:07:55] Voice 8: and the work that goes into the regional conservation plan

[3:07:59] Voice 8: is the strategy that we have and that planners have available to them

[3:08:05] Voice 8: to use for which areas that we know of should be prioritized

[3:08:11] Voice 8: for protection so that work was done 10 years ago and it's scheduled to be updated in the next over

[3:08:18] Voice 8: the next couple of years um that that is the tool we've been using to date to determine with every

[3:08:24] Voice 8: application that comes to us for securement we go through those steps and identify how it relates to

[3:08:31] Voice 8: what was identified in the um rcp the regional conservation plan thank

[3:08:38] Voice 5: you very much that was my

[3:08:40] Voice 5: My, the only one that I thought would be added,

[3:08:43] Voice 5: maybe a theme added to that meeting would be number five,

[3:08:46] Voice 5: the regional conservation plan,

[3:08:48] Voice 5: updating it and letting you

[3:08:50] Voice 5: see what we're up to with that.

[3:08:53] Voice 5: There's a comment in the chat.

[3:08:55] Voice 5: I know the people at home can't see your chat.

[3:08:58] Voice 5: I was going to read that out.

[3:08:59] Voice 5: What steps should the Allen's Trust begin taking to transition from

[3:09:03] Voice 5: primarily conservation,

[3:09:05] Voice 5: conservation, conventional land use, planning towards a more integrated conservation and

[3:09:11] Voice 5: ecosystem-informed planning model that better reflects the current ecological realities,

[3:09:19] Voice 5: reconciliation commitments, and long-term community well-being. Thank you for that comment,

[3:09:25] Voice 5: Trustee Elliott. And I see your hand is raised. Please go ahead.

[3:09:29] Voice 6: Yeah, so I agree with you,

[3:09:34] Voice 6: manager Tyrell the regional conservation plan is the one we have but it does need updating

[3:09:41] Voice 6: and it's not like can it be a different tool what kind of like spatial values can how can it be more

[3:09:56] Voice 6: integrated for the public for planners for staff can that regional conservation tool be imagined

[3:10:04] Voice 6: differently? Does it work as a, you know, the document that we have? So that's, you know, updating the next regional conservation plan. What do we need to consider now that, you know, climate change and reconciliation and our communities have changed a lot?

[3:10:26] Voice 6: But does the regional conservation plan, as we have it, is that the right tool?

[3:10:37] Voice 6: Or do we need to reimagine how it can better function?

[3:10:46] Voice 5: Excellent conversation today.

[3:10:51] Voice 5: Any comments there, Manager Turrell?

[3:10:53] Voice 5: Are we bound?

[3:10:56] Voice 5: Are we prescribed a particular way in which we use a regional conservation plan?

[3:11:01] Voice 5: Is there latitude for us in that?

[3:11:05] Voice 8: Absolutely. There is latitude within that. Absolutely.

[3:11:09] Voice 8: And given a 10-year window, I think the timing is excellent for updating that RCP and the conversations that go with it.

[3:11:20] Voice 8: There's lots of steps that will need to go towards that.

[3:11:25] Voice 8: And one of which is going to be coming to you for the budget request will be for a project charter and business case moving forward for the updating.

[3:11:36] Voice 8: I think we would need, I think the discussion would need to be had with how is the conservation RGCP being used currently to determine whether or not it's being used effectively.

[3:11:49] Voice 8: effectively so i think it has a lot of value in what is prescribed in it um however whether it's

[3:11:58] Voice 8: being utilized at its full potential is a question um and and could it perhaps be um better shared

[3:12:07] Voice 8: and um and and guided for its use and absolutely an updated rcp even using the same format

[3:12:19] Voice 8: mat would be significantly different because we have data that would change that, you know,

[3:12:27] Voice 8: any, there's always the interactive tool concept as well. So something online. So all of those are

[3:12:35] Voice 8: really good discussions. Thank you. I was going to go

[3:12:38] Voice 5: to Trustee Yates and then Trustee Elliott.

[3:12:41] Voice 20: Oh, thank you, Chair Govro. Such a good discussion. And I'm sorry, I have to have my camera off. My

[3:12:46] Voice 20: internet's quite wobbly right now um i just can't decide um because they're all so important

[3:12:53] Voice 20: um the one that i wouldn't tackle is the funding request um i don't think this is the right time

[3:13:02] Voice 20: but i do think we should have a discussion on artificial intelligence um just mainly so that

[3:13:09] Voice 20: well first of all it's very timely it's important it's relevant so that the uh conservancy and so

[3:13:16] Voice 20: so that counsel are kind of on the same page. So if we're approached by the press or by the public

[3:13:24] Voice 20: about AI, what will our message be? And will the ITC's message be the same as counsel's?

[3:13:34] Voice 20: And when we meet with EC, CAO Brawny is there, and that's really helpful too. So even if we only

[3:13:42] Voice 20: spent 20 minutes on artificial intelligence i would like to see that on the agenda thank you

[3:13:49] Voice 20: thank you thank you just elliot go ahead okay

[3:13:53] Voice 6: so i'm a regional conservation plan that is a pdf

[3:14:01] Voice 6: um with different links on our website to you know protecting tariff or sensitive ecosystems

[3:14:09] Voice 6: systems and so on. I just scanned through it again. This is a plan that is static. This is

[3:14:16] Voice 6: a plan that we did a lot of research and then produce a document and then staff use it. So as

[3:14:21] Voice 6: you say, Manager Tyrell, perhaps some knowledge about how the plan is used or what parts are used,

[3:14:28] Voice 6: but it's not a dynamic plan. It does not allow for there's changes on the ground. How does that

[3:14:36] Voice 6: get fed back into the plan so a 10-year regional conservation plan things are happening at a very

[3:14:44] Voice 6: quick rate so i do think there needs to be some sort of spatial integrated something different

[3:14:52] Voice 6: that um allows because we've got some communities that like start and stop their ocp review and it

[3:15:00] Voice 6: of goes for, you know, eight years. And then, you know, it's this shoreline zone that, you know,

[3:15:08] Voice 6: that doesn't translate to like, how is that information captured? How can we direct our

[3:15:14] Voice 6: attention? I don't know. It's, it's like a static plan that's a PDF is just it's, it does not allow

[3:15:20] Voice 6: for that ecosystem informed decision making. Like, is it a decision making tool? Or it's just

[3:15:31] Voice 6: here, we've produced what's important to us. And here's some goals, but we're actually not

[3:15:36] Voice 6: measuring how we're meeting those goals. Do you know what I mean? It could be so much more. So

[3:15:42] Voice 6: backing up is what does the regional conservation plan need to look like? Do we need different tools

[3:15:47] Voice 6: for that? And then how does that dovetail with the Islands Trust Council's direction from the CAO

[3:15:54] Voice 6: of a five-year plan for technology? Do we need to put in requests for specific types of technology

[3:16:02] Voice 6: and mapping tools so that it can be truly integrated? So this is the decision-making

[3:16:07] Voice 6: body that should be, with all of our knowledge, re-envisioning what does ecological protection

[3:16:16] Voice 6: or integrity look like across the trust area and how is that managed and how is the information

[3:16:24] Voice 6: fed back into the plan rather than just a static 10-year set of goals thank you i would like that

[3:16:31] Voice 6: to be the discussion at the

[3:16:35] Voice 5: meeting

[3:16:36] Voice 15: yeah

[3:16:37] Voice 5: i think we i think it's pretty clear that well from the

[3:16:41] Voice 5: voices that we've heard now um that the regional conservation plan should be a topic of discussion

[3:16:46] Voice 5: at the meeting if anything to gather the support from the executive committee at trust council

[3:16:52] Voice 5: during those budget talks as well is there any other comments from the board about discussion

[3:17:00] Voice 5: discussion themes for our meeting that's what we're looking for we have a two-hour meeting i

[3:17:07] Voice 5: it would be in my opinion um uh we would have time for a conversation around ai it does sound

[3:17:13] Voice 5: like there's conference there as well from the board here um yeah regional conservation plan

[3:17:20] Voice 5: what other themes that we have i think much of what um toby was talking about with the um

[3:17:33] Voice 5: what do you call it like the land use planning and biodiversity like where do these these um

[3:17:40] Voice 5: ideas meet um could be captured in a conversation around the regional conservation plan

[3:17:46] Voice 5: and kind of get swept in that i think it's going to be a really complicated conversation to steer

[3:17:50] Voice 5: as chair i would certainly love to see that scoped out a little bit more i don't know that we need to

[3:17:55] Voice 5: do that today um we have some time before that meeting but i'm looking for more themes from the

[3:18:01] Voice 5: from the board maybe from some of the voices we haven't heard much from today

[3:18:09] Voice 5: any any thoughts at all i

[3:18:19] Voice 9: wouldn't mind oh i heard a

[3:18:21] Voice 5: voice uh

[3:18:22] Voice 9: yeah i'm not entirely sure

[3:18:24] Voice 9: what the ec knows or what their role is in reconciliation and engagement with first

[3:18:30] Voice 9: nations but maybe that would be a good discussion to keep on there um kind of where we're at and

[3:18:42] Voice 9: where the lpc is at on that yep

[3:18:47] Voice 5: where the uh ec is and where the idea yeah exactly it's there's

[3:18:53] Voice 5: a lot of transformative change happening too it'd be amazing for us to get informed from the ec

[3:18:57] Voice 5: see on what's happening particular yeah

[3:19:00] Voice 11: i

[3:19:01] Voice 5: agree so reconciliation so we have ai reconciliation

[3:19:10] Voice 5: and engagement we have the regional conservation plan any other themes i'm looking at the time

[3:19:21] Voice 5: and i'm looking to manage your trail do you have uh do you have some um semblance of a plan here

[3:19:31] Voice 5: i'm sure we can meet again and go over and formalize a lot we've heard quite a bit from

[3:19:36] Voice 5: the board about their their interests oh i see oh sorry i see vice chair now comes in

[3:19:46] Voice 12: thank you chair gabbro um i just wanted to share that i also agree and and um thank you with uh

[3:19:53] Voice 12: trustee elliott's comment in the chat just regarding kind of the regional planning approach

[3:19:57] Voice 12: and i think that would be a good topic of discussion just in terms of what i don't need

[3:20:03] Voice 12: i won't read it out but she just laid it out really well there but um and maybe even in the

[3:20:09] Voice 12: example during that discussion if we're able to have have it um is even bringing up the example

[3:20:15] Voice 12: on north pender island um and that facility that was is uh zoned as rural and will be is has an

[3:20:24] Voice 12: application to be transitioned into industrial even though in the official community plan that

[3:20:29] Voice 12: area is designated as industrial but i think maybe highlighting that example would would be helpful

[3:20:35] Voice 12: for us to say like you know this is one example that we've seen recently i'm sure there's others

[3:20:40] Voice 12: to kind of help realign the priorities between both organizations and just trying to improve

[3:20:49] Voice 12: the planning process as suggested in in the statement that trustee elliott had put in the chat

[3:20:56] Voice 12: But I would really find that to be helpful because I feel that encaptures the really core essence of the Islands Trust Conservancy and the Islands Trust itself when it comes to preservation of the environment and, you know, effective community planning.

[3:21:15] Voice 12: So I just wanted to share my thoughts on that.

[3:21:18] Voice 12: That's a supportive discussion around that.

[3:21:19] Voice 12: And thank you for flagging that, Trustee Elliott.

[3:21:23] Voice 5: Thank you very much.

[3:21:25] Voice 5: Yeah, I think we noted that earlier as well.

[3:21:27] Voice 5: I'll keep that application in mind, that bylaw referral, when we came to the section.

[3:21:33] Voice 5: All right.

[3:21:34] Voice 5: Back to Manager Terrell.

[3:21:36] Voice 5: Do you have

[3:21:38] Voice 8: what you need?

[3:21:40] Voice 8: What I'm understanding is that the primary conversation, which I will ask that Carly jot down the quote that Trustee Elliott placed in the chat,

[3:21:54] Voice 8: or send it if you could trustee Elliott directly by email that would be great

[3:21:58] Voice 8: and that also reconciliation and engagement with First Nations so I'm I I was hearing two

[3:22:05] Voice 8: primary topics of conversation for that meeting and is that correct I think we also had AI

[3:22:12] Voice 8: okay as well so I can take those three topic discussions and

[3:22:23] Voice 8: and present that to Alex, the EC coordinator for the agenda.

[3:22:31] Voice 5: Thank you. Thank you very much. Great. And then we'll get the time.

[3:22:35] Voice 5: I suggest we move on. I guess we're kind of at a crossroads here,

[3:22:39] Voice 5: board. If we wish, I mean,

[3:22:41] Voice 5: we could continue on with the rest of the agenda or we can go to our in

[3:22:46] Voice 5: camera, which was scheduled to start at 1 PM under expectations from staff.

[3:22:51] Voice 5: staff, they may have had planning or may have scoped out that timeline and may be expecting

[3:22:58] Voice 5: to have that time break time away. Or what's the board's wish? Do you want to go to the

[3:23:06] Voice 5: camera now and then come back and complete the agenda or keep going for it? Trustee Yates?

[3:23:14] Voice 20: I'm happy either way. I'm just wondering if staff needs a preference here.

[3:23:19] Voice 20: That was my thoughts.

[3:23:21] Voice 8: Thank you very much.

[3:23:22] Voice 8: No, I'm happy to leave it up to the board for you to make that decision.

[3:23:27] Voice 8: We just were guessing at timeline.

[3:23:28] Voice 8: So if you want to continue with the regular meeting, that would absolutely work for us as well.

[3:23:34] Voice 5: All right.

[3:23:37] Voice 5: Then I'll suggest that we continue with the meeting.

[3:23:41] Voice 5: And I've scoped out about 30 minutes or so for the in-camera.

[3:23:45] Voice 5: So I'll keep an eye on the time.

[3:23:47] Voice 5: I'll keep an eye on the clock.

[3:23:48] Voice 5: Make sure we don't run out of time.

[3:23:50] Voice 5: all right so moving on to uh correspondence which 7.3 uh seeing none moves us into 7.4 which is

[3:23:59] Voice 5: updates for information and just a reminder to anyone who has reports from any committee meetings

[3:24:08] Voice 5: to send any bullet points to um either myself if you don't have carly's email uh or to wendy

[3:24:15] Voice 5: and we can make sure those are included in the minutes thank you um yeah item 4.1 is public

[3:24:24] Voice 5: acquisitions report and that would be over to uh specialist martel i am

[3:24:30] Voice 10: happy to take any questions

[3:24:32] Voice 10: that there might be

[3:24:33] Voice 5: awesome thank you any questions from the board seeing none then i believe we shall

[3:24:48] Voice 5: She'll go on to 7.4.2, which is a covenants report with Specialist Martel as well.

[3:24:56] Voice 5: Anything from the board on that?

[3:25:01] Voice 5: Seeing none, I thank you for your time, Specialist Martel.

[3:25:07] Voice 5: And item 4.4, yeah, 7.4.4, the ITC five-year plan update.

[3:25:14] Voice 5: Over to you, Manager Terrell.

[3:25:17] Voice 8: Hi, thank you.

[3:25:18] Voice 8: Jill Merrick is on vacation.

[3:25:20] Voice 8: And so I will be presenting just a brief update on the five-year plan.

[3:25:24] Voice 8: So due to staff capacity, I'm pointing at myself, phase two is not moving along as quickly as we would like.

[3:25:35] Voice 8: I think after audit and some vacancies are filled, we will have, I'll have a little bit more time to focus on that.

[3:25:43] Voice 8: However, we have been having some excellent working group meetings.

[3:25:49] Voice 8: The Islands Trust Conservancy are now attending working group meetings with SEALT on a regular basis, SEALT First Nations.

[3:25:58] Voice 8: We will be attending and have been invited to attend meetings with Tlatmen and Tsanamas as well in the coming month.

[3:26:09] Voice 8: And these conversations are agenda and activity specific.

[3:26:19] Voice 8: So we talk about the different referrals that are out to the nation, not just the five-year plan referral, but also we have a current covenant out for referral right now.

[3:26:28] Voice 8: We have another referral out to nations regarding Ruby Elton.

[3:26:33] Voice 8: And so these discussions are starting to become more fulsome, staff-to-staff discussions, which I think are really excellent.

[3:26:43] Voice 8: We have interests from other nations that are actively asking what is entailed in Phase 2, which is fantastic.

[3:26:51] Voice 8: And so I am very grateful to Senior Indigenous Relations Advisor Elliot for his contributions to this work and how we're moving forward and also Staff Policy Advisor Jill Merrick as well.

[3:27:04] Voice 8: And so our next plan in phase two is to develop guiding principles, looking at the work that the Islands Trust Conservancy does under the Act and the Five-Year Plan, and the overlap with interests that the nations have come to us with, and meeting with interested nations on discussing how we can work together on those overlapping interests.

[3:27:30] Voice 8: And I'm happy to answer any questions.

[3:27:34] Voice 8: Any questions for the board?

[3:27:36] Voice 8: just

[3:27:38] Voice 5: alien so

[3:27:40] Voice 6: if we have um through other work contacts with um representatives uh or first

[3:27:48] Voice 6: nation council members you know and i happen to raise you know conservancy is engaging on five

[3:27:54] Voice 6: year plan have you heard about it and they're like no idea do you want us to send them your way

[3:27:58] Voice 6: like what's the process absolutely yeah

[3:28:03] Voice 8: absolutely you can send them my contact information

[3:28:06] Voice 8: information um they also do uh as we know first nations are getting referrals on a on a massive

[3:28:15] Voice 8: level like 10 15 a day um and that process is really tricky so sometimes the referrals do fall

[3:28:24] Voice 8: through the cracks and the five-year plan is is one of those as well and so um we have followed

[3:28:32] Voice 8: load up with nations we haven't heard back from um a couple of times but at some point we have to

[3:28:38] Voice 8: sit back and um and let them come to us you know we are um i don't want to say we're small potatoes

[3:28:44] Voice 8: because that's not true but they have other priorities as well that they're working on

[3:28:48] Voice 8: and so when it becomes apparent of those you know that the conservancy is looking to address

[3:28:56] Voice 8: rest and and reconcile those those overlaps and work with nations i think um we will be hearing

[3:29:04] Voice 8: hopefully and working with more yeah but

[3:29:09] Voice 5: excellent work any more comments or questions from the board

[3:29:17] Voice 5: seeing them and we shall move on we're on to 7.4.4 which is i just realized i mislabeled the last

[3:29:26] Voice 5: item i'm sorry my numbering's off of my agenda today this item that we're on right now is 7.4.4

[3:29:32] Voice 5: four. That's the executive committee update. My apologies again.

[3:29:38] Voice 8: That's actually my mistake. I

[3:29:40] Voice 8: apologize for not updating your agenda.

[3:29:43] Voice 6: We live by the agenda numbers. Yes.

[3:29:47] Voice 6: Like, thank you.

[3:29:51] Voice 7: All right. So

[3:29:51] Voice 6: just two quick items to note. Executive committee met,

[3:29:57] Voice 6: I guess, April 15th and May 6th.

[3:30:00] Voice 6: Um, we had a good discussion on, um, so a strategic plan survey question, and this trust

[3:30:13] Voice 6: council is developing its strategic priorities.

[3:30:16] Voice 6: And, um, in lieu of public engagement on the budget, um, the budget preparation for next

[3:30:26] Voice 6: Next year's budget, council had directed, instead, let's do engagement on strategic priorities.

[3:30:33] Voice 6: So we had a bit of a discussion there, and Chair Patrick is always very keen with the analysis.

[3:30:41] Voice 6: We sort of redirected a question into categories, asking people what matters most to them,

[3:30:52] Voice 6: such as and to rank them protecting the natural environment supporting housing options so that

[3:30:57] Voice 6: that'll be coming out please keep an eye out for that i'm not sure the timeline yet but that

[3:31:04] Voice 6: is some of the work underway by executive committee and then i just wanted to note that

[3:31:09] Voice 6: all four executive committee members attended the association of vancouver island coastal

[3:31:16] Voice 6: communities convention just in April. I think it was the 22nd to 24th in Victoria. And so all four

[3:31:25] Voice 6: of us have produced reports on what we learned there. There was a number of great sessions,

[3:31:31] Voice 6: including the Islands Coastal Economic Trust had a panel presentation. Bob Chamberlain was there,

[3:31:41] Voice 6: Mayor Michelle Staples, Mayor of Duncan, who is chair of the ICE-T board, which we're not

[3:31:48] Voice 6: supposed to call ICE-T anymore. And so that was a great discussion. There were some other things

[3:31:52] Voice 6: that might be of interest. So if you want, I can forward those reports to the board just for your

[3:31:59] Voice 6: interest. There's sort of a range of learning topics and updates that may or may not be relevant,

[3:32:08] Voice 6: of it but I can send those along it's an important convention that's the hub for UBCM which is the

[3:32:15] Voice 6: union of BC municipalities they meet in September so oh and I wanted to mention there was one

[3:32:22] Voice 6: resolution advanced from the city of Nanaimo to ban the export of raw logs so there's a the wording

[3:32:30] Voice 6: on that resolution is quite good and actually if you look at through the resolutions there's some

[3:32:35] Voice 6: really uh key ones on um yeah anyway just ask me for the report or i'll send it to the board

[3:32:42] Voice 6: and i highlighted some of the key resolutions that i thought might be of interest to islands

[3:32:47] Voice 6: trust so that's it for me thank you thank you i would love to read those reports

[3:32:53] all right

[3:32:55] Voice 5: moving on to the next item uh trust council update um 4.4.5 our last meeting was

[3:33:03] Voice 5: It was the week after the last Trust Council, so there will be no update there unless Trustee Elliott has anything she wishes to add, future meeting.

[3:33:16] Voice 5: No, right.

[3:33:17] Voice 5: All right.

[3:33:18] Voice 5: Then we'll move on to 7.4.6, Financial Planning Committee Update.

[3:33:25] Voice 5: That's over to you, Trustee Yates.

[3:33:29] Voice 5: What's new in the world of the Financial Planning Committee?

[3:33:31] Voice 5: well i

[3:33:36] Voice 20: have to confess when it comes to reporting for the financial planning committee

[3:33:40] Voice 20: all i can say is um i'm just so happy that we have advice from islands trust conservancy board

[3:33:49] Voice 20: members and staff before we have fbc meetings we always get some really good input from staff

[3:33:57] Voice 20: staff and board members so that we can support the Islands Trust Conservancy budget at those

[3:34:03] Voice 20: meetings. And in my own, coming from my own personal perspective, we never, we never get

[3:34:12] Voice 20: enough for the Islands Trust Conservancy. And I think that is partly because there are quite a

[3:34:19] Voice 20: few trustees or some trustees who still don't realize how important the Conservancy is to the

[3:34:27] Voice 20: the entire trust area. Because I can assure you, even like residents and citizens of the trust area

[3:34:33] Voice 20: understand the importance of the Islands Trust Conservancy sometimes better than they do the

[3:34:39] Voice 20: actual Islands Trust itself. So perhaps Trustee Elliott would like to make a more direct comment

[3:34:47] Voice 20: on the, you know, what happened at the last meetings. But I'm just always really grateful

[3:34:53] Voice 20: for the support that we get before those meetings so that we can, you know, really support the

[3:35:00] Voice 20: budget that we need. Thank you.

[3:35:02] Voice 6: Thank you. Thank you. Chelsea Elliott. Yeah, just a note on sort

[3:35:08] Voice 6: of in advance of the next Financial Planning Committee meeting, which is May 27th. It may

[3:35:16] Voice 6: It may be of interest to board members to listen in. We have a new director of financial planning, no, financial services, and I don't know what the name is, administration.

[3:35:28] Voice 6: administration um sir director mobs is is on a leave of absence so derek coburn actually had a

[3:35:34] Voice 6: conversation with him he said they're bringing a substantial package uh for fpc to review

[3:35:41] Voice 6: and especially the um budget um assumptions and principles document which is kind of difficult

[3:35:52] Voice 6: to understand. We've been working on this all council, but it really is the guardrails for what

[3:35:59] Voice 6: council wants to fund. It's kind of like the strategic plan. It's the assumptions that go

[3:36:04] Voice 6: into it, the different factors and the principles by which the planning is done. And he seems to

[3:36:12] Voice 6: have a, not a different view, but he really wants to bring some energy to that conversation.

[3:36:18] Voice 6: And that could provide the rigor of early financial planning so that we're not in this, you know, at the end of budget time trying to make $2,000 to $3,000 cuts. We've got the guardrails on from the very beginning. So I think that's part of the conversation. May 28th, 27th is the FPC discussion. So this starts the cycle for next year. Thanks.

[3:36:48] Voice 6: Thank you.

[3:36:49] Voice 5: Thank you. Next item is the governance committee. That's me. It's 7.4.7. The last governance committee meeting, we discussed ways which improving trust council committee structure.

[3:37:10] Voice 5: We received a briefing overall, and we decided that the briefing was best served maybe in the hands of Trust Council.

[3:37:20] Voice 5: So you'll see it at Trust Council, probably the next one, I believe, actually.

[3:37:26] Voice 5: We also reviewed the table of the delegated authorities of executive committee.

[3:37:33] Voice 5: We agreed that we needed further discussion on that.

[3:37:37] Voice 5: so we'll bring it back to um in our july meeting it's quite the robust um table um there's uh

[3:37:45] Voice 5: policies there's um what do you call provincial legislation legislative responsibilities

[3:37:54] Voice 5: um so yeah it'll be part of a more fulsome dialogue looking at is this the most efficient

[3:38:00] Voice 5: way forward. Also, we made recommendations around bylaw amendments to formalize RWM procedures

[3:38:11] Voice 5: for Trust Council and for local trust committees. That's especially relevant to us at the ITC

[3:38:19] Voice 5: because we approved some model language for Donald's Trust Conservancy Board for the use

[3:38:27] Voice 5: of our RWMs and you'll see that in the upcoming board package. We also approved the Governance

[3:38:36] Voice 5: Committee, our annual report, minor amendments. And lastly, at that last meeting, which is quite

[3:38:42] Voice 5: a robust meeting, we forwarded the report from the Ombudsperson. They created a report around

[3:38:50] Voice 5: open meetings. So we'll be forwarding out to all trustees and the onboarding working group

[3:38:57] Voice 5: as well. And yeah, I'll leave it there. That's about all. I will send all my bullet points to

[3:39:06] Voice 5: Carly and we shall move on. Next item, number eight, public comments and delegations. I don't

[3:39:15] Voice 5: believe we have anybody from the public here today so we shall move on new business item

[3:39:21] Voice 5: nine there is no new business identified and so our next meeting which is not july 8th which will

[3:39:28] Voice 5: be june 2nd uh electronic meeting for us on tuesday june 2nd and then the following meeting

[3:39:36] Voice 5: will be uh july 28th from 10 till 3. and that brings us to the closed um closed meeting portion

[3:39:45] Voice 5: of our meeting. And I'm going to ask Manager Terrell a question first, looking at the agenda

[3:39:50] Voice 5: that we have. Is our motion sufficient for the topics? Yes, they are. Thank you. Excellent. Thank

[3:39:57] Voice 5: you. And then I will be looking for someone to move the motion.

[3:40:06] Voice 7: Trustee Yates, go ahead.

[3:40:09] Voice 20: I move that the Islands Trust Conservancy Board meeting be closed to the public in accordance

[3:40:14] Voice 20: with the Community Charter, Part 4, Division 3, Section 91E,

[3:40:19] Voice 20: the acquisition, disposition, or expropriation of land or improvements,

[3:40:24] Voice 20: if the Board considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected

[3:40:28] Voice 20: to harm the interests of the Islands Trust Conservancy Board

[3:40:31] Voice 20: and that staff be invited to remain in the meeting.

[3:40:37] Voice 20: Thank you. Looking for a seconder.

[3:40:43] Voice 5: Seconded by Vice Chair Namkum.

[3:40:46] Voice 5: And I shall call the vote. All in favour?

[3:40:51] Voice 5: Thank you. Motion is carried. If anyone's watching at home, I anticipate our meeting will probably be about 30 to 40 minutes when we'll return.

[3:41:01] Voice 5: Thank you. We can turn off the live stream.

[3:41:04] Voice 5: And we are live streaming.

[3:41:18] Voice 5: Great. Thank you. We're returning back to our open meeting, or yeah, to the open meeting from our closed meeting.

[3:41:25] Voice 5: And we are here just to adjourn our regular meeting.

[3:41:30] Voice 5: I'm going to entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting if there is nothing else from staff, sorry, I should check first. Is there anything from staff?

[3:41:41] Voice 5: No, there is no more from staff. Thank you.

[3:41:43] Voice 5: Thank you very much. Then I shall take a motion to adjourn our meeting.

[3:41:50] Voice 5: And I see Trustee Yates right there. Great. So moved and a seconder.

[3:41:57] Voice 5: Trustee Elliott there seconding and I shall call the vote.

[3:42:02] Voice 5: vote. All in favor? All right, unanimous. The motion carried. We are adjourned at 2.16. Thank

[3:42:12] Voice 5: you. Thank you, Chair Govro. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, staff.

[3:42:19] Voice 6: Here's a picture

[3:42:20] Voice 6: of my pretty horses. Oh, no, I can't see their masks. Bye, everyone.

[3:42:25] Voice 5: Oh, yeah, they are very

[3:42:27] Voice 5: Very cute.

[3:42:29] Voice 5: Oh, you're out in the barn.

[3:42:30] Voice 5: That's why it's so pretty.

[3:42:31] Voice 6: Oh, nice.

[3:42:32] Voice 6: I know.

[3:42:32] Voice 6: I had to go feed them.

[3:42:34] Voice 6: Thank you.