Islands Trust Conservancy Board regular meeting, July 28, 2026

[0:00:02] Voice 3: And we're finished. Fantastic. I will call duty to order. Today is Tuesday, July 28, 2026, so time is 10.08, and this is the Allens Trust Conservancy Board regular meeting.

[0:00:14] Voice 3: I would like to start by acknowledging the land that we are meeting on today as the unceded traditional territory to many co-sailor nations.

[0:00:23] Voice 3: Nations. My name is Lisa

[0:00:25] Voice 3: Govro. I have the honor of chairing

[0:00:27] Voice 3: for the Islands Trust Conservancy.

[0:00:29] Voice 3: I'm elected on Galliano Island

[0:00:31] Voice 3: and perhaps we'll do a round of introductions

[0:00:33] Voice 3: to the board. I pass

[0:00:35] Voice 3: it over to you, Trustee Elliott.

[0:00:37] Voice 3: Thank you, Chair Govro.

[0:00:38] Voice 3: I'm Toby Elliott, elected on

[0:00:41] Voice 3: Gabriela Island in Sonoma First Nation

[0:00:43] Voice 3: Territory. I'm pleased to serve

[0:00:45] Voice 3: on the Conservancy Board

[0:00:47] Voice 3: as the Executive Committee Liaison.

[0:00:51] Voice 9: I'm Trustee Georgeson

[0:00:53] Voice 9: appointed from Galeano Island and yeah I'm happy to be here.

[0:01:01] Trustee Yates (probable): I am Susan Yates elected for the

[0:01:05] Trustee Yates (probable): Gabriola local trust area which includes Mudge and Degorsi Islands and it is part of Snuneymuk

[0:01:12] Trustee Yates (probable): territory and I'm very happy to be here.

[0:01:16] Voice 3: I'm Risa Smith. I live in Galeano Island

[0:01:22] Voice 3: appointed representative. Thank you. Thank you. We do have a sixth board member, our vice chair,

[0:01:28] Voice 3: Namco, who will be joining us in a little bit. He's running a little bit late. He's in another

[0:01:32] Voice 3: meeting, but he'll be here. And then I'm going to hand it over to Manager Otero, who will introduce

[0:01:39] Voice 3: her staff. Hi. Good morning. My name is Wendy Terrell. I'm the manager of the Islands Trust

[0:01:45] Voice 3: Trust Conservancy, and I'm very happy to be here today at this board meeting. We are joined by our

[0:01:51] Voice 3: staff. We have Gemma Green. Gemma, can you introduce yourself, please?

[0:02:00] Voice 4: Hello, everyone. My name is Gemma Green. I'm the team lead for Protected Area Management,

[0:02:06] Voice 4: and I'm very happy to be here with you all today and looking forward to seeing you in person

[0:02:09] Voice 4: shortly.

[0:02:12] Voice 3: And we have Catherine

[0:02:13] Voice 12: Martel. I squeeze you every morning. Good morning.

[0:02:17] Voice 12: Oops, I disappeared. There we go.

[0:02:21] Voice 12: Catherine Martel, Ecosystem Protection Specialist.

[0:02:26] Voice 12: Thank you,

[0:02:26] Voice 3: Catherine. We have Jill Merrick.

[0:02:34] Voice 2: Good morning, everyone. It's a pleasure to see you again.

[0:02:40] Voice 2: I'm Jill Merrick, and I'm the Senior Policy Analyst

[0:02:44] Voice 2: and get lent to Wendy occasionally by Claire.

[0:02:50] Voice 2: And

[0:02:51] Voice 3: we have Caroline Guichereau.

[0:02:54] Voice 3: Yes, good morning,

[0:02:55] Voice 3: everybody. I'm Administrative Assistant for the Conservancy, and I'll be the record owner of the meeting.

[0:03:03] Voice 3: And I'm very pleased to announce two new Amnesty Trust Conservancy staff. We have in the room here Erin Udall. Erin is our new Communication Specialist, and we're great, happy to have her. And then online, we have Erica Bland. And Erica, can you introduce yourself?

[0:03:21] Voice 8: Yes, good morning, everyone. Lovely to be here. I'm zooming in from Denman Island, Pentlatch, Comax, Qualcomm territory, and very, very pleased to be part of the ITC team.

[0:03:36] Voice 3: And I'd like to also introduce to my left, Derek Cockburn.

[0:03:42] Voice 7: I'm the Director of Finance and Employee Services. I'll be here to support Wendy on the budget piece of today's agenda.

[0:03:50] Voice 3: And to my right, Claire Frater.

[0:03:53] Voice 3: Good morning, everyone.

[0:03:54] Voice 3: Very pleased to be joining

[0:03:55] Voice 3: you this morning.

[0:03:58] Voice 3: I'm the Director of Trust Area Services.

[0:04:02] Voice 3: Thank you.

[0:04:03] Voice 3: Thank you.

[0:04:03] Voice 3: That's Jo Elliott.

[0:04:05] Voice 3: Jo Elliott, yes.

[0:04:10] Voice 1: Yeah, it's Gwil.

[0:04:11] Voice 1: Jo Elliott, Column Leader from Traditional Territory, Couch, and Tribes,

[0:04:14] Voice 1: and recognizing the importance of our work with many Coast Salish First Nations

[0:04:18] Voice 1: who have distinctive recognition as nations.

[0:04:21] Voice 1: So, Aichika, thank you.

[0:04:25] Voice 5: Thank you. And

[0:04:27] Voice 3: that's it for staff. I see that we have my chair, Nankum.

[0:04:32] Voice 3: Say good morning, introduce yourself. Good morning, you.

[0:04:34] Voice 3: Good

[0:04:36] Voice 6: morning, everyone. Thank you, Chair Gavreau. I apologize that I'm not there in person today.

[0:04:42] Voice 6: I send my regrets, but it's good to see everyone and welcome to the new staff members as well.

[0:04:48] Voice 6: My name is Tanner Timothy and my traditional name is Nankum.

[0:04:52] Voice 6: I am First Nations from Slam and First Nation on the Upper Sunshine Coast.

[0:04:57] Voice 6: as well as Wiwakai Nation over in the same area of the Salish Sea,

[0:05:02] Voice 6: but just off of Vancouver Island on Quadra Island.

[0:05:05] Voice 6: Yeah, looking forward to our meeting today, and thank you for having me here.

[0:05:10] Voice 3: Thank you. Thank you.

[0:05:12] Voice 3: Before we get to the meeting, I do have an announcement.

[0:05:14] Voice 3: It's my absolute pleasure to announce that the province has appointed

[0:05:20] Voice 3: one-year reappointments for Trustee Jorgensen and for Trustee Smith.

[0:05:25] Voice 3: which has been extended until July 21st, 2027, and visa to August 21st, 2027, and this will mark visa's sixth year for the IPC.

[0:05:37] Voice 3: Thank you.

[0:05:39] Voice 3: Congratulations.

[0:05:42] Voice 3: Thank you very much. And then our meeting today, we have a very tight schedule this morning.

[0:05:48] Voice 3: We have a hard stop at noon for lunch, because this afternoon we're meeting with the Executive Committee for a liaison meeting.

[0:05:54] Voice 3: and we have a meeting run from 1 till 3. This morning's meeting is going to run

[0:06:00] Voice 3: from now till 1130 at which point we're going to go into camera and so I don't

[0:06:07] Voice 3: see us taking a break this morning but we do get one hour for lunch and your

[0:06:10] Voice 3: lunch is excellent so looking forward to that. Without further ado let's get into

[0:06:16] Voice 3: to the agenda agenda. Are there any additions? Seeing none? I

[0:06:26] Voice 3: think we will approve the agenda by general consent. I'm for

[0:06:30] Voice 3: res report. Nothing to report there. Moves us right into the

[0:06:34] Voice 3: adoption of minutes. So we're looking at the minutes for May

[0:06:37] Voice 3: 12. Did anybody have anything?

[0:06:40] Voice 3: Yeah, just one minor correction. It could have been in the

[0:06:43] Voice 3: the original i didn't notice it on page six um it says cultural practices including indigenous

[0:06:50] Voice 3: hunting blah blah blah example galliano conservancy association's quadrigal nature reserve

[0:06:55] Voice 3: um that management plan for that nature reserve is in draft form and it doesn't include prescribery

[0:07:03] Voice 3: so just take out the example i would

[0:07:05] Voice 3: ask sorry i'm going to ask a page six page six yeah of the

[0:07:09] Voice 3: agenda sorry i don't

[0:07:11] Trustee Yates (probable): know it's the one

[0:07:11] Voice 3: with the oh i see page six of the agenda and it's the may

[0:07:15] Voice 3: 12th minutes right yeah okay and it's the one two three fourth bullet point four fantastic we'll

[0:07:23] Voice 3: make a note of that any other amendments then we'll prove the minutes as amended by general

[0:07:32] Voice 3: consent we'll make sure i'm not going too fast for staff but those amendments retract yes we

[0:07:39] Voice 3: we have approval of the agenda? Yes. Yes, we do. Moving

[0:07:43] Voice 3: on. I'm going to be real fast today. All

[0:07:48] Voice 3: right. Then we're looking at the June 2nd minutes. That was the special meeting. Any amendments?

[0:07:55] Voice 3: I just need to keep up for the online. Seeing none, we'll approve those minutes by general consent.

[0:08:01] Voice 3: Then moving on to item number six, the follow-up action list. Any questions for

[0:08:07] Voice 3: manager cheryl seeing that we're moving right into business thank you thank you very much for that

[0:08:14] Voice 3: um items for approval we're moving straight into item 7.1.1 which is a 2026 27 ipc budget plus

[0:08:25] Voice 3: oh it should be 27 20. yeah it should be sorry thank you for that

[0:08:38] Voice 3: Over to you, Manager Turrell.

[0:08:41] Voice 3: Hi, thank you. Sorry about that typo on the agenda. That would be 2728 proposed budget

[0:08:46] Voice 3: request for the board. We have a recommendation for a budget we're presenting to you today

[0:08:52] Voice 3: and not unsimilar to the preliminary budget we presented in May. I am happy to answer

[0:09:01] Voice 3: answer any questions and go over anything in detail that you or the board is interested in.

[0:09:08] Voice 13: Looking

[0:09:09] Voice 3: to the board, any questions? Trustee Elliott, go ahead. So could you get into just

[0:09:15] Voice 3: to refresh our memories, what does the protected area management database development entail and

[0:09:21] Voice 3: new management plan template? And is this a one-time sort of cost the development of the

[0:09:27] Voice 3: template. So that's the last bullet on page 33. So the Protect Areas Management Database

[0:09:43] Voice 3: Development and Implementation Project, that one is currently we're not actually asking for

[0:09:49] Voice 3: any additional budget for that this year, for the 27-28 fiscal year. We have a small amount requested

[0:09:59] Voice 3: it for potential costs for the database but at this point most of the costs will be going over

[0:10:05] Voice 3: to the is department um as maintaining software but this was part of the purchase from last

[0:10:13] Voice 3: this current fiscal yes we have funding to purchase this fiscal is the 30 000 yeah which

[0:10:19] Voice 1: we're not

[0:10:19] Voice 3: asking for anymore this year okay

[0:10:21] Voice 3: but the templates um that's a one well i would say

[0:10:26] Voice 3: it's a not a common update that we need to do but occasionally we need to look at our management

[0:10:33] Voice 3: plans and the templates that we're using and update them so we have current information

[0:10:38] Voice 3: current language yeah especially in regards to reconciliation yeah well i was thinking that's

[0:10:44] Voice 3: kind of a big update though because the management plans have not been updated for

[0:10:48] Voice 3: I don't think it's been that long really yeah like I remember Robin was part um

[0:10:55] Voice 3: um creating the cultural template so that was

[0:11:00] Voice 3: five four or five years ago okay so this isn't

[0:11:03] Voice 3: detailed management for each this is the this is

[0:11:07] Voice 3: a template template

[0:11:08] Trustee Yates (probable): for yeah yeah that's good

[0:11:09] Voice 3: okay that's what I wanted to know

[0:11:16] Voice 3: I just was a bit confused on page 34 where you have projects and it's the ITC five-year plan

[0:11:23] Voice 3: it says $78,000 decrease and um it says the majority of capacity funding for the project

[0:11:34] Voice 3: having been provided in 2027-28 that should be 26-27 oh okay so that

[0:11:42] Voice 3: that's got me really

[0:11:43] Voice 3: okay thank you okay my apologies and then also um under that it says like project expenses will

[0:11:51] Voice 3: include 20 000 for capacity building and meeting costs which is 28 000 so i just don't understand

[0:11:59] Voice 3: what the decreases so last year we um requested and received 110 000 so the decreases mean from

[0:12:08] Voice 3: 26-27 to 27-28. So that's the amount less that we're requesting this year as this is phase two

[0:12:17] Voice 3: of the five-year plan engagement process. Okay and then I have one other question

[0:12:23] Voice 3: on page 35. So this organizational approval of the 27-28 budget will support

[0:12:42] Voice 3: support associated work with the island's trust conservancy to further protect and preserve

[0:12:46] Voice 3: the object of the trust but it isn't is it not also to support um the first nations consultation

[0:12:54] Voice 3: management i think the purpose of this sentence was to show that this is uh supporting the

[0:13:00] Voice 3: the mandate of the trust right so we have only that it supports the preserve and protect but

[0:13:06] Voice 3: i think it also supports it would

[0:13:08] Voice 3: be good to highlight that there yeah that it supports

[0:13:11] Voice 3: courts but it doesn't um claire i'm sort of confused i'm terrified of that sentence what

[0:13:16] Voice 3: i would say is that the object is to be includes the concept of doing in cooperation with so it's

[0:13:22] Voice 3: not just preserving and protecting it's doing so in cooperation but i'm trying to i wasn't putting

[0:13:25] Voice 3: my hand up because i haven't yet found the sentence oh it's under organizational yeah i

[0:13:29] Voice 3: understand that it does specify the protect and preserve mandate of the trust and i recognize i

[0:13:36] Voice 3: acknowledge what you're saying i agree that should we don't need

[0:13:38] Voice 3: to change it because it's simple

[0:13:39] Voice 3: yeah okay and then

[0:13:40] Voice 3: there's a typo under implementation communications it should be

[0:13:44] Voice 3: the 20 27 20 28 um and it's dyslexic numbers too so i totally i didn't touch any of them

[0:13:54] Voice 3: don't worry it's just the way we all do that yeah we'll get it by september we'll have it down

[0:14:05] Voice 3: and i think that was all of my comments okay um i have a couple more questions yes yes please

[0:14:13] Voice 3: yeah so budget for communications is proposed to go up is there it's but it's not really captured

[0:14:20] Voice 3: what those additional communication expenses will be and so one question and then the but

[0:14:30] Voice 3: But the table itself doesn't include projects.

[0:14:34] Voice 3: So, or it does, sorry.

[0:14:36] Voice 3: ITC 5.5 hair plan.

[0:14:38] Voice 3: Nevermind.

[0:14:39] Voice 3: So, that's good.

[0:14:40] Voice 3: Cancel that.

[0:14:42] Voice 3: So, communications is sort of,

[0:14:45] Voice 3: we haven't had a lot of attention on that.

[0:14:46] Voice 3: Obviously, just getting a new person on staff.

[0:14:49] Voice 3: So, what do you anticipate for efficient communication?

[0:14:53] Voice 3: I think one of the things I recognize

[0:14:55] Voice 3: is that we've only had 7, 8,000 maybe a year.

[0:14:59] Voice 3: And if you're looking at 12 months of a year, that doesn't provide a lot of communications outreach and work, other than the in-house work directly done by staff, which is also really important.

[0:15:11] Voice 3: So I'm starting with that foundation that $8,000 a year isn't really enough to just run a communications program for the Conservancy.

[0:15:20] Voice 3: But for Heron issues alone is between $7,000 and $8,000.

[0:15:25] Voice 3: We have the end-of-the-year appealed mail-out, which is $1,000.

[0:15:29] Voice 3: four ads per year at the most 3,000 or sorry four ads at the most for 3,000 um other expenses can

[0:15:37] Voice 3: be up to 5,000 like social media fees a holiday card printing out of the annual plan and the

[0:15:43] Voice 3: impact report um what we're asking for with this 6,000 increase is 3,000 for a graphic designer

[0:15:52] Voice 3: so we haven't had one on staff for the conservancy not on staff sorry uh as a contractor

[0:15:58] Voice 3: we would like to send our communication specialist to the canadian association

[0:16:02] Voice 3: of gift planners annual conference which is a hundred fifteen hundred we have the willpower

[0:16:09] Voice 3: legacy promotion campaign that is updated or um renewing next year and even after that we're

[0:16:19] Voice 3: still under budget so that's the request for the six thousand increase totally makes sense um it's

[0:16:26] Voice 3: it's only that in when executive committee approves its communication we had a communication

[0:16:31] Voice 3: strategy and we had like 50 000 allocated for those things listed out so i think for the next

[0:16:36] Voice 3: budget discussion we should maybe link it to the communications strategies we have one don't we

[0:16:43] Voice 3: is that for the irs trust or the conservancy concerns

[0:16:46] Voice 3: we'll take a look back i lost the

[0:16:50] Voice 3: plot i'm pretty sure we have a problem we approved a calm strategy and we'll have to

[0:16:53] Voice 3: to provide the itemization in the justification form anyway yeah okay yeah absolutely because i

[0:16:59] Voice 3: think you probably need more but i'm a little confused as to what's you know willpower fund

[0:17:04] Voice 3: a will giving or you know whatever the there's different buckets so it would be helpful to know

[0:17:10] Voice 3: what that's for and i agree that it needs to be more than eight thousand dollars it's just

[0:17:14] Voice 3: i think we want to see keep tracking what what the expenses are so that year over year you can

[0:17:22] Voice 3: and the board is able to support that.

[0:17:24] Voice 3: I think I'm just catching up to that.

[0:17:26] Voice 3: For sure.

[0:17:26] Voice 3: Learning about it.

[0:17:27] Voice 3: So yeah, thank you.

[0:17:28] Voice 3: The ability and the budgeting cycle.

[0:17:30] Voice 3: Yeah, exactly.

[0:17:31] Voice 3: It's not just a one-off or a surprise

[0:17:34] Voice 3: or a strategic fight for it every time,

[0:17:37] Voice 3: but it's connected to the strategy.

[0:17:39] Voice 3: Yes.

[0:17:39] Voice 3: Exactly.

[0:17:40] Voice 3: Important.

[0:17:40] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:17:43] Voice 3: Questions there?

[0:17:46] Voice 3: Jesse Yates?

[0:17:48] Voice 3: No, Jesse Jorgensen.

[0:17:50] Voice 3: I just want to put this in the contract budget.

[0:17:55] Voice 3: Um, I'm not sure if I read it here. I read the whole thing. So it might have been somewhere else. But you mentioned somewhere that we've hired a contractor to manage the monitoring of the trust properties. Is that right? Did I catch that right? Which is great. I'm not criticizing that. But does that mean that the staff aren't going to do monitoring?

[0:18:15] Voice 3: remaining? No, no, it's the same as last, or sorry, this current fiscal. So we're doing the

[0:18:20] Voice 3: hybrid model. We're requesting the hybrid model where we have a contractor do about 50%. This

[0:18:27] Voice 3: year it was 50 properties out of 115. So a little less than 50%. We have, I don't remember the

[0:18:34] Voice 3: number, I think 14 that are being monitored by the local conservancies and then the remaining

[0:18:39] Voice 3: or monitored in-house.

[0:18:41] Voice 3: Okay, thanks.

[0:18:45] Voice 13: I do have a question.

[0:18:48] Trustee Yates (probable): It sort of relates tangentially to budgets and funding.

[0:18:54] Trustee Yates (probable): And I should know the answer to this,

[0:18:56] Trustee Yates (probable): having been a trust supporter for 40 years.

[0:18:59] Trustee Yates (probable): What would happen if the province decided

[0:19:02] Trustee Yates (probable): to get rid of the Islands Trust?

[0:19:06] Trustee Yates (probable): I'm assuming that the Islands Trust Conservancy

[0:19:10] Trustee Yates (probable): would still stand because it's a conservancy and it does have its own budget but what's the answer

[0:19:19] Trustee Yates (probable): to that i

[0:19:22] Voice 3: don't think that you can't say of course we're a creature of the province and it's not the

[0:19:27] Voice 3: province what would happen the board has done some due diligence ensuring that these lands are

[0:19:32] Voice 3: protected in perpetuity in many cases by putting covenants on nature reserves to ensure that that's

[0:19:37] Voice 3: there's that third party protection i think the province would have to examine what options it

[0:19:41] Voice 3: it wanted to take and see if it wanted to continue it as a standalone entity if it wanted to have BC

[0:19:46] Voice 3: Park step in and be a system I think there would and they'd be working with First Nations to

[0:19:50] Voice 3: determine what that would look like um I think that would be a complex and a lot of work for

[0:19:55] Voice 3: the province to sort of thank you I

[0:19:59] Voice 3: would also say there's a level of protection as many of

[0:20:03] Voice 3: these donations were given through eco gift projects there has been tax receding on many

[0:20:08] Voice 3: of them so there's also Revenue Canada considerations around the protection of those gifts.

[0:20:12] Trustee Yates (probable): So yeah so my question kind of relates to could the Conservancy still stand on its own if the

[0:20:20] Trustee Yates (probable): model of government that we know as Islands Trust was somehow disbanded or changed by the province?

[0:20:29] Trustee Yates (probable): That's really my question. If they repealed that Islands Trust Act. Exactly because in my mind the

[0:20:35] Trustee Yates (probable): the Conservancy is still a Conservancy, and as you say,

[0:20:38] Trustee Yates (probable): it has protective measures for covenants and that kind of thing.

[0:20:43] Trustee Yates (probable): Are you planning something?

[0:20:46] Trustee Yates (probable): No, not at all.

[0:20:48] Trustee Yates (probable): I'm going to be a trust supporter until the end of my days.

[0:20:51] Trustee Yates (probable): Excellent.

[0:20:52] Trustee Yates (probable): But I sometimes worry about that.

[0:20:55] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:20:55] Voice 3: So I'm not sure.

[0:20:57] Voice 3: The piece I would add, of course,

[0:20:58] Voice 3: is the Trust Council is funding the administrative operations

[0:21:01] Voice 3: of the Conservancy, so that would be the key question,

[0:21:04] Voice 3: is how would you know with 115 protected properties under care right you know it would

[0:21:09] Voice 3: be challenging to fundraise for the operations entirely and so it would be looking at the

[0:21:13] Voice 3: province to potentially pick up that cost that's currently being undertaken by local taxpayers

[0:21:19] Voice 3: yes i just want to highlight one additional point of us that our properties do not have

[0:21:28] Voice 3: endowments like our nature reserves like on the galliano conservancy every property we own

[0:21:33] Voice 3: has an endowment to manage it but we don't have that in the trust and endowments and i don't see

[0:21:39] Voice 3: anywhere in the budget to try and like that's a really difficult thing to do retroactively

[0:21:43] Voice 3: but i just wanted to raise that because it's nowhere in the budget to try and get endowments

[0:21:49] Voice 3: and i realize the difficulty of that but i just wanted to raise that because it does relate to

[0:21:55] Voice 3: the security of our lands because we don't have even endowments to manage

[0:22:01] Voice 3: there's nothing to say about it it's just the way it is yeah uh yes josie elliott

[0:22:10] Voice 3: it's a different topic i just wanted to note and remind the board they do have funds

[0:22:14] Voice 3: so they have the covenant management and defense fund and the property management fund

[0:22:19] Voice 3: and the goal is to increase those funds um and yet the concept of endowments for new properties

[0:22:25] Voice 3: and acquisitions is absolutely something the staff would take direction from.

[0:22:30] Voice 5: So we should

[0:22:31] Voice 3: do that for new properties, is that what you're saying?

[0:22:34] Voice 3: I'm sorry?

[0:22:35] Voice 3: We should, if we have a budget in here for new acquisitions,

[0:22:40] Voice 3: should we require endowments for new acquisitions?

[0:22:43] Voice 3: I think that's a discussion the board could have.

[0:22:47] Trustee Yates (probable): Can I just quickly add to that same question?

[0:22:50] Trustee Yates (probable): What about Link Island?

[0:22:51] Trustee Yates (probable): I thought there was an endowment attached to the Link Island gift.

[0:22:55] Voice 3: There's not a direct endowment for the Link Island gift. There's a fund available when the cabin needs to be removed.

[0:23:03] Voice 3: When the cabin needs to be removed, yeah.

[0:23:05] Voice 3: Okay, thank you.

[0:23:09] Voice 3: So, only tangentially related to the budget. Item 3, the Regional Conservation Plan project.

[0:23:16] Voice 3: Will this come back to the board in September?

[0:23:22] Voice 3: September.

[0:23:23] Voice 3: for a

[0:23:23] Voice 3: charter do you think so the regional conservation plans project is yes and that

[0:23:31] Voice 3: will

[0:23:31] Voice 13: have a business

[0:23:32] Voice 3: case in september in september okay

[0:23:34] Voice 3: because i really do want to

[0:23:35] Voice 3: take a look at this and how much we'll be involved with mapping for biodiversity like

[0:23:40] Voice 3: bowen consistency is doing and whether 30 000 would be enough oh yeah so this is the beginning

[0:23:46] Voice 3: this very beginning this is a three or four year phased rollout for the plan and it will come in

[0:23:52] Voice 3: in approximately three main forms this current fiscal 26 27 we're doing an evaluation of the

[0:23:59] Voice 3: actual plan itself not the data or in the model or the tool and then the next phase we'll be looking

[0:24:05] Voice 3: at that data what are our data gaps where are we able to acquire new data that will help inform

[0:24:11] Voice 3: and then what model will we use to run that data and then there's that third part which is what

[0:24:18] Voice 3: what tool will we use to actually display?

[0:24:20] Voice 3: Will we have a nice tabletop, you know,

[0:24:23] Voice 3: brochure of book that we have now and a spatial tool that's interactive?

[0:24:28] Voice 3: So those are the questions that will come out in the evaluation and during

[0:24:32] Voice 3: this three-year phase.

[0:24:33] Voice 3: Great project.

[0:24:35] Voice 3: Probably publishing in 2030.

[0:24:38] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:24:39] Voice 3: I think this afternoon we'll actually pick up on that conversation a little

[0:24:42] Voice 3: bit more and go over some details and look for some collaboration.

[0:24:46] Voice 3: Exciting.

[0:24:51] Voice 3: Just back to your conversation around whether or not to require endowments when you receive

[0:24:55] Voice 3: lands. This has been discussed since I've been involved in the Conservancy over the last 20 years.

[0:25:01] Voice 3: The board has often considered whether that should be a prerequisite, but then has faced the reality

[0:25:06] Voice 3: that many of the donors in the Gulf Islands have been land-rich, cash-poor and are really struggling

[0:25:11] Voice 3: to make the donation they're making and pay the associated legal costs and appraisal costs and

[0:25:16] Voice 3: everything else associated with that but it is a consideration the board will have to you know keep

[0:25:21] Voice 3: keep looking at but i think at the point we've taken a voluntary approach but as you you know

[0:25:25] Voice 3: what the board has done is narrow up um how choosy it gets about the land it is taking yeah right i

[0:25:31] Voice 3: think there were decisions of the board back in the day to take you know thrilled about anything

[0:25:34] Voice 3: that came its way houses and the

[0:25:36] Voice 3: board now is being much more strategic around what it's choosing

[0:25:39] Voice 3: to accept and making sure that it really is a top priority within the regional conservation plan

[0:25:43] Voice 3: yeah and you're really getting the lens that you're looking for rather than just taking anything

[0:25:47] Voice 3: that's offered so that's you know i just wanted to flag that history and it's really been a

[0:25:51] Voice 3: long conversation yeah and

[0:25:53] Voice 3: it's something for the board to keep you know to keep looking at

[0:25:56] Voice 3: and considering um how you wish to move forward um and it really is back to back for funding piece

[0:26:01] Voice 3: around you know

[0:26:02] Voice 3: how you wish to have these lands supported thank you and there are lots of options

[0:26:09] Voice 3: to do endowments they don't have to come as a chunk of ones they can be fundraised for as a

[0:26:14] Voice 3: part of the campaign itself um lots of non-profit um not-for-profit land trusts are requiring

[0:26:20] Voice 3: endowments now it's not unusual anymore because especially with the cost of lands here in our

[0:26:26] Voice 3: region exactly i'm just looking at the time here one last question yes please and it is about

[0:26:31] Voice 3: finance so i'm just getting

[0:26:33] Voice 3: pushy all day but i know item five the admin support services

[0:26:36] Voice 3: This is just, can you remind me, is this a new presentation of our share of the admin

[0:26:42] Voice 3: allocation?

[0:26:43] Voice 3: Because I don't remember seeing admin in a previous budget.

[0:26:48] Voice 3: I could be wrong.

[0:26:49] Voice 1: It's

[0:26:49] Voice 3: usually at the bottom.

[0:26:50] Voice 3: It's usually at the bottom.

[0:26:51] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:26:51] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:26:51] Voice 3: And next to salaries, benefits, we do usually put admin in.

[0:26:55] Voice 3: It's usually a cost that is eventually finalized by finance, but I can let.

[0:27:01] Voice 7: One thing we try to do is make sure that it just shows the true costs of running the

[0:27:05] Voice 7: conservancy so those flow

[0:27:07] Voice 7: throughs from from my island's trust are showing up here and as

[0:27:11] Voice 7: when you said we're just starting our budget cycle now so we won't have these numbers probably till

[0:27:16] Voice 7: september so we just took last year's used a cpi factor right and that's a good placeholder

[0:27:22] Voice 7: now couldn't change a couple of thousand one way or the other i think it's probably a pretty

[0:27:26] Voice 7: realistic number okay

[0:27:27] Voice 3: thank you yeah you wouldn't have seen it in previous draft budgets as we

[0:27:32] Voice 3: previously didn't include it at this stage because there

[0:27:34] Voice 3: can at times be very clear and you'll notice

[0:27:36] Voice 3: that the highlighted yellow in the actual agenda or the spreadsheet um budget spreadsheet the

[0:27:41] Voice 3: yellow highlighted are those costs that are

[0:27:44] Voice 3: set by the finance

[0:27:46] Voice 3: department yes majority of the

[0:27:49] Voice 3: increase there we'd be happy to know you're

[0:27:53] Voice 10: happy fantastic are we

[0:27:54] Voice 3: ready for a motion any more

[0:27:55] Voice 3: discussion yes and then i'd

[0:27:57] Voice 3: be looking to make the motion thank you i think that the island's

[0:28:01] Voice 3: Trust Conservancy Board approve the proposed Islands Trust Conservancy 2027-28 budget as

[0:28:06] Voice 3: presented and direct staff to provide it to the Director of Financial and Employee Services for

[0:28:11] Voice 3: inclusion in the Islands Trust Draft 2027-28 budget. Thank you. A seconder? I see eight seconds

[0:28:17] Voice 3: and I shall call for further discussion. I shall call vote. All in favor? I carry.

[0:28:27] Voice 3: Next motion. I

[0:28:30] Voice 3: move that the Islands Trust Conservancy Board request staff to draft

[0:28:33] Voice 3: detailed business cases for significant budget line items actually just a pause here significant

[0:28:39] Voice 3: does that include communications or like everything in the something that highlighted

[0:28:47] Voice 3: those right everything there significant that's kind of over seven thousand five thousand five

[0:28:54] Voice 3: thousand everything over five thousand requires a business case awesome that's great to know

[0:28:59] Voice 3: significant budget line items for review by the board at the september 29th 2026 meeting

[0:29:04] Voice 3: for inclusion in the islands trust draft 2027-28

[0:29:07] Voice 3: looking for a seconder trustee eight seconds any discussion i shall call the vote all in favor

[0:29:16] Voice 3: motion carried thank you anyone

[0:29:19] Trustee Yates (probable): else i'll happily read that last one i move that the

[0:29:23] Trustee Yates (probable): islands trust conservancy board request staff to provide a property management operations overview

[0:29:28] Trustee Yates (probable): review for 2027-28 and the September 29th 2026 board meeting I would

[0:29:38] Voice 6: second the motion chair

[0:29:41] Trustee Yates (probable): sorry I think another second oh thank

[0:29:45] Voice 3: you thank you very much we have a seconder from

[0:29:47] Voice 3: vice chair and then uh any discussion look I shall call the vote all in favor and carry

[0:30:00] Voice 3: Would you like to add a motion about coming back with a communication strategy

[0:30:03] Voice 3: at September's meeting?

[0:30:06] Voice 3: Well, it's over 5,000, so.

[0:30:10] Voice 3: Okay, so it'll come in the business case.

[0:30:12] Voice 3: In the business case, it's fine, but I would link it to the communication strategy.

[0:30:15] Voice 3: Typically, the

[0:30:16] Voice 3: communications, we treat it as our operational line,

[0:30:18] Voice 3: but you tend to, you know, because it's hard to put together a business case

[0:30:21] Voice 3: with, like, the project and then alternatives.

[0:30:23] Voice 3: So typically, it would come forward as part of the justification form,

[0:30:26] Voice 3: but within there, we provide sort of an itemization.

[0:30:29] Voice 3: So you would get that specificity. So I would say probably in this instance, it wouldn't

[0:30:33] Voice 3: be a full-blown business case, but you'll get the details in that justification form.

[0:30:37] Voice 3: Yeah, I think that's good practice.

[0:30:40] Voice 3: Excellent. All right, then we are moving on. Is there anything else the staff need from

[0:30:48] Voice 3: us for that item? Nothing else, but we'll move on. All right, we're moving on to item

[0:30:54] Voice 3: of 7.1.2, which is they have a referral from Demmon Island LPC, so their bylaws. And RFD.

[0:31:06] Voice 3: I think I saw Narissa Chakwick here. Is there any questions?

[0:31:16] Voice 3: There

[0:31:16] Voice 10: she is. Hi. Hi. How's it

[0:31:18] Voice 10: going? Do you want a

[0:31:19] Voice 10: chair? It's fine. I'll just help you.

[0:31:24] Voice 10: No, I'm actually fine standing, to be honest.

[0:31:26] Voice 10: Should we do men or in men?

[0:31:30] Voice 10: Gemma just asked me to give a brief summary of the Denman bylaws,

[0:31:36] Voice 10: and then I'm happy to answer whatever questions you might have.

[0:31:39] Voice 10: Sure

[0:31:40] Voice 3: thing. Did you want to introduce yourself?

[0:31:41] Voice 3: Yes, because I don't know all of you.

[0:31:43] Voice 3: I think we all know you, but maybe for the people watching,

[0:31:46] Voice 3: I can introduce the item.

[0:31:47] Voice 10: Oh, okay.

[0:31:48] Voice 10: Okay.

[0:31:52] Voice 13: Yeah, everyone's happy now.

[0:31:53] Voice 13: Hello, everyone.

[0:31:54] Voice 13: Hi.

[0:31:55] Voice 13: Good to go.

[0:31:56] Voice 4: Yes, please.

[0:31:57] Voice 13: Go right ahead.

[0:31:58] Voice 13: Yeah.

[0:31:58] Voice 4: So ITC has received a referral from the Denman Island Local Trust Committee for Bylaw 260

[0:32:03] Voice 4: and 264, which are the result of a multi-year effort to amend the official community plan

[0:32:10] Voice 4: and reformat and revise the land use bylaw to increase housing options and address housing

[0:32:15] Voice 4: needs on Denman Island, while also minimizing housing impacts generally on the environment.

[0:32:20] Voice 4: And so for this, we have Narissa Chadwick, who you were heavily involved, spearheading the project from the

[0:32:27] Voice 4: regional planning side.

[0:32:29] Voice 4: Narissa will say a few words about the project.

[0:32:33] Voice 10: Yeah, so the project, the intention of the project is to increase the diversity of housing on Denman Island and balance the needs of the environment.

[0:32:46] Voice 10: So, essentially, what it has done is it shifted density from the ability to create new lots, subdivisions, large homes, to enabling the development of more smaller secondary units.

[0:33:05] Voice 10: Ultimately, the ultimate build-out, full build-out, is reduced by a total of 100.

[0:33:13] Voice 10: So previously, they had the ability to create well over 100 more lots with several buildings,

[0:33:21] Voice 10: homes on it.

[0:33:22] Voice 10: So we've taken that ability away, and we've increased the ability to have smaller units.

[0:33:30] Voice 10: The other thing that the bylaws do is it takes away barriers to subdivide explicitly for

[0:33:40] Voice 10: work, conservation, housing affordability,

[0:33:44] Voice 10: funding donations to the outlander for nations and

[0:33:47] Voice 10: other community uses. So that's essentially the bylaws

[0:33:52] Voice 10: in more than 10 words, but that's great.

[0:33:56] Voice 4: Thanks, Saoirse. And Saoirse is going to be here if you have any specific questions.

[0:34:00] Voice 4: But what staff did is we looked at all of the amendments to the

[0:34:04] Voice 4: OCP and the land use bylaws. Our covenant management

[0:34:08] Voice 4: specialist did a review of the land use bylaws in relation to all of our

[0:34:12] Voice 4: existing protected areas and that's in attachment to I believe and and we've

[0:34:18] Voice 4: consulted with Narissa and other regional planning team staff and we've

[0:34:23] Voice 4: come to the general conclusion that there are conservation benefits for

[0:34:27] Voice 4: Denman Island as a whole and that and just taking everything together

[0:34:32] Voice 4: the benefits to existing ITC protected areas and to securement outweigh a

[0:34:38] Voice 4: couple of potential negative consequences for lands adjacent to ITC

[0:34:43] Voice 4: protected areas. And so yeah if there are any specific questions please feel

[0:34:50] Voice 4: feel free to ask Marissa or I.

[0:34:53] Voice 4: I think you'll open up to the board.

[0:34:58] Trustee Yates (probable): I'll choose.

[0:34:59] Trustee Yates (probable): I'll make a comment that it's really helpful

[0:35:02] Trustee Yates (probable): to have a planner like Planner Chadwick

[0:35:05] Trustee Yates (probable): doing this work on Denman

[0:35:06] Trustee Yates (probable): and then also doing similar work for the Gabriola OCP.

[0:35:12] Trustee Yates (probable): There are so many good suggestions

[0:35:15] Trustee Yates (probable): coming out of the work that's being done elsewhere,

[0:35:18] Trustee Yates (probable): where um many of which we can apply to gabriola and um i'm really happy i'm just really happy that

[0:35:26] Trustee Yates (probable): this overall has a good benefit for conservation on denman island and i know i can see that because

[0:35:35] Trustee Yates (probable): i visit denman quite often and um i can actually see that by looking at this ocp and knowing what

[0:35:44] Trustee Yates (probable): it's doing to adjacent you know conservation areas but the potential of just having so much more

[0:35:53] Trustee Yates (probable): areas conserved or not developed really is the best way to put it just not or developed in a

[0:36:00] Trustee Yates (probable): really different way that just doesn't cause as much social and environmental harm so i really

[0:36:06] Trustee Yates (probable): appreciate that um if there's one little one little bullet under bylaw 264 in the lud

[0:36:12] Trustee Yates (probable): amendments the very last bullet require fresh water catchment and storage

[0:36:17] Trustee Yates (probable): cisterns for all new builds that's the one we're really

[0:36:21] Trustee Yates (probable): wrestling with because so many people on gabriella

[0:36:27] Trustee Yates (probable): know that there's just a huge water problem and

[0:36:31] Trustee Yates (probable): they know that having cisterns will help with

[0:36:35] Trustee Yates (probable): certainly with catchment storage you know

[0:36:38] Trustee Yates (probable): so guaranteed fresh water however however you get it whether it's trucked in or whether it's

[0:36:44] Trustee Yates (probable): rainwater catchment but there is a real discussion about whether it should be applied to all new

[0:36:50] Trustee Yates (probable): bills or just some in some areas or some so i i'm just really happy that this one says all new

[0:36:58] Trustee Yates (probable): bills like i'm pretty thrilled by that so thank you thank you for this great work and it's a real

[0:37:05] Trustee Yates (probable): pleasure to actually have this come to us as a referral yeah

[0:37:09] Voice 3: I just have two

[0:37:11] Voice 3: small questions the first relates to in the southern Gulf Islands in the CRD

[0:37:22] Voice 3: area we all just got a notice that the CRD is providing funding for people

[0:37:29] Voice 3: who will build secondary units or secondary buildings on the properties

[0:37:33] Voice 3: for affordable housing with the five-year agreement that it underwent.

[0:37:39] Voice 3: So is that going to, like, you're in a different regional district,

[0:37:45] Voice 3: but do you have a similar thing where you are in Denman?

[0:37:49] Voice 3: Like,

[0:37:49] Voice 5: are there any

[0:37:50] Voice 3: incentives for people to build secondary units and stuff?

[0:37:53] Voice 3: Would this bylaw affect the ability to do that?

[0:37:57] Voice 10: So there is an abstain incentive through the regional district.

[0:38:02] Voice 10: I don't think that there's something through the province and I don't know if that's already

[0:38:08] Voice 10: expired but um but then so yes the direct answer to your question is no there isn't that type of

[0:38:13] Voice 10: it of an incentive I mean certainly that would be a a good compliment to the the bylaws

[0:38:19] Voice 5: so these

[0:38:21] Voice 10: bylaws wouldn't prevent that oh not at all in fact um in fact they Denman prior to uh this project

[0:38:30] Voice 10: only allowed secondary units through temporary use permit so this allows them

[0:38:36] Voice 10: out right oh

[0:38:37] Voice 3: I see okay

[0:38:38] Voice 10: okay that's great my

[0:38:40] Voice 3: second question was um this is

[0:38:42] Voice 3: in the recommendation so I don't know who I'm asking this to maybe it says

[0:38:47] Voice 3: they're put in point seven under recommendation one the proposed changes

[0:38:51] Voice 3: will make it easier to subdivide for conservation by removing the minimum lot

[0:38:55] Voice 3: lot size requirements for land donation.

[0:38:58] Voice 3: I'm not sure how that makes it easier for land donation,

[0:39:04] Voice 3: except for very small land donations.

[0:39:07] Voice 3: Just see what I'm asking,

[0:39:09] Voice 3: like I'm not sure that's a good thing for conservation,

[0:39:13] Voice 3: could be good for other reasons.

[0:39:14] Voice 3: Can I ask for those online web page you're referring to?

[0:39:18] Voice 3: Oh, I'm on page 38 of the agenda

[0:39:20] Voice 3: and it's under the recommendations

[0:39:23] Voice 3: recommendations and the seventh it's our rationale why we why we really support these thank you and

[0:39:29] Voice 3: that's point seven and um it says it'll make it easier to subdivide for conservation so i wasn't

[0:39:37] Voice 3: sure how it was going

[0:39:38] Voice 3: to make it easier to subdivide for conservation i'm not questioning

[0:39:41] Voice 3: that yeah

[0:39:42] Voice 10: perhaps the appropriate wording or like a more clearer wording would be that there are

[0:39:47] Voice 10: to remove about any about uh any barriers that was like i can't even think of the word that i

[0:39:54] Voice 10: thought the barriers to yeah uh

[0:39:57] Voice 10: so you wouldn't have to rezone or uh to allow for a smaller

[0:40:03] Voice 10: if there was a smaller amount that was uh that was less than the minimum log size it would it

[0:40:09] Voice 10: would

[0:40:10] Voice 4: reduce the steps basically so conservation is one of the exceptions to um the subdivision

[0:40:17] Voice 4: that's smaller than the lot size

[0:40:20] Voice 4: for outright subdivision for private housing.

[0:40:23] Voice 3: Right.

[0:40:23] Voice 3: When I had a property that was, say, 40 hectares

[0:40:28] Voice 3: and I needed to make each 20 to subdivide it,

[0:40:30] Voice 3: but it was actually only 39,

[0:40:33] Voice 3: I could still subdivide it if that was for conservation.

[0:40:36] Voice 3: The LTC would look favorably on that application.

[0:40:39] Voice 3: That would have that ability.

[0:40:40] Voice 3: That's where the conservation piece would come in

[0:40:41] Voice 3: before nobody would get anything.

[0:40:43] Voice 3: The property would stay that size.

[0:40:46] Voice 3: it's not subdividable but now they

[0:40:48] Voice 3: could yeah so

[0:40:51] Voice 10: you'd have to go through a rezoning process

[0:40:53] Voice 10: to re-like to re-establish your minimum for that yeah for that lot so so so yeah just making it

[0:41:00] Voice 10: it's making it easier it's removing that stuff and

[0:41:03] Voice 3: the safeguard would be that the ltc of the

[0:41:05] Voice 3: day would get to decide on the merits of that application or

[0:41:08] Voice 3: whether that is conservation

[0:41:10] Voice 3: That's what I understood on the bottom.

[0:41:13] Voice 3: Okay,

[0:41:13] Voice 5: I must be really stupid or

[0:41:15] Voice 3: I'm kind of tired.

[0:41:16] Voice 3: I still don't understand.

[0:41:18] Voice 3: I don't know.

[0:41:18] Voice 3: Maybe if you just change the wording a little bit.

[0:41:21] Voice 3: So

[0:41:21] Trustee Yates (probable): we could change

[0:41:22] Voice 3: it to subdivide for conservation by removing or reducing barriers to requirements for land donation.

[0:41:31] Voice 3: So we just remove the subdivision.

[0:41:35] Voice 3: Minimum

[0:41:36] Voice 10: log size requirements.

[0:41:37] Voice 3: Exempt for removing or

[0:41:39] Voice 3: minimum log size.

[0:41:40] Voice 3: It just makes it easier to subdivide for conservation by reducing barriers to requirements for land

[0:41:47] Voice 3: donation.

[0:41:49] Voice 13: Yeah.

[0:41:49] Voice 13: Just

[0:41:49] Voice 3: in the resolution.

[0:41:51] Voice 13: Reducing, removing.

[0:41:52] Voice 3: Well, reducing barriers as opposed to removing the minimum lot size requirement.

[0:41:56] Voice 3: I don't know.

[0:41:56] Voice 3: That's confusing.

[0:41:58] Voice 10: Yeah.

[0:41:59] Voice 10: I mean, reducing barriers.

[0:42:01] Voice 10: Yeah.

[0:42:02] Voice 10: That's a broad way of explaining what's happening.

[0:42:04] Trustee Yates (probable): It could include minimum lot size requirements.

[0:42:07] Voice 10: You

[0:42:07] Trustee Yates (probable): can have other things too.

[0:42:09] Trustee Yates (probable): or

[0:42:11] Voice 4: a subdivision beyond the minimum lot size there's an exception for conservation yeah

[0:42:18] Voice 4: basically

[0:42:19] Voice 3: subdivision is going to be unachievable unless it's for conservation

[0:42:21] Voice 3: or

[0:42:22] Voice 4: other community benefits as identified okay

[0:42:25] Voice 3: if someone could just make that clear

[0:42:29] Voice 3: i'm sure you can i have a question if um there might be a proposed or a future

[0:42:38] Voice 3: further amendment that was missing and so on page 41 the last bullet isn't included in the

[0:42:48] Voice 3: recommendation so after the recommendation to uh you know c consider adding sea level rise

[0:42:56] Voice 3: if you go to page 41 the last section 5 10 1 of the land use bylaw to continue consider

[0:43:07] Voice 3: recommendation to add environmental conservation or ecological reserves to permitted uses

[0:43:11] Voice 3: as passive recreation implies human use and there should arguably be a provision for the use of land

[0:43:16] Voice 3: solely for ecological conservation and protection. So that's missing from the recommendations of what

[0:43:22] Voice 3: the board could consider in proposing to um I

[0:43:31] Voice 4: think it just about dropped off

[0:43:32] Voice 3: yeah on the on

[0:43:36] Voice 4: On page 41.

[0:43:37] Voice 4: Page

[0:43:37] Voice 3: 41, that would be, it's kind of like worded with A, B, A, B.

[0:43:43] Voice 3: Oh, the

[0:43:44] Voice 4: wording is completely thrown off in this.

[0:43:47] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:43:48] Voice 3: Is it?

[0:43:49] Voice 4: Sorry.

[0:43:49] Voice 4: In the upper resolution and the repeated resolution, it's off.

[0:43:54] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:43:54] Voice 4: And then, sorry about that.

[0:43:55] Voice 4: That's very confusing.

[0:43:57] Voice 3: I know we have been having problems with these, right?

[0:43:59] Voice 3: Like a lot of that.

[0:44:00] Trustee Yates (probable): Oh, I see.

[0:44:01] Voice 3: There's two recommendations and they're different.

[0:44:04] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:44:05] Voice 3: which one are we going by well there are two recommendations but the second recommendation

[0:44:10] Voice 3: follows the wording of the staff report on page 41 but the last one is missing do you see that

[0:44:20] Voice 3: yeah

[0:44:20] Voice 4: yeah so the second item b needs to be copied down into after c of item two yeah i want to see

[0:44:30] Voice 4: right thank you trustee elliott so

[0:44:32] Voice 3: that's confusing you can't pay 42 so no 41 it's the

[0:44:43] Voice 3: so this section here is basically recommendation two yeah the board might consider this but this

[0:44:51] Voice 3: whole section is missing oh i

[0:44:52] Voice 4: get mentioned based on the

[0:44:54] Voice 3: recommendation and so we're going to move

[0:44:55] Voice 3: it up to the recommendation yeah no it's in the

[0:45:01] Voice 3: first one it's not in the second so the

[0:45:04] Voice 3: proper recommendation is

[0:45:05] Voice 3: the one at the end of the rfd sorry

[0:45:08] Voice 4: so that's it's it's oh it's in the body

[0:45:11] Voice 4: of the staff report yeah

[0:45:13] Voice 10: it's right and

[0:45:14] Voice 4: it's not in the recommendation it's right before

[0:45:16] Trustee Yates (probable): implications of recommendations and it's b right toby yeah

[0:45:22] Trustee Yates (probable): Yeah, this one. Yeah, this

[0:45:25] Voice 4: item is missing. That's right.

[0:45:28] Voice 3: Well, I asked the board for the recommendation.

[0:45:30] Voice 3: This

[0:45:31] Voice 4: is to be added to the

[0:45:32] Voice 3: end of, if you go to the very top.

[0:45:35] Voice 3: You're

[0:45:35] Voice 4: talking about the

[0:45:36] Voice 3: first recommendation at the top?

[0:45:37] Voice 3: No, the second. It's added. Sorry.

[0:45:40] Voice 3: There's two recommendation areas on the RFD that when you start, there's a recommendation, and at the end, there's a recommendation.

[0:45:46] Voice 3: So this is

[0:45:47] Voice 3: the second.

[0:45:48] Voice 3: the second sort of the introductory line is the

[0:45:51] Voice 3: board may wish to also do these ones in

[0:45:53] Voice 3: addition to the staff recommended ones right yeah yes all of those are copied except the last one

[0:45:58] Voice 3: okay so we will add that to the recommendation um i will i think it's a good one

[0:46:07] Voice 5: thank you good

[0:46:09] Voice 3: eye yeah wow that's excellent getting four hours of sleep

[0:46:15] Voice 3: helps you're

[0:46:16] Voice 9: on it okay

[0:46:18] Voice 3: did you say and these letters are wrong the letters are

[0:46:22] Voice 3: but they're

[0:46:24] Voice 13: they're supposed to

[0:46:25] Voice 13: be yeah these letters

[0:46:27] Voice 13: here uh note down uh

[0:46:29] Voice 13: four hours of sleep

[0:46:32] Voice 3: i know i think she

[0:46:34] Voice 9: only got four hours i know i know what

[0:46:35] Voice 3: she wants to add

[0:46:36] Voice 3: But this is the actual recommendation, and

[0:46:39] Voice 9: it starts with

[0:46:39] Voice 3: D-E-F-G-E-S-T-O-N-E-R, page 42.

[0:46:44] Voice 3: Is that what you meant?

[0:46:45] Voice 3: No, page 38.

[0:46:46] Voice 3: It's like ignore the numbering.

[0:46:49] Voice 3: So the second recommendation for staff to consider, additional considerations, A, B, and C.

[0:46:58] Voice 3: there should be a D, which is, if

[0:47:03] Trustee Yates (probable): you go to 41,

[0:47:04] Voice 3: it's the B, section 5, 10, 1 of the LEUD.

[0:47:09] Voice 3: So those were just copied up and then renumbered so that they fit in the recommendation, but

[0:47:14] Voice 3: that list was dropped.

[0:47:15] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:47:17] Voice 3: Someone can get the recommendation.

[0:47:19] Voice 3: It doesn't have to go.

[0:47:21] Voice 3: So you need to copy and paste the recommendation, make sure it's all there, and then it needs

[0:47:26] Voice 3: to be on the screen.

[0:47:27] Voice 3: I just I need to know what I'm improving so yeah we're

[0:47:30] Trustee Yates (probable): going to get

[0:47:30] Voice 3: it on the screen if you look

[0:47:31] Voice 3: at the second are you looking at the second the one at the beginning of the decision or the one

[0:47:36] Voice 3: at the end of the decision after just

[0:47:39] Trustee Yates (probable): adding sorry just

[0:47:42] Voice 3: a minute I want to know Wendy what

[0:47:43] Voice 3: are we looking at the one at the end of the decision or the one at the beginning so the one

[0:47:47] Voice 3: at the

[0:47:48] Voice 4: beginning is missing an item at the end of the second resolution okay

[0:47:56] Voice 3: so we're working

[0:47:56] Voice 3: Working with the one at the beginning.

[0:47:58] Voice 3: If the last one is good, we

[0:48:00] Voice 4: can just confirm that the

[0:48:01] Voice 3: last one is good.

[0:48:03] Voice 3: I know that there's this one, but there's also the whole recommendation is that the

[0:48:07] Voice 3: end is different.

[0:48:09] Voice 3: So that's why.

[0:48:10] Voice 10: Yeah,

[0:48:10] Voice 3: we'll end it on the screen before we...

[0:48:12] Voice 10: Am I still needed?

[0:48:13] Voice 10: Are there any further questions?

[0:48:17] Voice 10: We can play this one.

[0:48:22] Voice 3: Is there any more questions for planners?

[0:48:24] Voice 3: one this is just um so you in your little talk thank you very much and thanks for coming um

[0:48:31] Voice 3: you mentioned that the full buildup for the whole denman is actually reduced bytes and all you've

[0:48:39] Voice 3: done is change the look you know you're moving boundaries around and stuff and it's great

[0:48:43] Voice 3: how is the full buildup reducing so

[0:48:45] Voice 10: we've reduced the ability for outright subdivision so

[0:48:48] Voice 10: So if you, so there was, I think it was, the number is over 100.

[0:48:53] Voice 10: Yeah.

[0:48:54] Voice 10: So if you consider the amount of residential units for each one of those subdivided lots,

[0:49:02] Voice 10: that's how we counted it.

[0:49:04] Voice 1: So

[0:49:04] Voice 10: it could have been one, two, three, depending on size.

[0:49:08] Voice 10: So we've taken that outright ability to subdivide out.

[0:49:12] Voice 10: So already you're taking out 200, 300 units.

[0:49:17] Voice 10: units. And then we permitted the additional secondary units outright where they were formally

[0:49:24] Voice 10: only permitted through temporary use. Okay, so by doing that, we've also on Denman, some

[0:49:30] Voice 10: of the larger lots were able to have multiple units. So you remove the ability,

[0:49:38] Voice 10: there was

[0:49:39] Voice 10: no cap on those on the one per four hectares for example in R2, one point uh one per one

[0:49:47] Voice 10: hectare in the small in that R1 so we maxed it to two in R1 and we maxed it to four in R2 which

[0:49:57] Voice 10: removes a number of more units uh in addition to the units that were moved through subdivision so

[0:50:04] Voice 10: So when you do all the math, it comes out as less.

[0:50:09] Voice 10: So essentially, we are shifting density from market,

[0:50:15] Voice 10: sort of the more market-based potential larger home builds

[0:50:20] Voice 10: to focus it on secondary, the support of secondary,

[0:50:27] Voice 10: hopefully to be rental, family accommodation, those kind of units.

[0:50:33] Voice 10: is okay

[0:50:34] Voice 3: so this uh this is because this is very relevant to all the islands so that's why i'm

[0:50:39] Voice 3: asking this question

[0:50:39] Voice 3: absolutely so what you're essentially doing then just from the perspective

[0:50:44] Voice 3: of a large landowner who could previously subdivide you're down so many so are you going

[0:50:51] Voice 3: to you may not see it that way and i actually don't see it that way but people

[0:50:55] Voice 10: use it we'll

[0:50:56] Voice 10: use that term yes it

[0:50:57] Voice 10: is a term that is relevant in this situation um but caveat be you can still

[0:51:03] Voice 10: rezone the subdivide so that place of decision to subdivide in the hands of the ltc at the moment in

[0:51:10] Voice 10: the community as a result of that okay

[0:51:13] Voice 3: so i i think because we've had so many court cases in

[0:51:19] Voice 3: galliano not exactly the same but you know it's relevant to everybody about what landowners are

[0:51:24] Voice 3: calling down zoning. And

[0:51:26] Voice 3: the courts have been very clear that's what the

[0:51:29] Voice 3: Islands Trust can do. But have you had any threats from this about

[0:51:36] Voice 3: lawsuits? Not

[0:51:39] Voice 10: surprisingly. Susan and I were just chatting about this this

[0:51:43] Voice 10: morning. Not from Gabriela, not from Denman. It has not come up.

[0:51:50] Voice 3: And you have

[0:51:51] Voice 10: precedent to say you can do this.

[0:51:53] Voice 3: I just wanted to check that.

[0:51:54] Voice 3: Oh,

[0:51:54] Voice 10: yeah. And I have to say, I mean, we've had legal, this was, we had legal review on this a few times. You know, we sent some initial thoughts, we got some back, we got some, you know, so we had

[0:52:06] Voice 10: to back and forth with our

[0:52:08] Voice 10: legal advisor. So we really wanted to make sure that we were doing it right in case we did get people upset.

[0:52:16] Voice 10: So

[0:52:16] Voice 3: thank you for sharing this with us, because I think it's very helpful to everybody, you know, see what another island's done, see what's relevant, what's not, what the implications are.

[0:52:25] Voice 3: Yeah, fantastic.

[0:52:25] Voice 3: I wish we had more time today to

[0:52:26] Trustee Yates (probable): go through it.

[0:52:28] Trustee Yates (probable): Just a really quick comment to add to Chair Smith's, sort of, whatever, your query.

[0:52:37] Trustee Yates (probable): It's interesting that Denman has gotten to first reading with this, and happily so, apparently.

[0:52:44] Trustee Yates (probable): and we're not going there yet because we want to do the same thing yeah you can only there's just

[0:52:49] Trustee Yates (probable): no more subdivision of those large lots unless you apply for rezoning uh we haven't got the first

[0:52:54] Trustee Yates (probable): reading yet but we plan to get there by september 3rd with this same idea right yeah

[0:52:58] Trustee Yates (probable): fantastic i i

[0:53:00] Trustee Yates (probable): do i just need

[0:53:00] Voice 3: to mention quickly that um i have a very clear memory of uh trustee graham uh the

[0:53:05] Voice 3: strategic planning session that we had at dales resta talking about how one day the islands will

[0:53:10] Voice 3: have no more subdivision potential and all that will be left is the itc to protect the land so

[0:53:15] Voice 3: i see that in this great document very exciting

[0:53:19] Voice 10: work well that's you know i mean we'll see how

[0:53:22] Voice 10: this is denman's setting a precedent um and so we'll see how it uh it runs out runs over the

[0:53:31] Voice 10: islands by the time excellent

[0:53:33] Trustee Yates (probable): and we've had no we've had no uh blowback either about this idea

[0:53:38] Trustee Yates (probable): and we're almost there fantastic and i see on the board we have

[0:53:42] Voice 3: an emotion it's just there's

[0:53:44] Voice 3: design for me there's the

[0:53:45] Voice 3: motion working on it okay thank you oh thank you very much thank you

[0:53:50] Voice 3: do you want to come back to this

[0:53:56] Voice 3: right i would love that

[0:53:59] Voice 3: also they can use the corrections or can

[0:54:02] Voice 3: we drop the motion that just

[0:54:03] Voice 1: points to this briefing

[0:54:04] Voice 3: And then we can send that as our referral response.

[0:54:10] Voice 5: They're almost there.

[0:54:17] Voice 3: Take a breath, chair.

[0:54:18] Voice 12: We have a schedule.

[0:54:19] Voice 12: My camera went off.

[0:54:23] Voice 3: We're

[0:54:24] Voice 13: actually doing very

[0:54:24] Voice 3: good for time, guys.

[0:54:27] Voice 3: Why don't we go ahead and do that then?

[0:54:29] Voice 3: Come back

[0:54:29] Voice 3: to it.

[0:54:30] Voice 3: Come back to it? Okay. We are going to come back to that motion.

[0:54:32] Voice 3: Is there any more discussion on that, though, where we'll be able to go back and just slam

[0:54:37] Voice 3: up that motion?

[0:54:38] Voice 3: Yeah.

[0:54:38] Voice 3: Awesome.

[0:54:39] Voice 3: Thank you very much.

[0:54:40] Voice 3: All right.

[0:54:41] Voice 3: We'll move on to 7.1.3, which is an RFD for Natural Area Protection Tax Exemption Program

[0:54:49] Voice 3: Conservation Proposal.

[0:55:06] Voice 3: So this is

[0:55:14] Voice 12: a proposal for a NAPTEP conservation covenant

[0:55:18] Voice 12: the landholders have worked with local cultural knowledge holders to come up with a name for it, which I will mispronounce, it's Schwach-Hinnitz.

[0:55:34] Voice 12: And the staff report goes through details of, it'll eventually show up.

[0:55:42] Voice 12: It is a lengthy staff report, I've noticed they're getting larger and larger, but I hope they're providing good information for the board.

[0:55:48] Voice 12: um so the

[0:55:49] Voice 12: natural values that are there on the property and um it's presented to the board to

[0:55:56] Voice 12: decide whether or not you'd like to accept the proposal and move forward i can provide more

[0:56:02] Voice 12: information more details i can provide a summary if you like i don't i wasn't sure but with our

[0:56:07] Voice 12: constrained meeting today what would be the best part of the board's wishes are we it's a good

[0:56:11] Voice 12: report yeah it's a great

[0:56:12] Voice 3: report support the proposal but also she doesn't need to talk

[0:56:16] Voice 3: because it's all here exactly is there a thought at some point and i know we're moving towards a

[0:56:24] Voice 3: new regional conservation plan and securement strategy i guess would be part of that like

[0:56:29] Voice 3: the prioritization of which lands are because i was just looking over our securement strategy

[0:56:35] Voice 3: um 8.2 property evaluation it it just seems very there's like is there a matrix

[0:56:44] Voice 3: Yes,

[0:56:45] Voice 12: so the same

[0:56:47] Voice 3: questions I have always raised.

[0:56:51] Voice 12: The securement strategy is preliminary and the matrix was not ever properly fleshed out.

[0:57:00] Voice 12: And so I do my best in that table that gets presented to the board.

[0:57:05] Voice 12: But there aren't really objective. I believe what it was written by my predecessor.

[0:57:12] Voice 12: She had clear ideas, but those have never been written out or elaborated in a way that

[0:57:17] Voice 12: is applicable across.

[0:57:19] Voice 12: I

[0:57:19] Voice 3: believe it needs to be, yeah, addressed.

[0:57:22] Voice 12: And I have been waiting until we look at the regional conservation plan and some of the

[0:57:28] Voice 12: pieces of that to really address that.

[0:57:31] Voice 12: Partly because I feel that the best use of that matrix and that scoring would be if the

[0:57:39] Voice 12: board has criteria to against like if it doesn't score at least this minimum amount you don't

[0:57:47] Voice 12: accept it or if you can get multiple proposals and so the score is higher or lower and we've

[0:57:54] Voice 12: never gotten to that step in this security strategy and

[0:58:00] Voice 3: i think this applies to what

[0:58:02] Voice 3: director frederick was saying is we kind of previously would have accepted you know and

[0:58:06] Voice 3: and here you can see there's a

[0:58:08] Voice 3: general table of you know how many hectares and

[0:58:12] Voice 3: our class is residential and that's like so there isn't really a categorization of what is really

[0:58:21] Voice 3: priority and why and so it's it's so subjective it's like you have to do this very lengthy report

[0:58:27] Voice 3: because it's like you're evaluating within the context within what's but it's a case by case

[0:58:32] Voice 3: as opposed to what is our securement strategy overall what would be the highest and then

[0:58:39] Voice 3: targeting there

[0:58:40] Voice 12: will always be some element of that case by case because each island is subjective

[0:58:45] Voice 12: yeah and the regional

[0:58:46] Voice 12: conservation plan on page 35 does you know how often i work at

[0:58:53] Voice 12: it does have a table that helps us with that yeah the appendices of the regional i use the

[0:58:59] Voice 12: a lot more than the securement strategy.

[0:59:02] Voice 12: Oh, yeah.

[0:59:04] Voice 3: Okay.

[0:59:06] Voice 3: Any more questions?

[0:59:08] Voice 3: Well, thank you.

[0:59:09] Voice 12: Are

[0:59:09] Voice 3: we feeling bored?

[0:59:11] Voice 3: Are we ready to make a decision?

[0:59:13] Voice 12: I'm sorry, Trustee Vanden Heuvel.

[0:59:17] Voice 3: Do you have any questions for us, Vice Chair Decoff?

[0:59:23] Voice 3: No,

[0:59:24] Voice 6: none for me.

[0:59:25] Voice 6: Thank you.

[0:59:25] Trustee Yates (probable): Thank you very much.

[0:59:27] Trustee Yates (probable): I move that the Islands Trust Conservancy Board accept the Conservation Proposal.

[0:59:31] Trustee Yates (probable): submitted by Mary Ann Paré, Leslie Joy, and Steve Sipos

[0:59:35] Trustee Yates (probable): to place a Natural Area Protection Tax Deception Program,

[0:59:39] Trustee Yates (probable): NAPCEP, Covenant, on approximately three hectares

[0:59:43] Trustee Yates (probable): of a North Pender Island property,

[0:59:45] Trustee Yates (probable): PID 001080849, Lot 18, Section 6 and 24,

[0:59:52] Trustee Yates (probable): Pender Island, Cowichan District, Plan 32261,

[0:59:57] Trustee Yates (probable): subject to review a First Nations referral.

[1:00:00] Trustee Yates (probable): responses, and ministerial approval to protect woodlands, cliffs, herbaceous habitats, and

[1:00:06] Trustee Yates (probable): mature

[1:00:06] Voice 3: rainforests.

[1:00:07] Voice 3: Thank you.

[1:00:08] Voice 3: Welcome for a seconder.

[1:00:09] Voice 3: Second by Trustee Smith.

[1:00:11] Voice 3: And then I shall call the vote.

[1:00:13] Voice 3: All in favor?

[1:00:15] Voice 3: Yes.

[1:00:17] Voice 3: Carried.

[1:00:17] Voice 3: Thank you.

[1:00:18] Voice 3: All right.

[1:00:19] Voice 3: And are we ready for the motion?

[1:00:21] Voice 8: Mm-hmm.

[1:00:22] Voice 8: We are.

[1:00:23] Voice 3: Thank you very much.

[1:00:24] Voice 3: Yeah.

[1:00:28] Voice 5: A

[1:00:46] Voice 3: little bit bigger.

[1:00:47] Voice 3: Yeah.

[1:00:47] Voice 3: All right.

[1:00:48] Voice 3: There's a leg.

[1:00:48] Voice 3: all right um all right we have a motion here in front of us is there anyone who's prepared to

[1:00:54] Voice 3: read the motion um somehow i can't see the whole thing

[1:00:59] Voice 3: so the whole thing well i don't have to scroll down yeah don't scroll i'll

[1:01:06] Trustee Yates (probable): read it thank you

[1:01:07] Trustee Yates (probable): i move that the island's trust conservancy board request staff to submit the bylaw referral form

[1:01:12] Trustee Yates (probable): to the denman island

[1:01:13] Trustee Yates (probable): local trust committee indicating approval recommended for the reasons

[1:01:17] Trustee Yates (probable): outlined below.

[1:01:18] Trustee Yates (probable): In addition to general conservation benefits

[1:01:21] Trustee Yates (probable): for Denman Island,

[1:01:22] Trustee Yates (probable): the amendments are expected to positively affect

[1:01:25] Trustee Yates (probable): the interests of Island Trust Conservancy

[1:01:27] Trustee Yates (probable): due to the following benefits

[1:01:29] Trustee Yates (probable): on its existing protected areas.

[1:01:32] Trustee Yates (probable): One, limits on potential development footprint

[1:01:34] Trustee Yates (probable): on adjacent lands.

[1:01:36] Trustee Yates (probable): Two, limits on subdivision potential for adjacent lands.

[1:01:39] Trustee Yates (probable): Three, potential to reduce development pressure

[1:01:42] Trustee Yates (probable): on undeveloped adjacent lands.

[1:01:44] Trustee Yates (probable): Four, removal of intensive agriculture

[1:01:46] Trustee Yates (probable): as a permitted use on adjacent lands and introduction of freshwater conservation

[1:01:52] Trustee Yates (probable): measures on adjacent lands six and the following benefits for securement seven

[1:01:59] Trustee Yates (probable): the proposed changes will encourage conservation as a community benefit

[1:02:03] Trustee Yates (probable): identified as eight part of rezoning applications nine the proposed changes

[1:02:10] Trustee Yates (probable): will make it easier to subdivide for conservation by removing the sorry just

[1:02:17] Voice 4: one moment it's copied from PDF

[1:02:19] Trustee Yates (probable): any wording a bit

[1:02:21] Trustee Yates (probable): funny numbering and wording but we know what we mean by removing the minimum lot

[1:02:26] Trustee Yates (probable): size requirements for land donation did we want to say something different there

[1:02:33] Trustee Yates (probable): is that still okay I want to change that was by

[1:02:38] Voice 3: reducing the barriers for land

[1:02:40] Voice 3: donated for conservation or something.

[1:02:45] Voice 3: We're

[1:02:45] Trustee Yates (probable): going to replace the word requirements with barriers.

[1:02:48] Trustee Yates (probable): By reducing the barriers for land donation for conservation.

[1:02:56] Trustee Yates (probable): Reduce the barriers for land donations for conservation.

[1:03:00] Trustee Yates (probable): Oh, that wasn't, sorry.

[1:03:02] Trustee Yates (probable): The land donation for conservation.

[1:03:11] Trustee Yates (probable): Yeah.

[1:03:13] Trustee Yates (probable): It says to subdivide for conservation.

[1:03:16] Trustee Yates (probable): Right.

[1:03:17] Trustee Yates (probable): You

[1:03:17] Voice 5: don't need the full conservation.

[1:03:18] Voice 5: Yeah, you're right.

[1:03:18] Voice 5: We don't need it.

[1:03:19] Trustee Yates (probable): We've

[1:03:20] Voice 13: already said that.

[1:03:20] Trustee Yates (probable): Yeah.

[1:03:21] Trustee Yates (probable): Make it easier by reducing.

[1:03:23] Trustee Yates (probable): Yeah.

[1:03:23] Trustee Yates (probable): So.

[1:03:24] Trustee Yates (probable): Oh.

[1:03:26] Voice 3: No.

[1:03:27] Voice 3: Is that thing the last for conservation?

[1:03:28] Trustee Yates (probable): Yeah.

[1:03:29] Trustee Yates (probable): You can remove the last for conservation because it's redundant.

[1:03:33] Trustee Yates (probable): And land on it.

[1:03:34] Trustee Yates (probable): Yeah.

[1:03:34] Trustee Yates (probable): And

[1:03:35] Voice 3: four subdivide?

[1:03:36] Voice 3: Or two subdivide?

[1:03:38] Voice 3: Easier to subdivide for conservation.

[1:03:40] Voice 3: Yeah.

[1:03:41] Voice 3: yeah so

[1:03:43] Trustee Yates (probable): that's good yeah can we do we want to

[1:03:46] Trustee Yates (probable): do the second one separately or do it now yeah

[1:03:49] Trustee Yates (probable): separately all right uh

[1:03:52] Voice 3: then looking for a seconder second by trustee elliot uh any further

[1:03:56] Voice 3: discussion show of hands all in favor motion is carried thank you please proceed i

[1:04:05] Trustee Yates (probable): move that the

[1:04:06] Trustee Yates (probable): island's trust conservancy board requests staff to inform the denman island local trust committee

[1:04:10] Trustee Yates (probable): of the following additional recommended considerations

[1:04:13] Trustee Yates (probable): for official community plan amendments.

[1:04:16] Trustee Yates (probable): A, amendments to section C1, lands and forest should

[1:04:21] Trustee Yates (probable): be based on the most recent ecological data

[1:04:26] Trustee Yates (probable): available to Islands Trust,

[1:04:27] Trustee Yates (probable): which is the sensitive ecosystem mapping.

[1:04:31] Trustee Yates (probable): Two, give consideration to the cultural importance

[1:04:35] Trustee Yates (probable): of the land.

[1:04:37] Trustee Yates (probable): Three, refer to the Islands Trust Conservancy

[1:04:39] Trustee Yates (probable): Regional Conservation Plan and 4. Identify known threats to the lands and forest.

[1:04:46] Trustee Yates (probable): B. Consider adding stronger language supporting removal of land from the Agricultural Land

[1:04:53] Trustee Yates (probable): Reserve for conservation purposes and supporting applications to place covenants on land in the

[1:04:59] Trustee Yates (probable): Agricultural Land Reserve. C. Consider adding sea level rise in the list of climate-related risks

[1:05:06] Trustee Yates (probable): in objective two of the climate change adaptation

[1:05:10] Trustee Yates (probable): and medication section.

[1:05:12] Trustee Yates (probable): And D, section 5.101 of the land use bylaw,

[1:05:17] Trustee Yates (probable): consider recommendation to add environmental conservation

[1:05:21] Trustee Yates (probable): or ecological reserve to permitted uses

[1:05:24] Trustee Yates (probable): as passive recreation applies human use.

[1:05:27] Trustee Yates (probable): And there should arguably be a provision

[1:05:29] Trustee Yates (probable): for the use of land solely

[1:05:31] Trustee Yates (probable): for ecological conservation.

[1:05:33] Trustee Yates (probable): observation. Thank you. Thank you. I'll

[1:05:37] Voice 9: be looking for a seconder. Trustee Elliott, any further

[1:05:41] Voice 9: discussion? I have one for item two. Give consideration to the local, to the cultural

[1:05:49] Voice 9: importance of the land. Who gets to decide who's, what the cultural importance is? Give consideration

[1:05:57] Voice 9: to cultural importance of the land. Well, because there is a history of cultural importance being

[1:06:04] Voice 9: decided by organizations and companies and not the local first nations yeah who

[1:06:09] Voice 9: are the rights holders

[1:06:10] Voice 3: yeah i think through any any time that this provision would be enacted and be under say

[1:06:14] Voice 3: a subdivision or a rezoning application which would have referral okay i

[1:06:19] Voice 3: think there would be

[1:06:20] Voice 3: an extensive robust referral to

[1:06:23] Voice 4: the first nations i i'd look to staff i just wanted to comment the

[1:06:28] Voice 4: The amendments to the official community plan try to do better

[1:06:32] Voice 4: in terms of giving attention to what's been learned

[1:06:38] Voice 4: in working

[1:06:39] Voice 4: with First Nations in developing these amendments.

[1:06:44] Voice 4: But the specific section on lands and forests

[1:06:47] Voice 4: doesn't mention the cultural significance of the lands and forests.

[1:06:53] Voice 4: So this is in relation to this specific section,

[1:06:57] Voice 4: which is an

[1:06:57] Voice 4: important yeah um omission as far as what staff have identified okay so just

[1:07:04] Voice 4: acknowledging that that is missing from this section yeah and

[1:07:07] Voice 4: that could be addressed okay

[1:07:10] Voice 4: okay any

[1:07:11] Voice 3: other question it just it's actually on the last point d i just want to um are these

[1:07:18] Voice 3: going to go for referral they haven't gone yet they would go

[1:07:24] Voice 4: they're included they were referred

[1:07:26] Voice 4: at the same time in this round of referrals they were included at the same time as island stress

[1:07:32] Voice 4: conservancy but i believe that we're being brought into the conversation at this late stage whereas

[1:07:38] Voice 4: first nations have been involved in earlier stages because

[1:07:42] Voice 3: that last point is something

[1:07:45] Voice 3: that first nations have objected to in bc in canada and everywhere else in the world

[1:07:50] Voice 3: this concept of conservation uh um only for animals not for people

[1:07:57] Voice 5: it's

[1:07:58] Voice 3: like this um suddenly

[1:08:00] Voice 3: i'm having a brain freeze but there's a name for that which we don't really do anymore internationally

[1:08:04] Voice 3: or in canada we don't have conservation that excludes people and so i'm just um i mean it's

[1:08:16] Voice 3: up to them to identify that but it's odd that it's in a recommendation from us when um that's kind of

[1:08:24] Voice 3: not the way we're going yeah do you know what i mean what's the word for

[1:08:28] Voice 3: it there's a word for

[1:08:29] Voice 3: that um sanitizing no no no it's like

[1:08:35] Voice 3: conservation um that excludes people there's a

[1:08:40] Voice 3: special word for

[1:08:41] Voice 3: it i'll think of it of course it'll come to me half an

[1:08:43] Voice 3: hour but you know what i mean yeah yeah

[1:08:45] Voice 3: you know what i mean yeah yeah i know yeah i it's fortress fortress conservation yeah

[1:08:52] Voice 3: yeah it's the

[1:08:53] Voice 3: council yeah it's like the idea that you have this land in a boundary on no and

[1:08:58] Voice 3: it's only for nature it's not for people whereas the first nation's perspective which they always

[1:09:03] Voice 3: argue about in all forms right is

[1:09:05] Voice 3: that people are part of nature so you

[1:09:08] Voice 3: can't have fortress

[1:09:09] Voice 3: conservation and so in Canada BC we're not doing that in although we do still

[1:09:17] Voice 3: have ecological reserves but anyways I just wanted to raise it that that's part

[1:09:21] Voice 3: of our secondary recommendations not a hundred percent sure but I got to leave

[1:09:27] Voice 3: it to

[1:09:27] Voice 13: people

[1:09:28] Voice 3: who know more about First Nations to comment on that I only know

[1:09:34] Voice 3: about it because I'm in the protected areas world right yes one suggestion

[1:09:40] Voice 3: suggestion would be to remove that last clause there. Another thought is that we do have

[1:09:47] Voice 3: closed nature reserves that are protected solely for ecological purposes. However, they

[1:09:53] Voice 3: are not closed to First Nations because First Nations have inherent rights to all lands.

[1:09:58] Voice 3: So just a consideration to keep in mind that the Island Trust Conservancy has protected

[1:10:06] Voice 3: did land solely for the purpose of ecological uh yes we have obligations too yeah yeah so if we're

[1:10:13] Voice 3: amending um the resolution it's already been seconded we have to do it yeah

[1:10:19] Voice 5: and

[1:10:21] Trustee Yates (probable): i'm i'm

[1:10:22] Trustee Yates (probable): certainly happy with dropping that last phrase well yeah we

[1:10:27] Voice 3: have to make an

[1:10:28] Trustee Yates (probable): option so do we have

[1:10:29] Voice 3: there

[1:10:29] Trustee Yates (probable): make a motion

[1:10:41] Voice 3: but this section is what we are recommending to death they might consider this

[1:10:48] Voice 3: it's not the part it's not in there yeah but also because as

[1:10:52] Voice 3: as your chair will say, there's section 35 rights that are maybe a super seed. I don't

[1:11:01] Voice 3: know if that's the right word there, but those are the considerations. As

[1:11:06] Voice 3: passive recreation

[1:11:13] Voice 3: implies human use. Yes. The way that I'm reading that recommendation is that currently passive

[1:11:24] Voice 3: passive recreation is one reason to include for ecological conservation or conservation in general

[1:11:32] Voice 3: that includes passive recreation. I think what this is saying that also one should be able to

[1:11:38] Voice 3: protect solely based on the purpose of ecological conservation, not instead of or it's including

[1:11:47] Voice 3: including so that it's not just for passive recreation conservation that's how i read it

[1:11:54] Voice 3: that's among the list of permitted uses yeah that one of the permitted uses would be that

[1:12:01] Voice 3: it's justifiable to protect land solely for ecological purposes

[1:12:07] Voice 3: that wording you can never get away with that in canada and internationally but we can here

[1:12:13] Voice 3: I don't mind

[1:12:13] Voice 3: that it implies that we can have land solely for the provision of ecological

[1:12:21] Voice 3: considerations and protection that

[1:12:24] Voice 5: is

[1:12:25] Voice 3: what it implies and that is what it's intended to imply

[1:12:28] Voice 3: but that is fortress conservation so all I'm saying is you can put that there I don't care

[1:12:35] Voice 3: it's not the biggest issue but I'm just saying it's if I was a First Nations person reading this

[1:12:41] Voice 3: recommendation it'll be a red flag to me maybe it's not to them or these particular people are

[1:12:47] Voice 3: going to read it but just raising it

[1:12:49] Voice 3: because it would be a red flag in many other contexts

[1:12:53] Voice 3: in this country in this province do you know what i mean do you know what i mean

[1:12:57] Voice 3: can we hear from vice chair

[1:12:57] Voice 9: see if vice chair nom has anything to say i was

[1:13:01] Voice 3: wondering is this

[1:13:02] Voice 3: do we do spice turn that home it looks like the glass there and i'm going to point to the time

[1:13:13] Voice 3: here. Not the rest of the discussion, but I'm rushing the discussion. We're going to

[1:13:18] Voice 3: cut the next item from the agenda as well, so that we can line it up in canon at 11 o'clock.

[1:13:29] Voice 3: Are we going to propose an amendment? Well, I propose an amendment to get rid of everything.

[1:13:38] Voice 3: I'd like to propose an amendment that we get rid of the sentence after the comment.

[1:13:43] Voice 3: on. That's just my amendment. I'm not married to it. You can not accept it.

[1:13:54] Voice 3: I think it's fine. Can we put it to the vote? I'll second it.

[1:13:58] Voice 3: You'll second it?

[1:13:59] Voice 3: Yes. Just

[1:14:00] Voice 10: make sure the minute takers. Yeah,

[1:14:02] Voice 3: we'll need to see the

[1:14:03] Voice 3: amendment.

[1:14:04] Voice 10: Okay. So what is it that the board removes?

[1:14:10] Voice 10: That's

[1:14:10] Voice 3: not the phrase. My amendment was that the board removes everything in that sentence

[1:14:21] Voice 4: So you're looking for a wording for that resolution?

[1:14:24] Voice 4: Oh, yes. Sorry. Yes, please.

[1:14:28] Voice 4: So there's a third resolution?

[1:14:40] Voice 9: It would be three.

[1:14:42] Voice 9: It's a separate.

[1:14:45] Voice 3: Resolution three?

[1:14:46] Voice 3: No, that

[1:14:47] Voice 4: would be a

[1:14:47] Voice 3: separate amendment, right?

[1:14:49] Voice 3: Yes, the Ombudsman's Conservancy Board amendment motion,

[1:14:52] Voice 3: and we can add in the motion number.

[1:14:53] Voice 3: Okay.

[1:14:54] Voice 3: Great. Thank you.

[1:14:55] Voice 3: Fire removing, and then you would put in quotations,

[1:14:57] Voice 3: the language to be removed.

[1:14:59] And

[1:15:15] Voice 3: I would say if you don't have 2D in there, we'll just add in the motion number when it's

[1:15:19] Voice 3: okay.

[1:15:20] Voice 3: Or I can, you know, if you build this, we'll fix up this in your minutes after the fact.

[1:15:25] Voice 3: Yeah.

[1:15:25] Voice 3: Yeah.

[1:15:26] Voice 3: All right.

[1:15:30] Voice 3: Mm hmm.

[1:15:30] Voice 3: Time to read that.

[1:15:33] Voice 3: And then the motion, fire moving.

[1:15:35] Voice 3: All right.

[1:15:36] Voice 3: We did have a seconder.

[1:15:38] Voice 3: I trust the other.

[1:15:39] Voice 3: So I will.

[1:15:40] Voice 3: Any discussion?

[1:15:40] Voice 3: Call the vote.

[1:15:41] Voice 3: All in favor?

[1:15:42] Voice 3: Motion carried.

[1:15:45] Voice 3: Yes.

[1:15:46] Voice 3: Are you saying none comes vote?

[1:15:53] Voice 3: Yeah, I

[1:15:57] Voice 3: don't know why we're not seeing him.

[1:15:59] Voice 3: Is

[1:15:59] Voice 9: there a way that we can see him?

[1:16:02] Voice 9: We were seeing him previously.

[1:16:04] Voice 3: Yeah, he was there.

[1:16:06] Voice 3: Apologies,

[1:16:07] Voice 9: WhiteShare.com, we

[1:16:08] Voice 3: can't see you.

[1:16:12] Voice 3: Technical difficulties today.

[1:16:20] Voice 3: so you would need to i would suggest because you've got someone um on screen call see if

[1:16:25] Voice 3: there's any opposed but i would call her thank

[1:16:27] Voice 4: you very much i would trust you not come as his

[1:16:29] Voice 4: hand raise

[1:16:29] Voice 3: yeah

[1:16:32] Voice 4: fantastic thank

[1:16:33] Voice 3: you part

[1:16:37] Voice 6: of me part of me for a moment sorry to interrupt i

[1:16:39] Voice 6: just noticed that there was a comment or question in the Q&A. I'm not sure if that was already

[1:16:46] Voice 6: observed or not.

[1:16:48] Voice 3: Oh, I haven't seen anything yet in the chat. You should not be having them

[1:16:57] Voice 3: commenting.

[1:16:59] Voice 6: It's okay. It's not through the chat specifically, but it's through the Zoom

[1:17:04] Voice 6: Q&A and it looks like it's from Salt Spring Island Conservancy with a comment. There's a

[1:17:10] Voice 6: comment there i'm just not sure if we address it now or later just wanting to uh bring into

[1:17:16] Voice 6: our attention thank

[1:17:17] Voice 3: you thank you very much for that i can acknowledge we have received a question

[1:17:21] Voice 3: which we can address after the meeting okay thank

[1:17:24] Voice 5: you thank you

[1:17:26] Voice 3: thank you very much

[1:17:27] Voice 3: and thank you

[1:17:28] Voice 3: for tuning in uh all right so we're back to the original motion as amended and that was moved

[1:17:40] Voice 3: seconded

[1:17:41] Voice 3: everybody to vote

[1:17:43] Voice 3: alright

[1:17:46] Voice 3: then I'll call the vote

[1:17:50] Voice 3: I'll leave the seat

[1:17:51] Voice 3: you can

[1:17:53] Voice 3: automatically cast your vote

[1:17:55] Voice 6: yes

[1:17:56] Voice 9: I had

[1:17:57] Voice 6: my hand raised as well sorry

[1:17:59] Voice 6: thank you

[1:18:01] Voice 9: excellent work thank you everyone

[1:18:04] Voice 3: yes just before you move on

[1:18:06] Voice 3: I just wanted to just for board education

[1:18:07] Voice 3: purposes the conversation around

[1:18:09] Voice 3: the minimum lot size I want you

[1:18:11] Voice 3: to know that the board has the power to create lots that are smaller than zoning through a

[1:18:16] Voice 3: section 99 subdivision power so that amendment that they're contemplating would benefit other

[1:18:21] Voice 3: agencies so benefit conservation in general but i wouldn't want you to leave the board meeting with

[1:18:25] Voice 3: the impression that the board can't do that already because it is a power that you have

[1:18:28] Voice 3: and you have used many times in the past so just as your ambassadors out there in community just

[1:18:34] Voice 3: know that if someone had a piece of land that was smaller than was currently permitted by zoning

[1:18:38] Voice 3: you could still proceed as the board to create that lot for the purpose it's a power that you

[1:18:42] Voice 3: have it's kind of somewhat unique to the board yeah but it would be beneficial if they were

[1:18:46] Voice 3: looking at working with a non-profit that didn't have that power thank you thank you for pointing

[1:18:50] Voice 3: that out that's section 99 section 99

[1:18:52] Voice 3: no all right we are on to item 7.1.4 which i think we're

[1:18:56] Voice 3: actually going to defer um how's the board feeling about that we

[1:19:00] Voice 1: only have another

[1:19:01] Voice 3: few more minutes

[1:19:02] Voice 1: to finish the agenda

[1:19:02] Voice 3: it's pretty cool i mean title of that agenda oh sorry that was the crd um after

[1:19:07] Voice 3: post trail improvements it was an rfd i think we should we can defer that there will be time for us

[1:19:13] Voice 3: to pick up again in september is it time sensitive i would announce no i think out of all the items

[1:19:19] Voice 3: we have here it's

[1:19:21] Voice 4: the least it's the least time sensitive right it's

[1:19:24] Voice 4: the least time sense yes

[1:19:26] Voice 3: thank you very much for that work yeah it's the least time sensing comparison i mean

[1:19:29] Voice 3: we could just

[1:19:30] Voice 3: make the motion i'm pretty happy to

[1:19:32] Trustee Yates (probable): make the motion to

[1:19:33] Voice 3: yeah not have discussion on that

[1:19:35] Trustee Yates (probable): discussion yeah well

[1:19:36] Trustee Yates (probable): i'm good for

[1:19:37] Voice 3: discussion yeah um we have two minutes sure we'll see

[1:19:41] Voice 3: so for the most important week it's a straightforward one right on all right

[1:19:46] Voice 3: all right make the motion that'd be wonderful thank you i move that the honest trust conservancy

[1:19:49] Voice 3: board request staff to notify the comox valley regional district that the addition of crushed

[1:19:54] Voice 3: gravel to improve wet sections of trail in lindsay digson nature reserve is not permitted due to

[1:20:00] Voice 3: covenant holder concerns. The Islands Trust Conservancy Board is supportive of the Denman

[1:20:05] Voice 3: Conservancy Association's alternate suggestion of boardwalks and will consider other alternative

[1:20:10] Voice 3: suggestions from the Comox Valley Regional District for addressing wet sections of trail

[1:20:16] Voice 3: that do not have potential negative ecological impacts and which are easier to remove and

[1:20:20] Voice 3: dispose of once the temporary use of this trail for Cross Island Trail has ended.

[1:20:24] Voice 3: it. Thank you for a seconder. Second by Trustee Yates. Any discussion?

[1:20:30] Trustee Yates (probable): Just a bit. This is

[1:20:32] Trustee Yates (probable): certainly going to go along with what we do on Gabriola where our trail in nature builds

[1:20:36] Trustee Yates (probable): boardwalks or always builds boardwalks rather than getting heavy equipment in or even non-heavy

[1:20:42] Trustee Yates (probable): equipment to be trucking gravel and making permanent. So good recommendation. All right.

[1:20:49] Trustee Yates (probable): All

[1:20:50] Voice 3: right, I'll call the vote. All in favour? And I don't know if I can steer down Tom's hands.

[1:20:58] Voice 6: Yeah, yeah, it's up.

[1:21:00] Voice 3: All right, good. And then we're at 11.29. We're moving on to 7.3, correspondence. Any comments on that section?

[1:21:14] Voice 3: um i think it's a it's a good observation but um the conservancy already does everything it can

[1:21:22] Voice 3: to um ease the costs for landholders who want to protect their land and trust council just

[1:21:28] Voice 3: approved sponsorship for her nap tip covenant wonderful it's happening so thank you for the

[1:21:33] Voice 3: comments yeah thank you for the comments uh stuart brett wrote us a letter um and he asked in a

[1:21:37] Voice 3: letter that'll be forwarded to this board for us to read and we have read the letter we've received

[1:21:42] Voice 3: be a correspondence. Thank you for writing. We'll move on to updates for information and I'm looking

[1:21:50] Voice 3: at the 7.4.1 public acquisitions report. Any questions? I'm going to go through these very

[1:21:56] Voice 3: quickly. 7.4.2 public covenants report. Anything there? I see that for the executive committee

[1:22:05] Voice 3: update that Trustee Elliott sent written submission which will end up in the minutes.

[1:22:10] Voice 3: um we'll move on to financial committee update from trustee yates and that was written as well

[1:22:17] Voice 3: thank you for that saving us a lot of time right now and trust council update as well was written

[1:22:22] Voice 3: in by trustee elkin thank you very much for for that time to do that um for the government

[1:22:27] Voice 3: committee update the last meeting was two days ago and i had regrets for that meeting i didn't

[1:22:32] Voice 3: actually wasn't able to attend a very important meeting and i'll make an update at the september

[1:22:36] Voice 3: meeting to let you know what happened at that meeting uh next item is 7.4.7 which is the species

[1:22:42] Voice 3: at risk evaluation program our evaluation program evaluation excellent report any discussion from

[1:22:49] Voice 3: the board i did have something i'm so sorry but i'm gonna i have it if you want me to share i

[1:22:55] Voice 3: have a motion here this is an excellent report and it needs this everybody needs to read it

[1:23:01] Voice 3: or to hear about it i think that we should um perhaps ask staff to admit a communication

[1:23:06] Voice 3: again media release around the achievements of this what do you think yeah it's really

[1:23:12] Voice 13: can you make a motion i have a

[1:23:14] Voice 3: motion that i sent that i would

[1:23:16] Voice 3: love that maybe if you read it

[1:23:18] Voice 1: i

[1:23:18] Voice 3: have a lot more to say about it but we don't have a lot of time it is such a big report

[1:23:26] Voice 3: motion would be uh some to the fact that uh i mean the island trust conservancy received the

[1:23:32] Voice 3: species at risk program evaluation report for information i request staff to issue a media

[1:23:37] Voice 3: release highlighting the outcomes and the accomplishments of the species program i'll

[1:23:43] Voice 3: second that we'll see it on the board first

[1:23:45] Trustee Yates (probable): i think you might be missing the word board

[1:23:48] Trustee Yates (probable): on the stress conservancy board recommend um yeah that

[1:23:52] Voice 3: may perhaps it is written on here i just

[1:23:55] Voice 3: yeah skip it thank you one moment please okay i definitely my my screen on zoom is having

[1:24:07] Voice 3: technical difficulties i can't reshare so it will be one moment before you will see it on screen

[1:24:14] Voice 3: just while we're waiting can we tell cody this as well do we have a way to like tell carly

[1:24:20] Voice 3: who's the writer of this yeah yeah

[1:24:23] Voice 13: but the board

[1:24:24] Voice 3: yeah yeah pass this motion

[1:24:26] Voice 3: absolutely tell carly that the board passed this motion she just

[1:24:30] Voice 3: did such a good job

[1:24:31] Voice 3: wonderful job that's what gave me the idea when i saw her name on it

[1:24:35] Voice 3: what an excellent

[1:24:37] Voice 3: report and we

[1:24:39] Trustee Yates (probable): should be we should be counting

[1:24:41] Trustee Yates (probable): can

[1:24:42] Voice 3: we

[1:24:58] Voice 9: do this motion by rwm

[1:25:02] Voice 3: if you're comfortable not you're seeing on screen oh my

[1:25:05] Voice 3: goodness we've been very consistent with

[1:25:10] Voice 3: oh it's having the motion that that would have been the first time we didn't

[1:25:15] Voice 3: excellent so there's the motion here yeah i move that the

[1:25:17] Voice 3: alice board board yeah

[1:25:21] Voice 3: i move the alice justice servicing board receive the species at risk evaluation report for

[1:25:32] Voice 3: information and requests that staff issue a media release highlighting the outcomes and the

[1:25:37] Voice 3: accomplishments of the species at risk program second second by trustee yates any discussion

[1:25:43] Voice 3: and i'll call the vote all in favor bush and kerry advice

[1:25:49] Voice 3: excellent thank you um next up is the budget report manager cheryl any questions from the

[1:25:59] Voice 3: board on that? No. Seeing that, we'll move on to 7.4.9. The first quarterly report.

[1:26:08] Voice 3: That one

[1:26:09] Voice 3: looks very good. Thank you for that. And then eight, no public comments or delegations,

[1:26:14] Voice 3: no new business. Then that'll bring us to the next trust meeting, which will be September 29th

[1:26:21] Voice 3: um um yeah at 10 a.m and i was a little trying to be right i don't know any all right so we're

[1:26:30] Voice 3: going to move into our closing uh session and i'll be looking for a motion i move that the

[1:26:36] Voice 3: island's trust conservancy meeting be closed to the public in accordance with the community

[1:26:39] Voice 3: charter part 4 division 3 section 91e the acquisition disposition or expropriation of

[1:26:46] Voice 3: land or improvements if the council considers that

[1:26:48] Trustee Yates (probable): disclosure could actually board if the

[1:26:51] Trustee Yates (probable): board considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the

[1:26:56] Voice 3: conservancy and 91 f law enforcement if accounts

[1:27:01] Voice 3: if the board considers that disclosure could

[1:27:03] Voice 3: reasonably be expected to harm the conduct of an investigation under or enforcement of an act

[1:27:09] Voice 3: thank you and

[1:27:10] Voice 3: seconder please second the trustee yates i shall call the vote all in favor

[1:27:15] Voice 3: and i believe that is carried i can't i

[1:27:18] Voice 9: mean i'm sharing

[1:27:19] Voice 3: the live stream

[1:27:20] Voice 3: all right so we'll turn off the live stream i don't know why thank you thank you

[1:27:32] Voice 3: we're still live streaming and we're still live