Council approved a $10,000 annual funding level for the Brentwood Bay Community Association for the remaining two years of its service agreement, and adopted several bylaws, including new speed limits. The sharpest debate was over a proposed three-term limit for local elected officials: supporters said it could make room for new voices, while opponents argued voters should decide and councils benefit from experienced members; the motion failed. Council also rejected a proposal to cut the Police Board’s E-Comm dispatch budget increase, but asked for an E-Comm presentation. Residents raised concerns about pickleball court bookings and flooding on Mabour Flats, and the Mayor said staff would provide public updates on the agricultural plan and flooding questions.
Generated from the recording's captions and the official minutes.
Council voted to move into a closed meeting under the Community Charter provisions for potential harm to the District’s interests from land matters and for litigation or potential litigation.
Routine: close the meeting to the public to discuss municipal land matters and actual or potential litigation.
Official wording: That Council convene a closed meeting pursuant to the following subsections of the Community Charter:
90(1) A part of a council meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following:
(e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the council considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality; and
(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality.
community services4 public speakers1:16:06 Watch · Read
Four residents spoke. A representative of a peninsula pickleball club said the club had contributed $35,000 toward planned court conversions but had been denied its usual group bookings and had not received a promised staff call back. A resident asked when the delayed agricultural plan would begin; the Mayor said staff should provide a public update. A Mabour Flats farm operator and another nearby resident raised concerns that water-management changes could worsen flooding of farmland and homes. The Mayor invited the farm operator to work with the Corporate Officer on a revised letter and said staff would prepare a public-facing update on flooding plans.
Agreement
The Mayor said staff should provide a public update on the agricultural plan and on water management in Mabour Flats.
Disagreement
The pickleball club representative said the booking decision left the club feeling unwelcome; the Mayor said he had no evidence that the District did not want the club and offered to follow up.
Council asked the Police Board to examine what it would take to publish records of its meetings in a way similar to Council’s current practice, and to report back.
Ask the Police Board to look into what it would take to publish its meeting records in a way similar to Council, and bring its findings back to Council later.
Official wording: That the Police Board review what would be required to post records of Police Board meetings, following what Council currently does, and report back to Council at a future date.
Council debated whether to reject an $82,000 increase in the E-Comm dispatch budget. A councillor amended the amount to $42,000 for 2026, explaining that it reflected the increase for that year. The amended proposal failed. Council then requested a presentation from E-Comm for Council and the Police Board to better understand service delivery and costs.
Agreement
Council supported asking the Police Board to arrange an E-Comm presentation.
Disagreement
Some councillors supported opposing the $42,000 increase, while others said the proposed cost was imposed externally and that the Police Board’s planned funding would not affect this year’s operations.
A councillor argued that Council should first understand E-Comm’s service and its relationship with the Police Board before directing budget savings.
Defeated 0 to 7Item 13.1.2
Do not approve the proposed $82,000 increase for E-Comm dispatch services, and require the Police Board to find the same amount in savings.
Official wording: That Council does not approve the $82,000 increase in the E-Comm dispatch budget services and therefore the Police Board must find the equivalent savings.
Change the proposed E-Comm dispatch budget motion so that it addresses a $42,000 increase for services in 2026, rather than the original $82,000 increase, while still requiring equivalent savings from the Police Board.
Official wording: That the motion be amended as follows:
That Council does not approve the $82,000 $42,000 increase for services in 2026 in the E-Comm dispatch budget services and therefore the Police Board must find the equivalent savings.
Do not approve the $42,000 increase for E-Comm dispatch services in 2026, and require the Police Board to find the same amount in savings.
Official wording: That Council does not approve the $42,000 increase for services in 2026 in the E-Comm dispatch budget services and therefore the Police Board must find the equivalent savings.
Council agreed to look at the wording of its temporary-use permit bylaw for farms, including what qualifies as farm accommodation. The request specifically seeks to exclude trailers and recreational vehicles that do not meet building standards.
Have the District review its temporary-use rules for farms and clarify what counts as farm accommodation, excluding trailers and RVs that do not meet building standards.
Official wording: That Central Saanich look into the wording of the bylaw for Temporary Use permit for farms and what constitutes farm accommodations, to not include trailers and RVs that do not meet standards of buildings.
Staff recommended appointing the District’s Corporate Officer and another staff member as the Chief and Deputy Chief Elections Officers, avoiding the extra cost of a contractor. A councillor first moved to seek a third-party election contractor, but that proposal was defeated. Council then appointed Emilie Gorman as Chief Elections Officer and Pamela Martin as Deputy Chief Elections Officer.
Agreement
Council approved the staff recommendation to appoint Emilie Gorman and Pamela Martin.
Disagreement
A councillor favoured considering an outside contractor, while other councillors supported the staff option as simpler and more cost-effective.
Have staff find an outside contractor to run the 2026 local election and bring that person's name to Council for appointment as Chief Elections Officer.
Official wording: That staff seek a third-party contractor to be hired to run the 2026 local general election and once selected that individual names be brought forward to be appointed by Council as the Chief Elections Officer.
Appoint Emilie Gorman as Chief Election Officer and Pamela Martin as Deputy Chief Election Officer for the 2026 local election.
Official wording: That for the Local General Election 2026, the following be appointed as Elections Officer:
Chief Election Officer – Emilie Gorman
Deputy Chief Election Officer – Pamela Martin
The new policy requires District employees to remain politically neutral while working and not use District resources or their municipal positions to influence an election. Council adopted the policy and referred it to the Central Saanich Police Board to consider a similar policy for its administration.
Adopt the District's Elections Conduct Policy and send it to the Central Saanich Police Board to consider whether it should have a similar policy for its own administration.
Official wording: 1. That Council adopt Policy No. 24-ADMIN, Elections Conduct Policy.
2. That Council refers the Policy No. 24-ADMIN to the Central Saanich Police Board for their consideration of similar policy for their administration.
Council supported a joint application with North Saanich for FireSmart funding, with Central Saanich as lead applicant and administrator. A councillor asked what would happen if grant funding became less reliable. Staff said grants had shifted from two-year to one-year terms and were less certain; future service levels and funding would need to be considered through service reviews and Council’s financial planning. Staff said they could administer the joint grant with current resources.
Agreement
Council supported submitting the joint grant application.
Staff said they would be able to administer the funding for both municipalities within existing resources.
Support a joint FireSmart grant application with Central Saanich as the lead applicant and North Saanich as the partner, and authorize Central Saanich to receive and manage the grant money for both municipalities.
Official wording: That Council provide a resolution supporting the District of Central Saanich submitting a joint application to UBCM under the Community Resilience Investment Program, FireSmart Community Funding & Supports stream, with the District of Central Saanich acting as the primary applicant and the District of North Saanich as the sub-applicant, and that the District of Central Saanich be authorized to receive and administer the grant funding on behalf of both municipalities.
Council adopted the speed-reduction bylaw. Questions focused on how to read the colour-coded road map, why some roads move directly between 50 and 30 kilometres per hour, and how the District will assess safety results. Staff said traffic and collision trends need to be reviewed over five years because road conditions and traffic volumes change; updated statistics are received annually.
Agreement
Councillors and staff supported assessing road-safety outcomes using longer-term traffic trends.
Disagreement
Two councillors opposed adoption; the bylaw nevertheless passed.
Council gave the annual parcel-tax roll bylaw its first, second and third readings and convened the Parcel Tax Review Panel, tentatively scheduled for April 27. Staff said there had been no registered objections to the roll in the past three or four years. In a related question, staff said about $50,000 a year is being planned for roughly five oil-to-heat-pump replacements while the District completes reporting on its existing grant.
Agreement
Council approved all three readings and convened the review panel.
Council deferred consideration of third reading until April 27. Councillors discussed whether information about the planned request for proposals (RFP) would be new information after the public hearing, and whether it made sense to consider the zoning alongside the RFP terms. Staff expected to bring the RFP scope and evaluation criteria to the April 27 meeting, with responses potentially arriving in July or August.
Agreement
Staff said Council could still decide whether to adopt the bylaw after third reading.
Disagreement
A councillor favoured waiting to consider the zoning and RFP together; the Mayor preferred not to delay third reading, though the deferral passed.
Council adopted the Official Community Plan amendment and the zoning amendment for 1882 Hovey Road. The transcript records opposition from two councillors on the first bylaw and one councillor on the second; both motions passed.
Disagreement
Two councillors opposed adoption of the Official Community Plan amendment; one councillor opposed adoption of the zoning amendment.
Council adopted the zoning amendment and authorized the development permit, which includes variances for lot frontage and setbacks. A councillor asked how provincial changes affect amenity contributions. Staff said the District’s current policy calls for $7,500 per new unit—$2,000 toward affordable housing and $5,500 toward the general amenity fund—and that the two new lots would provide $15,000 in total. Staff said Council still has discretion to discuss project-specific amenities.
Agreement
Staff said the application’s contribution met the District’s current amenity policy.
Authorize issuing the development permit for 6922 Saanich Cross Road, including exceptions to the usual lot-frontage and setback requirements.
Official wording: That Development Permit application 3060-20-22/21 (6922 Saanich Cross Road), which includes variances for lot frontage and setbacks, be authorized for issuance.
A councillor’s proposal would have asked staff to develop options for stronger public participation, including forums where residents help shape policy and a citizen liaison group. Staff said the District was already developing a public engagement framework for 2026–27 and that this work could inform it. Council referred the proposal to the incoming Council after the 2026 election.
Agreement
Councillors supported the value of improving public engagement.
Disagreement
One councillor wanted staff to prepare options for the next Council to consider; others preferred to leave the work for the incoming Council to shape.
The Mayor proposed asking the Province to limit local elected officials to three consecutive terms in the same office, with eligibility to run again after sitting out one term. Supporters said term limits could create room for new voices and broaden representation. Opponents said voters should decide who serves and warned that limiting experienced members could weaken councils’ institutional knowledge. The motion was defeated.
Agreement
Councillors treated the proposal as an advocacy motion for debate at the Union of British Columbia Municipalities, not a change that would affect the coming election.
Disagreement
Supporters argued that incumbency and name recognition can make it harder for new candidates, including underrepresented residents, to win.
Opponents argued that term limits would restrict voter choice and remove valuable experience from council.
Ask the provincial government, through UBCM, to limit locally elected officials to three consecutive terms in the same office, while allowing them to run for that office again after sitting out at least one full term.
Official wording: WHEREAS local government in British Columbia relies on democratic accountability and regular opportunities for new leadership and perspectives within municipal and regional district governance;
AND WHEREAS extended tenure of elected officials in the same office over multiple decades may limit opportunities for broader participation in local government and may contribute to entrenchment of incumbency;
AND WHEREAS reasonable term limits can support democratic renewal while still allowing experienced elected officials to return to office after a break in service;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Union of British Columbia Municipalities request that the Province of British Columbia amend the Community Charter and the Local Government Act to limit mayors, councillors, electoral area directors, and other locally elected officials to no more than three consecutive terms in the same office;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such amendments provide that an individual who has served three consecutive terms may seek election to the same office again after at least one full term has elapsed since their last consecutive term.
Council approved continuing municipal-facilities design with HCMA through the design-development stage for a fixed fee of $602,000, with the stated intention of proceeding under the remaining fixed percentage in its proposal. Staff clarified that the District could terminate the contract by written notice, paying for work completed and documented costs but not lost profit; services could also be suspended for up to 90 days. A councillor asked staff to confirm the District would retain the digital design files it had paid for.
Disagreement
Three councillors opposed continuing the project; the motion passed.
Continue the municipal facilities project with HCMA through the design-development stage for a fixed fee of $602,000, with the intention of completing the project using the remaining fee percentage set out in HCMA's proposal.
Official wording: Approve continuing the project with HCMA architecture and design, through Design Development for a fixed fee of $602,000 and with the intent to complete the project with a remaining fixed percentage of 4.883% of the Construction Budget as outlined in their RFP submission.
The notice proposed asking staff to discuss with the Extraction Lands owners whether a food hub for locally produced or harvested food could be supported as an amenity in the Keating Business District. The chair indicated it would be considered at the next meeting; no debate or decision appears in this transcript.
18 CORRESPONDENCE (Receive for General Information)
In follow-up to correspondence, staff said they were monitoring parking concerns on Lisno Avenue and discussing options with a nearby developer. Staff were also looking at a grant opportunity for community radon testing. On parking near Brentwood Community Hall, staff said they were considering how far wheel stops could move toward trees and possible gravel parking areas, while a councillor raised concerns about trucks blocking the bike lane.
Agreement
Staff said parking conditions would continue to be monitored and possible changes were being assessed.
18.2 BBCA re Request for Increase in Funding - March 20, 2026
community services1 public speaker2:57:00 Watch · Read
A Brentwood Bay Community Association representative asked Council to increase its four-year community service funding to $10,000 for each of the remaining two years. The representative said the association had received $4,250 rather than the full amount and its costs had risen. Council approved the increase.
Increase the Brentwood Bay Community Association's annual community-service funding to $10,000 for the remaining two years of its four-year agreement.
Official wording: That the funding for the Brentwood Bay Community Association's four-year Community Service Funding be increased to $10,000 and be disbursed for the remaining two years of the service agreement.
At the end of the open meeting, Council moved to close the meeting under a Community Charter provision concerning identifiable individuals being considered for municipal positions. The transcript ends before the chair declares the result.
Carried, unanimousItem 19.1
Routine: close the meeting to the public to discuss personal information about someone holding or being considered for a municipal position.
Official wording: That Council convene a closed meeting pursuant to the following subsections of the Community Charter:
90(1) A part of a council meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following:
(a) personal information about an identifiable individual who holds or is being considered for a position as an officer, employee or agent of the municipality or another position appointed by the municipality.