Transcript: Council - 28 Sep 2026

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'd just like to uh call the regular council meeting for Monday, September 28th to order. I just want to acknowledge that councelor Jensen had to send his regrets. Uh before I start, I would like to respectfully acknowledge that we are uh gathered here on the traditional lands of the Fakongan speaking people represented by the Sunis and Cassps nations. We're grateful to live, work, and play in this special place. Item two is approve of the agenda. I may have a mover and secondary to adopt today's agenda, please. Thank you, Council Ward. And I'm just going to get a seconder. Okay. Thank you. [sighs] and open for discussion. Councelor Day.

Thank you. I'd like to propose uh two amendments to the agenda. One is that we refer 9.1 and 9.2 back to staff. 9.1 um there has a lot of questions that have yet to be answered about work link, who they serve, whether or not they are in fact a nonprofit or a government service. And 9.2 uh just to um increase public engagement on the issue before we take a decision and also on the release of resolutions. Um, I'm just going to grab the motion IC20696. I'd like to propose an amendment. And um, if the proposed amendment needs to be discussed, then I understand that we would need to go in camera under section 90.1 and or 90 bracket one, I guess it is, and 90 bracket two.

uh per the uh notice of meeting for the meeting that that resolution comes from. Um the change that I'm proposing is not uh to change one word. The motion reads that the news release be distributed on Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026. And my amendment is that a news release be distributed on Tuesday, September 22nd. Okay. Thank you. So, I just want to make sure I'm clear. 9.1 you would like to defer. Yes. 9.2. Did you say? Yes. Uh this is for the um intergovernmental uh business bylaw. and just no one has uh in the public has had an opportunity or any engagement on what the changes are. Uh and those changes have been known since May. So um I I think that uh a change to uh something that affects people on a daily basis in the community uh should have engagement.

Okay. Thank you very much. Uh do I have a second for that motion? Okay, Councelor Jordison. and uh I'll open it up for discussion just uh procedurally um Mr. Johnson. Um just just on this the Ryzen report on the suggested amendment, could you uh just can you please ensure me that we're following procedure here? Your worship uh staff move forward with council's direction from that meeting which was unanimous at that time and we have implemented that uh decision your worship and that's led us to where we are today. Thank you very much council ward. Thank you Mr. Mayor. on the uh idea of of removing 9.1 and 9.2 or deferring. I would say that sort of steps against precedent that this council has set with an agenda item. Uh we have every opportunity to have some discussion on it for the first time this evening and the opportunity to defer or refer it to committee or back to staff would would also be available at that time. So I failed to understand why we would do

that right at the outset of a meeting when some in the audience may may well be interested in the agenda item. So, I will be opposed. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Any other discussion? Uh, Mr. Mayor, I guess I'm confused uh as to whether or not uh the uh amendment to the released motion uh IC 202696 uh is uh on the docket or not on the docket. If you want to discuss it, I imagine we need to go on camera. Okay. Thank you very much. Um, not seeing any discussion and and I'll agree with absolutely 9.1. I mean, I I think it's it's worth I think some representatives from work link are here anyways. So, it's it's worthy of discussing it. You know, what we do with it is going to be up to council, but the the discussion is is uh is worth having.

Um, 9.2 is I feel this the similar similarly on that one right now. And uh yeah, at this point in time, I I'll call the question. All those in favor? Well, just a moment, Mr. Mayor, may I please understand what uh I'm quite happy to let go of 9.1 and 9.2 and discuss those at the time. I just thought it was a lengthy agenda and that was a way to uh give time to the more prepared items. Uh but in regards to the IC 202696 um I would like to exercise uh my ability to propose that amendment of one word from the 2A. Okay. No uh it's duly noted. Um at this point in time I'll look for any other discussion on that point.

Councor Jordis, I would just like some clarification about this censor and sanctioning and how it is on the agenda this evening. Um just to clarify that there is no sanctioning. This is a rise in report. So, um, you're imposing a formal censor and significant sanctions against me and I was not provided an opportunity to address council or the public. I'm going to stop you right here, please. No, I I am um just so that you understand something. Uh, councelor Jordan, council has already made its decision um regarding this matter on September 18th and it was released publicly on September 22nd. We have uh nothing more we can say to this or to add to our decision. This is particularly important as section 5.8 of our code uh permits you a 30-day window to to request a review of council's decision. While we're in this 30D 30-day appeal window, which we are in right now, it would be totally inappropriate to discuss this matter any further. Uh, with this in mind, I'm we I'd like to

refer you to our September 22nd press release and the attachments and uh we won't comment any further. So, cut me off. Um, well, I have something else I wanted to bring up. Um, I'd actually like uh That's fine. You could do [clears throat] that after the meeting, but you have a you have a 30-day window right now. So, I'm just going to tell you that right now. You have a 30-day window and and you can't I am following the procedures of the team. Corporate officer, please. Corporate officer, please. Thank you, your worship. Yes, the code of conduct policy does have a section in that that allows for a 30-day appeal. Uh that appeal needs to be put in in writing to council. Um and then it would be considered at a later date, but not at this meeting tonight. Tonight is just got the release of in camera resolutions that are just put on the agenda for information only. Thank you.

And on that note, I'm I'm uh I I will let you speak a second time, Conor Day. Thank you. I just want to point out that the purpose of my motion is not to change what happened, but to accurately record [clears throat] the meeting. Uh I am strictly arguing about the wording of the final resolution and given that um there was no press release available at that meeting to review. It is a press release not the press release. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. Um at this point in time I I'm going to call the question. All those in favor. Okay. Uh, councelor Jordison, councelor Day, all those opposed. And that's the rest of us.

So motion is denied. Okay. I'm going to uh do the uh release of item three, release of or actually I I still have to have a mover and second. Well, no, we already got through the mover and seconder. Can I call the question to uh um to adopt today's agenda, please? All those in favor and opposed. Okay. Councelor Jordison and I didn't see your hand, Council D. Okay. Uh item three, release of of in camera resolutions. Um resolutions released from the July 13, 2026 in camera. uh meeting dealing with the West Shore RCMP. Uh resolutions dealing from the U um 24th of 20 uh 2426 in camera meeting dealing with the appointment of the alternate subdivision approving officer for the city. I guess I'm supposed to name off these IC's, aren't I? So um so the first one was IC 202659 con 260151 which is the Westshore RCMP facility expansion. That's the CCDC 30 2025 authorization.

The next one was IC 202669 appointment of subdivision approving officer. IC 2026-70 appointment board of variance member and uh lastly uh IC 2026-93 investigation code of conduct and that is for information purposes and I believe there's two more IC 2026-95 and IC 2026-96 six. Okay, I'm just going to move on to item four, which is the mayor's message. Before we begin begin tonight, on behalf of the city of Cowwood and the residents of Cowwood, I am proud to congratulate Scott Abramson on his appointment to fire chief and Josh Pedigrew as deputy fire chief and second in command. Scott and Josh are respected, trusted leaders who bring a wealth of experience, sound judgment, and unwavering commitment to our community.

Their appointments reflect the strength of the team uh we we we have built and give us every confidence in the department's future. As our city continues to grow, I am completely confident that the Cowwood Fire Department remains in excellent hands under their leadership. Please join me in congratulating Fire Chief Scott Goodman uh Abramson and Deputy Deputy Chief uh Josh Pedigrew on their well-deserved appointments. And I'd like to take this opportunity to thank uh uh Chief O'Brien Irwin for the lasting foundation he has built here at the city of Cwood. This is a proud moment for Cowwood Fire Rescue and for our city with Scott and Josh leading a skilled, dedicated team. Our community is in great hands now.

Adoption and receipt of minutes. Item five. May I have a mover and seconder for the adoption and receipt of the minutes detailed in section five of the recommendation. Okay. Thank you. Councelor Day and councelor um Olen and Okay. Go ahead, please. Are the I was just going to ask the questions. Any errors or omissions? Go ahead. council day. Thank you. I have a proposed motion that I have provided to Marcy. Um there was considerable debate uh around the presentation of a report on the 24th about proposed um amendments to uh how we manage our website and the necessary um uh things that have been identified by members of the public. And so my proposed motion uh will be up here in a moment, but it I believe that um the the minutes do not quite accurately record council's discussion concerning the status of the website action plan. Uh and the actions identified in the staff report as complete or in progress.

And uh so I'm proposing that the minutes of the regular meeting of council held August 24th be amended at item 8.4 website action plan to more accurately and completely reflect council's discussion concerning the implementation status of the actions including council's discussion regarding actions identified as complete or in progress. That item 8.4 four be further amended to record the staff undertaking contained in the August 24th, 2026 website action plan report that staff would return to council with further updates at the September 28th, 2026 regular meeting of council and that the corporate officer be directed to review the meeting recording and revise item 8.4 for as necessary just to ensure that the minutes accurately reflect the discussion decisions and undertakings arising from council's consideration of the website action plan and that the regular me meeting minutes as amended be adopted um likely at a future meeting. Uh the uh the current minutes um do include public participation and uh introduction of staff members working on the completeness of the review, the development of tracker and information that it shows and updating uh the publicly available information.

Uh so I'm just trying to make sure we don't lose track of some important work that we undertook. It was a pretty full discussion and I just think we didn't quite capture all of the things that were said at the meeting. So, I'm just asking for staff to review them and bring them back to a future meeting. Do I need a She's making a motion on that, right? Or so I need a seconder for fixing the minutes. Okay. Yep. Thank you. Um, councelor uh Ward and uh any further discussion on this? Seeing none, I'll I'll call the question I'll call the question. Uh all those in favor I have no problems with that.

That's unanimous. Uh motion carries. So with the exception of the August 24th, can I uh can I get a I'll call the question. Are there any other errors or missions on and on any of the other uh minutes detailed in section five? Seeing none with the exception on the on the amended uh adoption and receipt of minutes. Uh all in favor opposed seeing none. Motion carries. We'll move on to uh public participation. So we uh we received two written submissions uh that were received before uh um agenda uh publication and none were received after. The two submissions uh will be appended to the agenda following uh tonight's meeting. In addition uh they will be available on the city's meetings website tomorrow.

like to thank the public for their written submissions and uh no members of the public have registered to speak virtually. So members uh of the public will now be allowed to present concerns or issues to council. Alternately, you may want to wait for the agenda um item to be brought up and um to speak at that time. I just wonder if I get a quick showing if who wants to speak now and who wants to speak on the agenda item. Would you like to speak now or now? Okay. Anybody want to speak later on any agenda items? Seeing none. Okay. So, we don't have to pause here. Um you may uh business cards are on the on the podium there and they're available for anybody that would like a response uh to their comments or questions. Once uh and your email is received, the corporate services will forward uh the question to the appropriate uh uh department for response.

Just want to remind people that uh comments pertaining to the partial exclusion application of Cwood Creek Park from the agricultural land reserve ALR has been subject to public hearing and [clears throat] are prohibited at this meeting. also like to remind everyone participate participating in public participation tonight that we welcome your comments and u your opinions. Uh and I just ask you to please focus your comments on the issue the the proposal or the concern not on individuals. We may disagree on the issues, but we can and should do so we should do so respectfully and constructively. This point in time, I ask the public to come on up and speak.

Mr. Mayor, I just want to let you know I saw something uh for speaking to the individual item. Oh, sorry. Did I miss that? Oh, okay. You're you're speaking to that, aren't you? Not not public participation. You're actually doing the presentation, correct? Yeah. Okay. Okay. Gotcha. Come on up. Carol, just identify who you are and where you live. Carol Brown uh with Friends of Havenwood Park. Friends of Havenwood would like to thank this present C Hallwood Council for the support they have provided over the last four years of the 12 years we have been a volunteer organization in the park. Pulling blackberries is so much easier with a good pair of thick gloves. Thank you. Thanks to our FOHP statician David Petri, we can let you know that out of 28 Fridays in the last four years, Friends of Havenwood Park have been in the park for 177 of them. and FOP contributed um contribution is a 2hour session by each individual. We have had 1,249

such contributions in the last four years. The total number of hours worked in these last four years by all FOP members is 2,238. [snorts] As a member of a Cwood volunteer group, we take pride and joy in our work and our contribution to the Cwood community and environment. We thank you for supporting us through the assistance of the parks department and their managers, grants in aid, and the volunteer the Cwood volunteer coordinator. We look forward to our continued support from the Cwood Council, but we take this opportunity to thank each one of you today. Thank you. Thank you very much for your very kind words, Carol. Anyone else would like to speak at public participation?

Okay. Uh seeing none, I will move on to uh consent agenda section 7. Um just want to remind everyone items under the consent agenda will be voted in one motion. Uh a member may make a request to remove an item for the purpose of individual debate or discussion. Would u councelor Ward? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I'd like to remove uh item 7.1, the housing targets progress report, please. Okay, thank you. It will now become item 8.6 under new business. Oh, councelor D. Thank you. I would like to pull disaster resilience initiative, community risk assessment, and disaster mental health resilience report. Okay, that will move to 8.7 under new business.

Any other changes? Seeing none, we only have 7.3 under the consent agenda. May I have a motion, please? Thank you. Council Olson, Council Ward, and I'll call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. So, we get on to the main business here. Um, section eight. Uh we'll move on to 8.1 and um National Urban Park project update engagement results and parking scope. Um Mr. Johnson you want to introduce Thank you worship members of council. This is the national urban urban park project update. The recommendation for council to consider is that council receive the national urban park project phase 2 what we heard for information and that council receive the national urban parks assessment report dated March 26 March of 2026 for information and that council direct staff to continue discussions with parks Canada nations nations uh souk nation and further explore the implication opportunities and requirements associated with potential inclusion of Colbert Peninsula within a national urban park in the greater Victoria area and that staff report back to council with next steps

including park administration, financial information consider considerations prior to conducting the next round of public engagement on the national urban park initiative and seeking a decision from council of the inclusion of Cobert Peninsula in a national urban park designation. There is a report from um from our planning staff, Caitlyn Suzuki, planner one, and should council wish to receive it. Yes, please. Let's go ahead there, Caitlyn. Uh thank you for the introduction. So, I'll be providing a short uh update on the National Urban Park project, including engagement results and a park scoping report that was prepared earlier this year. Uh so as a brief overview, the national urban park program is a federal program with the goal of establishing protected green spaces near urban areas. Um these areas are supposed to support the three main objectives of the program.

Connecting people to nature, conserving nature, and advancing reconciliation with indigenous peoples. So the boundaries of the proposed Greater Victoria candidate site are still being refined. Um, we're still working to determine a study area, but it could include uh Parks Canada administered lands around Fort Rod Hill and Bisgar Lighthouse National Historic Sites. Um, as well as potentially city of Cwood administered parklands. So, uh, the the potential inclusion of these lands, particularly Coberg Peninsula is the subject of the scoping report um that we'll discuss later in the presentation. Um and so this project is currently in phase two or the planning phase. Uh as a part of the work of this planning phase is public engagement. So staff completed a uh public engagement session from March to May earlier this year 2026. So engagement topics for this included park priorities um how the national urban park objectives could be implemented at the potential candidate site as well as park boundaries and connections. So the results of this engagement period were summarized in a what we heard report which was uh provided today for council council information.

So during the engagement period five different methods of engagement were used. Uh we had surveys available both online um and paper copies at um at events. We had sounding boards available across the community. We hosted workshops as well as community engagement sessions. Um, we also had some youth specific sessions. So, across all of these formats, we received 797 total responses reaching an estimated 255 to 300 participants. There we go. Um so in terms of the results of this engagement um for each of the engagement topics we um established strong themes which were consistent across all methods of engagement. So when discussing park priorities we saw nature conservation, recreation and access to outdoor spaces and infrastructure and amenities support use as strong themes. Um this was echoed when we asked participants to select um from a list of potential park priorities. uh we saw nature followed by recreation as the most popular responses.

So looking at the uh implementation of the national urban park objectives when discussing conserving nature we saw protection of habitat restoration and stewardship and managing human impacts as the strong themes. um access and convenience and infrastructure and amenities were the strong themes for connecting nature and signage programming events and workshops were the strong themes for advancing reconciliation. Um kind of echoing this in the survey responses and youth engagement when uh participants were asked how they'd be interested in learning about the indigenous history and culture of the areas. Um we saw art as a popular response followed by signage and programming events and workshops. So when discussing a park connections, we saw regional trails and connections as a strong theme with many references to connections to the Galloping Goose.

Uh we also saw local trails and connections and bike roads and multi-use pathways as strong themes. And when participants were asked about the potential inclusion of city of Collwood administered parklands, uh Coberg Peninsula was the option that was uh most often supported followed by Lagoon Park and Perimeter Park. So based on the results of the engagement, uh a list of uh eight recommendations were uh put together to provide to the partner table. Um so these are to prioritize conservation as a foundational principle, balance access with environmental protection, advance meaningful reconciliation, enhance education and stewardship opportunities, plan for sustainable access and transportation, maintain a low impact design approach, provide clarity and ongoing communication, and continue engagement with underrepresented groups.

Uh so for the second part of this update, we're going to be discussing the park scoping or assessment report which was commissioned by the city to evaluate uh specifically the potential inclusion of Cobberg Peninsula within a national urban park designation. Uh so the focus of uh the purpose of this assessment was to provide a high level analysis to inform early decision-making um with some of the uh key areas of focus being ecological, social and economic development considerations, alignment with city plans and policies uh administration uh considerations alignment with the national urban park framework as well as some key gaps or potential risks. Uh so looking at the existing site um Cobberg Peninsula is a diverse coastal ecosystem. It's home to a migratory bird sanctuary. Uh additionally there's a long-standing cultural connections uh with the area for the ses and nations.

Uh it's a very popular recreational spot with uh many people doing activities such as wildlife viewing, cycling, walking, beach use. Um and so this recreational use does is one of the existing pressures um particularly considering the sensitive habitats in the area. Um as well some of the existing pressures are climate related risks. Um so in terms of comparison to callwood plans and policies uh when looking at our policies when they reference the waterfront um the vision is centered on environmental stewardship, climate resilience and community access to nature. So, some of the themes we're seeing across this are uh coastal protection, climate adaptation, parks, open space, and ecological connectivity, uh active transportation, accessibility, community well-being, um and improved indigenous relationships and collaboration.

So, overall, these policies do strongly align with the national urban park principles and objectives. Um but there are some areas that could require further clarification or development um to support designation. uh one being indigenous co-administration. So our current policies typically uh support um in improved and enhanced engagement with first nations whereas the national urban park designation could uh require more formal um cooperative management agreements. Uh secondly, transit availability. So active transportation is quite well supported and will be improved through the water uh waterfront pathway. Um but there is limited public transportation access to Kobberg Peninsula which could create a potential equity gap. Additionally, governance and reporting capacity. So there um are some reporting um suggested through the cold waterfront stewardship plan. Uh however, there could be additional capacity required to meet the requirements uh that parks Canada has for the national urban park designation.

Uh so looking at site compatibility there are some key actions that were identified to support um compat compatibility with the designation. Uh first was uh further work to improve ecological connectivity. Um improved accessibility um including uh improved transit access uh improve definitions of the boundaries of the park area. um enhance steps to protect and conserve the environmental areas. Uh step increase steps for visitor management um as well as uh strong uh coordination amongst all of the partners. So a cost benefit summary was also provided. So uh without the national urban park designation um the city would still be able to advance u the objectives of the Card waterfront stewardship plan and they would maintain greater local control. However, there potentially be fewer partnerships and funding opportunities. However, with national urban park designation, uh the city would benefit from greater structure, coordination, and national visibility as well as improved access to partnerships, expertise, and funding. Uh however, there's uh the increased government's complex uh complexity and

operational responsibilities with the designation. Uh so, some implementation considerations. Um so with um with designation we'd be looking at establishing co-management agreements um ongoing planetary planning monitoring and reporting requirements for the national park designation uh which would include increased capacity to coordinate this. Uh we would also need a formal uh designation agreement. Um and we need to ensure alignment with all regulations across levels of government and uh future steps to clarify jurisdiction decision- making liability and enforcement. Uh so in terms of next steps, the city is in discussion with Parks Canada and um both the what we heard report and assessment report um were included on the agenda for today's meeting as well following council acceptance. they will be uh linked on the let's talk callwood project page as well.

Um so the options and al alternatives for council today um first we have the stack recommendation. Um additionally um additionally council could defer the item for further information or another option as determined by council. Um I'll put the uh staff recommendation up back up for your reference. Um, but if council has any questions, um, I'm happy to answer. As well, we have some representatives from Parks Canada here as well today. Thanks very much. Great presentation. Uh, I'll open the floor for questions. Uh, Kaitlin, councelor Dave, first of all, yes, thank you. Excellent report. Um, I, uh, I know it's a very double-edged sword working with anything down at the lagoon. you're both trying to increase recreational opportunities but also protect the environment and I noticed that those themes come out in your table with the strong themes and the moderate themes that have emerged. So I'm just curious um are how those types of uh oppos oppositional kind of interests will be managed uh in a national urban

park. uh is there uh any sort of a hierarchy to how that might be decided in the future because environmental protection is very much in the strong themes but also managing human impacts is both it it's actually in both areas. It's in a strong theme on conserving nature and in a moderate theme on areas of concern. Uh thank you and through the mayor. Um we definitely did see um a lot of support for conservation as a main priority um in the public engagement that we did. Um so in terms of how exactly this might look in the national urban park. Um we don't necessarily have any decisions on that yet. that the um number one recommendation that um we would be providing based on this engagement to the partner table was to is to prioritize conservation as a foundational principle. Um some examples I suppose of what this might look like um could be um if there are infrastructure improvements um or amenities that could be added um putting those in areas that aren't sensitive um or are less sensitive um or they're

previously disturbed. Um it could look like um setting up conser specific conservation areas where perhaps they're limited access. Um but this is still kind of to be to be determined. Thank you very much. Councelor Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Caitlyn. This is a pretty big deal. Um my question really is before we before council is asked to make a decision um will council have a clear understanding of what authority and control the city will retain over the Coberg Peninsula um and what would change under a national urban park designation? Uh thank you for the question uh through the mayor. Um in terms of what exactly like administration would look like that is kind of still being determined. Um kind of one of the first steps is establishing and determining what the um study area would be which would kind of allow um staff and partners to do further evaluations and studies um to uh provide more information on those things. Um so inclusion of lands within a study area does not necessarily um mean they will be designated. um it's

possible through um the review we determine that it's not suitable. Um so it is still kind of um we would certainly have more information before council would have to make those decisions. Thank you. Cost growth. Thank you mayor. I mean this is very exciting. I believe for ourselves we're in a position now where we have zero excuse me my alto is getting in the way. We have uh zero revenue at the point at this point in the Cobert Peninsula and the cost to maintain and operate is significant. We're fortunate to have funds for the walkway project and then what I feel that Parks Canada brand is stellar in my opinion. Please if anyone disagrees with me, let me know. I see in my mind's eye the potential for supports for general infrastructure, general maintenance, but also for perhaps some staffing, thinking park rangers, trying to help not just enforce the bylaws that we do have in place considering the protection of wildlife, the behavior of

dogs on leash, etc., but also to uh help develop and in implement interpretive programming, educational programming and the potential for a draw shall we call it tourist interest given the national scope of the presence of that park then I think that what we contribute from call would be a significant element to it and help draw it out. I suspect that the the uh the urban parks folks feel the same way. Otherwise, we wouldn't be in this position. And um for me, it's very exciting attending some of the tours that we've had. There seems to be nothing but this incredible drive and energy toward something working given this remarkable coastal urban coastal uh element that we have which is so rare in the world now. Um I can't cite my source but I understand that urban coastal shoreline in the world is roughly three or 4%. So what we have here is a rare opportunity. The migratory bird sanctuary has been here since 1931.

Uh it's something that deserves to be protected. But of course then the discussion around the word recreation is really important and how that interface with humans. So I look forward to and I did have a few questions here and I think that they would be answered in the next step which is why I completely support and be happy to make that motion where it come to that time to recommend staff option recommendation option one I'll get back to you councelor Ward. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Um to some extent my comments would echo that made by councelor Olson and councelor Grove. Uh so thank you Caitlyn. This is a wonderful opportunity. I certainly agree with that. I think um when we first heard from Parks Canada, you know, over a year ago, uh it it was a pretty exciting idea. Um I think though it falls upon this council and the next council to shepherd the vision through to fruition because I I think if we can get to a place where we have this national urban park potentially incorporating Cobberg Peninsula, that

would be a win for the community. But um I just want to understand exactly what what that looks like and as councelor Olson referenced it as sort of a guarantee. Um I look at uh slide 24, page 24 of the um of the Cwood uh assessment report. Um and it speaks to legal and jurisdictional considerations and importantly pathways to designation. And I wonder if we've this multi-part question I guess but have we elected on this pathway to designation? There's there's three options. A partnership model which it it expresses as being most common, a third party administered model which is local or indigenousled or a hybrid layered model which is common in practice which I think might be more practical here. And for clarity, I think my concern when I look at option one um is that you know we will obviously continue discussions with other stakeholders like Parks Canada and Casspsum and Songhes Nations but we do know also that with the Tamuk treaty that royal roads um will be uh you know has been transferred or will be transferred to the Songhes nation but

that is being disputed in in court right now by the Ceptsum nation and I've heard through sources speaking with with federal authorities that there would be the real possibility that you know the federal lands that would be designated park here could become part of that discussion to to solve that issue. So my concern from a Cwood perspective is I'd very much love to see Coberg Peninsula for the reasons councelor Grove articulated move into this national urban park if indeed that's what we get. But could we see Coberg Peninsula and and you know the land that is ours, the other land is federal. That's not a question. Could we see that potentially lose park status and be rolled into you know potential settlement uh with one of the nations? um you know and this isn't a concern about reconciliation efforts and it's just do we have a risk there where we say sure incorporate this you know thealt lagoon effectively all of Cwood's you know beachf facing park um and risk seeing that lost essentially

uh thank you for the question to the mayor so um with the um designation of any city of Cwood parklands the city would still maintain ownership of any lands that it currently owns. Um and it would only be um the designation uh the national river park designation wouldn't take away from that. Um in terms of the different kind of options for designation and what kind of that administrative structure would look like. We're definitely still in very early stages of that. Um Elena from Parks Canada might be able to provide some more information on what those could look like. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Elena Green from uh Parks Canada. I'm the project lead for the proposed National Armor Park. Thank you very much for having me today. I just wanted to respond to uh one of your questions and just to clarify that um the through the National Armor Park designation, this wouldn't be the city of Cwood um um relinquishing any kind of administration or ownership of Cobberg Peninsula. that would that would be

retained by Collwood and any um discussion about co-management would still be um worked out through a uh a legal framework uh uh designation agreement. So we're still away from that but um the exploration of study area is the next the next sort of key point and even the commitment of lands into a study area does not mean that they're committed to a boundary yet. So, this just helps us move through the designation process where we can um explore the study area, understand what the the cost is, what the um like we have a five-year implementation um plan and then um permanent ongoing funding through the designation. So, that would be um still explored under uh the next phase of the planning. So, yeah, just to clarify that point.

Wonderful. Thank you and welcome back by the way. Um no, fabulous. I think that's one of the most concise and and you know comprehensive answers I've had in a long time. So thank you that that answers some questions for me. Appreciate it. Just one last question for me then just along that same lines. Um so if if you [clears throat] go up to to Tofino right now there's national parks. They're not called national urban parks but national parks. And um I noticed that a lot of things have changed up there. [snorts] um and and maybe to the detriment of uh of uh citizens. Now, you made it very clear that they're looking at the model of us still administer administering um this I I think it gives me a little more satisfaction that it be become part of the national urban park because I think it offers a lot more protection for in the future. Uh some some other people that decide maybe that's a good good way to create revenue, start put developments down there, right? So, I'd

be totally against that. And uh so I I guess um is that option open though that it is fully a a national urban park and u you know I I guess the only we haven't had these discussions amongst our own council. So we you know it'd be a a good a good thing to actually organize uh Caitlyn. So, you know, because to me, I'd be okay with this as long as that there's still unfettered um um um access by Cwidians and then if one day you guys decide to put parking meters down there, then you know, Call Whittians get it for nothing. You know what I mean? uh that sort of type of arrangement, you know, so that there is no uh burden to to uh people that live in Cwood, you know, it could be it could be as as big as a a a transfer over because I like that protection to tell you the truth and I don't know which option provides the best protection to tell you the truth.

So I I just want some of your thoughts on that because you know you you say that this is the model but could it be other [clears throat] models right now because we haven't had that discussion amongst counselors. So thank you. So I will say for from Park Standard's perspective um when I first started on this project I thought I understood I was like oh I understand what a national park looks like. I've been to some of these other um Parks Canada places and I understand what it's going to look like. But once I understood that this is a designation under a policy rather than legislation, uh it has a lot more flexibility for our partners. And so that's kind of the the idea. Uh particularly um we're working with the city of Cwood and uh our partnering nations and their um the preference in collaboration is um designation of our policy is ideal, but it is something that could be explored um uh with discussion and can speak more about it with your staff. Um but uh the the designation under policy uh is um

provides a lot more flexibility for citizens. Thank you very much. No, that's great. That's a great answer. Thank you. Clearly understood. Councilor Grove, you going to move something and go ahead. Thank you, Mayor. Uh I just wanted to make one comment kind of what's driving my thing uh thinking since this discussion first came up a couple years ago was it seems to be very much this sort of vision or what could possibly happen as in the national park at point ple national park in Ontario where you know even broad overview I've been there it's spectacular boardwalks the protection a lot of the uh activity sort of thing that's not talking about ferris wheels and turning it into a circus grounds which is kind of uh my fear. So um is that a fair comparison to look at that as a model for what might evolve there um in in some very broad overview? I think that's really for the partner table to determine. Um like um uh Point Peely uh is a is a beautiful place, but

it is also uh we live in an urban area and that's you know the the designation to be urban um is pretty critical and and unpacking what an urban park looks like especially meeting the three objectives of connecting people with nature, conserving nature and um uh uh advancing reconciliation. Um that looks different at different places across Canada. Yeah. For Oh, for sure. Thank you very much. And councelor Day, thank you. I'd like to move option one, the staff recommendation. And uh I have just a slight addition to add to it. Uh just a recommendation that council seek to um meet with our indigenous parters partners at the lagoon uh as often uh as is feasible.

Give that corporate officer. Okay. Can I get a second there, please? Hey, don't sing and motivation. I'd just like to say that um for many years we've worked on the lagoon and previously the Esquimalt Lagoon Stewardship Initiative and others. harbors and watershed program from CRD when they were involved um came down to the lagoon and worked very hard on restoration. In one of those uh times uh the uh the partner that we were working with uh happened to be walking down the beach and it was a lovely uh moment where we were able to meet with the chief of the Isquamalt nation and chat about the importance that Esquyalt Lagoon is to their culture and to their people and the very um high regard that they have for all the environment and the many benefits that it has provided for them. The chief used to always say when the tide is out the table is set and uh they really are keen to be able

to return some of the environmental processes to the pre 1940s. Uh I think 46 was when the fishery was actually closed in that area. but uh to be able to return to a healthier environment producing food for for the region. Um so those are all admirable things that may take time and and effort to achieve but uh I think that a majority of uh Pwidians would be in favor of having a healthy environment at the lagoon and good connections with our indigenous partners. So I I just think we need to to try to uh meet with them um where they are and where they want to be, which is out in nature enjoying beauty.

Thank you very much. Um Councelor Jordison, do you have anything more to add to that for motivation? Uh any other discussion? Okay, I'll call the question then. Uh everyone know what the motion is? It's what's in the recommendation plus what uh councelor um a has has put up there. And if you can just put it up. Thank you. And that's the last line there. It's a lagoon too. So yeah. Okay. Um at that point I'll call the question. All those in favor? Okay. That's unanimous. Motion carries. Thank you very much, Caitlyn. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Okay. Next item 8.2 2027 budget approach. Um Mr. Johnson, if you can introduce who is going to be speaking here, please.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through the mayor to council, the recommendation is that council endorse the 2027 budget approach, including the guiding principles and proposed timeline. And Miss McClennon is here to answer any questions that you might have. Your worship. Do you have a presentation at all? No. Yes, I don't have a presentation, but I'm happy to highlight uh the approach before you begin since I um so this uh approach is for us it's a bit exciting. We're hoping to introduce a lot um of engagement to get feedback on our service delivery. it talk it like we know that there was feedback from council about the um uh service review and so it's it's an attempt to limit the um I'm not finding the right words to say not the effort but just the time it takes to conduct that review and make it more focused approach and a more efficient approach so that we're looking at the right things and and council is focusing on the things that matter and so in this approach

There's a um we would still prepare all of the documents that we normally do. We would still go through the regular budget process. I know there was some commentary on budget principles. This is not a procedure. This is an approach. And so we have sometimes do ourselves a disservice when we list our principles in like full scap instead of just the five bullet points that cuz I went to see what CRD has and it's really it's so short and concise and what we're trying to do through this approach and on Mon sorry on the 5th we'll be introducing the policies that will support the approach. So those help give council the reassurance that we are following the principles and guidelines that council has endorsed to support um the execution of the budget deliberations and preparation. Um in addition the cyclical review of this plan makes sure that every service review does get a touch point though and the schedule that I built out is um it sort of follows the LGD classifications of general

government protective services. it makes sense to us and we often presented it that way anyway during um service review. So we put I know there was some talk about um some feedback around choosing those maybe more based on what is happening in the year like a more strategic priority sort of driven selection. However, because this approach talks about already an exceptionbased approach to um budget, we'll be looking at those service areas anyway. So they would naturally float to the top. Otherwise, we're going to be looking at, no offense to the new chief in the room, but fire and police and like those service areas will be on the agenda every year. We want to make sure that we touch every service area because staff really do miss that feedback when we do have it.

And this year we put general government first because of all the attention on website. This year we want to get targeted feedback around that. We want to highlight the new tools that we're introducing and rolling out. And also today we um added the engagement approach for council to look at and provide feedback. We're super excited about that because we want to see how we can gather that. I don't know if all of council had a chance to look at those targeted questions, but they are very specific to budget and we they're just samples for now, but we want to also um t change them every year potentially depending on the service areas being questioned so that we can get feedback from um residents that really talk about those services that we're looking at and then learn how we can incorporate that into the budget process and to help council know what um the community is most concerned concerned about. I think I've talked enough about all of that

other than we're going to uh introduce those um all those supporting policies on the next meeting. Great. I'll go to council for any questions. I just have one question actually. So, you know, I I noticed that you're going to you're proposing, you know, a new debt management policy and surplus policy and etc., etc., and then also update existing financial policy. So, are you going to be able to have this in place for for 2027 then for those budget discussions or is this going to come after or I just want to get that clarified moment? Yes, thank you for the question. Those are coming on Monday. So, we um part of that meeting will be we'll be discussing the reserves and the surplus bylaw. So, the policy but also the reserve bylaw.

We won't be I won't be bringing forward a bylaw change at that meeting, but it's more for conversation because we will look at everything that is in place and then at the next meeting we will approve that. But I can still we'll still move forward with those recommendations that will that will be in place. Super. Thank you very much councelor D. Thank you. Uh and I appreciate that you've laid out a a very wholesome process uh and uh that's probably a little bit challenging to do. uh but I've also addressed uh identified uh certain areas within the city that I think are major cost drivers for the future uh including engineering, roads and sewer infrastructure. So, I wanted to suggest and see if you could possibly concur with me that perhaps the year two items should go first because those are probably our biggest cost drivers. The engineering, the public works, the roads, the storm sewers, and the sewer utility. Those are issues that if we don't get those ones right, um there's not that much left to work with.

So, uh, by putting that first, I really felt that we might be able to early in the next council's term have identified for them uh, where where the big money has to go uh, so that we can kind of keep our priorities um, in line our expectations in line with our abilities. Uh would you think that would be doable through the chair? Yeah, I love that idea. This was really just a slate to get the four before and because um there was so much interest in website, but we've gathered a lot of that feedback. So if that's count, I feel like that's a great option as long as we're rotating within those four slates, that's great.

Perfect. Thank you. So um I I'll let other people speak when it time comes. I'll propose that motion. Okay. Uh, councelor Olson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, just one quick question. Just wondering if um will new staffing positions and service increases continue to be separated out individually for council consideration like and any significant new spending? Yes, thank you for certain those will come forward. Um, I'm not sure I need to elaborate on that. Those will be coming forward. Okay, great. Thank you. it. Seeing no other uh questions, I will go to councelor day for the motion. Sure. I'll I'll move the that council endorse the 27 27 budget approach approach including the guiding principles and proposed timeline and that year two be come first and year one replace it. Just switch year one and two. Uh the rest are are great. will still achieve all of that in the four-year cycle.

Great. Thank you. That corporate officer. So, I'm just going to do a flippy. Okay. Uh, can I get a second, please? Thank you, Council Jordis. Discussion. Seeing none, I'll call the question. All those in favor and it's motion carries unanimous. Thank you very much. Okay. Uh item what we at? 8.3 now. Yes. Uh 2025 Q4 budget summary. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is the Q4 budget summary and the recommendation is that council that the report title 2025 Q4 budget summary be received. and Miss McClennon is here to answer any questions that council may have. Okay, thank you. I'll um speak to the content of this amazing report. Uh normally we do deliver this report when the financial statements are delivered. Um Jared, cover your ears. Jared decided to have a baby right when that was all happening. So we were I was doing suddenly doing audit and budget at the same time. So this report is um a little bit late but so I apologize for that but we are here to uh elaborate on those results. And so this document it just supports what is audited and presented

in those financial statements but it is intended to convey the information in a way that is more understandable for council and in this in the format that we are used to looking at our our budget for example. So these um this report sort of also explains the difference between um the accounting surplus that shows up in the financial statements and our budgetary surplus. And I try to walk through how that looks so the council doesn't think, oh, we had a $37,000, not council, but the staff more probably uh sorry, the public when they see a $37 million surplus, obviously that comes to mind that we have $37 um $37. I should slow down. $37 million in the bank account. And so, um, I include a chart annually, every year to show like what that 37 million really looks like. And we know that the biggest piece of that is the developer contributed assets. And we don't budget for those under PAB because firstly we can't predict them necessarily for certain and they're they're not a um a cash transaction and

so they they will play with our financials every year and we can't and in periods like this where we had significant contributions um of parklands and other assets we we see that spike. Um again the amortization transfers from reserves and debts. So I just um explain those if the council has any questions around those. They look um pretty straightforward to me. The transfers that we use to fund operations and capital like transfers from and two reserves are also excluded. Those are not a PAB item. So after we eliminate all those things, we're left with a $2 million budgetary surplus of which 200,000 is um sorry I'm speaking about the consolidated result. So that is attributed to the west shore parks and wreck which brings us to just over a $2 million surplus for the city of Cwood um unconsolidated and so I don't know how much you want me to get into it if you've read through the report the major drivers of the surplus were um we did see again you're

tired of me talking about the variability of PILT but it continues to be an issue is an issue again this year we are still working with the federal government to try to figure out what we might see this year and we are in we're almost in October. So just so you know it's an item that is very hard to budget for and to to nail down. Um property taxes were pretty clean. Investment income again is another one that we try our best to predict but we can't haven't figured out how to get that in right. Development revenue. So all the things that you hear us talk about every year, we're still talking about, but we um we have made uh you would say significant improvements in our uh revenue budgeting. So the teams are they're meeting regularly now and we have really worked out a decent way of of budgeting those for council. Um the sewer deficit is really something we want might want to talk about. That deficit is um sewer actually had a surplus. Yay. this year that doesn't hasn't been happening for a

long time. We've been recovering from a period of deficits. So this year we were able we intentionally and were able to cover uh some of the arars for transfers to reserve that we hadn't been able to make in the past. So that is a good news story and there's just a small deficit on one of the l's just um just a small um $359. So that will be recovered in the next year which we always do. You'll take too long. I think so. I mean everything is in here. It just talks about our we had really a good position and a good ending and I included the sort ratios as recommended under PAB that I started last year just so that council can get a sense of I guess nationally and internationally how are we doing compared to other organizations.

We're doing well. So you've you've got that done now. You said uh the sort ratios. Yes. Yes. I always ratio. That's great. Yeah. What page is that on missed that? It's right before reserves, but I apologize. It's not numbered in that. Before reserves. Okay. It's too much to read. Okay. Uh, councelor Day, go ahead, please. Thank you. Um, I was looking at all of this and I just had a few notes to make that I think would help to make this more informative for our public. Um, I noticed that in the consolidated statements it always identifies um that we're dealing in millions of dollars and we didn't have in the these little charts which are very helpful. It just doesn't tell us that. So I I'm kind of assuming that we're talking about millions, but I don't know that for sure. And then uh when I looked at the consolidated statements after the taxation line, it has a note 14 and I found it very difficult to find note 14 to know what's the variation there that we're talking about. Um

and uh and I wondered why we had reduced taxation in the same year as we had record building statistics for example. So you know I just uh thought I'd flag a couple of things that stuck out to me for somebody who's been trying to understand these statements for more than 20 years. Still working on it. Um and so um and then with the sewer deficit table, you know, an uneducated guess would have been that we were in a worse position, but I know that's not what you're telling us. You're telling us that we were able to put back into the reserves money that we weren't able to put back into them in previous years, but it didn't quite read that way.

And it also shows us that we have a total reserve funds deficit of it looks like 3 million $3.5 million. Um, and I just didn't I didn't understand where how I would find out where that came from. Thank you. Excuse the chair. Um the reason we see variation in taxation is because we have supplementary assessments every year when we start recording all the results of appeal. So those start coming through and then because we levy exactly what is approved in the for the financial plan. That is ex that's 100% what we levy and then throughout the year we start getting appeals uh supplements coming in and then those are refunded. So that's why you see fluctuations in tax. Sometimes they work in our favor but uh mostly they are the other way around. Um thank you for the tip about the millions. That is an easy thing I should have had in place. um the 3 million in reserve change is a reflective normally of the capital spend that we are are making in years. So that is just a reflection of

actual decline in reserve that we showing that we are using our reserves to fund uh growth not growth so much that's the wrong word but you know what I mean by like we are funding our own infrastructure. Yes. Thank you. Yeah. Did I miss anything? Yeah that that did great. And uh just wondering uh where residents can see our levels of debt if you could point that out. Just trying to increase public engagement in budgeting. If you want to know what council's doing, the budget's where you find out. I neglected to um turn my mic off. Thank you. I'm just too comfortable. Um it's in the financial plan. There's a section on debt and in there it shows our new debt, our existing debt and the level of our um limit that we are at. All right.

Thank you very much. We're at approximately 7% right now of the 25% that we're allowed to have the max. So yeah, I noticed that. So I just have a couple questions Kathy. Uh I'm more worried about sustainability as you know. I mean uh on the surface the uh you know the accounting surplus 39 million looks pretty good um and uh but obviously the budgetary surplus is what 2.2 million you said. So I guess my question is um you know can you tell council because I can't I can't figure this out. Is that sustainable or is this like a a one-time thing that we have here because of uh you know timing differences, deferred expend expenditures. So can you explain that to us right now?

I can try. So surplus although we budget to have no surplus. Surplus is the desired outcome. If we had to choose between surplus and deficit, we would we prefer surplus. Surplus is a tool that municipalities use to fund projects. So surplus is not a negative thing. Although we're not striving, we're not trying to achieve surplus, but it is a natural outcome of managers managing their budget so that they don't go over. And so if every manager is doing that, you have 21 service areas. We do administration will work with the whole city to make sure that some may go over and some may come under, but overall there's not um there's an attempt to to spend that budget to deliver the services that council has endorsed.

However, a surplus, small as it may be, is a natural result. Most of our surplus is driven this year by pilt. So, that we've already mentioned is really not it's it's hard to call it sustainable. It fluctuates and we are we will update council as soon as we know what the outcome is of this year's um discussions. But I would say surplus is desirable and [clears throat] sustainable and staff work to make sure that they don't go over budget. So it it's but the level of surplus is what is not sustainable unless we choose to plan for the reserves that we have talked about like um the rate stability reserve council can choose to fund differently and then we would achieve different surplus.

And just the second question, uh what was I found a little more alarming was the uh $4.6 million uh the development uh uh the development um contributions were $4.6 million under. And I looked at that, h that's interesting. Well, I I wonder why, right? You Well, obviously development has slowed down considerably. So I guess what is what is the financial risk if this continues on for the next three or four years you know what impact is that going to have on taxes for example that is a trade-off question of course because if there's no development at least we won't have theoretically new services to support so it will have impacts we know we've coming we're coming off of periods some periods of high development where we have put aside side excess revenue from building and development because we knew leaner years are ahead.

So once we run out of those reserves though it will become it may become an issue if that becomes our horizon and then we haven't seen a significant impact in the five-year plan so far. Um but we acknowledge that trying to forecast out past two years is it's hard to forecast past the first year to be honest but we have a little bit of a handle. we know maybe what's in the pipe even though it doesn't trigger when we think it might. But the risk is um it's real. It's just not we have not identified it as significant yet in our five-year financial plan knowing the development that we think is coming.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah, that's why I don't have a lot of faith in our in our fiveyear forecast right now. It's so hard, you know, even to forecast one year out, never mind five years. So I understand there's so many things at play here. I don't like your job. I would not like your job anyways. Okay. Uh councelor date please. Thank you. Just a follow-up question because we are looking at these are the 2025 numbers. So that uh $4.64 million deficit of developer contributions that's in the chart under revenue. uh and shows uh the developer assets and the developer contributions being less. I'm still trying to figure out just where where we can get a sense of how much our costs are going to be to maintain the assets that we get given. Right? It's that park um I don't know um hangover that we get from when we get a lovely park with its amenities contributed to the city but then we have to come up

with the staffing hours and the necessary amounts to maintain it. Um so I'm just trying to figure out where it's coming from. in 2025 was still pretty uh intense development in Cwood as far as our numbers of permits etc. If I could thank you through the chair. So the developer contributions are not contributing honestly to our surplus or deficit because those are the contributions that we move right away into reserves. So they affect our reserve but those contributions specifically don't drive surplus or deficit development application fees development fees those are in the revenue and the surplus but the contributions are those negotiated or levied um community amenity contributions the ones for the fireh hall the amenities the um affordable housing and those whatever we receive although we budgeted more than we got they won't contribute to our deficit because we transfer goes into reserve through bylaw.

And how could we better predict our anticipated costs for the contributed assets to maintain them? Is there anywhere in there or is that just we're looking at the SORB uh as our way to look at our sustainability part? Um thank you through the chair. Um if I understood the question correctly, we do know the cost and we have detailed schedules of what has been contributed. um engineering receive a um a sign off from the engineers on those projects before those are hand before they're accepted by the city never mind handed over. So there was a formal acceptance and we know exactly what we are getting and we build those into our asset module and management practices and those become part of our asset base.

Okay. And uh I just wanted to congratulate you on the the sorb ratios that are in here because they do show that um even though our our uh flexibility has gone down a little bit, meaning that things are older than they used to be, um the the other numbers are are are looking promising. Thank you. Yeah, great job. Oops. Council Grove like to recommend the report title 2025 quarter fourth quarter budget summary be received. Okay. Thank you. Second. Thank you. Uh council Ward discussion any further discussion? Just before we depart, thank you very much for all your hard work uh Kathy on this. I I know you guys have been uh going through rough times with uh with having enough people aboard and you've been putting in long hours you and Jared and uh thank you very much.

Okay. And on that note, I'll call the question. All those in favor? Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries unanimous. Thank you. Okay. Uh I think we'll take a five minute uh recess right now for health reasons. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you very much. I'll call us out of recess right now and uh we'll move on to 8 uh 8.4 which is was 7.1 and uh housing targets program. No, that you got an email on that earlier. Yeah, that's that's what's going to be u the whole meeting October 5th is. Okay. So, the uh consent agenda uh 7.1 housing targets progress reporting period 2.0 and I'll turn it over to council ward. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I uh I asked to pull this off the agenda because I think it's time for um for Cwood to do more than simply just put our hand up and say, you know, we've we've accomplished what we've accomplished. Um, we can obviously go through the the staff report with uh I presume Caitlyn, you you were going to present it, but you know what what stands out to me is that we are are very much on track and and will easily accomplish the the five-year performative housing targets that were put in place by the province.

And I say performative because I look at some of the housing targets around the region. I look at O Bay for example and the the small number of homes that they were asked to build and um that would have been accomplished in one fell swoop with a project that was proposed at UIC by the province who ultimately pulled the funding because they ran out of money or were running such a huge deficit. So, you know, the West Shore has done the heavy lifting for a long time. Um I think this council has done a good job of of very much doing what we said we would, which is approving projects that were OCP compliant. um we turned away a few that you know that sought to do different things um you know and I think there's still opportunity to do more in the right places you know Cwood Corners is an area where you know there's there's obviously a lot of projected growth um beachlands will continue on their master plan for a

long time but I think a lot of residents of Cwood are genuinely concerned that infrastructure won't keep up with with growth and what I'd personally like to do is um is say to the province great we We're tired of the carrot and stick approach without the carrot. You know, you're just using the stick. You're wielding the stick, but you're not giving us anything in return. So, I would like to go back to the province and say, "Hey, we we did it or we've almost done it. Now, it's time for you to come to the play. Now, we're prepared to keep going, but what are you going to do to make that feasible for the residents of Cwood?" Uh, so I did prepare a um a motion on it, but I will uh refrain until such time as the discussion's taken place here.

I don't think there's any discussion on the numbers. It was pretty straightforward. I think they had a comment or question though. Okay, councelor Day. Yeah. So, this is exactly uh the area of my concern and I'm really pleased to see the numbers come forward. um that this uh it does show that we've been uh doing a lot more maybe even than uh is is beneficial in some respects because we have never identified where all of the services are for some of the development areas uh that were not previously anticipated to be serviced with sewer. And while we back under uh Mayor Hamilton, we reserved capacity for everything that was on the books plus a bit more allowing for um septic conversion of existing dwellings that needed it. Uh we we are at three times approved what we have the capacity to serve. So some decisions will will have to be made and either we get more services for sewer and roads or or we are going to be uh having some big costs

levied on all residents of COD including those who don't even have access to the sewer. So that that is my issue and I think this is a good initiative to go forward to the province and say well you told us to build more we did that and now we need more capacity to service those houses that we're continuing to build. So, um I just think that that we have to try to match resources to um the the needs of the community that we have here right now. Thanks. Thank you very much. I I agree with this. Um you know, with what was been said already. I'm I'm uh we're kind of fortunate though that we had two developments that helped us get to those numbers without us even trying uh with Beachlands and uh and Royal Bay or Path developments. Pretty lucky. And uh my biggest problem is that you know if you look at the types of housing that we've had you know uh three or four years ago we were ready to roll with 85 Belmont

for affordable housing and for four years now to be turned down saying they ran out of money they don't have any money they don't have any money and that's critical. part of the u the the diversity of housing that we should have here in the city of Cwood and for God's sakes you know maybe that's something we can use for leverage in the letter too you know that uh you know at least uh you know give us the money to complete that project it's ready to go it's shovel ready the project is shovel ready and it's a bit frustrating anyways I do agree with this but let's get a motion on the floor and I'm expecting that's what council board is going to do council board thank you Mr. Mayor, I did send the motion or proposed motion over to Marcy. Um, I would be open to a friendly amendment just to add in um I had bullet points ABCD in there. I would add point E that they follow up with us on their ability to deliver on

affordable housing, specifically the 85 Belmont project. If we could add that in. Sorry, Marcy. I'm happy to repeat that. I know I just spit fire sentences at you and it's not fair. I can read through this while we wait if you want to see that. Sorry. Oh, sorry. The We don't have a a motion on the Yeah. Point E on the um on the motion would be to um ask the province to provide an update on affordable housing in Cwood, specifically funding the 85 5 Belmont project. We have to wait to amend it. Um, and if I may motivate Yeah, we'll get a second or first. Oh, you want to add something?

I'm open if councelor Grove would like Oh, okay. I don't It's a friendly amendment. Nothing friendly. I'm just pointing out that the project I believe is referred to as one Jerome Place. Ah, excellent. Well, let's update the address correctly to One Jerome Place. Is that what it is? I always thought it was 85 Belmo. And sorry. And and can we have staff confirm the accuracy of that prior to should the motion pass, we would have staff confirm the accuracy of the address. Okay. Just to ensure that we have Yeah. Yeah. Oh, I see. So let's put one Jerome and just highlight it for verification. Got sorry.

So if I may, I'll read through the motion from the beginning just so that Sure. And then I'll get a second. Oh, yeah. Sorry. Do we have a second? Can I get a seconder, please? Okay. Thank you, Councelor Bolson. So, first of all, my my ask here is that we send a letter back to the Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs. As I said, their targets are somewhat performative and I recognize that even this request may be viewed as such. They may simply come back and say thanks but no thanks or you know choose to respond in a different way. But what I've asked is that council direct staff to convey to the minister of housing and municipal affairs that while Cowwood has achieved and is on track to meet the housing target order targets, the city cannot support unfunded or uncoordinated growth going forward. The city requests the province to a establish a growth infrastructure funding framework that provides stable long-term funding for essential infrastructure, roads, sanitary sewer, water, drainage, transit, schools, and other services in

areas experiencing growth. B. Adopt or enhance growth related funding tools and cost sharing mechanisms, eg development, cost charge updates, provincial grants, regional funding arrangements to ensure growth pays for growth so that infrastructure is not shouldered by existing residents or delayed. and C, coordinate with regional partners to align infrastructure capacity, excuse me, with approved development and any future resoning, ensuring that service levels and capital plans can keep pace with growth. A D, consider a phased or staged approach to approvals if infrastructure funding or commitments cannot be secured, and provide clear signals on how targets may be adjusted if capacity constraints persist. Then, of course, there's E we just added. And lastly, the directive is that staff prepare a formal letter to the minister outlining these points and report back on potential funding opportunities and any required policy changes. So, in my view, it's it's a politely worded letter that just says, "We need help if you want us to keep going." They most likely will send it straight to the shredder.

Um, but I think a lot of other municipalities have made similar ads in in various formats. Locally, View Royal is one that's pushed back. Um, and I think if anything during a provincial election, it puts them on the spot and it puts the opposition parties on the spot to say, "If you're elected, what are you going to do about Calwood's infrastructure and growth issues?" So, I think now is more timely than ever to send more back than just the typical form letter. Thanks. Well, we also need uh the motion for the for the letter back, the form letter, the original motion. We also need to add this because it didn't we Oh, there it is on the top. I see it there. Sorry about that. So, we're included in both. Okay, I'm good.

Any further disc Oh, concert growth. Go ahead. I'm just trying to be helpful here. I believe it's 1901 Jerome Road, but also known as 85 Belmont. So, I think it either way or both would be appropriate. 1901 Jerome Road/85 Belmont Road. I just don't want them to lose track of what we're talking about. Okay. Amendment. [snorts] Anything to add to this on the motivation? Okay. I will not seeing any other discussion or hands. I'll call the question. All those any opposed? Seeing none motion carries unanimous. Thank you very much. Now we'll move on to uh 7.2 which is 8.5 and I believe uh it was council day that wanted a poll. So if you can um ask your questions councelor sorry about that.

Thank you. Uh I just uh just let me reorgan. I'm we're all over the place with these agendas moving things around. Uh so this was the disaster resilience initiative, community risk assessment and disaster mental health resilience report. And uh it is just the beginning. And uh I really wanted to hear from our uh uh fire department on this, but we've taken so long to get here that I think we Oh, no, you're here. There you go. Uh I would just love for our community to hear about what you've done and uh I'm hoping that at the end of hearing about what you've done because that's a big piece of work that we get a wholesome engagement organized uh for uh the next council to undertake to really engage our population in being involved in this planning and knowing what the risks are and informing us about the little things that we might not know that they think we need to know.

Thank you through the chair to councelor day. Um I agree with you. This is very exciting and uh unfortunately over the last couple years it's been kind of hurry up and wait. Uh the legislation came out. we've been uh waiting for the regulations to uh solidify what uh the baseline that we need to achieve to be compliant and and prepare our community. Um so even though it has been a significant amount of time since we've started this, a lot of work has has been put in place. Um, and these are just foundational documents that we're uh working on right now and they're going to set the stage for for the next uh um phase of this and and really our next step is the disaster resilience sorry the uh disaster risk reduction plan and u there's there's going to be lots more uh we're going to be bringing out for the next council but uh I I appreciate that uh your sentiment on this and and we are excited And I do want to

highlight today um starting tomorrow we've got our emergency program officer who will be uh dedicating time and thank you to council for allowing this um and day one is tomorrow. So that's exciting stuff and they'll be able to really focus on and and help us build uh some resilience in the community and get us prepared. Yeah. So I I think it's just so important that uh in case I'm not here uh in at the next council that that it there is a motion on the floor to say uh that we will do public engagement and education on this initiative in a wholesome and frequent manner in order to get people really fired up about this. because when you talk to the communities that have experienced the fires, the droughts, the the landslides, all the other things that have been going on in BC, um it's it's a multi-year recovery process that has not been easy on communities and uh we need to get involved early and get prepared really well. Thank you.

Okay. Um, is there a plan to do a communication about this? Cuz I thought this was phenomenal. I I assumed and assumed as you and me, but that we were going to put some type of communication out on this because this is pretty pretty exciting for us, you know, in our community. So, yeah, I agree. uh your worship. Um that's what we're here for today is is we were going to hold off and uh for the the next council, mayor and council to provide this and and actually uh look for some direction. Um but we were wanting to update the community engagement portion of this. Okay.

So, uh we wanted to bring it forward so we can get that done. Okay. Thank you very much. I understand it clearly. Okay. Uh motion to receive, please. Okay. Thank you, councelor Day and councelor Olston. Uh any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Thank you very much. Excellent. So, we're on to uh section nine, the bylaws. Uh first one is uh uh Marcy, can you start us off on these, please? Thank you, Ror. This is Sorry. No, he's he's actually the presenter. Oh, yes. or he's the qu the the person that's going to answer questions. Go ahead, Marcy. Thank you, worship. So, this is the permissive tax exemption consideration um prior to first, second, and third reading of consideration. I'm just going to hand that over to uh finance to provide an overview. Thank you. Thank you.

So before you tonight uh mayor and council is the permissive tax exemptions for 2027. We received one application this year from one eligible applicant and uh which was work link and they're here to answer any questions should you have any. Thank you very much. I I think in future um when these type of things happen I I think they should go committee of the whole first because it's surprised to to get it for for second third reading bang like that right without proper discussion but he's here and I when I saw him in the audience I I thought it was you know probably the the nice thing to do we could probably ask a lot of questions but in future just just have that as a consideration. Thank you very much. Okay sir if you want to come up here we got lots of questions here for you.

lots of questions and I'll start it off. Um and and uh so nothing I say is you know meant to insult you or anything like that but you know I have some fundamental questions. I know what work link is. I know what work link is all about. Uh I've used worklink being a an employer before. uh lot of lot of respect for the organization I believe and you can just confirm this you're fed you've get some funding federally you get some funding proincially you're considered but uh a registered nonprofit organization I believe I just want to get that's correct and so I guess this is where I I'm just having some difficulties in my in my head right now I look at the dollar value and I know for a fact that uh even when you guys have your uh announcements and all that. You serve uh not only the West show, but you serve Souk from what I understand, all the people. So, I guess my question is, you know, I I'm just taking a look at as a taxpayer.

And so, I'm saying, well, you want me to do this tax exemption, so I'm I'm basically subsidizing the whole West Shore, including Souk. A and I would be more more attuned to you know um you know our portion of it because it's our tax dollars in a sense because if we were to take that that uh that revenue away it has to be made up by call taxpayers but I don't think call taxpayers want to pay for the world or you know west shore plus soup. So I'm just giving you a perspective on this right now and so you know if you can address that issue for me.

Certainly. Uh we've already approached suit council and last week unanimously they pounced uh passed the permissive tax exemption for us. But how did they do that when the when work link is in college? We also have an office in souk. Okay. Oh so there is a separate office. So, this one actually only serves the five West Shore communities, I'm assuming. Yes, that's correct. Okay. So, it doesn't make it any better, but because we're still uh Do you have stats, for example, like how many Cobians you're you're helping, how many Lford, how many, you know, highlights, how many were chosen? Do you keep those stats? We do not. Um we can probably get them um through the ministry. we just know who comes through our door. Okay. So that's what I have issues with and I and uh that's why I was having a lot of problems, you know, um trying to make a decision on this and I don't feel comfortable until I sort of know some more factoids and th

those in particular I'm interested in because you know if we if if it's typical we're going to probably be you know uh with everything all the other services that we share we're anywhere between 20 to 24% right for and so But you're asking us to take the full burden on for all the West Shore and I don't know how that can work. But aside from us giving you that portion, you know, should should council consider it. But without that data, I think it's I don't know if anyone here was ready to make that decision, but I certainly am not. Certainly. And I can provide you that data.

Okay. Um, other questions? Oh, councelor Olsson, go ahead, please. Thank you. you. I think this question is for staff or Kathy. Um, can you remind us what the approximate dollar value is of this exemption and what does that represent? Oh, did I 37? Okay, thank you. Councelor D. Finished. Any other questions? Concert pay. [clears throat] Thank you. I guess I just want to know um what the impacts are uh if if this is not approved here uh this year. Well, just for a little bit of background, I've been the executive director now for four weeks, although I have been with WorkLink for two years. Um I'm really still kind of wrapping my head around these procedures. Um, we learned recently we were not successful with our RFQ for WR BC. So, we will not have that contract going into 2027.

We are looking at several substitutions. Um, right now I'm working on some projects with the Chamber of Commerce, with Royal Roach University. I'm confident we'll get some more funding back. Um, but that's going to be a big hole to fill. So right now we offer an open resource room where any member of the community can come in, use our computers for job search, get support with resumeéumés. They don't have to be a workb client. This kind of funding would help us to keep that alive as well um if we were to get the tax exemption. So um we're offering other uh services. We're a pickup location for bread donations from Cobb Breads where we pick them up every Sunday and then members of the public come in and get their donations as they need them. Um, you know, as well our building, we uh provide Service Canada, a spot to operate from as well as a local daycare. Um, and sorry, I just kind of went off the rails a bit there, but you know, this tax exemption would really help us keep some of these programs that we have going alive, as

well as give us a little bit of breathing room so that we could bring in some new ones. Our first priority at work link is to serve the community and the clients who walk through the door. And my second priority is to keep the society going so we can continue to do that. Absolutely. Thank you very much. I will um reserve my comments for making a motion. Thank you, Dr. Ward. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um I I think I would be interested in in sort of the breakdown of the population that you serve. I I think WorkLink does great work. Um very much a value partner in the community and works with some other very valuable agencies as well. Um, I I wonder too if we're able to understand what the deadlines are on this, if if either yourself or through city staff if we can find out when do we need to make a decision on this.

The bylaw needs to be approved before October 31st. Okay. So, it's this meeting or the next one would be the final opportunity. If it were the next one, it would have to be adopted before October 31st. I believe there would have to be another special council meeting. Yeah, I believe we may have we have a meeting scheduled. Is that correct? October 5th. Yeah. Yeah. I just think that might give opportunity to look at some of the numbers that uh that we weren't able to see here this evening. And I think just in terms of the commentary around um the population serves, I would probably draw on the fact that we've already set a precedent in that and this is uh something that will go back to my first year here. We we provide permissive tax exemptions to churches in Colin that serve a population outside Collwood.

They serve Cwood residents, but they also serve residents in Langford and elsewhere. Um both the the Anglican Church and the um and Calwood Church and others extend beyond our borders. Um Pacific Center Family Services would be another one, you know. So I I don't know if it's um necessarily needs to be defined by borders. I I certainly understand the mayor's line of questioning. I think we we have to be very cautious when we, you know, look at this because it's it's not a dollar value out of our pocket. It's a dollar value that then is added on to other taxpayers to, you know, to to make take up the slack. So, I think we need a little bit more information. So, my first inclination would be to um to defer to the next and last council meeting to to bring everything to the table that we need to make an informed decision. Thank you. Thank you, Council Grove.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, have you do you uh have you approached the other uh municipalities in the west shore for funding supports in any way? Not yet. Um, this process started before I took this position. Um, right now we're looking at what our funding options are moving forward and what supports we can get, which is why we're reaching out to our community partners. Right. Sounds like we need I need a bit more information as well as councelor Ward suggested we defer but uh it's a bit tricky just to try to decide seeing as it's a sort of a west shores focused support makes sense to all share if we were doing our 15 roughly population based it would be somewhere around $7500,000 that call would contribute toward that 38 so $37,000 number uh so I would uh unless we can decide something tonight motion with a different form of funding or some such creative solution. I suspect that I think a deferral makes sense. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for coming in. Councelor D. Thank you. I just want to confirm with staff uh that they would be eligible to apply for a community grant. Though it wasn't necessarily a tax exemption, but a community grant would allow us to to suggest to other municipalities in the West Shore that they join with us in supporting this uh endeavor. Um, so I mean it needs some work, but I just wonder if we could provide the information on applying for the community grant while um the work link representative is here. Absolutely. And may I add that um staff can be directed to proportionally allocate the rather provide a proportion a partial uh excuse me a partial exemption based on population or any other um metric that you see fit.

Awesome. And you mentioned that you might be able to tease out some statistics for us and the number of uh users of your services who reside within Cwood so that we could sort of connect the dots. That's something that we've done in the past with Pacific Center Family Services. We know that kids are highly mobile. Probably your clients are highly mobile too. But being able to provide some particular statistics uh would be helpful in your application to all of the municipalities. So I would expect that uh V Royal Langford um Calvin Mosen Highlands uh might all be interested in that information and potentially supporting uh your work.

I appreciate that. Thank you. We should be able to pull out some statistical information, but again a lot of people come in the door, use our resource room and you know it's kind of a no questions asked at the door. Um, but through our workb contract and our start contract, we should be able to at least cobble together some ratios. Perfect. Would that be satisfactory? I think that works. Okay. Well, Mr. Johnson, please. In order for this to come into effect, legislation requires that it be adopted by October 31st. So, the reality of timing is we have October 5th as a special meeting. it would require another meeting in order for it to be adopted. Uh considering the amount of information needed um it might be more appropriate for council to refer this matter or refer this group to the grant and aid process uh that has been mentioned which would keep it moving forward. But the permissive tax exemption which would need to be adopted by October 31st is one of a problematic

from a timing perspective uh which would require essentially two special meetings now in order for council to consider this. If we go on the 5th, uh the election is on the 17th. Um could be new folks around the table. Uh not in effect until the inaugural of uh the first meeting in November. So the timing is problematic to consider this with additional information considering the timelines that we have. Thank you very much for that advice. I do have one other question. I just you said something that triggered something in my head. You said service Canada is in your building. So, if we're giving this exemption, is that for Service Canada, too?

No. Uh, we do receive um rental income from Service Canada. We're only asking for the exemption on the percentage of the building we use, which is about 61% I believe. That's interesting. Yeah. Um, does anyone on council want to make a motion here? Counselor Day, please go ahead. So, I'll because in order to get this moving effectively, uh I think it does need to go to the grant aid process. So, I'd like to refer that to the grant aid process. So, um that we can maybe work to help you to make that application to other municipalities as well as our own because once you've done it for us, you'll probably have a template for doing it with others. uh which might make things easier to achieve the funding that you need uh within this fiscal year coming up.

Thank you. Can I get a second? Uh Council Ward uh further discussion. Councelor Grove. Thank you, Mayor. The uh limits to the grant a program such that I believe it's 5,000. Is that right? maximum and rarely do I see anything even close to that amount granted. So, I'm not sure. Uh it's a substantial help here. um sort of based on the premise that the program should be allowed to run. But the circumstances we're under, it's uh awkward and difficult to find ourselves in place where we were looking to uh uh contribute such a substantial amount compared to the need. So if the grant need a name process is the only way through which I'm just thinking the population basis we were we're roughly 1/5if of the population that would make it a$ 8,000 8540 short of $7,500 roughly contribution that we make toward this $37,000 request.

So I'm not sure the grant a does that for us but guess we're in a bit of a bind here. So, I'll just uh be quiet. I would support any motion at this point that moves some money forward. Okay. Uh I'm not seeing any other discussion. I'm going to call the question. Um all those in favor and any oppose. So, it's unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much for coming out by the way and uh congratulations. I haven't met you yet. four weeks and you got this job to do. Wow. You got a lot of courage. So, good luck to you. Whatever we can do to try to help you, we'll try to help you, sir. Thanks so much.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Uh 9.2. Marcy. Thank you, your worship. So this is for the inter community business license bylaw number 2132 2026 and it's for consideration [clears throat] for first, second, and third readings. Okay. Uh does someone going to talk about the report? Okay. Mr. Johnson. Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Heather. Um I believe councelor Day had some questions. say the chair. Mhm. I just found it difficult to know what the changes are with this and so I'm I'm hoping that we could understand it better. Uh it it does seem uh rushed uh given that the information was out there uh in early May and this is the first that we're hearing about it. So um I I don't really know what the changes specifically are. So maybe you could speak to that how the impact might be felt within the community. So the inter community the intermunicipal uh business license is basically in our regional district um that we um um we participate with the other 14 municipalities in the region. The inter community is more

along lines with uh the island. So, Naimo, Lady Smith, North Kawachin, um, uh, Parksville, um, those communities are involved in it. And these are for mobile businesses, so contractors, landscapers, um, um, and it allows them to have, it basically tightens up the agreement. We're already in an agreement to do this intercom community business license. Um, some communities don't, um, do it. Um, uh, North Sanage does, but, Langford doesn't. Um, uh, Sydney does it, you know. Um, so there's certain communities that are in our region that do not participate. We currently do. Um, and it lines everybody up to have a business license that's perpetual, all of those municipalities, and that we all have the same fee. So, prior to it used to be that each of those uh, communities, the business licenses, they weren't exactly the same u price-wise. Um, now they're all in line with each other, which means that residents that are here would pay their business license here and then they could go to other municipalities.

it kind of funnels the money directly here whereas ours I think was a little bit cheaper and um which then had people coming to us for that business license that those other and out of my understanding currently is that 10 of the 13 or 14 participating um uh municipalities have signed this agreement. Um there was a little bit of a timing. I think the the uh conversation took a little bit to get to us and then we went back and we had to check into it for the same reasons as yours before we brought it to council. So just on the on the bylaw itself, it it has uh the amendment from I believe it's $70 plus a base license fee and it's moving to $170 plus a base license fee. I don't have any frame of reference to know what the base license fee is.

It's $100. So it uh that the intercom community business license was $170 combined um at the city of Calwood and to participate in that. Now we're saying that everybody is going to do 270, but it's a perpetual license that it's a one-time amongst those municipalities. Oh my goodness. Okay. Um yeah, that that seems like um uh a free lunch ticket in in some ways. Uh so I don't know enough about it. Uh and unfortunately when I don't know enough about something, I tend to not support it. Some some uh communities our business licenses here in uh college are perpetual. So they roll over every single year and we send out new business licenses whereas some municipalities will charge every single year. So, this brings everybody kind of in line and make sure that the fees are the same right across the board.

The fees are the same, but some are charging them every year and some are charging them. They can't anymore with this agreement. Yeah, it would be every all of those municipalities that are participating in it. Um, so any person that lives in CO that has a mobile business license that wants to do business up in Nimo or up in Parksville or North Calin or Duncan or Lady Smith, they could do so with a business license that they had here. Thank you. Okay, growth. Thank you, Mayor. I uh I'd like to move the adoption of option one. Okay. Uh, can I get a second there, please? It's been missing something.

Oh, it's the option one in the report then. I guess it must be in the report. [clears throat] Yeah, I've put the motion on the screen for you. Okay, that's the recommendation. Okay, this is the staff recommendation. Okay, that's what you mean, right? Correct. Okay, thank you. council or some seconds discussion. I would just like to motivate first. Yes, please. I would just like to say that the amount and the usefulness of this particular item is is for me it just seems that we should move forward with the slight change that's in the dollar amount. Looks like an update to me that it's a useful agreement to be involved with.

Okay. Thank you very much, councelor Olson. Anything to add? Okay. Council Ward. Uh yeah, thank you through the mayor. Really quickly, Heather, two things. One, I have tried and tried and I'm probably missing something glaringly obvious, but is there a term on the agreement? It seems open-ended in the in the actual agreement document. I don't know. It's not right in front of me. Um like it has signing dates, but it doesn't say this. It doesn't have an expiration date or anything. It looks like no it probably is perpetual would be if without looking at it right there. Yes. Yeah. I just thought you know there's no option to review the fee then or anything. It just stays like that in perpuitity.

I will say that this group does meet um with the province um as a part of their active it's a bit of an active uh um initiative. And is there any provision for a community member like a member community in the group to you know say four years from now raise their hand and say okay we we've amended our business license u in callwood to be a recurring annual fee so we want to change it or is it you just locked in or I think you can get out of the agreement we could decide to not be a part of it. Right. So there's an opt out provision somewhere. Okay. Um and then the other piece just going way back to what counselor day said about changes. I I'm a super pet peeve guy because I review legal documents and stuff all the time all day and I think having a redline version would be really helpful on anything moving forward. I know we've said it before, but I'm just going to beat that drum again and again again because appreciate the reminder. Thanks very much.

Since seeing no other discussion, I'll call the question. Uh all those in favor and [clears throat] opposed councelor Day and councelor Jordison. Okay. Thank you. Okay. 9.3. Thank you, Arisha. We have public notice bylaw number 2117 2026, amendment number one, bylaw number 2133, 2026. And it's for first, second, and third reading. This is just for a minor housekeeping. Okay. Thank you. Second, please. Thank you, councelor Olson. Discussion. Seeing none, I'll call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Next, please. Uh, development permit delegation bylaw number 2127 2026 and this is for adoption. Okay. Thank you very much. Move, please. Councelor, councelor Day, councelor uh war, please discussion.

Seeing none, call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. 9.5. Sewer local area service enlargement amendment bylaws. All going for first, second, and third reading for Cowwood Main Sewer local area service establishment uh and loan authorization bylaw for um 3436 Fton Road. Cwood West sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw for 3436 Fulton Road. Cwood main sewer local area service establishment bylaw. This is for 2444 Souk Road and Cwood Central Sewer Local Area Service for 244 Souk Road. Over Olen's and WS second. Uh discussion. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Next, please. Uh last we have sewer local area service enlargement amendment bylaws. All going for adoption. Uh it is Cowwood central sewer local area service and this is for l enlargement for 605 hulser and callwood main sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw for 605 hulser.

Thank you. Mover house board second please. Councelor Olson. Uh discussion see none. Motion carries. Thank you. And at this point in time there being no further business I will adjourn the meeting. Thank you very much everyone.