Transcript: Capital Regional District Board - 2026-09-09

Speaker A · I'll call our Capital Regional District board meeting to order at 1:48. Good afternoon, everyone. I'd like to begin by acknowledging Director Riddle, now representing Central Saanich, joining the meeting today and Alternate Director Wagner Langford joining the meeting today. We do have a full board, also 20, 24 directors wishing to participate in the meeting today. We have some new technology. We have 20 directors participating online or participating from the room, from the boardroom. I do now want to take a moment to ask. Ask Directors Plant and Thompson, who are connecting with the new technology, if you could both connect and confirm your audio visual, please. Good afternoon.

Speaker B · I'm here.

Speaker C · I'm here on zoom.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Plant. Okay, we will check in again with the Director Plant. And we're using. We're going to Director Plant. Thank you. Just confirm your audio Director. You're muted. Dave here, Director Plant. Yeah, still muted. Okay, and we're now going to pause for a moment. We also have two participants looking to participate by teams. I'll first turn to pause for that and ask for Director Brace to. To connect if possible. I am connected. Thank you, Director Bryce. And we understand Alternate Director Srivastava for North Stanich is looking to connect as well, but hasn't just yet. So thank you everyone. Good afternoon to staff and hello to members of the public and presenters both in attendance here in the boardroom and to those who may be watching online.

Speaker A · I did just comment that we do have new audio and visual technology and we're very pleased to have introduced that today to replace the old aging equipment. However, we are working through some of the bugs. You will see improvements to the system. It's meant to improve the experience participation for those directors and staff in the room and presenters. To those participating online and to members of the public who are watching the meeting. You will see speakers highlighted and you will see their names and where they're from, as well as staff and their positions on the screen. You will see some different camera angles and shading as we work through that.

Speaker A · Please don't adjust your set. We're working through that. But I just wanted to note that at the beginning I want to thank Director Caridona for providing the territorial acknowledgement at a previous meeting this afternoon. And I would now look for seek a motion to approve our agenda. Vice Chair Little and Director Murdoch obey those in favor. Thank you. Any opposed? Not opposed. That carries. And if we could have the same movers for adoption of the minutes of our July 8th meeting. We have the same movers. Thank you. Any corrections to the minutes? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Not opposed? That carries. Turning to report of the Chair, I want to highlight two CRD successes that have occurred since we last met in July.

Speaker A · On July 30, I was pleased to be joined by Vice Chair Little, Director Desjardin as Chair of our Environmental Services Committee, Director Coleman as Chair of our Core Area Liquid Waste Management Committee, Cao, Robbins and other staff for the Build Canada Strong funding announcement of $7 million for the CRD's biochar project.

Speaker A · the media event, I expressed our sincere gratitude to the Government of Canada, the Province of bc, the Union of BC Municipalities who are all in attendance for their partnership and significant investment in this important and innovative biochar project. And on September 6th, I was pleased to join Director Holman and staff for the official opening of the new Fire hall on Salt Spring Island. The new state of the art facility was decades in the making. A significant step forward occurred several years ago when the Salt Spring Island Fire Protection District Board of Trustees. That's a long handle. And the CRD reached an agreement that helped make the project possible by leveraging $1 million in federal community works funds to support construction.

Speaker A · This project is a great example of what can be accomplished when organizations work together towards a common goal. And it was exciting to see such a large community turnover at the event, highlighting how important the new Fire hall is to the island community. On today's agenda, we have four long term initiatives to consider for final approval. I'm referring to the new CRD Reconciliation Action Plan, the new Regional Water Supply Service Development Cost Charge Bylaw, the updated Regional Housing Affordability Strategy and the updated Climate Action Strategy. It's notable that the Reconciliation Action Plan had its genesis and Recommendations from the 2018 CRD First nations relations Task Force and the Regional Water Supply DCC bylaw had its Genesis in the 2017 Regional Water Supply Strategic Plan.

Speaker A · These are long term plans. We thank the boards that served before us and acknowledge the remarkable work of staff in advancing these four initiatives which are important deliverables for our Board's strategic priorities and the corporate plan. With other important items to also consider advancing today, let us now turn to today's agenda business. Thank you. And turning next to presentations and delegations, we do have a presentation I'm pleased to welcome.

Speaker D · Pardon me, Chair. We did have an item that came forward from eac, so can I ask for the agenda to be reconsidered again? Like just let's have it amended to include 8. 1b. A Notice of Motion from Electoral Areas Committee that will be asked for same thing Consideration will go through the whole process process today.

Speaker A · Thank you. If I could have asked for a mover for that to effect I have Directors Holman and Alt Director Wagner. Thank you. Any discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. We have the the agenda amended. Thank you. DCO Lagoa. Turning back to presentations, we're pleased to to welcome Paul Gerard, our CRD representative and VAA Director, and Elizabeth Brown, President and CEO of the Victoria Airport, to provide their report to nominators this afternoon. Welcome. Good afternoon. My name is Paul Girard and I am the CRD representative on the Victoria Airport Authority Board. I sit on the Steering committee as Chair of the Planning and Development Committee and I'm also on the Audit and Finance Committee.

Speaker A · We continue to be an economic driver in the region for the business, transportation and tourism sectors with a new Marriott Hotel and suites now open on airport lands and a new control tower to come on board 2027 and more new destinations in the near future. Having said that, I'd like to introduce Elizabeth Brown, our President and CEO, who will give you a presentation.

Speaker E · Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you and good afternoon.

Speaker D · Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much for having me here and sorry, I'm just going to start my timer so I don't run over time.

Speaker F · For all of you,

Speaker D · thank you very much for the presentation and also having heard the last two meetings, thank you all for your public service. I know it's going to be a busy fall for all of you, but thank you for what you do. It's important for all of us as

Speaker F · citizens here in this community.

Speaker D · So 2025 was an important year for YYJ. We welcomed approximately 1. 98 million passengers, our busiest year since 2018, and we saw strong growth across many parts of the airport operation. But what stands out most to me is not just the growth itself, it's how our team, our partners and our airport community responded to that growth. Together, we continued advancing major infrastructure planning, strengthened airline relationships, improved the passenger experience, and made meaningful progress on reconciliat and community partnerships. Being named one of BC's top employers for the sixth consecutive year is something we are also deeply proud of because it speaks directly to the environment our team has helped create together.

Speaker D · And of course, we were honored to receive the 2025 Airport Service Quality Award for the best airport in North America in our category of under 2 million passengers. Most recently, we've seen some moderation in passenger volumes as airlines adjust capacity in response to higher operating costs, including fuel prices, and make changes to certain routes. That kind of fluctuation is part of the aviation cycle. What we are watching closely is a longer term trend which continues to point to strong demand for travel to and from our region. One important milestone in 2025 was the approval of our updated land Use plan by Transport Canada. That works. That work helps create a clear roadmap for future development opportunities across the airport campus.

Speaker D · The Victoria International Airport sits on about 1,000 acres of land and approximately 200 acres can still be developed. It is our mandate to maximize use of our lands for the financial benefit of the airport. This is about positioning YYJ not only as a transportation hub but as an important economic driver for the region while balancing growth, sustainability and community benefit. Update aligns with strong passenger growth, infrastructure needs and strategic priorities and the land use plan can be found on our website. In 2025 we also completed a study to better understand the travel patterns of the people using YYJ and people who could but don't use yyj, our passenger catchment area and the leakage we experience at other airports or modes of transportation.

Speaker D · Of all the trips taken by residents in our catchment area shown In Green, about 38% of those trips started at YYJ, but almost 35% of those trips started at YVR. That means those residents either walked or drove onto the ferry and transited to YVR to start their trip either because of cost, lack of service or occasional challenges with reliable air services out of yyj, anybody had a challenge with their early morning departure flights. In 2025 we continue to strengthen connectivity through our airline partners. We focused on that connectivity with increasing services to Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal, Montreal and Porter. Airlines continue to expand in our region by adding services to Ottawa.

Speaker D · Alaska Airlines continues to be a strong connection hub for us through Seattle with up to five flights a day. This is the current map of our current routes that are operating out of YYJ and I'm happy to report that this winter we'll see eight flights per week that will be going to Mexico. For anybody who needs a break and get a little sunshine, airports today are complex economic ecosystems. To support long term sustainability, airports need diversified and resilient revenue streams. My focus for VAA has been to strengthen our efforts on commercial development, land use planning and stakeholder engagement and revenue strategy. In 2025 we established a dedicated revenue strategy and business development team and continued engaging with airlines, tenants, tourism organizations and community partners.

Speaker D · Our future success will be built on essential partnerships like with Destination Greater Victoria, the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce and the South Island Prosperity Partnership. The airport supports the ambitions of the community and we all must work together to achieve the ambitions of our airport. 2025 was a major year for infrastructure planning and capital Delivery. We delivered $14. 6 million in capital program that included upgrades to stormwater infrastructure, passenger systems, utilities and operational equipment. At the same time, we continued advancing planning for larger long term projects that will support future demand and operational resilience. This is what I mean when I stated catching up with some of the growth we have already seen.

Speaker D · This is actually our upper hold room during departure time at about 10 o' clock in the morning and I see a few nodding who've been in the middle of all of those people trying to find seats. The types of aircraft operating at YYJ have changed over the years. We have less ground loaded aircraft and more jets requiring passenger bridges. These planes are also larger which means more people and more bags. As passenger volumes and aircraft sizes continue to grow, we are seeing increasing pressure on our existing departure hold room areas leading to a poor passenger experience. As a result, one of the most important near term projects is the upper hold room expansion. In 2025 we completed design for the work of the expansion project with construction expected to begin in the next month.

Speaker D · The project will improve passenger flow, increase seating capacity, add concession opportunities and create a more comfortable departure experience overall. This is an important step in YYJ's long term terminal development strategy. This is the actual design of which will be the extension of the existing hold room space. And if you're wondering where we found that space from the hold room will occupy the area that is now the Victoria Airport Authority offices. Yes, as landlord we are kicking ourselves out of our own offices, but we are looking forward to seeing new retail, new food and beverage, expanded seating area, improved heating and cooling, expanded washrooms, and seismic upgrades to a building that was completed in 1962.

Speaker D · We also intend to address five main areas with a terminal expansion which we're now in the midst of planning for. The impact of the change of aircraft with more jets and people upstairs means that we need to ensure that we are able to accommodate those aircraft types with bigger airplanes. That also means we need a better, more robust baggage handling system. We have limited capacity in pre board screening, especially with new machines and technology that are being adopted across the country. Limited check in space and improved concessions and passenger services are all part of our focus, but we also still need to maintain the things that people love about the Victoria International Airport, ease of moving through and the convenience of a smaller airport.

Speaker D · A project of this magnitude will take years to develop before we are able to put shovels into the ground. And it started with the master plan in 2023, moving to high level cost estimates and then determining how a project like this could be delivered. We are now entering what's called the validation phase, which will lead to final design, cost and project timeline for the board of directors to consider before moving forward. If all goes well, we should be in the ground and starting construction in 2028. But that is still a big if with a lot of work to be done first. Not to mention determining how we will finance a project of this magnitude. Whether it's beekeeping at yyj, restoration work in Dixon woods or long term climate planning, sustainability initiatives reflect a broader commitment to responsible tourist stewardship.

Speaker D · What I appreciate most about this work is that is increasingly connects operational planning with community values. We have already reduced our emissions, invested millions of dollars in restoration of the two creeks that run through the airport property and reduced our water consumption. And we also have very ambitious targets for sustainability over the next five years. And that five year sustainability plan will be on our website in the next two weeks. One of the most meaningful areas of progress this year is the continued work with the Wisanich Nations. After years of dialogue and relationship building, we reached agreement on the Wisanish Nations VAA Friendship Agreement. With formal signing having happened early 2026, we also created a new Director of Indigenous Relations position and continued cultural place making initiatives across the airport. The work is about more than projects or policies.

Speaker D · It's about building long term relationships grounded in respect, understanding and partnership. And it will be continued to shape the future of YYJ for many years to come. That concludes my presentation and I'm happy to take any questions.

Speaker A · Thank you very much for the presentation. I'll turn to colleagues if there are any questions. Not seeing any questions. Thank you again, Elizabeth Brown and Paul Gerard. Oh, I'm sorry, I was just going to say thank you for that. I had no IDEA it was 1. 98 million people coming through. And if that's an abstract number, that is 226 people per hour, 24 hours a day, or 3. 7 people a minute. Sounds silly, but if you think every minute of every hour of every day, just under four people walking through the doors is a huge amount coming through the airport.

Speaker D · And we're holding our breath for 2 million this year.

Speaker A · Thanks Director Goodmanson. Director Almond, please.

Speaker B · Yeah, thanks Chair. Thanks for the presentation and the success over the years and continued success. Questionable first nations relations are there Any financial arrangements with first nations that you can tell us about or are being discussed.

Speaker D · It is a contract that is, that is between the seven nations and Victoria Airport Authority. It's actually with each nation there is a revenue share that is contemplated. But more importantly it's about place making. It's also about ensuring that there's opportunities for their youth through education, internships and scholarships. And there's also been a commitment that's been made by the airport Authority for a piece of land at the front entrance of the airport that would be for the development of a future cultural and community center. What we feel that's really missing at the Victoria International Airport is that important placemaking of the Wesanich people. They're not seen enough on the peninsula.

Speaker D · And we really think it's up to us as the, as the first impression and last impression of this region that we should have that appropriate placemaking built forward in the future.

Speaker B · Thank you for that. And one other question, Chair. There's a. Maybe it's a rumor that there was a suggestion that the federal government was considering different ownership options for airports. Is there any truth to that or.

Speaker D · That is a good question, sir, and thank you for that. There is quite a bit of conversation regarding the further privatization of some of the airports in Canada. I would put to you that through the Airports act in late 1980s, our airports were functionally removed from the day to day operational responsibility of the federal government. And we as a Victoria Airport Authority have a lease relationship with the federal government and pay rent to the federal government for the operation of the airport. The conversation that's happening is actually for the larger airports in Canada. So it's the four largest hubs, Montreal, Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver. They are reviewing what they might want to do in the future.

Speaker D · What's really the most important thing for the federal government right now is how to encourage pension funds, particularly Canada pension funds, to to be able to invest in airports. They invest in airports worldwide, but not as much they aren't able to in Canada. So it's really about opening up those pathways for continued investment for airports that are needing billions of dollars of infrastructure investment. And I think we'll see that move forward in the next year or so.

Speaker A · Thanks Director. Seeing no further speakers, I'll just pause for a moment if there's any. And not hearing or seeing any. Thank you Elizabeth Brown and Paul Gerard for your informative presentation today. We wish you all the best with your ambitious plans and thank you again.

Speaker D · Thank you, sir. Thank you very much for having me.

Speaker A · I'll Next turn to Dicio Lagoa. Just to confirm, we do not have any delegations today.

Speaker D · That is correct. No delegations.

Speaker A · Thank you. So we're turning to Consent Agenda. Does the Director wish to move to raise an item from Consent today? Looking around the room, pausing a moment for online, I'm not seeing any. May have a motion to approve consent move by directors to Jardin and Kobayashi. All? All in favor? Any opposed? None reposed. That carries. Thank you. We're now turning to admin Administration reports. We do have 11 today. And I'll turn to item 7. 1, which is the CRD Reconciliation Action Plan. And please begin with GM Kristen Morley. Good afternoon.

Speaker F · Good afternoon. Through the Chair. Good afternoon, Directors. I'm really pleased today to present the staff report which provides an update on the development of the CRD Reconciliation Action Plan. The revised plan is in front of the Board today for approval and it's attached to the staff report at Appendix B. So today I'm going to speak about the purpose and the intent of doing a Reconciliation Action Plan. We'll talk about where we started and what we've built on through the development of the plan and the process we went through to get to today. We will also, at a high level, some specific aspects of the plan, including the guiding principles, goals and action items.

Speaker F · The last comprehensive guiding document that the CRD adopted related to reconciliation was the First Nations Relations Task Force Final Report and that was endorsed by the Board almost exactly eight years ago. That document and the recommended actions were approved by the outgoing board in 2018, just prior to the general election. The new board then picked up the torch and was able to incorporate the actions and goals identified in that Task Force report into their strategic plan, which then has carried on into this current board's term. Now, eight years later, the goals that were identified in the Task Force Final Report have all been addressed or are underway.

Speaker F · The purpose of the Reconciliation Action Plan is to set a strategic roadmap on how CRD will advance reconciliation over the next 10 years. The identified goals and actions are aimed at helping us to deliver on the commitments in the government to government MOUs and to establish a process for accountability through regular reporting. The starting point for the goals and actions in the plan is to build on previous and ongoing work. So the plan builds on the actions that were set out in the CRD corporate Plan, the board priorities and the MOUs and protocol agreements that have been signed with first nations over the past few years.

Speaker F · It also builds on reconciliation related initiatives that are in existing strategic plans, such as the Regional Parks and Regional Water Supply Service Strategic Plan. It also builds on a wide range of ongoing collaborations with first nations where we are already working together across CRD service delivery. This slide is an image from page 22 of the Plan and it shows some of the milestone steps and actions the CRD has taken over the past 10 years to improve our relationships with first nations in the region. In terms of how we developed the plan. The work started in earnest last fall and staff reached out to first nations for input from prior to doing an initial draft of the plan.

Speaker F · Staff also reviewed prior feedback from first nations over the years that could be incorporated into that initial draft. We then worked with all CRD divisions to review possible action items through a lens of operational and financial feasibility. The draft components of the plan were approved by the Board last February and since then the draft plan was shared with 19 First Nations, 11 of which provided feedback. The feedback has been summarized in the what We Heard report and that's attached to the report at Appendix A. Based on the input from nations which I'm going to get to next, and with involvement from the Executive Leadership team, the plan was revised slightly to the version that is before you for approval today.

Speaker F · So in terms of what we heard through our engagement, a number of first nations were concerned that this plan would detract from the importance of working on nation specific priorities that had been outlined in the MOU and protocol agreements that we currently have. Language was added to reflect the MOUs continue to be the basis for relationship building with the nations and that the plan supports the organization to operationalize these commitments. Co management of land and access to land continues to be a top priority for many nations. Two additional action items were added to reflect this, namely that we will explore co management in parks and develop an organization wide land acquisition transition strategy for how and when we talk to nations in advance of acquiring land.

Speaker F · There is interest in being more involved in decision making and ways that go beyond existing structures. So we added an action item to explore what might be possible and first nations are looking for stronger commitments around the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, free prior and informed consent and recognition of Douglas Treaties. So wording was updated in the plan to reflect this while remaining consistent with what the Board has been previously approved. We also added an advocacy action to ask the province to do more to support nations in resolving approaches to shared territory as this is an area that keeps coming up with nations when we're in discussion.

Speaker F · Finally, there was some feedback around prioritization and capacity required to implement the plan it's important that we progress step in step with the nations that we're working with. So we have shifted it to be a 10 year plan and we've indicated in the timeline for each action item when we expect we may be able to accomplish it. The guiding principles are intended to provide guidance to the organization and each division as we work towards implementation of the action items. They can be found, pardon me, at page 14 and 15 of the Plan and have been updated very little from what the Board approved in February.

Speaker F · This map is included in the plan to show the 19 First nations that have territory in the region. Territorial boundaries are not something for the CRD to really weigh in on, so we have included just the reserve lands and indicated that the Nation's territories extend broadly across the region as outlined in the Plan. While we work with all 19 nations, we work most closely with those having reserve lands and communities within the region where the CRD provides servicing. In terms of goals, these four goals that are outlined here so Indigenous Self determination and relationship building, shared prosperity, relationship with the land and water and cultural safety and inclusion are the four goals that act as the organizing principles to the action items that are outlined in the plan.

Speaker F · On page 25 and 26, the sub goals and related action items are each outlined in Appendix B of the Plan. So turning now to the action items, this slide is an excerpt from the table of action items and I'll walk you through how they're laid out. So we've indicated lead and support divisions for each action and there's legend in the back of the plan with acronyms. The status column indicates whether the item is new, whether it's ongoing and exp expanded, and the last column indicates the timeline and prioritization of the actions. The tag indicates whether the action can be absorbed within existing financial plans fully or partially, or whether it will require additional resourcing. Approval of the plan will not impact the CRD's 2027 operational budget.

Speaker F · Approval of the plan does not approve any additional resourcing. Rather, it lays out a strategic framework to bring forward projects and initiatives to to be considered in future budget years. Anything requiring new or additional resourcing will be brought forward by the lead divisions as part of annual service planning for Board consideration and will be subject to operational requirements and budget availability. Many items in the plan are already resourced or can be absorbed within existing budgets, and this is where staff is going to focus its efforts for 2026 and 2027. For many of the items, it's also a matter of scale, so for example, item 4. 1. 6, which is providing signage.

Speaker F · We're working with first nations to advance interpretive signage in one or two regional parks, but it's certainly not something we're going to try to accomplish for every park at this time. However, there is potential in future that if there are available resources, that is something that could be scaled up in time. Looking through Appendix B of the plan, you can quickly see which items have funding and which don't. Some of the areas that nations have identified as priorities, such as supporting economic opportunities through CRD procurement, will require a bigger lift and a little bit more effort on an organizational level. And that's the kind of initiative that would be brought forward through future service planning. So there are some other components in the plan.

Speaker F · This is a document for the board for staff, but it's also a document for the public. So the salal and Urba Buena artwork that you see in the plan was commissioned by Sarah Jim. She's a Wisanish artist from the Sachem First Nation. The quotes that you see that are interspersed throughout the plan were provided by first nations. And they help to ground us all in what this plan is really all about. And at the end of the plan, we include a link to each of the first nations websites so that if people are interested in learning more, they can go directly to those nations websites and learn more.

Speaker F · The CRD overview was included to be clear that this plan applies to all aspects of crd, so including the Capital Regional Housing Corporation and the Hospital district, as well as crd. And the accountability section lays out the commitments to annual progress reports. So in terms of next steps, the recommendation today is that the CRD board approve the plan as presented. If approved, staff will share the plan with all 19 First nations and and initial implementation will focus on items currently resourced. And any new resourcing requests would be brought forward to the Board as part of annual service planning. This concludes our presentation. I think before I wrap up, I'm just going to express some gratitude to Amy Prizniak and Caitlin Vernon, our First nations relations team, for all the effort they've put into this along with our staff.

Speaker F · Happy to answer any questions that the board may have. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you for the presentation, GM Morley. And are there any questions? Director Kobayashi, please.

Speaker E · Thank you very much. Through the chair, I just want to say something. That's an excellent report. Thank you very much. I think we should all adopt this. I don't even know why we're writing our own. This is kind of waste of time when you've got a product like this. It's excellent. What I found absolutely fascinating was that the feedback on the engagement that was so interesting. That was the best part. Part of the whole reading, to tell you the truth. Just a simple question. So I'm going to assume like I see your plan and you sort of time said this is the time and it's.

Speaker E · So we're going to probably get the details on the operations as far as, you know, what it's going to cost, how much we're going to spend over the next two or three years. I assume when you're doing operational plans, is that right? So we don't. It's not in this plan. I don't think so. I just want to get confirmation of that.

Speaker F · Yeah. Thank you. Through the chair. That's a really great question. Yeah, the. So as, as we do annual service planning, I would say that this is the strategic roadmap forward and it's, it's a collaboration across departments, across the crd. A lot of these initiatives that we want to advance take more than one division or department to accomplish. So this is a way that we've already coordinated with staff on what might be possible. And then as we do our annual service planning process and think about the initiatives we can bring forward, we would bring that forward to the board through the service planning process.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you.

Speaker E · That just leads to my second question. So this is really good. There's lots of initiatives, though. Lots. And I'm going on how they're going to do this. So again, prioritize. And you use the word that prioritize, but they're not really prioritized yet. So again, that is part of the operational plan that you're going to prioritize all these. Because I want to cheat off you

Speaker B · guys and copy you, actually.

Speaker E · So that's why I'm asking the question.

Speaker F · Yeah, thank you. Through the chair. Yeah, absolutely. I would say that we have set a bit of a timeframe in terms of when we would like to accomplish or advance those initiatives. We need to have some flexibility here because, of course, we need to, like I said, walk step in step with the nations we're working with and have some flexibility to be able to change. We also know that we are not in an environment where we have unlimited staff resources or financial resources to do all this work. So, you know, there is room, I think, for future boards to consider what they want to prioritize. We would bring the information, information forward that we're hearing from nations to help with that prioritization. But Absolutely. There.

Speaker F · There is still some prioritization that needs to take place, and that would come forward as we do that annual service planning.

Speaker E · Thank you very much.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director. Are there any further questions? Seeing none. If I could look for movers of the staff recommendation. We have Director Sujarden and Vice Chair Little. I'll turn to the movers to first motivate.

Speaker G · Thank you. I just want to express my appreciation and gratitude for all of the work that has gone into this. The number of years that we've taken to really develop the relationships is evident in the document. And so I'm wishing CRD well going forward. Forward having this great foundation. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Little.

Speaker G · Yeah, thank you. And thank you to staff as well. This, as Director Tate will remember, is a long time in coming, and with the task force. I see the CRD reconciliation plan as a living document to help move us forward in a good way, and it outlines our. Our priorities. And I'm happy to help move this motion, this recommendation.

Speaker A · Thank you, Vice Chair Little. Not seeing any other. Director Tate, please.

Speaker H · Thank you very much, Chair. And similar to what Director Desjardin has said, just wanted to express my thanks and appreciation for all the work that has been put into this. It's been a long time since the days of the task force, and so just to see that capture and the work evolved is. Is really inspirational and same thing. Wish the next board well in their term and. And just appreciate that there's this foundation to go forward with.

Speaker F · So thank you very much, staff.

Speaker A · Thanks, Director Tate. Seeing other speakers, I'll just comment very briefly how positive this is, and that I was certainly pleased to see, as we've been working towards this, and then see it in the staff report in the presentation, that this dovetails very well with the MOUs that we have with nations today, and that it doesn't.

Speaker A · It doesn't preclude us pursuing MOUs with other first nations, or it doesn't replace wanting to have those MOU arrangements with other nations. I'll leave my comments there and look to call the question all in favor. Thank you. Or any opposed? Seeing none opposed, that carries unanimous. Thank you. Next, turning to item 7. 2, which is the draft Regional Housing Affordability Strategy. Directors, we have a presentation today from our external consultant, JD Bassey from City Spaces, Principal of City Spaces. We'll welcome them to.

Speaker C · To the podium, please, through the Chair. I was just going to make a couple brief introductory comments first before we get into the presentation.

Speaker A · Please do. Jim Lorett.

Speaker I · Thank you.

Speaker C · So, once the board has received the presentation from Jada Bassey, who's a principal at City Spaces. I'll offer a few additional remarks and then staff from both City Spaces and CRD are available to answer any questions the Board has Just to provide a bit of background, the CRD approved its first Regional Housing affordability strategy in 2001 with the intent of advancing housing policy efforts and supporting various affordability initiatives.

Speaker C · Updates to the strategy were then made in 2007 and following that 2018 through the 2018 regional housing affordability Strategy, the CRD advanced considerable work, such as the delivery of approximately 1,500 total new homes through the Regional Housing First Program, the administration of over $55 million through through various federal programs, and the authorization to borrow up to 85 million to support potential partnership opportunities to increase the supply of affordable housing.

Speaker C · A summary of the Accomplishments under the 2018 Regional Housing Affordability Strategy is attached to the staff report is Appendix a. The draft 2026 affordability strategy is attached as Appendix B and highlights actions that provide opportunities to increase impact, clarify the CRD's role, mobilize and focus advocacy, and align resources and activities. As has been noted in previous staff reports, the CRD has limited authority under the Land Banking and Housing Service or the Community Health Service to significantly alter its current scope or mandate. For this reason, the 2026 Housing Affordability Strategy is focused on targeted actions within the CRD's existing authority, while also positioning the CRD to increase its leverage and incentivize external investment while working to simultaneously manage upward cost pressures and requisition impacts.

Speaker C · I now wish to invite City Spaces forward to provide the presentation that will offer additional insight into the draft strategy.

Speaker A · Thanks GM Laurette and welcome.

Speaker J · Thank you for that introduction and good afternoon Chair and Board Members. So my name is Jada Bassey. I'm a principal with City Spaces Consulting and I work really closely with a number of colleagues on this 2026 Capital Regional District Regional Housing Affordability Strategy. So I just want to acknowledge them my colleagues Julia Bayan, Ariella Barmash, Kevin Green, our sub consultants, Shelly Cook with the Community Social Planning Council of Greater Victoria and they led our engagement process and our close working relationship with CRD staff, including Jamie Proctor, Jerry Michael, as well as Don Elliott.

Speaker J · So I'm going to take the next few minutes to walk through the process, share with you what we learned, some of our key findings. We'll highlight the priority areas as well as the strategies for your consideration. So the Regional Housing Affordability Strategy is not new. It's 25 years old. It was first developed back in 20 2001. It was last updated in 2018. And the strategy at that time established five goals that shaped the CRD housing policy for eight years. So looking at today, the 2026 update realigns the strategy with today's housing trends, provincial legislation as well, well as community priorities. It also aligns with the CRD Board's priorities as well. And that's reflected in the vision statement that we have a quote here on the slide. It's residents have access to affordable housing that enhances livability.

Speaker J · The process unfolded over four phases, kicking off in July 2025. So phase one was our exploration and analysis. So we looked at background, technical information, information, collected data, did our analysis. Then we moved into phase two, which was engagement and consultation. We engaged with a broad range of interest holders and nations and local governments. Then we put pen to paper for the strategy development. And that was informed by what we heard as well as the evidence that we had collected. We finally went to consultation, again bringing the strategy in draft form to get, get some input on how we've landed in terms of the areas of focus, the priorities and the strategies.

Speaker J · And we had some workshops and a survey to get some constructive feedback. And then we fine tuned the strategy that's available for your consideration today. So engagement was quite broad. Altogether, we had nine workshops and information sessions. We ran targeted surveys across each of the phases. We reached out to 15 nations and we received five who express interest. We did one on one conversations with four of them. We talked with interest holders, including local governments, nonprofits, service providers, people with living and lived experiences, island health, the business community as well as the development sector. One of the key drivers to this strategy is recognizing that housing affords. Affordability is a regional crisis.

Speaker J · So some of the information that we collected that helps demonstrate this is recognizing that Victoria is now the second most expensive rental market in Canada. This really affects renter households. 40% of renter households are spending greater than 30% of their income on housing costs. And although we've seen an alleviation to the overall vacancy rate in the region, it is still quite a tight market for anyone who's looking for something to rent that's less than $1,500 a month. So that rental vacancy rate ranges between 1 to 10 to 1. 4%. The average rents have climbed steadily since the 2018 strategy. For example, a three bedroom unit in Victoria, CMA now averages over $2,800 per month.

Speaker J · So one of the key questions we tend to get is well, how many units are we looking at at here? How many do we need in order to address the gap? There was a lot of thought and effort that went into a methodology to do a non market affordability gap analysis. And the results of this revealed that the CRD requires around 8,500 non market homes over the next five years. And looking more long term, 19,350 non market homes over the next 15 years. So far there's over 3,800 units that have are either in the pipeline or been delivered since 2021. So that's really good news.

Speaker J · But at the end of the day the completions have not kept pace with the need and demand. So we really do need to look at interventions in order to close that gap. And that's part of the intention of the regional housing affordability strategy is to address this. G I think it's also important to ground this strategy in the provincial housing target order. So there's 10 member municipalities that have this provincial order totaling 16,923 units, the majority of which are in Victoria, Sanich and Lankford. But of course this is spread across many different communities. So the regional housing affordability strategy is also one tool to help member municipality to address their target order. Now the strategy is guided by three priority areas.

Speaker J · The first is to facilitate the renewal and development of non market rental housing. The second is to advance a coordinated regional response to homelessness. And the third is to support rural and remote housing solutions. So I'm going to walk through strategies under each one of these priority areas and I'll touch on the the implementation a little bit. So starting with the non market rental housing. So we have three strategies under this prior area. The first is to work with the provincial and federal orders of government to access additional funding for the renewal and construction of non market housing. Next, to facilitate partnerships among municipalities, development industry, first nations nonprofits and other organizations to support support the delivery of affordable housing.

Speaker J · We also want to explore partnerships to deliver non market housing with First Nation governments as well as indigenous led organizations and businesses. Now there are several actions that are outlined under each one of strategies. I'll highlight one of the key actions here and that is to leverage CRHC, the Capital Region Housing Corporation lands and up to 80 million of the CRD's loan authorization to access additional funds from provincial and federal orders of government. So the idea here is really to position the CRD to be attractive for that external investment to stack that funding to deliver more homes under two the coordinated response to homelessness we have three strategies here.

Speaker J · The first is to promote regional alignment and resourcing for supportive housing and sheltering objectives. Next, to strengthen housing and service capacity and coordinate across the the homelessness serving sector to support a more streamlined, efficient system. And then the third is to enhance and align regional data systems to support the homelessness serving sector's ability to monitor and evaluate services, programs and interventions. This is important given that the point in time homeless count is seeing an increase in chronic number of people experiencing homelessness and that indigenous people are overrepresented in the homelessness population. And the third priority is supporting rural and remote housing solutions. Three strategies here. The first is to explore opportunities to leverage available funding and pursue partnerships to advance rural and remote housing solutions.

Speaker J · Second, to facilitate regional alignment with existing housing strategies for rural remote communities within the crd. And the third is support ongoing efforts to advance housing affordability in rural and remote communities. This is important to recognize that there's distinct affordability pressures in rural remote communities. For example, on some of these communities, renters tend to have a lower income on the whole compared to the crd. So the implementation section is quite detailed. I'm just going to highlight how it's been organized. So we have short, medium and long term actions starting from 2027 and then moving to 2041. I think there's a typo there that says 2047. It's meant to say 2041.

Speaker J · So looking at short term 2027, most of the actions do launch immediately and they have quite a long duration in terms of how they're going to unfold. And those include things like advocacy, the Housing Supply Partnership program, round tables with nations, as well as immediate steps to to address regional homelessness alignment. At the medium term, we're looking at scaling the funding, deepening relationships and partnerships of first nations and also embedding the regional data systems to track outcomes. And looking more long term, we're looking at the sustained delivery against non market housing targets, regional coordination as well as advocacy. So in summary, the 2026 Regional Housing Affordability Strategy has three priority areas.

Speaker J · The first is non market rental housing that's facilitating its renewal and development. The second is responding to homelessness that's advanced a coordinated regional approach. And the third is rural and remote solutions. And it's really tailoring housing solutions to the island and rural communities. Based on the housing unit need estimates at the regional level, the CRD needs approximately 19,350 non market homes by the year 2041. Looking at the Provincial Housing Target Order, there's 16,923 units targeted across the CRD municipalities. And this document has 20 actions across nine strategies across nine strategies to help bridge that gap. So that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions that you have, but I believe I'm going to turn it over to the GM for for some closing comments.

Speaker A · Thank you very much. GM Laurette.

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you Jada and City Spaces for the presentation. As shown in the draft 2026 affordability strategy, it identifies three areas of focus and related actions to support CRHC 2045, a path to 5000, the ongoing delivery of homeless intervention efforts under the Reaching Home program, and a clear focus on exploring opportunities to better support the housing needs in rural and remote communities.

Speaker C · Should the draft 2026 housing affordability strategy be approved today, staff will work to include actions in the 2027 through 2030 board prioritization and corporate planning process for consideration. This will allow the actions and the related financial and or staffing implications to be considered alongside any other activities or initiatives identified and considered by the board through that process. Recommendations included in the staff report are to approve the draft 2026 Housing Affordability Strategy, direct staff to include actions in the upcoming corporate planning process and authorize staff to engage other orders of government to explore partnership opportunities. Thank you. And staff from the CRD and City Spaces are available to answer any questions the board members have.

Speaker A · Chair thank you very much GM Loret and I'll turn to questions. To start us off, Alternate Director Wagner, followed by Director Murdoch. Okay, thank you.

Speaker K · Through the chair I had a question about the non market homes and how deeply affordable would they be? For example, in Lankford we have a program that's 10% below market for a certain number of years. But those aren't really deeply affordable, which is where most of the need is. So this number of 19,350 non market homes. I just wondered if we could have a bit more information about is there a breakdown of how many deeply affordable homes are needed compared to just that? Market competitive, I think was the term used in a previous presentation for slightly below market.

Speaker G · Yep.

Speaker J · Through the Chair, that's a good question. So we do have a table. Table 1 I believe in our in the final deliverable of the regional Housing Affordability Strategy that does outline the number of units and the affordability ranges. So this is based on B. C. housing, high income limits, the hills in terms of its affordability. I'm not sure if you're able to. I don't have it on my my PowerPoint but effectively all, all 19,000 units, those non market homes are in the affordable non market estimate but they're broken down by income and unit sizes. So for example, there's a couple different scenarios, a lower scenario and upper scenario. In the lower scenario there's 7025 studio one bedroom units that are estimated needing for households that are earning less than 50,000 per year.

Speaker J · So the data is telling us

Speaker L · how

Speaker J · many units are needed based on the income ranges. But from the data that we have, we can't analyze how deep that affordability needs to be. I hope that answers your question.

Speaker F · Yes, thank you.

Speaker K · It's just really interesting to see how the housing target order doesn't really help us get where we need to go. So appreciate the work here to actually look at the kinds of non market housing we really need. Lankford has already blown well past our first year. Target at least doubled if not tripled the, the housing target order but with very little affordability there. So thank you for your presentation.

Speaker A · Thank you all. Director, Director Murdoch Bay.

Speaker M · Thank you. I have two questions for the presenter and one for staff. Thank you for the presentation. Just curious about the. You referenced the BC housing stats and the province in their provincial targets of their 16,000 or so units regionally they gave a target of around 30% at below market housing. And what you have is around 8,500. A little over 50% of new buildings that are targeted for below market housing. Just curious about why the, why that, that gap.

Speaker G · Correct.

Speaker J · Yeah. So I think what you're asking is why does a regional gap analysis differ slightly from the housing target order?

Speaker N · Yeah.

Speaker J · So the numbers they are, they're built from the same underlying data but they're answering different questions. So for the targets, the 16,900, 20, 23. So those are officially the housing target orders. They're signed by the province under the Housing Supply act and those are applied or they've been directed to 10 of the CRD member municipalities. So not, so not all of them. And it's looking across that. The housing target order is looking across the housing continuum, the full spectrum from ownership to rental, all the way to the most deeply affordable. So that's the, that's the targets for a regional gap analysis. Analysis on the high end is 19,350. It takes the same data as basically the H and R method calculations from the interim housing needs reports.

Speaker J · So it includes all the members, palladies that have targets, all the ones who don't have targets includes electoral areas. So we're looking at, at the regional level as a whole. And we're only looking at the non market component. So the housing target or order looks at ownership for example, whereas a regional gap analysis is only looking at the non market housing. So we're, we are drawing from the same data for answering different questions. And I'll just add one more thing. With the housing target order, if I recall correctly, the member municipalities receive that direction in different timing or they have different time frames. Right. So if you were to add up all of their numbers, it wouldn't be equivalent to the regional gap analysis. Hope that answers your question.

Speaker M · Yeah, that was a great answer.

Speaker A · Thank you very much.

Speaker M · My other question is just related to, in the, in the report there's no mentions of seniors housing. And I know we're certainly loud and clear from the seniors advocate. There's a sort of crisis of people unable to sort of stay in their traditional homes but unable to kind of transfer. And I'm just curious about should that not. Or maybe just that question should just be why that wasn't. At least in the report I could read a kind of find any mention of seniors or elderly care or any of those kind of transition pieces which are leading to some homelessness and some other challenges.

Speaker J · Yeah. So a lot of the priority areas and the strategies don't focus on the target population. So we don't specify the seniors, the youth, the families to that degree. It really does stay up at a higher level. But do we do recognize that seniors is there is a need for housing for seniors and we did hear that loud and clear from engagement as well. But staying at the higher level, we're looking at how many affordable units do we need in the region and then subsequently when more detailed work plans come into place and also depending on funding opportunities, what can be built under those programs.

Speaker M · Very good. Thank you very much for that. And my question to staff is just obviously we're seeing a lot of the for profit housing edging into the, you know, low market to below market housing challenges with the vacancy rates. So I'm just curious if, I don't know, it may not be possible. Can staff seek to just any efforts that we're making to as new things are getting built that we're keeping, you know, finding mechanisms for either reducing the development or operating costs of the non of the below market housing to kind of make sure that we stay ahead of that, that of that pressure, that cost pressure curve and keep us fully occupied.

Speaker M · Not sure who to give that to. Thank you.

Speaker C · I'm going to refer that to senior manager Elliot, thank you.

Speaker O · Yes, thank you so much for the question through the chair. That's continuous and ongoing process and under the context of this item, it is quite specific to the operational model of the housing corporation itself. However, when we look at the increasing supply in those below market units where we are finding ourselves competing with for profit or private developers, we are always looking at what is our value proposition, what is it that we can or should be doing differently either to bring down costs or increase revenue responsibly. One of the things that I do note, and forgive me, I don't have the data for the capital region, but across the country, country, we're Looking at about 4. 6, 4.

Speaker O · 7% of all rental housing is in the non market housing sector. So that means the vast majority of housing is existing in a landscape where the primary drivers of rent levels are market volatility. So for us, it really is about increasing that proportionality in a responsible way so that we can create less incentive around increasing those prices. And, and part of why that's so important is because it does help nonprofit operators like the housing corporation increase affordability over time. So even though on day one, it might not be that much more affordable than what our competition can open down the block, by year 10, by year 15, by year 20, it is considerably more affordable because our revenue goes back into only maintaining those assets and supporting operational costs, not to shareholder dividends or profit motivation in the same way.

Speaker P · Thank you.

Speaker L · Thank you, Chair.

Speaker A · Thank you, Chair. Next to Director Caradon, followed by Director Holman.

Speaker Q · Thank you very much, Chair. I want to keep going on the question of the coordinated regional response to homelessness, which is what all of my questions have to do with. And thank you to both the consultant and to staff. I don't know if this question is for the consultant or for staff, so I'll just put it out there. But I mean, the, the CRD has been under a lot of pressure to be doing more on homelessness. Some of that pressure has come from the city of Victoria, some of it has come from the Minister of Housing, some of it has come from advocates and activists and residents and really from all directions.

Speaker Q · So it is positive to see these, these, this approach, making it into the, the housing of the affordability strategy. But I want to drill down a little bit on what's proposed. And we all know around the table, I think people around the region don't always understand it, but we understand that we have limited jurisdiction and that a lot of the funding constraints and funding obligations come from the province, especially when it comes to shelters and supportive housing, local governments typically don't fund such things. But I guess my first question is, were there other options here that were considered, considered as part of this report that were weeded out or that the consultants or staff opted against?

Speaker Q · Is there any additional jurisdiction, any additional options that were looked at but were ultimately not included in this report? Or does this report reflect the sum total of the CRD's jurisdiction and abilities to advance a regional approach to homelessness?

Speaker C · Through the chair, I'll ask Jada to provide an initial comment and we'll see if we need to add additional context.

Speaker J · Through the chair, through the engagement process, we, we received a high volume of information from local experts. Everybody was in the room, from the ministry to frontline staff, to people on this, on the strategy level and persons with lived and living experiences. So the amount of information we received were, you know, to the very detailed, tangible, rolling up our sleeves on what, on what to do to more high level systems point of view. But through the process of working collaboratively with the CRD and even sharing the strategy, the draft strategy with those same participants, we heard loud and clear, clear what the priorities are when it comes to responding to homelessness in the crd.

Speaker J · That's regional alignment, that's aligning with data and data systems and. Yeah, and regional alignment. So when we got feedback from Engagement, they were quite supportive and positive with what they saw here at the strategic level. And the plan is that moving forward that staff are going to start creating more detailed work plans and what that might look like. But from what we heard from Engagement, this is reflective of what those participants had said and that they're very supportive with this direction.

Speaker Q · Thanks to the chair. I think that partially answers my question, but doesn't fully address it because my question is mainly around jurisdiction. We're all trying to figure out what more regional districts can be doing in this space. And just as other local governments, in particular cities, in the city of Victoria have pushed the envelope, let's say, and in some ways veered outside their lanes to address this crisis on the street, I'm trying to get a better sense of what the jurisdiction is of the regional district and if there were any options that were left on the floor or left in the desk that didn't make an end of this report.

Speaker Q · But there are other options or is this really the, the sum total of our jurisdictional possibilities and opportunities.

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you. Through the chair and I ask Senior Manager Elliot to comment, but I do want to maybe just provide another comment in that Ultimately there will be through the. Through the board prioritization and corporate planning process, there will be other opportunities to look. Look at this strategy and provide actions to staff to advance the work under this strategy and put the funding and resources towards it. We did provide a report back through to the board prior to us bringing this forward that really outlined what our legislative authority under the CRD was and what we could provide. And the staff report speaks specifically that we kept the actions very specific to what we could implement under our current jurisdictional authority.

Speaker C · I'll just look to Senior Manager Elliot if he can elaborate on specific items that may or may not have been pulled out of the comments that we received.

Speaker O · Yeah, thank you so much.

Speaker D · Through the chair.

Speaker O · So I'll take a run at this as well. In terms of specific actions that would have been outside of our jurisdiction as a regional district, those were not identified, nor were they purposefully or intentionally excluded in some way. We really did seek to hear broadly from participants through the process what we could accomplish. However, it was noted very explicitly at one of our early engagements, specifically on homelessness, that there was an insufficient mandate for local governments and the commensurate resources, resources to support actions and activities associated with unhoused populations in their local jurisdictions. Which is why we did seek to include, and this is Action 2. 1. 1, which is advocating for a clear provincial mandate outlining roles, responsibilities of local governments and addressing homelessness alongside proportional investment and resources.

Speaker O · So what we're really trying to do is look at what our authorities are, as Mr. Lorette had noted outlined in a previous staff report, look at where we could have a positive impact, acknowledge that there are gaps in the way the system currently functions to support unhoused populations, but also are reflecting that our service authority as regional district comes under our ability to implement and administer the Reaching Home program.

Speaker O · So that's really why we've couched it in that way. Now under that program, we are moving, moving several works forward, but in terms of directly investing in mental health and or substance use services, that's not where we're looking at this strategy to take us in terms of administering funds to support the capital development of supportive housing, we've done that. So that's the type of area that we're looking at moving into or staying into, which is those areas where we've had success and continue to make an impact.

Speaker Q · And thank you. And to the Chair, I acknowledge that it's not our role to figure out how to push our jurisdiction per se as part of this report, but my question was more about our jurisdiction now. So thank you for answering that. The three main approaches that jump out to me in this strategy are one, the mapping of services across the region that unhoused people rely on two, the coordination of siting of new shelters in supportive housing and then improve regional data on homelessness. So maybe on the second one, coordination of siting of new shelters, supportive housing. Can. Can staff or the consultant walk us through what that might look like, noting that it is the province, typically, that proposes supportive housing.

Speaker Q · So I. I don't know exactly what that means.

Speaker B · What.

Speaker Q · What exactly would our planners be doing to help this, to have more of an equitable sighting? S I T I N G. Thank you.

Speaker C · I'll just have Jada respond to that.

Speaker J · Yeah, thank you. Through the chair, the idea is that the member municipalities would work together to define what that criteria could be of citing shelters and supportive housing. I can give you one example that's been completed recently in a neighboring jurisdiction, the Cowichan Valley Regional District. They recently went through a process and they adopted sheltering and support of housing policy. And what they did is they worked with all member municipalities to develop criteria based on best practices of where these could be cited. And they went through a spatial analysis exercise as well, and putting in buffers, you know, around things like schools and recreation centers, things of that nature. And they reviewed it as well.

Speaker J · And now that that policy has been adopted, I don't know if that's the same process of the CRD would undertake. But that's just one example of where a regional district has pursued that type of policy.

Speaker Q · Okay, thank you for that. And that kind of leads into my next question, which is what does this report mean for the province or what does it imply for the province? Does this report. Are we going to send this to the Minister of Housing? Will this be rolled up into any advocacy work? I'd like to know how this gets put back into their hands. I mean, are they going to be made aware of the fact that we're willing to partner with a more with the province in a more coordinated rollout of sheltering and housing facilities across the region?

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you for that question. Ultimately, this is a board strategy. We did engage with the province on this. I'll just look to Senior Manager Elliot, how the report will get shared with the province.

Speaker O · Yes, thank you so much to the chair. At this time, we don't have. And it's not that we couldn't. We just don't have a specific intention to distribute this document to the province. What this document does is enables us very clear direction and clear focus towards a number of areas that will help us, I think starting in 2027. So I'll just highlight a couple of examples. If there are commitments made to support allocations of up to $5 million as outlined in the report, to support rural and remote housing as an example, or up to $80 million to support CRC 2045 as an example, that enables staff the opportunity to put something tangible on the table, something concrete, something that has been vetted, something that we all support.

Speaker O · And that makes it an opportunity for us to really create an incentive to bring that investment in. The same thing with the federal government. Now when we look at the specific actions identified under the Homelessness Initiative, what we're really doing there is working within our current authorities through the administration of a federal program. And we are building a much more fulsome business case. What is missing? What are the services that are over subscribed? What services aren't having the impact that we would like them to? How many individuals at any point in time are experiencing chronic or episodic homelessness? It enables us a much more fulsome way to bring forward clear recommendations to the province.

Speaker O · There's a lot in this document that is around advocacy, bringing municipalities, bringing staff together to support advocacy, but that enables us on a program by program or project by project basis to try and incentivize investment, to try and create a political incentive to support these efforts that currently aren't being funded in the ways that I think any of us in the in the region would like to see.

Speaker Q · Thank you. Two more questions. One, on the question of data, how's things going with CAA and hifis?

Speaker O · Yeah, thank you so much. Through the chair, the progress on CAA and HIFIs is going well and I do wish to acknowledge that it is not going I think as quickly as any of us in this room would like to see. That being said, we have made considerable progress on getting some of the foundational elements of the system completed. We are looking at nearing completion of our regional service inventory focusing on BC housing funded resources as well as those supported through the Reaching Home program. So we are making consideration progress towards actually having a system and the infrastructure necessary to support what we're talking about in here.

Speaker O · So I would say all in all we are expecting clarification on onboarding sequences to a HIFA system in the coming month. And at that point in time we will be able to share exactly when we expect the system to go live and we'll have A much better understanding of exactly how that is going to be utilized here in this region to support more positive outcomes for service recipients.

Speaker Q · Excellent. Last question for me, Chair, is there's a relative dearth in this report around addiction, around mental health, around dual diagnosis housing and homelessness. Is homelessness is somewhat simplistically treated as solely a housing issue and of course it is partly a housing issue. But we know anyone lives in this region knows it's typically more than just a housing issue. So I just wanted to get a sense of what our plan is to deal with the complexities of the people who are facing homelessness.

Speaker O · Again, thank you so much for the question through the Chair. This strategy, similar to the question on specific affordability levels, is really about giving us broad direction to move it forward. Now when we see HIFIs implemented, when we start to understand what's happening with service provision throughout the region, we will start to see where those programs are falling short of their expectations. We will see in a very concrete way how we can better mobilize the limited resources available to have the best outcomes possible. Now we have to acknowledge that it is the responsibility of the health authority to provide, provide that level of high acuity service. At present we are focusing first on B. C.

Speaker O · housing and reaching home funded resources, but are actively engaged in looking at how we can more meaningfully and more rapidly expand and include health services. Because we all know that it is a combination of those that contributes to long term housing stability, particularly for the more individuals with the more acute needs.

Speaker Q · Thanks for those answers and thanks Shar.

Speaker A · Thank you Director Caradon and Director Holman please, followed by Director Alto.

Speaker B · Yeah, thanks Chair and to staff for the report. Just to continue on the homelessness issue, we had the Minister of Housing come here a few months ago. Now this was before the pausing of provincial funding for affordable housing. Just wondering if staff can comment on the state of play in terms of provincial funding for supported housing and shelters versus the Community Housing Fund and building. Building BC My understanding was, and this is what I'm asking is, is there more, are there more possibilities short term of funding for support and shelters than there are for the other affordable housing programs from the province?

Speaker A · We'll turn to Senior Manager Elliot again. Thank you.

Speaker O · Yes, thank you so much through the question. So as best as staff are aware, all of the programs that are currently available, whether it be the Women's Transition Fund, Indigenous Housing Fund, Community Housing Fund, Support, Supportive Housing Fund, are fully subscribed. We are not hearing from staff at BC Housing that there are new or uncommitted resources available. So our effort has really been to make sure that those projects that we have in process are fully committed and that a recent example, again tied to the minister's visit to this board around a project like Mount Ptolemy, that we're continuing those conversations and continuing to move those forward where we have those opportunities because of the really difficult fiscal climate at the provincial government.

Speaker B · Thanks for that, Chair. And with respect to the proposal in the report, 80 million for CRHC project 2045 and 5 million for the RH P. So if we vote to support this strategy today, are those amounts set in stone or are they. Can they be revised upon further, like the corporate planning process and all of that and you know, by a new CRD board.

Speaker A · I'll add the budget and I'll turn to gm Loret.

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you. They are not set in stone, but it does give us guidelines to start having those partnership conversations. It shows a rationale as to why we are separating the 85 million to support both streams, rural housing as well as the CRHC path to 24 or 2045. Yes.

Speaker B · Yeah, thanks for that, Chair. Where I'm going with this, which probably the board is. It's fairly predictable coming from me, but the 5 million as a percentage of the 85 million is a little bit less than 6%. And I just want to say how much the electoral area directors have discussed this informally and how much we appreciate that set aside. And it does relate to motions that this board has considered before around regional equity. So it's much appreciated. But I would just point out that the three electoral areas, for example, the share of converted assessments, which is the basis for which our share of the carrying costs for that 85 million are determined is about 7. 6%.

Speaker B · So just saying. But that's why I was asking the question about. I won't be at this table, but I suspect other electoral area directors may be, you know, pressing on that, on. On that question. So it's good to hear that at least there, there is a possibility for future discussion. I wanted to ask about the. The targets, the numbers of affordable housing that the consultant put forward and is. Can there be a quick explanation of how they were derived? And I think it was Mr. Elliott who mentioned that the current proportion of affordable housing as a proportion of the total housing Stock is about 4 to 5%.

Speaker B · Do the targets in this strategy increase that percentage and is there a rough estimate of that?

Speaker C · Just refer that to JADA to provide a comment.

Speaker J · Through the chair. The calculations of the housing unit need Estimates. It's, it's a simple question asking how many units do we need? But it's a fairly complex question to answer. So there was a lot of thought and effort put into that methodology, including looking at comparable regional districts on how they've done it. We work closely with the province. We got their methodology on how they did the provincial housing target order. So we had that methodology and the intention is, or the intention of the analysis was to apply that on a regional basis. Because right now, or prior to this strategy, those housing target orders were individually applied to those 10 member municipalities. So the estimate used a two step provincial methodology.

Speaker J · The first was looking at the housing needs report method, the HNR method. So that's a standardized approach that was introduced by the province in 2023 and that uses census data and some other data as well to estimate housing need over five and 20 years. So that was part one. The second part was the housing target or border methodology that we were able to get from the province that's tied to the Housing Supply act and that is normally applied to individual municipalities. But we were able to take that methodology and apply it to a regional level of all 13 municipalities and also say that we. Those numbers are order of magnitude. Right.

Speaker J · So their estimates are not absolute, they're not not precision, they are ranges. And what we have provided is a companion technical memo that provides a step by step methodology. Excuse me, methodology for that. That will be. It's still in the finalization stage, but that will be provided soon. I think there was another part of your question through the chair.

Speaker B · Yeah. Other part was if you do achieve those targets, and I, you know, I get it about their estimates and it's, it's as much an art as a science. But if you do achieve those targets, is it expected that the proportion of the housing stock represented by affordable housing would go up from 4 to 5%?

Speaker J · Sorry, can you repeat the end part?

Speaker B · So if the, if affordable housing has a proportion of the total housing stock now is about 4 to 5%, if we achieve the targets put forward in this strategy, would that 4 to 5% be increased? Do you have a sense of that?

Speaker J · Go ahead.

Speaker O · Since I'm the one who introduced that figure, I think it's fair that I do my best to respond to the inquiry. Thank you so much.

Speaker D · Through the.

Speaker F · Mr.

Speaker R · Chair.

Speaker O · Unfortunately, as I noted when I made the remark, we don't have that data available for the region. The data that I was citing is based on national data and it's really done looking at the proportion of non market Housing that is available to renter households across the country. And the conclusion from that is that it is insufficient to effectively control the risk of rental cost escalation over time. I think it is reasonable to look at if the document is endorsed, if we're able to as staff, identify those partnership opportunities to create supply programs for leveraging CRHC and in rural remote communities, it would have a meaningful impact on the availability of non market housing in the region.

Speaker O · But I have to also acknowledge two things. One, that is subject to broader market activity which we can't control. If there are additional programs, resources, really, really low interest rates, financing opportunities, then we could see the private market re engage in the development cycle. We're currently seeing them withdraw. So it's a great opportunity to make that countercyclical investment. But we could see them in five or ten years come back in.

Speaker A · Right.

Speaker O · So that would change the proportionality of our product. But the other thing I think is really important to note, and it's been alluded to previously, is that even if this is endorsed today, this is really about enabling us to go out and bring back those partnership opportunities to apply pressure upward where, let's be honest, more of the investment has to come from for us to make a meaningful difference.

Speaker O · So when we talk about numbers set in stone, when we talk about next steps, before any dollar is spent, it will have to go through the CRD's financial planning process, which will then have it considered alongside any other priorities or other conditions that may require that we control cost escalation. Because we know that debt servicing over time can be quite expensive. So before we go down that road, we do have to do the math to figure out what is our partnership opportunity. We what kind of supply can that provide? What is the affordability level targets of that supply? That is very similar to the approach we took in designing the Regional Housing first program.

Speaker O · Because we have to remember those conversations started in 2015. We are expecting the completion of the final project funded through that program in 2028. So we are looking at longer time horizons for these really important investments. But it's also critical that we take that time because this type of change is going to be complicated and it does have the risk of considerable expense. So we need to make sure that what we're providing is in terms of impact is going to meet the need that's starting to be identified through the analysis that was done.

Speaker A · Thanks, Director Holdman. Next on my speaking list I have Directors Aalto Kobayashi and Tate. Director Aalto, please.

Speaker L · Thank you very much. Thank you to the other directors who've asked most of my questions, but I have three questions I don't believe have been asked yet. First of all, I really want to thank the consultants and the staff for the report. It's a lot of work and I don't think any of us see how much has gone into this. But three questions I haven't heard asked yet. If I heard the answer to an earlier question correctly, and that was with regard to regard to 2. 2. 3, explore a regional approach, etc. I thought I heard someone say that one of the roles of the CRD would be to facilitate a conversation or some process with all municipalities to create some sort of policy or standard or some such thing.

Speaker L · I guess two part question, is that correct? And if that's correct, what does that actually mean? What piece of work is that?

Speaker A · Senior manager, please.

Speaker O · Thank you so much for the question through the chair. It's a totally fair question. And to be perfectly honest, the engagement strategy has not yet been designed by staff, nor has it been costed or resourced. So this is really about seeking endorsement on staff moving into that space which is available to us under our role as a reaching home, community entity. So it provides opportunities for us to play that role of facilitation, coordination, thinking on the spot. In my mind, this would be modeled off of similar work that we've done in other contexts where what we look to do is to share information, listen to concerns, bring parties together.

Speaker O · There is language in here around roundtables, so the opportunity to constructively and I think respectfully highlight the need, the unmet need across the region, talk about success stories, talk about sustainable solutions. We as CRD don't have the authority to compel. What we can do is we can help share information, we can help bring people together, we can answer questions, we can listen to concerns, we can highlight for the province, as we've done previously, opportunity where they may be available. And I think that for us is really the intent behind this piece is to move us more clearly into that space, but not to extend or exceed our service authority as a convener, collaborator and a willing partner in the region on some of these conversations.

Speaker L · Thank you for that. You have a lot of goals and actions outlined in here, but I don't see, see evidently to me, anyway, how are you going to measure whether or not you meet those goals and whether the actions you're taking have made a difference?

Speaker O · Yeah, thank you so much to the chair. Similar to what I had shared earlier, the really important piece on these is that they're all so distinct and they all rely so much on what we can pull into this region from other orders of government. So it's really the intention with this that the specific measurables, the actions, the outputs would be defined through a service planning process and through the financial plan process for the crd. That initiative business case process that we work very hard on as staff to sort of bring that information forward to the board is really where we have the opportunity to work out the cost metrics, to look then at how we can resource that as soon as staff, whether it's new resources or a redeployment of resources.

Speaker O · And I think most importantly, as outlined in those community need summaries that come forward every year, exactly what the board should expect in exchange for that service, that commitment or that resourcing. So it really is us trying to pivot away from broad ambitious signals in a landscape like affordability or homelessness, where we have very little direct authority, into a space where we're measuring success based on our ability to move specific actions forward and the type of impact we can have, which we can better outline through a service planning process.

Speaker L · So just as a follow up to that, you would see this conversation then being able to be continued by the next board when it does its priority setting.

Speaker O · I'm very sorry, can you repeat that? There was just some paper rustling.

Speaker L · You would see this then, if I understood you correctly and from your earlier comments, that the next board could in fact consider this as a priority and direction to staff and the appropriate allocation of resources?

Speaker O · That is correct, yes.

Speaker L · Right, thank you. And my last question is actually a question to you. Sorry, I should have left because you know what I'm going to ask about HIFAs 15, 16 years later. Are you aware of the fact that the Capital Regional District's lack of having an active HIFIS has in fact excluded us from accessing federal funding on certain programs?

Speaker O · Yes, I am aware it is funding and you'll have to forgive me, I am not sure which federal agency it comes from. It's not from the Fed directly. I do believe it comes from a third party because we do not meet the criteria, nor do any other communities in British Columbia to my knowledge meet the criteria either. None of us in the province of British Columbia were eligible for that funding program and I can't remember what it was for. So you'll have to forgive me.

Speaker K · That's okay.

Speaker L · You might want to double check that one quick comment. Actually, I understand why there's no obligation here to share this report with Mr. Boyle, but I would think it would be perplexing why we wouldn't given the fact that she has been part of this conversation over the last year or more. So I would hope that as just as a matter of courtesy courtesy that it would be shared with her office. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thanks Director Aalto. Sure. Perhaps I can maybe just follow up with a comment in response to Directors. Director Aalto's comment there. Unfortunately, with the disappointment that our meeting request through VCM with Minister Boyle was not accepted, we were going to use that as an opportunity to not only pitch the funding opportunity and the partnership arrangement that we have done over the last three UBCMs, but also mentioned subject to the Board approving the strategy.

Speaker A · I mentioned this strategy and seek a follow up meeting just to, to talk in more detail about the role the regional district can play in implementing the strategy in partnership with the province. So we won't get that opportunity next week, which is unfortunate, but certainly agree that after next week we can take the opportunity to subject to the Board's agreement to reach out to the province and seek a follow up meeting with the Minister and share this information and talk about those partnership opportunities. So if the board would like us to do that, we can take direction. Thanks CEO Robbins. And thanks again, Director Aalto. I have next Directors Kobayashi, Tate and Riddle.

Speaker E · Thank you very much. Chair, just two questions here. My first question is the report clearly acknowledges that there's a substantial investment that's needed here right now. And you know, that's something that CRD can't do on its own, that's for sure. It's going to need senior government support in. So my question comes down to is what, what commitments are, are we holding ourselves to or are we holding the province and the federal government government to, you know, in order before we start spending money, substantial monies right now, what, what commit firm commitments are we looking for? I just want to have that clear in my head.

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you. Through the chair, ultimately this provides direction for us to pursue those partnership opportunities. So we would then look out to senior orders of government on funding because you're, you're correct, we can't solve this problem problem on our own. And ultimately if you look at what was accomplished under the 2018 regional housing affordability Strategy, it took years to implement that fully implemented and it took a lot of discussions. It was the partnership with the CMHC in the province that enabled that 120 million investment under the Regional Housing First Program. So this is really the starting point of the strategy enabling the Next levels of partnership opportunities.

Speaker C · And then we would be reporting back through board priority setting, through service planning, financial planning process to identify what the benefit of the investment is and weigh that off against other priorities in the region. But it does provide that guiding document to us.

Speaker E · Thanks very much. My second question, it's. It almost seems tactical but it's not because I just learned something and I found out that all our affordable or rent geared to income dwellings in Colwood are actually have been done in partnership with the Greater Victoria Housing Society. I don't think you have. We have anything that's CRD in Caldwood whatsoever. But here's my question. This is what I'm so I'm a bit frustrated. Three years ago I we worked with them for 139 units all ready to go. 85 Monmouth, 130 units and we're all ripping ready to go. Everything was done, the design work, everything, all the architectural work.

Speaker E · We got rid of all the DCCs, everything. We made this extremely affordable. So my question is, I'm just trying to understand do you work with the Greater Victoria Victoria Housing Society? Are you two separate entities or.

Speaker A · It might be.

Speaker E · This is the tactical part. Maybe you know, is it. Should I take this off the line with you? Because it's been frustration three years in a row already and every year they promise it was going to happen and it never happens.

Speaker C · So yeah.

Speaker P · Thank you.

Speaker C · Through the, through the chair. We don't work directly with the Greater Victoria Housing Society. They're their own own non profit housing provider. Capital Regional Housing Corporation again is a non profit housing provider. We bring forward the projects through the CRHC and CRD board for approvals. Happy to have further discussions on offline if you'd like on some of the challenges that you're facing.

Speaker E · Okay, thank you very much.

Speaker A · Thanks. Director Kobayashi, just a note to colleagues, just a reminder, we had four from the tech support for our new microphone system. If we can just notice the direction of the mics and our closeness to the mics. I have next on speaking directors Tayton Riddle.

Speaker H · Thank you, Chair. May I move the recommendation?

Speaker A · Yes, that would be. There's certainly the opportunity for questions after that, please go ahead. It is a three part motion that can be moved.

Speaker H · Would you like me to read it out?

Speaker A · No, I think the staff indicated during their introduction. So.

Speaker H · Okay, thank you. So I'll move the three items within the staff report.

Speaker A · Thank you. And seconded by director Murdoch Stanich please. Alternative movers.

Speaker H · Okay, thank you. Just staff touched on this briefly. Just as this would go forward is to have the prioritization and planning and also discuss the challenges. And I think that's a very critical part to this because yes, there's a need for non market housing, but it's also the ability for local governments to handle the non market housing. So what I mean by that is within our community, where I'm glad that we have something, there is also the livability for the residents and what the community requires. And all of that is property tax dollars. So property tax dollars fund everything from the food bank, prenatal care, youth counseling, necessary services in the community to support populations because the provincial and federal government are not showing up or they're cutting back.

Speaker H · So the challenge there is now, we can no longer offer permissive tax exemptions because there is a need to provide the necessary services for the entire population and they're growing. 1% increase in property taxes only generates $140,000 in souk. We also are facing a rising 911 bill that is currently over, I don't know, 450,000, growing to 1. 2 million by 2030. So of your 10% tax increase, 4% of that is just to fund 911 service. And then there is also the need to have necessary emergency services like police, fire and ambulance. And because ambulance isn't readily available, it's our fire department that is providing services which are career firefighters because our volunteers are burning out. So all of that just becomes an expensive process problem.

Speaker H · We're not even talking about playgrounds and, and amenities. These are core essential services that just cost dollars. And so when we talk about getting the developers to do it, and I'll say this bluntly, every time they come to souk in the time I've been there for 18 years, very few of them can just meet the expectations. They build great beautiful buildings and infrastructure everywhere in the corner they come to soup. Can't do it. Too expensive. I guess everything got expensive in that short 30 kilometer stretch which means property taxes have to fix it. Every shortcut that's made is an expensive, costly infrastructure and fix. And I've seen it time and time again. So I think yes, there is a

Speaker B · need,

Speaker H · but I think having a, a strategic conversation about the church, challenges in how to deliver and meet the needs of the population are also critically important. I'm glad to see that Sook has not been named yet a target. Not that I want to say that too loud because then I'll get the letter saying that we have to have other targets, but we simply cannot provide more because we're struggling to meet the needs of the community today. So I just wanted to raise that. That it's not just about building houses. Yes, that's important. But you need to build homes, which means providing all the necessary pieces to have people thrive and to live in place.

Speaker H · So there's all of that. And that's where the property tax framework has to change in a way or some other funding mechanism needs to come up because we simply cannot fund everything that the province is walking away from from like the food bank. You can't build a house and not feed people. Like it's, it's getting to be.

Speaker Q · It's.

Speaker H · It's just extremely challenging. So I just wanted to leave it there and just appreciate the work. That there's the other conversation of the challenges. It is really important that that happens in this room. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thanks. Director Tate, Director Murdoch, please.

Speaker S · Thank you. Chair McNeil Smith. It's going to take some getting used to that. We've got these large projections in front of us while we're speaking. Fortunately, I probably only have to do this one more time, so you will all have to get used to it and I'll be watching you from home with my popcorn. I am pleased to to second the the motion to approve and direct staff to include this as part of the upcoming work for the future term. I really appreciate the analysis and the collaborative efforts involved in developing this strategy. It's clear that this is the most significant and most urgent issue that we face as a region.

Speaker S · Folks who are unable to find a home in our community and the of the rest range of necessary supports, both financial and in terms of health supports that are necessary in order to ensure everyone is able to make a go of it in our region. I am really heartened to see the number of actions that are outlined in the strategy and I think that they're the result of listening thoughtfully to partners to ensure that this region continues to play a significant role in ensuring that everyone is able to live and thrive on the South Island. I think what's clear is that none of us has the answer and none of us can act alone.

Speaker S · And I think that what we have in front of us is a blueprint that ensures that as 13 local governments and the electoral areas are able to work collaboratively to. To do what is really the most important thing for all of us. And that is to ensure that future generations and those who are currently seeking housing are able to settle here, find a job, go to school and receive the services and amenities that are so necessary for the quality of life that so many of us enjoy. So what? While nothing is resolved today by virtue of this strategy, I am hopeful that what's laid out here is something that sets us on a very significant path to improving life for so many folks on the South Island.

Speaker S · And I'm really hopeful that the CRD will continue to play a leadership role in bringing together agencies, organizations and senior levels of government in order to fund and deliver on, on what's, what's required. The task is not small, but I know that this document represents a commitment to continue to work together. And I think rather than finger pointing or working at cross purposes, that alone is what's going to help us to, to get on top of what is a very significant challenge. So I'm quite happy to support this and I look forward to the great work that it's going to, going to support over the course of the, the, the coming term. Thanks, Mr.

Speaker P · Chair.

Speaker A · Thank you. Director Murdoch, Director Riddle, you were next on the speaking list before the motion. Would you care to ask your question or motivate?

Speaker N · Sure, I will. I'll also start by thanking everyone for the very comprehensive good work and I, I also am in support of this recommendation. This is more, I guess for my, my learning and catch up and, and a bit of curiosity, but don't spend too much time because I'm mindful of where we are in the meeting. But it's with regard to the priorities and you've outlined a huge amount of work that went into this. But I'm wondering if you could shed any additional light on how you landed on those three specifically and then if there were any that you also considered that you felt were really important, maybe that we should still hold in mind as we go forward.

Speaker N · But that just didn't make the cut because I'm very impressed that you were able to cut it down to three. That's really hard. Thank you.

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you. I'll just refer this for Jada's comment.

Speaker J · Thank you. Through the chair, it was quite clear through the evidence of the data and what we heard through engagement that these were the priority areas. There wasn't a point in the process where there was attention, where there was a, a large debate. These were very clear from, from the onset. And you know, we, we did make some assumptions when we were drafting the strategy, you know, gleaning from everything what we heard. But the whole point of going for that final consultation period where we had that the, the draft strategies was to, to go back to, to everyone to make sure that this does resonate.

Speaker J · It does land that we didn't miss any other priority areas and we did get that comment confirmation that we these were the, the right focus areas. So to answer your question, was there anything else that identified as a priority that kind of fell off of the strategy? No, these were, these were clear from the onset.

Speaker G · Thank you.

Speaker A · Thanks. Director Riddle, are there any further speakers, Director Wickham, please.

Speaker R · Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Ms. Bassey and manager, for all your work and efforts and in providing us with, with some solutions going forward. I will just comment though, and I don't want to be the Debbie Downer here, but for several years now I've spoken with people in our neighboring municipality who appear to be homeless. And consistently and repeatedly I hear that these people, people refuse to go to the one supportive housing unit in Souk. The, it's known as the Hope center because the staff there are, according to these people. And then there's been probably close to 10 people I've spoken to about this are other homeless people who have been taken in the shelter and then provided jobs and then repeatedly enter people's apartments and rob them.

Speaker R · And this happens over and over again. And I've heard it from many people. And I'm wondering if there's a change in policy where, or if there is a policy where there can be a more secure management system for this kind of a program. Is it just isolated to this one thing in Sucre or is this, is this a common theme because it's making people homeless because they don't want to go there with their very few provisions and have them ripped off. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thanks, Director. For the question, I'll turn to Senior Manager Elliott.

Speaker O · Yeah, thank you so much. Through the chair, what I can offer is that staff meet regularly with staff from BC Housing who is the funder of supportive housing and sheltering options across the region and are happy to share feedback with them for me to comment on the operations of a shelter operator that is independent from the CRD or to comment on the potential motivations or experiences of individuals I don't think would be appropriate at this time, but absolutely appropriate to share the feedback heard today with staff at BC Housing so that they can work with operators across the region to make sure that the services being resourced are providing the appropriate service to those in need.

Speaker R · Thank you. And I will also just comment that I have heard that you've consulted with committees and staff and managers and other people's success stories, but I think it's the failure stories that you can learn from as well. And I haven't heard anything about engagement with those people. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director. Director Coleman, please.

Speaker P · Thank you. And thank you for laying this out in a way that I think becomes

Speaker E · a report card or a look for

Speaker P · opportunities in the future for future housing. But it does bring up a couple of questions that I would have asked before that it was put on the table. The report identifies the 40% of rental households that spend more than 30% of their income on shelter costs. That's the CMHC rule. There is another metric that is 45% of household income and transportation costs. And as the CRD is looking to get into transportation, it allows us to take a look at the opportunities around transportation oriented corridors. So I'm just wondering if we had thought about it, because it may still be 40%, I suspect it's lower. But it then guides us, the crd, in looking at opportunities. Have you considered that?

Speaker C · I'll just look to perhaps Senior Manager Elliot, if that's come up in the discussion around this specific work. And I know we look at transportation within the Regional Growth Strategy Indicators Report, but not as a combined household transportation income. But I'll just see if Senior Manager Elliot can provide further comment.

Speaker O · Thank you so much. Through the chair as it relates to the specific strategy that we're looking at today. You know, staff of course, are aware of the different, I think, important considerations when looking at a definition for household affordability. What we have found is that so much of that hinges on the type of partnership we're able to enter into with a provincial or federal government or program. So we stop short of making a very definitive assertion or very explicit targets in terms of supply. Because so much of what we're trying to do is highlight the unmet demand which is primarily in those more affordable homes.

Speaker O · And then we look at leveraging that way of thinking to support those conversations with the provincial or federal government. Because we know that senior or other orders of government, pardon me, are more inclined to look at grants on the front end to manage or reduce the long term operational obligations. But if we're going to be successful at really getting at that deep affordability that's actually 30% of a household's income, then we're going to need some form of ongoing operating subsidy. I think we just have to acknowledge that from the front end. So when we talk about the affordability or the specific, whether it's 30% in accordance with CMHC or 40 to 45% when you factor in transportation costs, we're aware of that, but we didn't build that in because the idea is to create a clear opportunity space for another order of government to make an investment.

Speaker P · So my interpretation of that. Thank you. Is that it's a contextual piece that will be brought in specifically application by application. The second question would be on the 16,923 new homes targeted across the CRD. I think you also need to turn your minds to the land base in each of the municipalities because it defines what type of construction and development processes and types you would look at. So Victoria, which is supposed to deliver 4902 is just under 20 square kilometers. Saanich, and I'm not quibbling with the numbers because we need the housing, but Sanich is just over five and a half times as large, pared down because they also have agricultural reserve lands that we don't have.

Speaker P · But it will define the type of projects that you will turn your minds to. And I just think that that needs to be infused somewhere in here. But I think that the direction is right because you're looking for what are the best opportunities with limited value dollars that we have and how can we market that to other funding bodies. Is that correct?

Speaker C · Yeah, I'll just make a comment and then I'll turn it over to Don. Ultimately, one of the things with the affordable component of the strategy is to really look at a redevelopment of our existing portfolio and that those homes already exist and it's, it's probably the best bang for our buck with the investment investments. So I'll just look and see if Don has anything further to add to that.

Speaker D · Yeah, just.

Speaker O · Just to build on Ms. Lorett's comments, I mean, the point is absolutely taken about the different land use availability or the different opportunities for development. But as Kevin had noted, the emphasis on CRHC 2045 path of 5000 is really to look at the utilization and the leveraging of both, both the CRD and the crhc. Because I think as noted in the report, the CRHC lands are valued at just over $124 million of memory serves. So what we're trying to do is really position that as the greatest incentive, or I guess the director put it, the best bang for our buck. So that really is underpinning that piece around a new supply.

Speaker P · Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Coleman. I'm not seeing other speakers, so I'll look to call a question. All in favor? Thank you. Any opposed? Seeing none opposed. That carries unanimous. Thank you very much and thank you to staff colleagues. Just given the time we are in the afternoon, I would like to call a Short recess, less than five minutes. Just to confer with Cao Robbins and Jim Morley on the remainder of the agenda. I would ask you to age in place and and I'll be right back.

Speaker T · Sa.

Speaker F · It.

Speaker A · Okay. We're going to look to reconvene now. Thank you. And we're next turning to item 7. 3. Sorry. After meeting with CEO Robbins and GM Morley, there are some items we've identified that can be referred to the October meeting. And what we'll do is rather than offering you a batch as we come to those items, I'll ask for a motion to refer. So we will proceed with item 7. 3. And I'll turn to GM Laurette, please.

Speaker C · Thank you. Through you, Chair, this report provides an update on the development of the regional transportation plan and summarizes the results of phase two engagement completed in Q2 of this year. This is coming forward direct to the Board as we committed at the regional workshop to bring forward the what we heard results of that income engagement before the end of this board term. The Overall the feedback demonstrated broad support for improved regional coordination and governance, enhanced transportation choice and stronger connections across the region. Regional consistency emerged as one of the strongest themes throughout both the workshop and public survey and Workshop and survey participants also identified congestion, accessibility, service and outlying communities, and future rapid transit and rail opportunities as important regional considerations.

Speaker C · Staff will now integrate these findings with technical analysis, policy review, implementation considerations, funding opportunities and ongoing discussions with our regional partners and First Nations. Additional work will also continue on the role of rapid transit corridors, including the consideration of the Region Reconciliation Conciliation Corridor initiative within the broader regional transportation network. A draft regional transportation plan will be brought forward through a public engagement phase in 2027 before returning to the Board for consideration. This report is for Information and staff are available for any questions.

Speaker A · Chair thank you. Are there any questions on this report? Not seeing any. Director Almond, please.

Speaker B · Yeah, thanks. Chair thanks. Just one question. Like the as I understand the main focus of the transportation strategy, like the the new focus is transit. Like there's also regional trail. We're already doing that as the CRD and the regional trail has shifted from parks to the new transportation service. The the new initiative, as I understand it, is primarily around transit, which is a good thing. My question though is Salt Spring has a standalone service. We are not part of the regional service. That was done deliberately for a couple of good reasons around affordability. Are there any implications in this plan for Salt Spring?

Speaker C · Thank you through the Chair. So maybe a initial comment to your opening remark is that no this isn't primarily around transit. Ultimately, the new transportation service and the update to the regional transportation plan is really setting that vision for the region on transportation. The new service covers multiple categories with safety policy, multimodal networks, multimodal transportation options. Transit is a pillar of the. Of the plan and ultimately setting what the priorities for the region will be. So I think once the regional transportation comes back and it sets what those regional priorities are, we can then advance that work through the board that doesn't preclude, you know, there being regional trails on the islands.

Speaker C · And it was one of the things that we're looking to addressed through the update to the regional transportation plan and also recognizes that people traveling to and from the islands, Salt Spring island or the Southern Gulf Islands use the road networks. And so removing congestion and making more efficient use of those, that transportation is a benefit to all of the region.

Speaker B · Thanks, sir. But just specifically on Salt Spring Transit, do you salt any implications at this point?

Speaker C · Because that is an individual service providing, and I don't see any implications on the plan on Salt Spring island transit. We would have to work with BC Transit on transit for the region. And we're really playing that coordination role with BC Transit right now that sets the transportation or transit routes in the region.

Speaker A · Thanks, Director Holman, Director Kobayashi, followed by Director Dijon.

Speaker E · Sorry about that, Chair. I was just gonna. I forgot we haven't been at CRD in a long time. I was gonna move to receive, but we don't make those motions.

Speaker B · So sorry about that.

Speaker A · No worries at all. Director Dejarna, please.

Speaker G · Thank you, Chair. I'm really happy with this report. There's a very small section on page 17 of 35 that talks about the significant interest that came across very clearly around rail and corridor solutions. So looking forward to further discussion and dialogue and decision making around the reconciliation corridor initiative and encouraging CRD to keep that front and center in your decisions as you go forward. And just a huge thank you to staff for all the work they've done to bring to our attention as a board the funding that has been available that is really helping us to move forward the idea and the feasibility study to see whether there actually is a solution there.

Speaker G · So I just want to express that. That appreciation. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director. Seeing no other speakers, that item was for information, we'll move to item 7. 4, AAP results in adoption of bylaw. I'll turn to GM Morley and then perhaps to Director Coleman, Chair of the. Of the core area, to move the two records recommendations separately. GM Morley.

Speaker F · Thank you. Through the Chair. This report contains the results of the alternative approval process for bylaw 4699, which is the Core Area Wastewater Treatment Plant loan Authorization Bylaw number 1 2026. This is a borrowing bylaw to authorize borrowing of up to $34,840,000 for the purpose of capital renewal and upgrading of the wastewater treatment and convention conveyance system. On June 10, the board resolved to proceed with an elector approval process by way of alternative or sorry, Elector approval by way of alternative approval process for the entire service area. The number of electors in the service were confirmed at 259, 590 and 10% of that number, which is the threshold number of responses required for the AAP to fail is 25,259.

Speaker F · Notice of the AAP was published on June 18th and 24th in the Times Colonist and on June 6th, 15th and 22nd in the Black Press regional newspapers. Notice was also published on the CRD website and communicated on CRD's social media channels. July 31 was the deadline date for responses to signal objection to adopting the bylaw. CRD received 79 valid elector response forms as set out in the certificate of results that's attached at appendix A. Accordingly, the bylaw has received electoral approval approval and may now be adopted by the board. Thank you, Chair. I'm happy to answer any questions that the Board has regarding the AAP process and GM Fraser is also available to address any questions regarding the planned capital projects. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you for the introduction. I'll turn to Director Coleman if you'd like to read in the motion. Questions could then be asked.

Speaker P · Certainly.

Speaker E · So you would.

Speaker P · Do you want them read in together or read separately?

Speaker E · Please? Separately.

Speaker P · The recommendation is that one, the attached certificate of results of alternative appeal approval process for bylaw number 4699, appendix A be received.

Speaker A · Thank you. We have moved and seconded Alt. Director Wagner. Any. Any discussion or questions? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? None opposed. Carries.

Speaker P · And 2. That bylaw number 4699, core area of Wastewater Treatment Plant Loan author Authorization Bylaw number one 2026 be adopted.

Speaker A · Moved. And the same. Seconder. Thank you. Discussion. Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed. None opposed. That carries. Returning to item 7. 5, the transition initiatives for the Performing Arts Facility Service, I would look for a motion to refer this item to the October meeting. Moved by Vice Chair Little, seconded by Director Alto. All in fame. Thank you. Opposed? None are opposed. That carries. The next four items are Financial plan bylaws I'll turn to CFO Chan to provide an introduction and I think we can move the through these.

Speaker I · Thank you. Chair 7. 6. The current approved five year financial plan was adopted by the board in March 2026. Amendments are brought forward throughout the year to reflect updated project requirements, funding changes and board decisions. The report report details three amendments. They are as follows. Number one Westshore RCMP Detachment expansion. The board approved borrowing authority of up to $103 million in June. This amendment incorporates the corresponding capital expenditure and debt funding into the financial plan. As the 2026 requisition has already been collected 771,000 of interest only costs will be requisitioned from the participating municipalities throughout the through the regular 2027 invoices. Number two, the McPherson Playhouse balcony upgrade.

Speaker I · This amendment adds $204,000 to the capital plan funded from the Services Capital Review. And number three. Urgent repairs to the Sky Valley Middle Reservoir in the Bettis Water Service. Staff recommend advancing some budget that was originally planned in 2028 into 2026. Also adding from some capital reserves. Total budget for the this project will be 76,000 entirely funded from the service. Recommendation is the financial plan amendment be introduced read three times and adopted. Happy to take any questions.

Speaker A · Thank you. If normally we would have our finance committee chair or vice chair they're not in attendance on the move. So I will look to open to a director to take us perhaps through the next four bylaws. The same mover and secondary Director Kobayashi please. Two motions separate Lake is. Yeah, if you can read them in. These are bylaws. If they all be read in.

Speaker E · Financial plan bylaw. Oh, thank you. 2026amendment bylaw number three 2026 be introduced and read a first, second and third

Speaker A · time moved and second director Tate, any discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Error. Any opposed? None are opposed.

Speaker R · Okay.

Speaker E · And 2. The bylaw number 4795 be adopted moved

Speaker A · in the same seconder. Thank you. All in favor? Thank you. Any opposed? Non opposed carries back to CFO Chen.

Speaker I · Thank you Chair. Item 7. 7. This report brings forward a correction to the the recreation fees and charges bylaw that was adopted by the board in July. The annual update covered FEES for the 20262027 recreation year effective September following approval by the respective commissions and after adoption staff identified an incorrect schedule had been attached to the bylaw in the agenda system. As a result, the bylaw left the previous year's fees unchanged. Bylaw number 4799 corrects that error and implements the feature fees and charges as originally intended. The confirmed changes are included in appendix B. Error was identified before implementation, so there are no notable service impacts. Adoption will ensure that the updated fees can be collected as intended. Recommendation is that bylaw 4799 be introduced, read three times and adopted.

Speaker I · Happy to take any questions.

Speaker A · Thank you. I'll turn to movers to move the bylaw. Director Tate, if you could reason in two separate motions.

Speaker D · Okay.

Speaker H · That bylaw number 4799, Capital Regional District Recreation Services and facilities fees and charges. Bylaw number one, 2009amendment, bylaw number 23, 2026 be introduced in red a first, second and third time.

Speaker A · Thank you. And second Director Coleman. Thank you for Director Tate. This is awaited participants for Central Sanich, North Sanich, Sydney Souk, Juan De Fuca and Salt Spring Island. So I'll turn to the participants to call the question. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? None are opposed. That carries, please.

Speaker H · And that bylaw number 4799 be adopted.

Speaker A · Thank you. The same weighted participants. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed. Honor pose. That carries. Thank you, Director. Returning 7. 8. CFO Chan.

Speaker I · Thank you, Chair. 7. 8. Cedar Lane Water Service temporary borrowing. In July, the board adopted an LA bylaw permitting borrowing of up to $230,000 for a maximum of 15 years for capital renewal upgrades to the Cedar Lane Water Service on Salt Spring Island. This report brings forward the temporary borrowing bylaw needed to access interim financing while the projects proceed ahead of issuing long term debt. Bylaw authorizes temporary borrowing within the previously approved $230,000 limit. The adoption does not commit the CRD to borrowing the full amount and funds will be drawn based on project cash flow requirements and completion of applicable financial approvals. Recommendation is bylaw 4797 be introduced, read three times and adopted.

Speaker I · Happy to take any questions.

Speaker A · Thank you. I'll turn to Salt Spring Island Director Holman to take us through two motions separately.

Speaker L · Yeah. Thanks.

Speaker B · Chair. The bylaw 4797 temporary borrowing Cedar Lane Water Service bylaw number one 2026 be introduced and read a first, second and third time.

Speaker A · Thank you. Seconded by Director Jardin. Thank you. Any questions or discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed?

Speaker Q · Non.

Speaker A · Opposed. Carries.

Speaker B · Please continue that bylaw number 4797 be

Speaker A · adopted and Director Tate. Seconded. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Non.

Speaker R · Opposed.

Speaker A · Carries. And returning to the four, CFO Chan.

Speaker I · Thank you, Chair. Item 7. 9. This is for the Fulford Water Service temporary Boring. In July, the board adopted a loan authorization bylaw permitting up to 270,000 for improvements to the Fulford Water Service on Salt's property, Spring Island. These include completing the SCADA monitoring and control infrastructure, installing security fencing around the treatment plant and so on. This report brings forward the temporary borrowing bylaw needed to access interim financing while projects proceed ahead of issuing long term debt. Recommendation is that bylaw 4798 be introduced. Read three times and adopted. Happy to take any questions.

Speaker A · Thank you.

Speaker B · Director Holman, please that bylaw number 4798 temporary boring. Fulford Water Service bylaw number one 2026 be introduced in red a first, second and third time.

Speaker A · Thank you. Second Director Murdoch, any questions or discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Non. Opposed.

Speaker B · Carries that bylaw number 4798 be adopted.

Speaker A · We have the same seconder. Thank you. Call the question. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? None of that carries. Thank you directors. Returning item 7. 10. The biosolids beneficial use Management. The July and August update. Normally we have an introduction from staff. This is a report that comes forward on a regular basis. And I would first. I would look to. Not to have the introduction of the report. But if there are any directors on this report. Any questions on this report from directors? It is an information only report.

Speaker B · Director Almondyte, Just one question. Chair. Just wondering about the. For the advanced thermal facility. Taking into account the $7 million grant. What's the total anticipated cost of that facility at this point. Which I understand is.

Speaker B · It's a pilot at this point. Point. But I'm not clear on whether the. The PI. To what extent. Pilot. To what extent permanent.

Speaker A · I'll turn to please.

Speaker Q · Yeah.

Speaker T · Thank you through the chair. So previous direction from board has been to consider this a permanent facility with a 20 year life cycle. At this point, the capital plan is approved for $10 million. The work that we're doing right now is looking at the balance of plant costs from going from what was originally considered a demonstration facility to a permit facility. But those numbers will be coming forward at a future time when we can look at the entirety of the project cost and look at how the impact of that grant will impact the overall cost in the future.

Speaker B · Thanks.

Speaker A · Thank you, Senior Manager Tuke. I'll turn to Director Wickham.

Speaker R · Thank you. And through the chair, I know that I guess it's Butler Lafarge Energy Feedstock Cement Manufacturing. Their contract has expired. And I recall that we provided. I believe it was Butler Lafarge quite a large sum of money to outfit their manufacturing system to accept the biosolids. Is it likely that this contract is going to be reinitiated or where. Where are we going with that, having invested so much

Speaker T · through the chair. So we did after previous conversation of boards look at what are any options we have under the existing contract that has now expired with Lafarge, which is now considered called or named AM Rise. There doesn't appear to be any obvious ways or simple ways to to recover that capital investment. That being said, the report does note that we are planning to open an rfp. We have been in conversations with amrise and have indicated that that will be coming and so it will largely be up to them if they want to compete for future biosolids management offtakes for our biosolids. But there's an opportunity, no guarantee that they'll come forward out of that procurement opening in the next couple months.

Speaker R · Thank you. And are there any other concrete or cement manufacturers in the province that are in Alberta that would be interested? Is there another market for.

Speaker B · I guess is what I'm through the chair.

Speaker T · So there are other concrete manufacturers who may take that as energy feedstock. The report does know that we've put out a request for expressions of interest that is closed. But I can note that there were four submissions. And so through that process we know that there are at least four separate groups that are interested in taking biosolids and that would range from industrial land reclamation through to some sort of potential energy use. But ultimately that needs to come through the official RFP process and we'll bring that forward for board's consideration once we're out of that procurement process to identify an option or options to award.

Speaker R · Very good. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director. I'm now turning online to Director, Director, Plant, please.

Speaker K · Thank you, Chair.

Speaker A · Thank you for the report. I just want to ask staff if they could remind the board, please, what is the estimated time for provincial approval? We know we're going to have a decision in early 27 for the new board to advance or not advance, but then in understanding how much longer. And so I'm wondering whether what the realistic time frame is that we actually might see biosolids being turned into biochar at the CRD Heartland facility. Senior Manager too, through the chair.

Speaker T · So we've given a rough date of 2030 for commissioning the provincial approval process. Our application at this time, the province has indicated it's due by June of 2027. Following that, the province indicates in their general communications that they could take up to three years for review of that application. We don't anticipate it would take that full three years. But that's really the next sort of key regulatory milestone. Once we get our application forward, provincial review, and once we get acceptance or feedback from that, then we get our effectively an authorization or a permit and that would then trigger the ability to start construction or installation of the technology.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Plant. Thank you for that. I think it might be prudent for us on our CRD website to. Yeah, I'm sorry, there seems to be a lag. I apologize. Chair. I was just going to suggest that staff may consider adding that sort of information to the website. For the public who is interested, who are thinking that there is going to be to be a biochar facility operating in the near term. I think that would be beneficial. And because of the delay, I'll just stop and leave that as a comment. Thank you, Director Plant. We certainly heard you. Heard you well. And that is noted. Seeing no other. No other speakers or. Sorry, no other questions.

Speaker A · Was an informational report. We'll turn to the next item, 7. 11, the 2026 Census impact on regional district board voting. We won't take an introduction on that as there's no recommendation. It's for information. But are there any questions on the report? Director Wagner, please.

Speaker K · Thank you. I just wanted to clarify in the report through the chair, if I might. It said that the census information might be coming in the fall of 2027, but it also said before the inaugural meeting of 2027 the board would be adjusted. I just wanted to have clarity on when we might get the results. As you might guess, some of our municipalities have grown quite a bit and may be entitled to another.

Speaker A · Director, please.

Speaker F · Yeah, thank you. Through the chair. So this is information that we received from the Ministry of Municipal affairs and Housing and they're the ones who certified the census results and. And then provide us with that official certification of the voting strength numbers. Now, I can't speak to municipalities. I would. I would guess it's the same process. However, you know, I can only speak to the information we've been given as a regional district. And we were told that we would be given the formal certification likely in October of next year to allow us to implement any changes before our November meeting. And that would be the meeting where we have the chairs and the vice chairs elected for the three boards. So that would be our. Our November meeting. So I hope that answers the question.

Speaker K · Oh, thank you. So it is going to be a whole nother year.

Speaker F · Yes, apparently it takes a year to certify those population numbers and to communicate that out to the local governments.

Speaker K · Thank you. I just wanted clarity on that inaugural, but I thought maybe that was mistake.

Speaker F · Appreciate that.

Speaker A · Thank you for the question. Any further questions or comments? Not seeing any. We'll move to the next items which are under reports of committees. We have the Electoral Areas Committee. This is coming from the electoral Area Committee meeting this morning. I'll turn to Chair Brent to take us through the four motions separately, please.

Speaker M · Sure. I have a couple of bylaws here

Speaker A · that need need to be moved and so I'm just going to read them out.

Speaker M · That bylaw number 4772 Capital Regional District Ticket Information Authorization bylaw 1990Amendment bylaw number

Speaker A · 912026 be introduced and read a first, second and third time. Thank you. Second Director Holman, any discussion questions? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? None opposed? Carries. And that bylaw number 4772 be adopted. Second Director Holman called the question. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed, not opposed. Carries. Whoops, sorry. That byline number 4773 bylaw notice enforcement bylaw number one 2025amendment.

Speaker M · Bylaw number five 2026 be introduced and

Speaker A · read a first, second and third time. Second Director Holman, any discussion Call the question. Those in favor? Thank you.

Speaker M · And the bylaw number 4773 be adopted.

Speaker A · Thank you. Second Director Holman, those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Not opposed. That carries. Thank you. This was the item that was added through the agenda amendment. It was a notion notice of motion from Director Holman that was read in and given some day consideration at committee meeting. I would look to Director Holman to to read the motion in and then ask you to make a motion for same day consideration.

Speaker B · Thanks, Chair. That the CRD board join the campaign initiated by Vancouver Island MPS advocating for equitable funding for BC Ferries from the federal government.

Speaker A · And if you could move a motion for same day consideration.

Speaker B · So moved.

Speaker A · Do we have a seconder please? Director Wickham. I'll call. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Not opposed. So we have same day consideration. Could I have a seconder for the motion? Read in, Director Wickham, Alternative mover.

Speaker B · Yeah, thanks Chair. I think it's pretty clear this is an advocacy motion. There is a concern and Director Brent I think is familiar with the numbers. The funding that the east coast host receives for their ferries versus BC Ferries. And it's. It's there. It's by a factor of a couple of hundred. Director Brent can maybe speak to that. So this is the. The wording is chosen so that the CRD board, if, if the board approves, can weigh in on an existing initiative. So we're joining an initiative as opposed to just a separate, you know, letter or request. So that's the rationale for the specific wording. Chair, thanks.

Speaker A · Thank you. Turn to the secondary. Okay, that's great. Director Brent, please.

Speaker M · And I'll just quickly wade in here.

Speaker A · It's on the East Coast. The feds give $291 per passenger to assist the Maritime Atlantic providing ferry Service.

Speaker M · They give $1. 63 per passenger here.

Speaker A · The basis is, is that they say it's going extra provincially, whereas we're interprovincially. But still there's an inequity that is very substantial. And so I think it needs to be addressed and should be addressed. Thank you. Seeing no further discussion. All those in favor? Thank you. Opposed. Not opposed. That carries for attorneys. Item 8. 2. The Juan de Fuca Land Use Committee. Director Wickham, your chair, if you could take us through the three motions for the. For the item separately, please.

Speaker R · Thank you. And this is regarding a UK fish farm in Shirley. The Land Use Committee recommends to the Capital Regional Board 1 that the referral of proposed by law number 4764, Wanda Fuka Land and Use Bylaw 1992Amendment bylaw number 1702026 to the Shirley Jordan River Advisory Planning Commission, CRD departments, First nations and external agencies be approved and comments be received

Speaker A · seconded by Director Tate. Thank you. Any discussion, Director Wickham?

Speaker R · It's a great thing for. For surely to see new businesses springing up and is family oriented and the community is fully in support of this.

Speaker A · That's great. I'll look to call a question. Those in favor, please. Thank you. Opposed. None reposed. That carries. Sorry, that was a non weighted participants voting block A which is Juan de Fuca electoral Callwood, Lankford, Director Goodmanson, Machosin and Suk. So if I could recall the question for the participants. So non weighted participants, please. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed. Non.

Speaker R · Opposed carries number two that proposed bylaw 47641. If you can land use bylaw 1992amendment bylaw number 1702026 be read a first second time and

Speaker A · thank you. Same five non weighted participants. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed, not opposed.

Speaker R · Carries that number three. In accordance with the provisions of section 469 of the Local Government act, the director of the wonderful electoral Area or alternate director be designated authority to hold a public hearing with respect to bylaw number 4764.

Speaker A · Second director Tate. Thank you. Same voting block. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Not opposed? Carries. Thanks, Director Wickham. We're turning to item 8. 3, which is the Transportation Committee, the Transportation Governance updates. I'm going to turn to GM Lorette in just a moment, but after the introduction of this, we will be looking to go in camera and I'll be turning to DCOA to take us through that. So GM Lorette, please.

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you. Through you, Chair, this report was presented to the July 22nd Transportation Committee and there was a good discussion and ultimately the committee passed an amended motion and we will be putting that up on the screen later on. Before we get to that, I do want to provide additional detail on the events that have transpired since the Transportation Committee meeting. The CRD Chair and staff delivered a presentation to the VRT on July 28, and following that presentation, CRD's staff and the board received an in camera letter from the vrtc. So we'll pause this item now and go into an in camera meeting to consider the letter and then return to this item on the open agenda. Following that, Chair.

Speaker L · Thanks.

Speaker A · GM Lorett, DC Oligarch, if you could do the motion to close, please.

Speaker D · Yes, the motion is that the meeting be closed for proposed service or contract negotiations According to Section 97 Community Charter and that such disclosures could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the

Speaker A · Regional District Vice Chair Little to move. And do we have a seconder? Director Goodmanson, thank you. All in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Non. Opposed? Terry? So we do have to pause to go on camera and have confirmation from Stuff. Okay, so we're now going to reconvene in open session. Thank you. We're turning back to the item 8. 3 that we were at.

Speaker A · And GM Lorette, do you wish to make any further introduction? And then I will turn to Transportation Communication Committee Chair Murdoch to take us or make the corrected motion as a recommendation.

Speaker C · Yeah, thank you. Through you, Chair. Ultimately, just to comment that there was an amendment to the recommendation that was captured in the staff report that your iPads show the original recommendation. So Marlene was going to put the amended motion up on the screen that'll show what the changes are. And with that I'll just turn it over to Chair Murdoch if he wants to add any further.

Speaker S · Thank you, GM Lorett. And with the blessing of the chair. Would you like me to read it in or is it sufficient that it's been posted.

Speaker A · These are minor. Is a minor correction to what was published in the agenda. It's certainly not a change in intent. It's just the. The motion that did come from committee.

Speaker C · That's correct.

Speaker B · It was just.

Speaker C · There was some changes for further clarification at the committee, but when the posting of the agenda went out, it had the original. So it does show the underlined changes that are. That were captured at the committee.

Speaker A · Okay. Yeah. So the committee did. Did amend it. Thank you for noting that. But this. This motion that we're. That you're looking at now was approved as worded by the committee.

Speaker S · So I'm happy to move the motion as shown on the screen.

Speaker A · Thank you. And seconded by Director Caradana. I'll turn to the movers.

Speaker S · Thank you. This was a discussion we had online, which was a fascinating experience as chair to facilitate the discussion, but one which was spirited and I think enthusiastic because it represents, I think, a final opportunity for this term of the board to advance what I think will be ultimately be one of the most important questions around our transportation service, and that is the question of governance.

Speaker S · We have, as you all know, operated in silos over the course of our recent past, and we think that there's an opportunity, opportunity for us to work better together through an integrated model. But of course, that's going to require discussion with the province and ultimately legislative changes. So doing that in concert with the vrtc, NBC Transit, along with the province, I think is going to be a significant step forward and one which will ultimately enable better governance for transportation and the delivery of transportation services on the south island. And important, importantly, implementation of some of those key aspects, including infrastructure that will help move people more efficiently and get them to where they need to go.

Speaker S · And ultimately, I think we all hear regularly from our residents that we need to get our act together on the south island in order to get people to their destination and back home again. And this is one of the key steps in order to do that. So I'm quite happy, happy to support this and I look forward to the board's support and I'm hopeful that the next step ultimately results in a much more integrated governance model. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker P · Chair.

Speaker A · Thank you very much, Director Caradon.

Speaker Q · I'll just add briefly that the amendments also included some new language around a consultation and collaboration plan with regional first nations, who are increasingly playing an important role and leadership role in regional transportation issues. The Reconciliation Corridor Initiative being just one example, and have expressed interest in being more involved in governance structures. So that was part of the piece as well.

Speaker A · Thank you very much, Director Caradana. Director Wickham, please.

Speaker R · Thank you. If I'm reading this right, it sounds like there will maybe be finally be representation from the electoral area, specifically the one of Fuka, which has gone for many, many years, unrepresented and very overtaxed and underserved. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Alto, please.

Speaker D · Thank you.

Speaker L · Just a question, and the question is given number three, that staff report back in 2027, etc, do staff anticipate that in that report they would highlight any challenges that they would learn might arise in this proposal and what alternatives would be present if any of the partners declined to participate?

Speaker C · Yes, through the chair. So ultimately it does say considerations, proposed phasing and mitigation strategies and ultimately that would address any challenges and what we heard through our consultation. And so it really is an opportunity, opportunity to provide an update to the board in 2027 of what transpires between now and the. And the engagement that we have with the Province Species Transit prtc.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Aalto. I now have a speaking list including Vice Chair Little, Director Murdoch Obey and Director Tate.

Speaker G · Thank you. Through the Chair, I will absolutely support this motion. I recognize the considerable amount of work that has been done by staff on this governance piece. It's absolutely necessary and I echo Director Murdoch's motion. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Murdoch.

Speaker M · Other Director Murdoch. Thank you. Introducher.

Speaker G · Just.

Speaker M · Just want to, just express my appreciation to the committee for the changes that are here. I think really important to recognize this is not an easy task and this sort of recognition that this is going to take multiple parties working together to see if this is possible, a little less presumptive and I think a really good path forward. So just kudos to the committee for that, for the final wording that's in front of us.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director and Director Tate,

Speaker H · thank you very much. And to the committee for, for this work here. I'm fully in support of all of this. So I appreciate the changes. Just have one question where it refers to other jurisdictions, would that potentially include school districts? And I just raised that because they do have very relevant statistical data in terms of the student intake and out our way particular is who's on a bus and who isn't. And so there is a school, school bus shortage and which means more parents are needing to drive because there's no alternative and some can walk, but not everybody can for. For many different reasons. So it's, it's either simply too far, it doesn't work. And the current transit service May or isn't really a viable option. So there's really excellent data.

Speaker H · And I think when we talk about transportation, getting kids to school on time, it all fits.

Speaker C · Yes, thank you for that. So the jurisdictions was comprehensive airport authority, BC Ferries, those type of jurisdictional authorities that also play a role in in our regional transportation and how we advance transportation in the region.

Speaker H · So yes for school districts or yes for school districts?

Speaker C · Yes.

Speaker H · Thank you.

Speaker A · Thanks, Director Tate. Seeing no further speakers, I'll call the question. Those in favor? Those in favor?

Speaker H · Yes.

Speaker A · Thank you. Those opposed? None are opposed. That care is unanimous. Thank you very much. So we're Next turning to four bylaws. And I'll be turning to Director Wickham for 9. 1. Director Holman for 9. 2. Back to Director Wickham for 9. 3. And Director Coleman for number 9. 4. We'll back to 9. 1. Director Wickham, please.

Speaker R · Thank you. Chair. Regarding adoption of bylaw 4706, the bylaw number 4706, Juan de Fuca land use bylaw 1992amendment, bylaw number 168, 2025 be

Speaker A · adopted, moved and seconded. This is non weighted participants voting block A. The five participants. I'll call the question. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Non. Opposed. Carries.

Speaker R · Just comment on that.

Speaker A · Sorry.

Speaker R · Just to advertise that that is a new farmers market which is being developed now in Shirley and will work in conjunction with Shirley's Town Market and is another great addition to businesses to the Shirley community. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thanks, Director Wickham. So that has carried 9. 2. I'll turn to Director Holman.

Speaker B · Yeah, thanks, chair. That bylaw 4572, Bettis Water Service loan authorization bylaw number one 2026 be adopted.

Speaker A · Thank you. Seconded by Director Brent. Any discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Non. Opposed. Carries. Thank you, Director. Direct back to Director Wickham for 9. 3, please. Thank you.

Speaker R · And this relates to an expansion of Shirley Fire Protection District into Blueberry Flats. And is the adoption of number 4 7. Bylaw number 4757. Shirley Fire Protection and emergency response services Establishment, bylaw number one, nineteen 1991amendment. Bylaw number four, 2026. The bylaw number 4757. Surely fire protection and emergency response service Establishment bylaw number one, 1991amendment. Bylaw number four, 2026 be adopted.

Speaker A · Move. Director Tate seconded. Any discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? Not opposed. That carries. Just going to the next One we we do just need the recommendation turning to Director Coleman.

Speaker C · There we go.

Speaker P · That bylaw number 4658 Regional Water Supply Service Development Cost Charge bylaw number 12026

Speaker A · be adopted move by second. Thank you. Seconded by Director Murak. Oak Bay this is await participants all except so Gulf Islands and Salt Spring Island. Any discussion look to call the question those in favor. Thank you. Opposed? Not opposed. That carries we're now. We're now on to notices of motion. We do have a couple and the first is under 10. 1 and this is from Central Sanicha. We would ask Director Riddle to read in the motion from the Therefore, be it resolved please.

Speaker N · Okay. Thank you very much. So therefore be it resolved that the CRD consider establishing a regional Agricultural Advisory committee. The CRD consider assuming administrative responsibility for an AAC or a successor model and staff report back to the Planning and Protective Services Committee on options for a regional or sub regional governance and administrative framework.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director. I will need some support from from staff DC Olagoa. Is this being read in today or are we looking to have a seconder and discuss?

Speaker D · It was served in July so it's ready for discussion today if the board so chooses.

Speaker A · Thank you. I would look for a seconder. Thank you all. Director Wagner or I'll turn to the movers.

Speaker N · Okay. Thank you very much. One of the things I love about coming to the CRD is seeing the different folks around this table light up about the thing that really drives them. Maybe something that they're really passionate about, that they want to get that regional collaboration going on. So today we've talked about a few of those. We've talked about transportation, we've talked about arts. And so I am grateful for the opportunity to talk to something that is near and dear to me and certainly to my community, which is agriculture. For many decades now, we have been well served by a municipally supportive regional committee that has provided really strong advocacy on regional issues like the water rates and geese management, which is a very popular topic and also provided very valued municipal advice.

Speaker N · And so we are very supportive of that work and very grateful. We've come to a place now where we don't have a municipality that is willing to host this committee anymore. Sanich did for a long time. Central Sanich has done it. And now we're at this point point where, you know, the regional nature of agriculture is growing. There are so many things on the agenda coming down the pipe that recognize that some of them already at the crd, the food lands. I Know we got an excellent report on climate change and the impact of agriculture. I understand that there's another forthcoming strategy, so really a lot going on in this space and no regional place to hold it. So this request is really just to put it to staff to.

Speaker N · For a committee report to see what could this governance look like going forward. Could be. I think there's a range of options that that could be on the table and so to set the next board up with that information and also the incoming councils because there's a lot to consider and I know that this is something that we value and I hope that folks around this table can get excited as we are about it.

Speaker N · So thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Riddle, Director Wagner, thank you.

Speaker K · I am also very excited about food security and I'd note that the province is also investing in this area and just the community, just generally I hear more and more interest in this and some concern with climate change. People are really thinking about food prices going up, the scarcity that we see at times. So supporting local is also rightfully very popular right now. We want to support local businesses and we could invest in agricultural businesses and farmers markets are great. Community builders, community gardens. There's a of lot, lot going on right now, but it's quite disconnected. I've been trying to. To get involved in this space and it's been taking me a lot of energy. So I think having a coordinated effort

Speaker H · would be really helpful.

Speaker K · I note also with my experience with the Water Advisory Committee that the regional approach with members of the community that serve on that committee are bringing such a variety of perspectives and that can inform then the Water Commission as well. So then that informs the CRD board. So it's a great way to get more people involved in, in their governance of, you know, making things actually happen at that higher level and coordinating the region. So I think it's a great place to start is trying to establish a regional committee.

Speaker A · Thank you, Altair. Seeing no further discussion. So sorry, Vice Chair Little.

Speaker G · Yeah, thank you. Through the chair, the. This in no way has any negative statement towards the Peninsula Area and Agricultural Commission and, and Director Riddell and I have, have discussed this. They're an incredible committee that has given advocacy and advice to Central Saanich, North Saanich, Saanich, Machosin on a variety of issues like water supply, economic diversity, farmland stewardship, the regional goose issue as well as recently they helped a workshop on soil dumping and if you look at their annual reports, they're an incredible committee that does an incredible amount of work the past Chair is Robin Tunnicliffe.

Speaker G · She's a farmer in the chosen. Highly motivated towards food and seed security within the region. Unfortunately, they're a committee sort of without a home and they've done such an incredible amount of work and that legacy piece and all of those annual reports they put out every year. It would be just a shame just because of capacity issues at municipalities that it would fold. They provide absolute vital advocacy and advice to the municipalities. At least like to see them have a home. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Vice Chair Little. Now seeing no further discussion, I'll look to call the question. All in favor? Thank you. Any opposed? None are opposed. That carries. Thank you very much. We're turning to item 10. 2. This is a notice of motion from Director Caradana who is reading it in the motion in today for discussion at the October 7th meeting. Meeting. Director Caradano, please.

Speaker Q · Yes, Chair. It's been shared with staff.

Speaker A · Sure. We'll just pause for a moment if this is coming up on the screen. Thank you. That staff return privilege from plant. Yes, Director Plant.

Speaker R · Go ahead.

Speaker A · Unfortunately, unfortunately, due to technology, those of us who are on teams no longer have access to any visuals. If you could please read it out. Thank you, Director Plant. We. We will proceed. Thank you.

Speaker Q · That staff return to the December 2026 meeting of the Capital Regional District Board with a staff report detailing the implications associated with the requested three year funding extension to the Aboriginal Coalition to end homelessness starting at $164,636 in 2027 and increased annually with an inflation indexation for 2028 and 2029.

Speaker A · Thank you. So we do have that read in. And as indicated that will come forward at the next board meeting. Our last on October 7th. Thanks Director Carano. Returning to item 10. 3. And I'm grateful to direct or to Vice Chair Little to read in the notice of motion with regards to the letter of support from the Victoria Airport Authority on the agenda we're going to

Speaker G · do same day consideration.

Speaker A · If you could please read it first. Y.

Speaker K · Okay.

Speaker G · Y. That the CRD board chair write a letter of support for the Victoria Airport Authority's application to Transport Canada trade diversification corridors fund for the planned Runway expansion and terminal upgrades at the Victoria International Airport.

Speaker A · Thank you for reading that in. And if you could now move a

Speaker G · motion for same day consideration request consideration from. For same day consideration, please.

Speaker A · Thank you. And a seconder. Director Brent. Thank you. Did you want to motivate on. On same day? I mean there's a. There's a deadline for further application I'll look. I'll call the question. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed and unopposed. Same day consideration. If we could have a seconder to the motion. Director Myrtle Cope Bay. I'll turn to Vice Chair. Little to motivate, please.

Speaker G · Yeah. Thank you. We heard earlier today an excellent presentation on The Victoria airport. BC top employer for the six year running. They've got 14. 6 million delivered in 28 major infrastructure projects. They're doing good work out there based on the demand. And we heard that they are nearing 2 million passengers. I think we can provide a letter of support to them for their grant applications. Application.

Speaker A · Thank you. I'll turn to the secondary. Seconder. Thank you. Any further discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor? Thank you. Any opposed? None are opposed. That carries. Thank you. Vice Chair Little. We have no new business. I'm turning to DC Oligo to for the motions to close the meeting. These have changed based on a motion passed previously in camera Vice DCO for

Speaker D · reasons that the meeting be closed for appointments and personal information accordance with section 90 sub 1 sub A of the community charter. That the meeting be closed for labor relations in accordance with section 90 sub 1 subc. Of the community charter. That the meeting be closed for inter for proposed municipal service or contract negotiations according to section 90 sub 1 sub K community charter. That such disclosures could reasonably be expected to harm the interest of the regional district.

Speaker F · District.

Speaker A · Thank you. If I could move. Moved by Director M. Seconded by Vice Director De Jardin. Thank you. All in favor? Thank you. Opposed? None opposed. That carries.