Transcript: Regular Meeting of Council - 29 Jun 2026

Okay. Okay. Good morning every sorry good morning. [laughter] [laughter] Uh good evening everyone. Um this is a regular meeting of council. Silence please. We're going to start. It's on. Okay. Thank you. This [clears throat] is a regular meeting of council Monday June 29th 2026 called order at 7:05 and I look to councelor Debatisa for the territorial acknowledgement. Thank you chair. We wish to acknowledge that uh the Wasanic people on whose traditional territory we live, we learn, we work and we play. Thank you very much. [clears throat] Uh we move on to item three which is introduction of late items. And we got quite a few changes. Um, we've got late items number 6 B, 7B, 8 A, 8 C, a further one 8 C, another one at 8 C, uh 10 A. Um, we've also got 11B, and uh we've also got further changes to item 8 B2 and item 11 E and item 12D.

[clears throat] Uh plus what we have as late items is also approval of three late items that include late item to the ryzen report from the camera meeting of council dated June 29th 2026 making them items 13B expiration of lease agreement and CFIA for the pavilion building and item 13 C which is public information regarding our officers bylaw and 13D officers bylaw and related matters. And when we look for the um so those are all late items and when we do the approval of the agenda um so before I go to the appro uh addition to the approval of the agenda I look are there any other late items.

Thank you just to the chair just in regards to 11B I realize we're moving um 10 forward. I'm just wondering if we should still have something under new business later in the agenda and that I could move 11B into that or whether you're happy to stay as 11B under correspondence where we can still discuss it. Okay, sorry. Oh, I I'm just I don't want to move it too far ahead in the agenda. Um but I just think 11B, which is the the housing report, I think we should actually have that as a new business item to discuss. Okay. So I would just I'm not sure if we would create a new 11 and make it 11 a and then move all correspondents into 12 if that makes stop. Makes sense. It does to me.

Okay. Then I would make that motion as well to add that to the Okay. Thank you. All the changes. Thank you, chair. Yeah. So now I look for [clears throat] if there are no other late items, look for approval of the agenda as as we've just previously stated, but also variances to the agenda to bring forward the following. Uh we're bringing forward item 7 A and 7B petitions, delegations, and presentations to item 5 A and 5B. We're bringing forward item 13A, 13B, 13 C, and D uh rise and report to items 6 A, B, and C and D. And we're bringing forward item 10, motions and new business to make item seven, except for what councelor Debatista was saying. Um and then we got the public participation period becomes item 8 and all the other items uh dropped um right after that. So we look for a motion to adopt the agenda with late items and variances.

Councelor Stark [clears throat] seconded. So so moved. So moved. Uh seconded. Councelor Sanjief. Questions comments. Councelor Mcclintok. Yes. Thank Thanks, Mayor. Uh, as far as councelor Datista's motion to move everything from 12 or from 11 to 12, my motion was going to be to move item item 11D to no correction from 12 A to 11D. So, if my understanding is that all correspondence now um includes correspondence for council information, would that be correct? Uh, no. the the intentionality is to pull out 11B which is the housing minister's report uh and make that new business which would actually now stand as 11 and that correspondence as it's presented which would be 11 A C and D would still be correspondents that have an option for staff direction and that correspondence for information would then become 13. [clears throat] Okay, thanks for that explanation. Then I'd like to move item 12 A to 11 C now.

Okay. Do you want me to second that? Well, it wouldn't be a second. We've got a motion. Uh okay. Uh staff, is it okay if we just make that change? Okay. Thank you. So, we have a motion seconded. Any further questions? Those in favor? Unanimous. [clears throat] So now we move on to item five, which is now the petitions, delegations, and presentations. Would you like to please like to come forward? It's not public. Is it publication? It's going to be later. Okay. [snorts] Oh, no. It's not public participation. Not yet. Sorry. This this is we brought forward petitions, delegations and presentations which is artsy artsy artsy art.

Yes. Do we have artsy here? That's is memorial. No. Is Memorial Park here? Thank you. [clears throat] All right. Good evening, mayor and council. I'm pleased to be here tonight to provide a report of our 2025 activities. And first off, I'd like to acknowledge the members of our board who are here. So, D Algresar, who is our board chair, Katherine Kryser, and Dan Pageley. So, it's a contractual obligation that I appear before you once a year to shine a light on our financial situation and highlight our benefit to the community. But it's important to me that I provide information to you [clears throat] and the taxpayers of North Sanage that is both interesting and useful.

So, let's start with the financial information. We continue to operate on solid financial footing. We've achieved an average net income before interest in advertisation of over $278,000 for the past 3 years. That net income has been allocated to address capital deficiencies and fixed asset upgrades that have been necessary due to the age of our building, which is 25 years old this year. The funding we received from the District of North Sanage is essential for our sustainability and we're grateful to have an agreement in place for annual base funding to support the Mary Windser Center. We have a strong team in place at both the board level and staff to ensure we are making wise decisions with respect to the community assets we're tasked with caring for, namely the Mary Windspear Center and Blue Heron Park. Our financial decisions are consistent and transparent and risk is managed appropriately.

The two major capital issues that we've been unable to fund to date are replacing our roof and HVAC system. Um we don't currently have heat in all areas of the building and we only have air conditioning in room 2 and the theater. We can confirm that climate change is real and it is affecting staff and patrons in the center. When Canadian blood services operate in the Bodin in the warmer months, they need to rent and set up a whole air conditioning system that takes a few hours to regulate the temperature. Obviously, not ideal. As for the roof over the theater, we had a fairly catastrophic failure in November of this year when there were high winds and a downpour of rain.

During the matinea, the roof failed and people in the audience started getting really wet. Um, this was the description of the show that happened to be on stage at the time. When cat catastrophe strikes at James and Jamesy's Christmas tea party, flooding the world with tea, the duo conjure wildly funny solutions to stay afloat and sweep the audience out to sea in a jolly aquatic escapade brimming with whimsy, action, and ingenuity. The audience at first thought for real that it was an immersive experience and the artists on stage really leaned into that interpretation, but ultimately we had to move people to new dry seats, but it was a soldout show, so there weren't that many. Some people were too wet and cold to stay for the remainder of the show. Staff had to go out in that absolute horrible weather on the roof with a tarp and sandbags to stop the leaking cuz we had another show that evening. uh we ended up having to give people refunds and it was an

embarrassing situation. The tarp and st sandbags are still there. So obviously we really need to focus on the roof. So while we're hopeful that we can secure funding for the roof and the HVAC system, we are exploring options for fundraising and some other upgrades on our wish list. Consultants have just completed a fundraising feasibility study to see how much support there is in the community for a fundraising campaign. Our ultimate goal is to ensure that the Mary Winspair Center is able to serve this growing community for the next 25 years. Of note, this year was the passing of the CRD's performing arts facilities service bylaw for the purpose of operating and funding regional performing arts facilities, of which we are pleased to be one of three. So, we will be receiving capital and operational funding for the Charlie White Theater starting in the CRD's fiscal year 2027.

We are looking forward to our 25th anniversary party that will be held on Saturday, September the 19th. The celebration will include entertainment for kids and adults, food trucks, and participation by many local organizations. I hope everyone can make plans to attend. The Mary Winssper Center continues to provide space to a large number of community groups for meetings and events including the Sanage Peninsula Arts Council, Sydney Probest, Sanage Peninsula Probes, CFUW, Peninsula Newcomers, Sydney Anglers, The Camera Club, Shoreline Medical, Sanage Peninsula Community Foundation, Rotary, and Artsy. I thought they were going to be here to present tonight. So, wanted to give them a shout out because we are hosting their art of living event in March.

Looking to the future, I wanted to spend a bit of time discussing Blue Heron Park. Having demonstrated our ongoing stewardship of Mary Windsbury Center, it's time to turn more of our attention to Blue Heron Park. We regularly hear from the community about issues in the park and receive requests to upgrade aspects of it which we've been unable to carry out due to there only being expenses related to its operation zero revenue. The amount of communication we receive is a clear indication that the park matters to area residents. Driving that point home is that a generous community donor provided a $200,000 donation to install a playground next to the soccer fields. The equipment has been ordered and will be installed at the end of July, early August. The next project on our radar is widening the road and attending to parking issues, both of which are safety issues that I'm aware have also been brought to your staff's attention.

In reading over your park's master plan and strategic plan, I identified many common goals for the district and ours for Blue Heron Park. There are five other parks currently operated by the District of North Sanage, but owned by other organizations. Our current funding agreement with the district expires at the end of 2027. And I'm hopeful that together we can create a new agreement to support maintenance and development of Blue Heron Park rather than funding the Mary Winspair Center as has been historical. We would like to see Blue Heron Park become the community asset that it has the promise to be. And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Okay. Thank you. Council questions, comments? Oh, they're seeing no hands up. So, I guess you did a very good job. All right. Thank you. Thank you. And again, is art C shown up? Nope. Okay. Then [clears throat] we move the forward if that was item uh five. So item six [clears throat] and again this is the uh ryzen reports and we have a total of one two three um four five risen reports. [clears throat] So I looked to the risen reports as of um the special in camera meeting held June 29th 2026 which was today. Um council passed the following resolution that [clears throat] council authorize the following rising report resolution at the next regal meeting of council.

The district is exploring the potential lease agreement with the Canada Food and Inspection Agency CFIA for the former pavilion building for the purposes of supporting community and seniors programming. Uh the second one is um at council one direct staff to engage tart and bond communications to prepare and publish a public information piece included uh to a explain the purpose and intent of the district officers bylaw. B clarify the legislative and governance relationship between council and the CEO. C correct common misconceptions currently circulating in public publicly and D provide residents with clear factual information regarding how administrative authority operates within the municipal government. And item two rise and report the resolution of June 29, 2026 regular meeting of council. Um for the third one I look to councelor Deatista.

Thank you chair. Did you want to do 13A first? That was already on the agenda or do you want me to go first? I'm sorry I missed that. There was two that were 13A that were already on the agenda. Did you want to do those or do you want to do those after? Um, we'll do them. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Uh, the council direct the mayor. Oh, sorry. Did you want to do yours first and then I'll do Yeah, I've come to you just on this one. Then I'll go back to the right to to items A um which is the the council appoint Kathleen Harrison and the other one which is direct staff to schedule.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. Uh that council direct the mayor to rise and report on the following including the timeline regarding the adoption of the officer's bylaw and related matters at the regular meeting of council on June 29th, 2026 as follows. Council recognizes that there has been a significant public discussion regarding the adoption of the officer's bylaw and related matters. We also recognize that in the absence of complete context, questions and differing differing interpretations have emerged through committee discussions, public commentary, and on social media. Under the community charter, certain matters must be discussed in camera to protect the public interest, municipal operations, legal considerations, and personal matters. These legislative requirements place limits on what council may disclose publicly even after decisions are ultimately brought forward and considered in an open meeting. The officer's bylaw was adopted in a public meeting in accordance with legislative requirements of the community charter.

However, much of the background discussion and rationale that informed council's decisions occurred through confidential processes that could not publicly could not be publicly detailed at the time. As a result, narratives have developed regarding the intent and purpose of the bylaw that may not fully reflect the information and considerations available to council within those protected discussions. Throughout this term, council has repeatedly discussed ways that we can be more transparent and forward- facing with the community while continuing to respect the legal protections surrounding incame meetings. In keeping with that commitment to openness and accountability, council is providing the dates of the inc camera meetings at which matters related to the officer's bot were discussed without disclosing confidential content. The purpose of sharing this timeline is to demonstrate that these discussions occurred over a period of time and form part of an ongoing governance process prior to the adoption of the bylaw.

The following timeline is provided to assist the public in understanding the sequence of council's consideration of these matters. At the October 27th, 2025 inc camera meeting of council staff report CS-25-038 regarding a departmental opter optimization review planning and community services department was received. The resolution to receive the report was carried 7 to zero. Council directed staff to prepare an amendment to the officer's bylaw and that resolution was carried 5 to2 at the December 15th, 2025 regular meeting. Council was presented with that draft bylaw for consideration of readings. Motion to provide first, second, and third reading was defeated three votes to four or defeated four votes to three, whichever way you want to look at that.

[snorts] At the January 12th, 2026 in camera meeting of council, staff report CS-26-001 on related matters was received. The resolution to receive that information was carried unanimously 7 to Z. At that same meeting, council directed the mayor to rise and report resolution 04-IC at the regular meeting of council on January 12th, 2026. And that resolution, that motion to rise and report was carried 43. At that same meeting, staff report CS-26-002 regarding related matters was received and the resolution to receive that was carried unanimously. 70. Council also received correspondence dated December 27th, 2025 for information related to the officer's bylaw and a resolution to receive that information was also carried 4 to3.

At the February 2nd, 2026 inc camera meeting of council, staff report CS-26-011 on related matters was received and a resolution to receive that information was carried 7 to Z. At the March 9th, 2026 in camera meeting of council, information on related matters was received authorizing the mayor to act upon certain legal matters. Resolution to receive that information was carried 7 to zero. At the April 27th, 2026 inc camera meeting of council, a verbal update regarding related matters was also received. The resolution to receive that information was also carried 7 to zero. At the May 11th, 2026 inc camera meeting of council, an update from the mayor and CEO regarding the related matters of the February 2nd, 2026, March 9th, 2026, and April 27th, 2026 agenda items were received and the resolution to receive all of those items for information was carried. 7 to zero. Thank you chair.

Thank you. [clears throat] Now if we go to um which was item 13 which is on the the agenda which is in camera resolution one that council appoint Kathleen Harrison as chief election officer and Holly Nun as the deputy chief election officer for the local government election schedule for October 17th 2026. um sorry uh from the district of North Sanage as outlined in staff report number CS26025 and two that council risen report that the appointment of Kathleen Harrison as the chief election officer and Holly Nun as the deputy chief election officer for the local government election scheduled for October 17, 2026 at the regular meeting of council dated June 29, 2026 and [clears throat] uh effective June 15, 2026. One, direct staff not to schedule any further meetings of the community plan advisory committee, agricultural rules security advisory [clears throat] committee, and healthy living advisory committee until council can receive and review a legal opinion on the issue.

Two, direct staff to conduct a review of the behavior of members of the committee. um perhaps should be committees but committee and whether any conduct amounts to a breach of code of conduct and report back to council once the review is complete and further three that council rise and report on the matter at a regular meeting of council dated June 29 2026. Uh those are the rise in reports and now we look to the next item which is new item seven which is motions and new business and uh right now we're motion new business is uh councelor stock. Uh yes thank you very much chair. Um I just uh wanted to give a short uh introduction. Did you uh want me to do that or would Nope. You give the Okay. Y uh thank you very much. So, I guess you could say that the reason for this uh new business notice of motion is because over the past 6 months or so, there has

been this growing trend for members of the public to discuss or wish to discuss, try to mention individual staff, staffing issues, uh employee human resource issues during public participation. uh and all of this at our open council meetings. Uh and whereas this practice is contrary to many uh codes uh uh statutes and policies which I was asked by several people last council meeting to um bring forward uh and I will name them now. the respectful workplace policy, the access to information and privacy act, the human rights code, work safe BC, the workers compensation act, our own district of North Sanage code of conduct and council procedures by law.

And so, not only are these statutes and policies in play when you're talking about staffing and human resource issues, but also to have anything about someone's employment discussed in a public meeting may be harmful to the employee or employees. uh because as you can imagine most of us wouldn't want any of our employment to be discussed here in front of all these people. Uh there are private matters that are very access to information and privacy in BC and across Canada is one of the major statutes that relates to this. So after those wherees, what I think we should do is therefore it should be resolved that the district of North Sanage will issue a public announcement outlining how this type of discussion or comment will not be tolerated.

And I think that we we should also make an addition to the preamble which is read by the mayor or the chair of the council meeting because when we have cows a committee of the whole um then one of us is the chair of the meeting but most of the time uh during council meetings it's the mayor. So this preamble would uh now contain an addition uh a statement that public comments must focus on policies. If you have an issue with policies or our projects, capital projects or otherwise, if you have an issue with bylaws or you want to discuss something related to a new or amending bylaw and also of course agenda items, but members of the public will not be permitted to refer to or speak about specific staff personnel issues at open council meetings, disparaging, attacking, or reflective reflecting Acting negatively on staff is considered a breach of meeting decorum and will lead to a meeting recess and this has happened at other council

meetings in BC or the speaker being removed. Usually councils try to just um have a recess because that's a lot more you know diplomatic than trying to remove someone remove a speaker from from the room. And I I just want to add quickly that I've had several letters saying, "Well, if you put these types of things in, what if someone has an issue, say with a staff member and I would I if through the chair staff can corroborate what I'm saying, but say you, you know, somebody here in the our residents, one of our residents thinks they haven't been treated politely or properly by staff, then that's not something that you raise at an open council meeting, but you you go to see the CEO or our corporate services director or our human resources manager and you say, you know, my name is so and so. I live at this place and I was here on June the 12th and I wasn't treated properly and I'd

like to make a complaint. And that's how you do it. you or you you don't bring those things up in public at public participation. There are many other venues you can write or email the CEO or our corporate service officer or the human resource um uh director manager, but that's where you deal with issues that you may have as a member of the public, as a resident of North Sanage with our employees. So, um that is my motion, chair and mayor and um and the reasons I think that people know the reasons that I've brought this forward and it's been a sort of a cumulative effect over the past 6 to 8 months I would say of people becoming frustrated with us because they try to start mentioning staffing or human resource issues. But these are the reasons why we can't discuss private staff issues or human resource issues or if you think someone's not performing properly or was impolite. Those have to be raised in private. They're privacy concerns.

Thank you very much. Um just a question. Um obviously we're asking staff here to do some work. Um, do you have a date by which council should come back to council by? Uh, or perhaps we can ask council. Um, sorry, staff. Um, I think the chair just just uh for clarity just the work around the public announcement. Mhm. We can undertake that work, but if council wishes to give a deadline, we're happy to receive that. I was I don't know. I didn't think about a deadline. So I I and we have we're entering into our summer recess period. Um our next meeting isn't until I think June the 15th or so. So I would I don't know if that's too soon or maybe there's an also a meeting in August. One meeting in August. Perhaps we could ask for that if that because I know also people are on summer holidays stuff. Uh you know July and August are usually months when people are away at different times. So I'm not sure I would take direction from staff.

What about the best efforts for the August council meeting? Yeah, through the chair. We'll we will endeavor to have it um complete before the July 13th our next regular meeting. Okay. Oh, okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Uh, so we have a motion on the floor. Um, do you have a second? Councilor Debatista. Um, okay. Questions, comments? Councelor Mcclintok. Yes. Thank you and thank you for bringing this forward. Councelor Stock. Um, we've all been um been in the council chambers when things got a little heated as far as uh public participation was was um taking place. Uh, I do have a question for staff. The preamble that the mayor or the chair reads in relation to the public participation period, is that just a standard narrative or is that uh is that legislation or where does it come from?

And my only reason for asking that is can it be amended and if it can be amended fine and uh I think the insurance the asurances have to be made to the public that this is no way of muzzling freedom of speech and there's no way of muzzling expressions that um [clears throat] um concern individuals in relation to things that have happened in the um in their meeting with staff or however this is a governance table and the issues that come before council are should be of government's nature as opposed to staffing nature similar to what uh councelor Stock had said uh through the chair. Thank you. So the statement that the mayor reads is something that has been collaboratively developed between staff and the mayor and it's not bound by the council procedure bylaw and the mayor can from time to time change or update that statement as or the mayor or chair as they see uh fit. Thank you. Thank you.

Council questions, comments, council Batista. Yeah, thank you chair. Um so based on that information um the last two sentences in the be it resolved members of the public are not permitted disparaging attacking um can we just make that effective tonight then and include that in written form for the next meeting like if it's not a bylaw that needs to go through first second third reading I'm wondering why it just couldn't be adopted tonight and included as part of the public participation rules of procedure. Um what I would suggest is um you know we have what has traditionally been um items 1 to six that I will state uh plus for this meeting uh only um there are some words that have been provided with regard to the public participation period and we'll go to that um my [clears throat] first day on council I was given items 1 to six and the only time we've changed from that was a few weeks ago where we got it from the corporate attorney to

make some changes specific to a particular council meeting. So, um you know what I anticipate now coming out of this uh based on what councelor Stock has has motioned um would be u perhaps further changes. That's what I would suggest. Thank you, chair. Thank you. Any further questions, comments? Sanjief. Thank you, chair. I think looking at this motion there are aspects of it that I fully support which is every employee of the district deserves a workplace set free from harassment, bullying, discrimination, intimidation and personal attack. I support the principle completely. In fact, having personally experienced different aspects of it, I can very well watch for that we need this kind of emotion.

However, there are some significant concerns that are raised. First one, there is the my concern today is not about the objectivity of this motion. It is with the way it has been drafted. Local governments operate on two equally important principle. One is respectful workplace. The other is democratic accountability. As councelor, we ought to protect both. The proposed motion does not adequately distinguish between criticism of government actions, personal attack and personal attacks against employees. They are fundamentally different things. The residents may be able to say that a staff report is incomplete. Would that be considered as being disrespectful to staff or attacking staff? Uh that a recommendation is inconsistent with the council policy, that an administrative decision has negatively affected their property or neighborhood, or that a planning recommendation fails to protect the environment. Any statement made against that would then be considered as an harassment. No, it's not. Yet the wordings before us prohibit comments that reflect negatively on staff. The phrase is broad, subjective, and undefined.

Almost an any criticism of an administrative decision could be interpreted as reflecting negatively on staff. That creates uncertainty for residents, for the chair, and uncertainty for future councils. That's my first concern that I have. And I have two more. I can wait for somebody else to speak and then I'll give the Any further counselors wish to speak. I'm seeing none. So please move forward. Thank you. The second one is the community charter is founded on the principle of openness, transparency and accountability. Public confidence depends on people believing they can come before council and rise concerns about how government decisions affect their lives. The motion risks creating a chilling effect. Residents may personally conclude that it is their comments criticizing the action or recommendation of staff that could be ruled out of order or removed from the meeting. Even if it is not the intention, it is a foreseeable consequences of the language before us. My third concern is that we are already possessing significant authority to deal with improper conduct.

Our procedure bylaw allows the chair to maintain order. Our respectful workplace policy addresses bullying and harassment. The law already protects employees from discrimination and workplace harassment. In addition, guidance in guidance is required. I believe it should be carefully craft drafted to target harassment, threats, intimidation, discrimination remarks and disclosure of confidential personal matter not legitimize criticism of public administration. I believe the motion requires further legal review. It should be examined by experts in administrative law even to some extent constitutional principles that needs to be addressed in this. Thank you. Did you have a third? All right, I'll continue. Um, so we must ensure that's part of the third and ending towards it. We must ensure that any restriction on public participate public participation is carefully tailored, legally sound and proportionate. I would welcome a revised motion that protects staff from abuse while explicitly preserving the public right to comment on policy reports, recommendation, administrative decisions and their impact on the community. I will stop with that. Thank you. Thank you.

Councelor Stark. [laughter] Yes. Uh thank you very much councelor Shustava. Uh so [sighs and gasps] I think that you've kind of overstated uh you know it doesn't say in my motion that you that there is no openness or transparency in public participation. What we're talking about here is uh human resource issues, employee issues, staffing issues, and individual staff members. I have not mentioned anything about if people want to make comments on a staff report because one of the things I talk about in the motion is that public comments must focus on policy projects bylaws or agenda items and I think that leaves it open. uh you could say I think that report my staff is wonderful or I think there's something missing from it um that you know I I here's what I would like to add. So I don't think that this motion restricts uh in any way uh transparency or public discourse on an item. Uh uh I'm willing to discuss reflecting negatively that you said you think uh that's too much or that's overboard, but I don't think that

we um should should change um the rest of my motion. It's true that we have uh procedures by law, council council procedures by law, and we have a code of conduct, but they don't really say or state that you cannot in public participation uh criticize or discuss uh individual employee issues. And that's what I'm trying to cover in this because all individual employee issues or human resource issues are privacy issues. They're private issues. They're not matters for the hundred people in our council chamber to know about. And um you may disagree with that and that's part of democracy, but I've never worked in a public environment or a corporation where any issues about people's employment are allowed to be discussed in public like this. It's different. As I said, if you want to make an appointment with our CEO or our any of our senior staff who deal with uh staff like the manager, director of human resources, and come in and and speak about it. But the council chamber which is where we conduct our business

which is policy and bylaws if you like statutes the statutes that municipal government governments pass are the bylaws um and any policy issues that's all open for discussion uh that this does not restrict any of those issues. So um but if councelor shuvistava if you think there could be a different way of uh um you know writing reflecting negatively but I I was trying to um cover all instances in in that not trying to be limiting of people's ability through through the chair um especially My concern comes especially in the last paragraph where you have about attacking and reflecting l ne negatively on staff. A report could be criticized and that would be seen as a negative comment on staff.

It it can easily be perceived as a negative comment on staff and these are the dangers that we're leading into. All right. Well, I I don't think that criticizing a report. Uh you we've all done that at council meetings, and I is the same as bringing up individual staff's names and what they're doing or not doing. Somebody else. Okay. Council, sorry, council. Yes. Thank you. I think we can get down to the minutia of all this um all night long. um the whatifs and could bees. However, I think that um uh councelor Stock's motion is general enough that we will have enough parameters that we won't um of discussion in public participation that we won't have to uh go down that road. I think it's it's reasonleness too and that's what we we have to be here.

I'm sure we could um we could get lawyers to to draw craft us a public participation that was squeaky clean at maybe $100,000, but I don't think it's necessary. The p public participation preamble has worked just fine for many many years, 12 years that I've been on council, and this uh this particular matter, this um this um hasn't come up before. I don't know why it has, but it has. However, I think just modifying it a bit would still be within the uh within the right of this council and I think to do a service to the public as well. Okay. [clears throat] And perhaps I could suggest um the motion is asking staff to come back to council again. And what you may want to do, council, councelor Sanchief, is um talk with staff, talk with um councils. Um, so if you want to words smmith it differently to see if we can get it to work. So then when it comes back to us, um, hopefully it meets the standards that you that that you wish to, um, achieve.

But words smithing it here, um, when it's just a general directive to staff, um, we it can be worked on when staff comes back through the chair. I I understand that yes there is an option open. However, I also worry about the limitation and this boundary that is being created in this motion. And until we are able to direct staff in a manner that allows the freedom and the participation without taking away the democratic institution of public participation, it becomes quite a difficult process to approve. So as it stands it does not give enough flexibility. I can see yes we can carry on discussing as much as we want throughout the night and no lawyer is going to charge 100,000 just to review a simple uh motion in place. This is about a question of looking at legalities of are we infringing on public participation rights the residents rights to speak in front of the council and that's the danger that I'm seeing that this is uh heading into

okay thank you councelor stock yes thank you very much uh chair and thank you councelor shava you know I've been here uh many years and I've been a counselor for 16 16 years is a long time. I've seen almost everything here. I have never seen until, as I said, the last 6 to 8 months, people bringing up all of these staffing or human resource privacy issues. And so, we've never had to change the preamble or never had to even think about it for all these years because we didn't really have a problem. sometimes. I think maybe once when uh Mr. Buckan, Rob Buckan was the um the CEO, we did have someone try to mention something about staffing and he shut them down right away. Uh and that was probably about 15 or 14 years ago. So I would never I'm not someone who's against uh freedom of speech. I'm for of course I'm forced freedom of speech and democratic rights and transparency.

But if people are going to try to take over public participation and use it as a complaint period about staffing and human resources, that's not what we're here for. This is a council chamber. uh it's not a uh a place to uh talk about staff and uh put yourself in the place of someone who's employed by the district of North Sanage. Would you want people answering questions about your staff uh about you in this type of venue? Uh so that's the only reason that I even brought forward this motion because I think it's so important. uh we can't descend into those types of issues when we're supposed to be discussing and and making uh bylaws and discussing policy and putting it in place on very serious issues.

Uh, so I don't see this as having to go through some type of legal um, uh, overview, but uh, and I'm not I I drafted it with all of those issues in mind, council, you know, transparency, people being able to criticize uh, reports that are that are um, uh, made created by our staff. And we have had people criticize reports in public participation and nobody does anything. That's totally different from bringing up people's names and asking about what they're doing and what's happened and you know or associating that name of that employee with something that that member of the public, one of our residents doesn't like, that's not the venue for it. If you don't like something that somebody who's an employee is doing, there are venues that you have as a resident to complain about that or make your statement about it.

Thank you, Council Con. Uh thank you, chair, and and I appreciate the conversation. I would just like to say that I feel there's going to be any changes to our rules of uh public procedure. I would like to see it um verified by a legal person, someone expert in the field and um and hear what they have to say. And perhaps it's a question just of of you, mayor. Uh you referenced when you made a change to um the preamble for I think it was the May 25th meeting. I think we had a conversation offline that that was um done by a lawyer. Is that correct? Thank you. That's correct.

Okay. Thank you. So I think if we're going to be changing it uh again through the chair if we're going to be making any sort of changes we want to make sure that we do have the legal eyes on it someone [clears throat] that's expert in the field. Thank you. Thank you. Uh just a comment on that. If that's the case, then when staff comes back with with what they find rep then council can discuss it and then we bring up at that point that um you know legal or review uh cuz that won't take long. I'm fine with that. If if uh councelor McConi and councelor Sher Vistava would appreciate that, then I think that's what we should do. Um I mean but I think that one of my other reasons for bringing this forward is that people need to know why uh you know we've made these types of interventions when when members of the public have tried to bring uh what are essentially private issues forward in a public open meeting.

Uh so I uh should I make a motion? No, not yet. Um, we've got a new speaker which is uh, councelor Marshall. Yeah, thank you chair. I just, um, I appreciate the clarification around the rules of participation when they are changed before. I know you said that we did seek legal opinion on that as well. So, um, I would like to see it for this motion as well. I'm just wondering I I don't have it in front of me, but I'm wondering if there's a way to um, add that to this motion or are we just asking that when staff returns that we will then ask for an additional uh, legal opinion? And then I just wanted just for some clarification.

Um I understand if somebody is concerned about something certainly they can speak with the CEO, but I wonder if we can have a little bit of clarity when we're talking about personnel issues. Um it's my understanding that you you still can't go to the CEO and ask for HR information and personal information when we're talking about staff. So certainly if somebody's concerned, they can speak with the CEO, but it's those still those same um parameters apply. Is that correct? That's correct. Yes, that's correct. That's right. [clears throat] So, the the what where the crux of where we are right now is is that do we allowed the motion to be voted on the way it is and then when staff comes back with a report, we can assume the vote was positive. I can then come back with a report and then we will disc discuss it in council again and then part of that will be a motion um to get a quick review by an attorney and uh see if it meets the requirements.

Um if council doesn't want that then we'd have to do I would say an amended motion and we'd have to have a separate vote on that to add it. But the first thing that have to come I believe is that um do we have the vote is is based on the motions on the floor. Uh we take a vote of that and staff you can tell me then we can do a second motion to add. Yeah. Disa just to the chair just for simplicity and and keeping this timeline short given that we are going into the summer months. I'm wondering and I'm happy to make the amendment that we can vote on is that um during staff's review that they get legal advice conduct a legal review or have a legal review conducted before bring it back to council.

That's right. So we have an amendment on the floor. Uh seconded well councelor stock. Yeah. Okay. So we have amendment on the force. So any further comments on the amendment through the chair just some clarity. So we are accepting the motion and we're saying that the staff will get legal review. No. No. Um we got the amendment to vote on first and if the amendment is yes then we vote on the main motion. Could we please repeat the amendment? Just as part of the review process staff will undertake a legal review of the amendment to the public participation rules. Would the legal and then report back.

Thank you. Through the chair. Would the legal review be made available to the public or to the council? No. Legal reviews are protected by camera. Yep. Okay. They have solicitor client privilege. Okay. Okay. All right. Okay. So, we again any further questions on the amendment? I see none. Those in favor? Those opposed? Um I'll take that as unanimous. And now we move to the the main motion uh as presented by councelor stock. Sorry. Someone speaking somebody said it's not unanimous but I maybe I did I saw hands down. So hands down means you voting in the affirmative. So to actually oppose you have to put your hand in the air and I did not see any counselor do that.

Okay. So now we got the main motion um as presented by councelor stock. Um again any further questions, comments before we look for a vote through the chair. I just want to be assured that this motion will broaden the perspective and not restrict st public participation towards reporting on staff comments uh staff report. So in the revised motion I would like to see that comments on policy report recommendation administrative decision and their impact on community are preserved in this report uh in this motion. I appreciate what you're saying and you can certainly put forward any motion of your own, but it doesn't change what you're saying is because if when staff comes forward to us after it's been reviewed by council, if you you're still concerned about that, that's when you you look at it as it states. I will not be in a position to support it when it comes back. Then I will think of councelor Marshall.

Sorry. And just to clarify, we're voting on the main motion as amended, correct? Yes. Oh, sorry. Didn't I say as amended? [laughter] You're correct. So, the main motion as amended. Um, any further comments? Yes, as amended. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Council Marshall. Uh, look for a vote. Those in favor? Those opposed? Uh, motion carries 61 with councelor Sandu in opposition. [sighs] Now, we move on to the next item. And I better make sure that's motion. So now we move finally on to participation public participation period. I'll go through what I what is here right now which is uh rules of public participation. Persons wishing to address council must state their name and municipality of residents for identification and also the topic uh involved. Questions and comments must be on topics which are not normally dealt with by municipal staff as a matter of routine. Questions and comments must be addressed through the chair and answers given likewise.

Debates with or questions of individual council members will not be allowed. No commitments shall be made by the chair in replying to a question. Matters which may require action of the council shall be referred to a future meeting of the council. Each speaker during public participation period must use respectful language and refrain from making offensive gestures or signs and is limited to speaking for three minutes unless authorized by the chair to speak for a longer period of time and 20 minutes will be allotted to the public participation period unless extended by vote of council. Oh, first person's already up there. [clears throat] Ready to go. [snorts] Good evening everyone. My name is Peter Chandler and I live in North Sanage. I would like to speak to the rise and report resolution that prevents the three advisory committees from meeting.

I am the chair of the agriculture and food security advisory committee. I like the 20 other community volunteers who serve on these committees was invited by this council to review matters as directed by council and provide advice. I would like to Okay, I'll try. Is there any any suggestions? Okay, thanks Lindsay. Okay, I would like to acknowledge the contributions of these volunteers and thank them. I can without reservation state that members of the egg and food security advisory committee share their extensive subject matter expertise generously, openly, and collegially. It was entirely unexpected that with no notification to the committee chairs, a public announcement was made expressing council's concern over their conduct and that a legal opinion was required on an unexplained issue and that the committees would no longer meet.

During my two years as chair of the committee, no one has ever brought to me any concern over the conduct of any member. No [clears throat] one from the public, no one from the committee, no one on staff, and no one on council. As it stands, this resolution stops the work of our committee advising council on agriculture indefinitely. The work of the harvest hub working group is in limbo. For a council that was given the public trust to promote a rural and agricultural north sanage, support of this res resolution effectively blocks their access to local knowledge. The critical review of the zoning bylaw is now flying blind when it comes to agriculture.

In my opinion, council has publicly brought into question the conduct of 21 community volunteers. There was no prior attempt to resolve the matter. There was no prior opportunity to respond to the accusation. By using a legal opinion, we may never know the outcome of the review, further obscuring from the public what is at the heart of this matter. On tonight's agenda, there's an item under motions and new business that is meant to prevent the treatment of others in a way that is disparaging, attacking, or reflecting negatively. Ironically, I feel council's handling of this matter is disparaging and reflects negatively on those residents who have volunteered to serve on the committees.

In closing, I ask that when it comes time to discuss the rise and report resolution, we hear from each member of council their position with particular attention to a the value that council puts on the advice provided by the committees and how their decision-making is affected in the absence of this advice and two b how this resolution impacts I want their position their understanding on how this resolution impacts the 21 committee members who have been asked by their families, their neighbors, their co-workers, and others why this council believes that a legal review is required of their conduct. Thank you. [applause] Uh would the audience please stop clapping? We can't have it after every speaker that you agree with because it affects others that are here who may disagree with it. Plus, it takes time and we have a limited time. So, sorry. I appreciate that you've just arrived at the at the podium. Please continue.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Stuart McKinnon and I am a resident of North Sanage. At the last council meeting, some residents came asking questions about personnel matters regarding staff. It was unfortunate that the mayor as the chair of the meeting could not clearly explain why these questions could not be answered and why they were inappropriate for the resident participation period of the council meeting. In British Columbia, the public is not permitted to comment or raise human resource issues involving specific municipal employees during council meetings. Under the community charter and local procedural bylaw guides, the rules surrounding HR issues are strictly enforced for the following reasons. Discussions regarding individual employee compensation, hiring, firing, labor relations, or personal HR complaints must legally be closed to the public to protect privacy and labor laws. If a municipality voluntarily offers a public question or comment period during an open meeting, speakers are strictly prohibited from discussing specific personnel matters, complaints against staff, or confidential legal or labor issues. If

an elected official or member of the public attempts to breach these confidentiality rules at a public meeting, it can result in legal liability for the municipality and censure for the council member. If the public has a legitimate personnel complaint or HR related concern, the pro correct procedure is to submit it in writing directly to the municipality's chief administrative officer, the director of human resources or the corporate officer rather than bringing it to the council floor. This is clearly stated in the community charter. These guidelines are easily available and should be at hand for anyone chairing a public meeting. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Diane Reefe. I'm a resident of North Senate.

I'm finding it troubling that on the same agenda as item 10A tonight, which seeks to protect staff from public criticism and discussion of identifiable personnel matters. Council has chosen to publicly announce that it is investigating the behavior of identifiable volunteer advisory committee members for possible breaches of a code of conduct. These committee meetings are recorded and are publicly available, making the volunteers readily identifiable even though they are not named. Council's own respectful workplace policy expressly applies to volunteers and other employees of the municipality and recognizes that confidentiality is a fundamental to any complaint process. The policy states that respondents have the right to be informed of the allegations against them, to be given an opportunity to respond, and to have confidentiality maintained throughout the investigation. Yet, council has publicly announced a review into the conduct of identifiable volunteers before any review has been completed or findings made.

I also question the process council has followed. The published resolution states that council directed staff to suspend committee meetings until it could receive and review a legal opinion. At the same time, council publicly announced a review of volunteers behavior for possible code of conduct breaches. Had council received and reviewed the legal opinion before making that public announcement? If so, when? If not, why was it appropriate to publicly disclose an investigation into identifiable volunteers before completing the legal process council itself considered necessary? I therefore ask council to explain how this public disclosure complies with its own respectful workplace policy, its obligations regarding confidentiality, procedural fairness, and the protection of personal information. If these protections are important enough to be embedded in district policy, they should be applied consistently to everyone the policy is intended to protect, including the volunteers who generously give their time to serve this community.

Bill Irving from North Sanich, Mayor and Council. haven't been here in some time. I was pleased to sit on the planning committee, the stewardship committee and and help in drafting the terms of reference for the new committees. [clears throat] So, it was with some interest that I just heard that they've been uh temporarily suspended and I'm familiar enough with local politics to know that you don't do that offhand. there's an issue going on that you're trying to resolve and I appreciate that. Um, what I did want to encourage is that in the terms of reference, there were built-in processes every year to sit down with the chairs particularly of each committee and make sure that they're functioning properly and none of this kind of stuff is occurring. So, I hope that is occurring and I hope the chairs uh bring the kind of information to you that you need to make these kind of decisions.

I also would like to reference the housing report from the adviser that talks about the um community planning advisory committee and how important a function that is. So just in your review of the committee process and the the issue that at hand. I really would encourage you to to uh appreciate that advisory report. I know there's an awful lot in that report. It's a big issue and I hope you you have the enthusiasm to tackle but uh that one is important to me because I found that over the years 25 years in politics that they are extremely valuable tool to uh lies with the community and get good information. I should have mentioned up front I have three and a half issues. I hope shoot I got a minute left to do them. The second one I just like to comment on was the council policy, respectful workplace policy.

And in the [clears throat] uh preamble, it talks about um the district acknowledges and accepts its role in creating a community and workplace that respects I'm not sure how you're going to accomplish this. The first part, the community, and I'm thinking you're talking about North Sanage. I think that's well beyond the scope of uh your policy. I think you can you can um uh represent good communication, but I don't think you're able through this policy to go into the community and and prevent harassment. I would I would suggest that in a rewrite they just removed the word community and talk about workplace. The and tied to that is something that I think was just mentioned is is a bit missing.

uh and the mayor has this prerogative, but if somebody stands here and talks about a member of public in a derogatory form, I think that should be understood as harassment. You have to be not only volunteers but members of the public that somebody may be or a developer that they may be speaking against to take action on as quickly as possible. You have that power to do that. And the last one I just wanted to 11 seconds. Okay, this is my half. [laughter] Uh, North Sanage Road. No, McDonald Park Road where we live. There was a quite a collection of homeless material. Oh, I got added time. That was very nice of you guys.

So, uh, the RCMP came by the other day and they took it off the rightway, but a lot of it was moved onto the the district's pumping station area, and I know I should talk to staff about this, but I want to get my I would appreciate if staff could go look at that and uh, remove it if possible. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council. Thank you for this opportunity to be uh in this position to address you all. My name is Lori Lumley and I am a resident of North Sanich. I am also a owner and operator of a short-term rental business here in the district. First off, I want to express on behalf of local hosts our appreciation to all staff and council on your thoughtful inclusion of short-term rentals in the upcoming um draft zoning bylaw. Um I know it could not have been an easy task given the housing strategy that has been put down before you from the province. So we appreciate the efforts and the thoughtful inclusions um that we find within that draft by law.

So thank you. However, I am here to address a concerning contradiction in North Sanage's current approach to sort short-term rentals. While we are only just a few months away from seeing the finalization of this framework or draft zoning bylaw that includes the short-term rental. Uh the District of North Sanich has found itself initiating strict enforcement to shut down these vital businesses in our community. Uh the shutting down of these community of these vital businesses not only impacts hosts which are taxpaying residents here in North Sanich impacts our viability our um our potential um opportunity to um age and place in our homes and our um as well I would like to suggest that the enforcement of this uh shutting down of short-term rentals als also impacts I would suggest about a thousand or more guests. These are a thousand visitors that come to our district. They have chosen North Sanich as their destination to spend their tourist dollars. With a shutdown, it means that they have to go

elsewhere and they have to leave the district as we don't provide any commercial accommodation. I don't really say that that's much of a welcome mat for our guests that come from all over the world and they spend their dollars here in the district. When this process began, some hosts stepped out of the shadows, I included, as well as a number of hosts that are seated behind me. We revealed ourselves to you by name and by address where we conduct our business, as it was our intention to work collaboratively with both the staff and with council. These hosts put our faith and trust in council as we believed that an active participation would lead to a fair transition. as we move towards the implementation of the new zoning bylaw. And I want to make it clear, mayor and council, that these hosts wish to be compliant. We want to be able to purchase and produce a business license, which is not available to us right now. We are compliant with the province. We are compliant with the BC short-term rental a uh registry. We

are compliant with Canada Revenue and other tax laws. We urge council please to pause enforcement at this time. Allow host to continue to operate under the terms or sorry under the temporary grace period that was afforded to us prior until such laws become enacted. And lastly, mayor and council and staff, please let hosts finish this process within the same spirit of collaboration and trust from which it was born. Thank you all very much. Yeah, thank you. Susan Chandler, Nora Sanage. Dear Mayor and Council and Minister Bole, in the provincial housing report on page 77, there is a list of who was interviewed for this report.

past and present, municipal staff, mayor and council, active developers in the community, third party consultants. I don't know who those are. So, let me get this straight. A report was written about our community and not one resident was spoken to, not a farmer. Minister Bole, it's true that we are a small district who did not vote NDP, but we are still British Columbombians and I would argue still entitled to a voice. It actually wouldn't have been a lot of work to take the pulse of nor Sanage. We have just consulted extensively to complete our official community plan. So what are we to think that you value the opinions of a development lobby more than the people who live here? If you had done any checking in, you would know that we do in fact support housing, in particular affordable housing. As an aside, if you do a word search on the housing report, the word affordable shows up zero times.

You would also know that our just completed OCP will let us meet provincial housing targets and in a way that protects our rural and agricultural lands. But perhaps that's not such a big money maker. While it will support our local builders and trades, it mitigates speculation and mass development. We don't want six-story buildings plonked down without consideration for the real cost of infrastructure, water pipes, fire, hospital, schools. We don't want to follow the Vancouver trend where structures are built that are not a good fit that stand empty and have to be bailed out by the province in particular by you, Minister Bole. Here's the thing.

We agree that people need housing, but people also need food. We have been working consistently in this district to build agricultural infrastructure and initiatives. If you had had read our OCP, you would know that. What drives me particularly crazy is that there's a lot of talk about creating the necessary conditions for developers to have appropriate profit margins. But no one in your government asked about [clears throat] appropriate profit margins of farmers. Have we already forgotten what it was like during CO to see empty grocery shelves? I have a suggestion. Before the province comes in with a wrecking ball, perhaps Minister Bole, you would like to come for a visit and a chat. We're easy to find. North up the highway, just past the urban containment boundary. You can't miss us. We still have open fields, trees, and hedge. Speaking of the urban containment boundary, Minister Bole, for some of us who live here, the UCB is in viol. Please don't think about tweaking, tampering, or terminating. I would like to close with a special

thanks to those three councilors who have consistently voted to support a rural and agricultural north Sanage. Christine Marshall, Sanji, Shiva, Vista, Irene McConi. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [applause] Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Donna Rutton, and I'm here tonight because I care deeply about the future of North Sanich. I chose to make North Sanage my home because it is un unlike anywhere else in the capital region. It is a community that values rural living, agriculture, open spaces, environmental stewardship, and carefully planned growth. Those qualities are why so many of us choose to live here, and they're worth protecting. Just last year, after years of public consultation, this community adopted a new official community plan. Residents invested countless hours attending meetings, completing surveys, and sharing their vision for North Sanage.

We participated in good faith because we believed our voices mattered and that the official community plan would provide a long-term roadmap for our community. Now, only months later, we're being asked to accept significant changes to that vision and to accept that they are somehow only minor amendments. with respect they are not increasing development in key areas changing long-term land use planning and fundamentally altering the character of our community are major policy decisions. They deserve the same level of public consultation that created the official community plan in the first place. Me, many residents supported this council because they believed you are committed to protecting the rural character of North Samich and implementing the vision reflected in the official community plan. I ask you tonight to honor that trust and continue defending the principles that residents were promised would guide our f community's future.

If we can spend years developing an official community plan through meaningful public consultation only to substantially rewrite it months later without that same level of engagement. What message does that send? It tells residents that their participation can be set aside when it becomes inconvenient that it's not the democratic process that local government should represent. I recognize that British Columbia faces a housing challenge and I support creating housing for young families, seniors, and local workers. But the question before us is not whether housing should be built. The question is whether housing should be imposed in ways that disregard the vision this community has already established. North Sanage is not simply vacant land waiting to be developed. It is home to productive farmland, sensitive ecosystems, limited transportation corridors, and infrastructure that was never designed for rapid urban growth. Agricultural land is one of our most valuable resources. Once it's paved over, it's gone forever.

As food security becomes increasingly important, protecting farmland is not resisting progress. It's planning responsibly responsibly for future generations. Growth should be thoughtful. It should respect infrastructure, protect the environment, preserve agricultural land, and reflect the unique character of North Sanage. Most importantly, it should respect the official community plan that this community works so hard to create. I respectfully ask council to stand behind that plan, insist that any significant amendments receive the full public consultation, and continue protecting the rural character and values that make North Sanage such a special place to live. Thank you. Yeah. [applause] Good evening, mayor, council, and residents. My name is Loren. Sorry, just to interrupt. Can we make a Can I make a motion to extend public participation? I just don't know how many other people want to speak.

Do you want to do So, we need to extend it one. Sorry. How many more people like to speak? Just so we know how. Okay. 1 2 3 4 5 6 20 minutes. 20. Chair, I'll make a motion to extend public participation by 20 minutes. Yeah. Second, councelor talk. Uh those in favor? Um unanimous. [clears throat] Sorry, apologize. Please move forward. My name is Loren Soulner, North Sanich resident. I want to address um and improve upon a a message that was given by councelor Stark regarding CFUW, the Canadian Federation of University Women. I also want to let them know that other people other women are invited to join. I bel have been a long-term member of the Sanich Peninsula CFUW.

Councelor Stark correctly stated that the charter for the organization states that it was to be it was founded to aid women to pursue preserve pursue higher education. We do indeed give scholarships to women in all four high schools. the individual learning center, UIC and Kimosan College including the trades. The Sanage Peninsula Group is one of many across Canada. There is a national office uh which hosts a yearly conference for all members. The Sanich Club has also been involved in many other areas as well as scholarships. Federally, the federal minister for seniors has asked the national office to assist them in delving into the problems encountered by seniors. Our local club has a group leaz liazing with the BC government seniors advoc advocy to ad advance the well-being of seniors men and women in the area. Several years ago, the Sanage Peninsula Cub hosted a well-attended free carefare for seniors so they would could be put in touch with contacts uh that give them assistance.

Some of the events that are included in this year's Canadian Conference is the study in reconciliation, indigenous lessons for navigating change and uncertainty. Then there's the New Horizons for seniors program. The club in Windsor, Ontario is raising funds for a project they call the Ukrainian lamp project which provides solar lamps when electricity is disrupted in the Ukraine. The local club won a competition recently to provide books for the [clears throat] for all in the independent learning center in Sanichton. Our local groups raise money for many other projects and [snorts] a variety of educational uh pursuits as well as human rights activities. The um we have a variety of educational subgroups like advi the advocacy group and the environment group and all groups provide input into the arranging for speakers on the many concerns re the environment and other problems facing society at our monthly meetings. Our local group does fund other areas in need in our community.

Thank you. But I also would like to uh give a kudo to whoever's made the improvements to Siampson Park. I have been away uh not attended there for several weeks. I was there for the first time and it's a very nice improvement. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Paula Young. I'm a resident of North Sanich. I wasn't going to speak tonight um but I do want to touch on a couple of things that have come up. Um I really admire what people, you know, how they envision the community to be predominantly rural. um and how they do really value the idea of us having a um or contributing to I guess the bread basket of the of the communities which we live. I do however, and I'm about to become the least popular person in the room, [snorts] remind everybody that there is not just a rural North Sanage. There is an urban North Sanage as well. And I live there in a wonderful community of well over a hundred houses across from the North

Sage Middle School. We're often overlooked um and I think in some ways perceived as a bit of a pariah because we don't fit into the ideal of North Sanage as this predominantly rural area but we do exist and we are taxpayers and we have children and we have old people and we function really well as a community. So I just want to remind people of that. The other reminder is while I love the idea of the food uh as contributing to the bread basket, only 5% of the ALR land in North Sanage is actually used for human food production. So, it's a real challenge giving the market for land and land prices to actually um succeed in that goal. So, I think it's just something as part of the reality check, something we have to um have to face. And while I do not support widespread growth, um I do support some some development. Perhaps not a six-story building down the street from where I live, but certainly some kind of development there, you know, provided the soil's been tested and is okay. So,

it was a garage. Anyway, that's all I have to say. Thank you. [snorts] Good evening, council. Jack Thornberg, resident of North Sanage. Um, I was going to say a few words about the demise and fall of the late great advisory committees, but uh that's already been done. Um I just wanted to say a very simple uh message to this council which does have some power uh in the province and that is please defend our OCP. We all contributed to it. There was much effort, goodwill and intelligent research that went into it. And um to me it would be a waste to have that go down the dumpster. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Jones and members of council. My name is Paul Brooks and I live in North Sanage where my wife and I operate a small bed and breakfast uh short-term rental from our home. And and I'm here this evening because of that issue. Earlier this month, similar to others, I received a notice under the provincial short-term reg rentalal uh legislation stating I needed to obtain a business license from North Sanage. There isn't currently an applicable category other than a bed and breakfast, which um I went down that path. Uh my application was denied because um district staff stated I had a kitchenet uh which actually isn't part of the proh prohibitions. So after moving down that path, I was informed that um I had a cooking facility because I had a kitchenet um and that any device used to warm food would be considered an appliance used for as a cooking facility. Um, I accepted uh that interpretation and removed uh a hot plate, microwave, and toaster oven from the room. I took

photographs, updated my listing, uh informed the the person that uh I had done so and offered to have my property inspected for compliance. Um, since then I've emailed, phoned, left voicemail, and uh have received zero response. Um, and so now I'm in a difficult position because as of Wednesday, I've been informed that the province will uh cancel or move forward with action uh because I don't have a business license. So, I find myself in a difficult position. I've complied with every direction that hasn't been given to me, but I can't complete the process because um district staff seem confused about definitions. Uh my guests, which I um did a survey and I have observations, contribute about $29,000 annually to places such as the Fickle Fig, Red Barn Markets here. And that's just my Airbnb and the guests that I have there. So they're they're providing into the econ the economy. And I appreciate that staff have many competing priorities and but there is a new bylaw being considered

but the urgency wasn't created by me but it's being stymied by the lack of action within the district staff. So, I am asking council uh like Miss Lumley to suspend enforcement against this uh the short-term rentals until the new bylaws in place or that staffing levels are such that I can actually process a business application. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Jones and council members. Thank you for letting me speak this evening. My name is Julie Thorson. I'm here with my husband, John Christensen. We live on Lanszen Road here in North Sanich and are members of this short-term rental owners association that we formed two years ago. We have collaborated fully with council for almost two years now, asking for a short-term rental bylaw and licensing framework, one that's compliant and aligns with provincial regulations. We have attended council meetings, meet and greets, open houses and engaged with individual council members and staff on this very important initiative. We could not have been more engaged, cooperative, or transparent this past two years. We were pleased to see our recommendations included in the new bylaw draft, section 208 of short-term rentals. We appreciate the support that you have given us these past few years, including your assurance, Mayor Jones, that we could continue to operate our short-term rentals without any negative consequences.

The past few weeks, however, a staff member has initiated non-compliance notices to resident hosts through the provincial registry. This notice states that listings will be removed from all platforms if we do not secure a district business license, which of course does not exist yet. Some hosts have been notified that they will be fined $500 a day if they continue to operate their short-term rental for less than 30 days. The timing and rationale of these non-compliant notices is both confusing and extremely frustrating for us as resident hosts. It will cause severe financial hardship for long-term residents in our community. Units will now be forced to sit empty until the new bylaw and licensing framework is adopted.

Local businesses will be drastically affected as Paul has just mentioned and uh hundreds of guests as Lori has mentioned will have all their summer vacation plans canled. Uh, I can say that, you know, ourselves alone with our cottage, we're looking at over 40 cancellations just this summer. So, uh, in order to uphold these reservations and keep our small businesses operating without disruption, we are imploring you to take immediate action and cease these non-compliant notices. Thank you. quiet back there. Mayor, council, staff, uh my name is Jim Wolford and I am a resident of Norwich and I want to thank you for allowing me to take this time.

I'm not going to reiterate what uh Julie just said so eloquently. Um I'm here to talk about the short-term rentals and um to give you just a brief overview. I'm sure already know that the bylaw 1255 which was established in 2011 um September 7th to the exact day um which prohibits short-term rentals in North Sanage. So you're the bylaw officer is correct. But since that time, our Airbnb uh mine personally um was established after that of course and when I inquired several years ago as to what the u the um about the bylaw and how it was enforced and I was told that it was enforced by uh complaint bases only which doesn't give you you know the authority to run a by an Airbnb under that bylaw but it's kind of reassuring that since 2011, there hasn't been really um the kind of um activity that's going on this week and last week cuz effectively they're all being shut down, which is kind of unusual on the timing of it since we have a draft bylaw, which um as Julie mentioned to you that the

people that were in the short-term rental and there was like three three dozen of us that went to meetings, did the survey, talked to council, provided act, you know, literature as to um the new bylaw that's been drafted. So, there was a lot of collaboration, there was a lot of transparency and uh we think we staff came up with a very fair bylaw. So, my question tonight is why the timing all of a sudden? Why are we shutting down now before the summer and then when the staff is taking their holiday break? There's going to be a thousand people that are coming into North Sanage in the next few months that won't have a place to stay. And so, um, I put that question to the, uh, the staff and because of I'm I'm not going to elaborate what the response was. Um, but I'm, if anybody wants to ask me, I've emailed all every council. Um, you know who I am and I I will elaborate what the response was. So, um, having said that, um, I think going forward, I

hope that, um, council can direct some reassurance to us. What do we tell the the register because we can't get a we can't get a business license. It's got, you know, like the chicken and the egg. We need to get a license, but you can't have we don't have one in North Sage. So, that's where we stand right now. Anyway, I appreciate listening to me. Good evening. My name is Greg Warner and I live in North Sanage. I would like to speak tonight about the advisor's report of April 2026 and and the Minister of Housing's letter of June 2026. The attempt by our provincial government to impose and enforce massive urbanization for North Sanity is deeply authoritarian and unjust. It trivializes and dismisses important principles and concepts laid out in our OCP.

In the advisor's report, the adviser refers to the Modus OCP planning consultant. Modus, as you will recall, resigned from their engagement as OCP planning consultants after the 2022 municipal elections. The electorate the electorate the electorate of North Sanage in that election made their voices heard at the ballot box. The OCP being drafted with modus as advisers appeared to be a cookie cutter copy of the OCP used by a neighboring municipality. The engagement process included closed dooror meetings with developers with inadequate public input and engagement. And yet the advisor's report of April 2026 states that the modus phase utilized structured surveys, dialogue sessions, and verified data collection. There seems [snorts] to be some inconsistency that warrants further investigation before accepting the advisor advisor's report verbatim.

Contrary to what the advisor's report would suggest, if you examine our OCP, it is quite clear that it supports moderate, carefully planned infill housing, new secondary suites, and laneway and carriage homes where appropriate. But it also addresses other critical considerations like addressing climate change, preserving forest canopy, strengthening farming, and the agricultural sector to improve that dismal 5% number that was just quoted. uh enhancing environmental protection and preserving of rural character. It is it is a matter of achieving balance and a reasonable path forward with a more cautious approach to increasing population density. I will address one other troubling aspect as I have only 3 minutes and not much time left. In the minister's letter of July 2026, the minister states that she intends to issue four directives under enhanced reporting. In appendix B, it states that the district of North Sanich should apply to the CRD for a minor amendment to the regional growth strategy to modestly extend the urban containment boundary to include three

development nodes. In our OCP, changing the urban containment boundary is a non-starter and is non-negotiable. So so close to the end of its term, this council should not be compromising or negotiating with the minister on the urban containment boundary. What the minister contends is minor and modest does not meet the same standard as the majority of residents of North Sanich. It is a core principle of our OCP and we must stand firm. Thank you. [applause] [cheering] [laughter] Good evening, mayor and council. Uh my name is Jamie Wilbornne. I'm chair of the Capital Bikes Peninsula Local Advocacy Committee and I live in Sydney. [gasps] I'm speaking tonight in regard to the McDonald Park Road for a joint project with the town of Sydney. I would like to see a simple safety upgrade for people on bikes along the existing multi-use youth path on the west side of the road. The path is mostly great, but it could be made better by adding elephant feet markings and bike crossing

signage to the crossings at Club Morgan and at the north end of the road paving project. This would allow people on bikes to legally cross without dismounting and this would improve safety by reducing time spent in an intersection, which reduces the risk of injury. Dismounting could also be an accessibility issue for older people and those with disabilities riding bikes. My understanding is that the streets and traffic bylaw regulation 1261 would need updating to legalize the use of elephant street markings in North Sage crossings. As both Sydney and Central recently updated or in the process of updating their bylaws to legalize elephant feet elephants feet crossings among other changes, I hope there would be a plan to update bylaw 1261 in North Sage in the near future too. Thank you.

uh through the chair. You might want to do another motion to extend. It's spent another 20 minutes. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to extend public participation by three more minutes for our last speaker. Uh Terry Ghoul, journalist, Free State of North Sanage, Supreme Court of Canada, Ramsden versus City Council of Peterborough, September 1993. A law or bylaw will be found to restrict expression if it has the effect of frustrating the pursuit of truth or participation in the community. Under this test, Council Stock's notice of motion on public participation is way too broad. It is in fact hostile to the public's right to participate in the community and pursue the truth of what takes place behind the scenes. in our governance. It decrees that speaking about quote staffing issues and employee human resources issues is contrary to the respectful workplace policy and our DNS code of conduct. It asked the mayor to read out a preamble before public participation stating that quote reflecting negatively on staff is

considered a breach of meeting decorum and will lead to a meeting recess or the speaker being removed. While it allows for commenting on quote policy projects, bylaws or agenda items, we have already seen how council stock strictctures have previously been used to shut down commentary on the officer bylaw and its consequences simply because staff was at the center of that debate. Indeed, it makes it impossible for the community to talk about policy since my investigations of governance in this district make it plain that many policy initiatives initiated with staff suggestions, which is as it should be. Staff are thinking beings with ideas. I've got 1600 pages of their proposed policy ideas and commentary in my FOI documents. We know how council Stock's notice of motion can be abused from her own words and actions regarding my use of the political term zombie bill. That whole affair made this council into a laughingstock in Victoria and Vancouver as if we were Dayton, Tennessee in the middle of the 1923 Scopes Monkey trial.

To say you are defending staff because they can't defend themselves, I'm sorry to say under these circumstances the height of hypocrisy. I realize they are not employees, but you just put 21 committee members under a cloud of suspicion by a resolution in section 13, which quote directs staff to conduct review of the behavior of members of the committee and whether any conduct amounts to a breach of the code of conduct. That's a direct violation of your own code of conduct to keep these sorts of allegations confidential until they are resolved. So, council stock, please agree to trim your motion down. The compromise would be that we just can't mention names or make clearly disparaging comments or accuse staff of possible violations of a code of conduct as you have just done with the committees. any more than that, your Musling citizens will very likely keep reminding council of its own hypocrisy in this matter. And as long as I've been here, I haven't heard anybody ever mention his staff by name. It's been by title. Okay. Thank you. Sorry to keep you up late.

[applause] Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? I see no one coming forward. So I call Do you wish to speak? No. Okay. [laughter] Definitely no. So I call a closure to the public participation period and we move on to the next item which is adoption of minutes. Are there any addition are there any errors or missions? Hold on a sec. There's some people leaving.

start. Okay. [clears throat] Okay, let's get as we shall move along. Um, council, any arrows, emissions? I'm seeing none. Look for a motion consent resolution one and two. Council Sanjiefto seconded. Thank you. Any comments, questions? I see none. Those in favor? Uh, unanimous. We okay with that stuff? Okay, we shall move right on to reports. Uh staff report adoption of 2025 annual report. Staff, anything to add? Nope. Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] So I look for a motion based on the recommendation. Okay. Council council stock. Second council depista. Yes. Do you want me to read the staff recommendation? You can do as read. Okay. Fine.

Thank you. Questions, comments? Council Sanji. Thank you, chair. Um I think this is again something that I've been talking about for a while and we I was hoping that this time we would have got a full report on the ISO. Uh there is a brief mention of it but nothing more than that. Uh it's I know it's a complex situation but at this point in time I think the fact that we have gone over this several times that we should be bringing in the ISO categorization of what has been going on in different departments is not present in this report. And also at the last Sufi report discussion uh there was an indication that there would be ISO reference done in this particular report which has not occurred. So for that reason I would not be in a position to support this report.

Y thank you council. Any more questions comments? I see none. So those in favor? Those opposed? Motion carries 61 with councelor Sanjie in opposition. [snorts] Item two, which is h harvest hub facility and new service update. Uh staff. Uh thank you. Uh we've put a report together uh for your consideration uh to move the operation uh plan for the harvest hub. Now that we're in construction mode, building's coming along nicely. Um we're seeking for approval for an expression of interest. uh looking for an operator for the facility. Um we've got uh Darren Scott from Green Chain has helped us and supported us in in uh putting the documentation together for the uh business model um as well as the expression for uh interest document and he's online uh to answer any questions that you might have. Um and I'm happy to take any questions uh that you might have. Thank you.

Thank you. Um [clears throat] before I look for a motion based on the council recommendation, any questions, comments? Council M can talk. Yes, thank you. Just a few questions for the report uh through to um to staff. On page 108 or page two of the report, it talks about a couple scenarios. And in scenario one, it talks about a 1.25% cost and another one in scenario two 65% of a tax impact. What does that work out to in dollars?

If I've done my math right, um the 1.25% uh increase or tax increase under scenario 1 equates to approximately 185,000. Scenario 2 equates to 96,000. And the difference is uh under scenario two uh with an external operator there wouldn't be a as as a big a lift needed for a staff staff on site to support that facility. Okay. Thank you. And if it was a staff position that staff that 185,000 would be in perpetuity. we we'd continually pay that because I understand that staff positions don't don't expire. They don't go away. They just continually get paid. Included in the 185 would be a somebody's a position, a half-time position. The other part of those costs are just the the cost of building maintenance and utilities that are assigned with that and and those kinds of costs. Um but you're right there there's a staffing component to that that we would have to consider um for a longer longer period of time.

Thank you for the reporting. What did that cost? Uh the consulting work was I believe I I believe was 7500 and the work's not done yet. Thank you. I have other questions, but perhaps uh councel has more questions. Council, there's some questions. Councelor Datista. Yeah, thank you chair. Just an attachment to uh under the expression of interest the operator will report directly to the district of North Senich and will be expected to work collaboratively. I'm just wondering, have we determined and maybe I missed it in the report. I apologize if I did. Who is that operator going to be reporting to? like what director are they reporting to?

Um I think that's that that has yet to be determined as to specifically who that operator will report to. But I in the same way that we have other uh not forprofits providing a service for for us for the local or for the district. Um an agreement would put in place and and that would be um defined in that agreement. Thank you. Council, further questions, comments. Council, Council Kentok. Yes. Thank you again. I see on page three of the report 109 of the agenda that um the operator will have the advantage of not having to construct a new facility. That's correct. Or take on the cost of maintenance and utilities, which would be, I presume, a taxpayer u funded.

And the facility can focus entirely on the operations. as a not for-p profofit, they can apply for grant aid, which is also a tax is also paid by the taxpayer. So, the operator um other than working doesn't have any has zero overhead and it's entirely placed upon the taxpayer to either provide tax or grant an aid or um the maintenance of and and the utilities of the building. Would that be correct? Yes. the operator would be responsible for the operations which would include you know staffing um ensuring they meet health and safety requirements and regulations um as well as vihaw and those kinds of regulatory obligations.

The the operating of or the the functioning of the building is something that um we've budgeted within within the district as we do with other our other assets. Mhm. Okay, Jack, you finished? Oh, sorry. I see that we've um um identified explicitly um primary processing processing activities and then it's um the consultant has added including honey extraction. Um, was that an afterthought or I didn't recall that as being um one of the original um purposes of the hub? I I'll hand that over to uh Darren Sto to answer that question. I believe that came out of his conversations uh with the stakeholders. Darren, would you like to elaborate a little bit more where that came from?

Yes, absolutely. Um yeah, thanks for the question. And so obviously this um harvest hub is being built um partly due to a donation from a resident as well as funding from the district. And so what we did um knowing full well that the building was going to be built was to go out to the community additional to what research has already done the agricultural community to understand how the facility um would be used once it's open. um being that it was actually going to be tangible now as opposed to you know you know what would you like to use it for? And one of one of the things that really came back was the um the beekeepers which are a lot of them. Uh and when I say beekeepers kind of like hobby level and small scale um that they were really looking for a space to do their honey processing. Um they have equipment that's shared around. They have some space that they rent out but to have a facility like this available to them where they can store their

equipment and then do their processing um was ideal for them. And so we were looking at ways to obviously support agriculture but to look at revenue generation models and to have the facility used and that was one of the strongest um that came through the the engagement with the agricultural community. that plus um aggregation and distribution as well as retail such as an online store and then actually the processing for farmers in particular produce farmers um actually came further down the line and they were saying no it's a great opportunity but we need to do our own business planning we need to do our own research to see where that might lead um for us and so we we love the fact that the facility is coming online for us and to support us um we just need to kind of like um understand those new market opportunities which is exactly why the donor was building the facility. Um but of course it's not something that they've kind of um been

planning all along. whereas distribution aggregation they had and then obviously with the honey producers um they were really wanting a space and we want to identify other needs within the community whether it's millers of grain um or storage of uh specialtity products that would really use the facility and start to get some revenue and use out of the building that supports the agricultural community in North Sanage. Um I think thank you. I was only able to get catch bits and pieces of that but um thank you for your reply. Um on to other council members. Council questions. Your floor. Council Clint working on the um through you to staff working on the uh the um idea that no more than 15% any producer can only use or occupy 15% of the of the facility. could you expand on that the original um concept?

Uh thank you for the question. Um yeah, I think that that will um have to be worked into the expression of interest. Um there's some specific requirements as you mentioned the 15% um that the operator will have to understand how they how they manage uh to to fulfill that on behalf of the district. and through you to staff. I as I recall although I don't have the original I don't have the legal agreement with me um the district is responsible for for the operation of the harvest hub to a successful level or was it something like that in so far as that um we can't just ignore it. We have to actually um make reasonable attempts at making it profitable or at least functional. Um am I correct in saying that that that was a two-year obligation?

Uh thank you to the chair. Um so the obligation under the gift agreement is that we operate the harvest hub um in accordance with the uh guidelines in the gift agreement for 5 years. Um so there is no reference to um profitability or it's just simply that it has to be operated for the intended um purpose [clears throat] for that period of time. And thank you and and my last I could ask more questions but I think this these are just some pertinent ones. Um the harvest of facility on page 108, page two of the report uh contract price value of 100 of $1 million 12,844 and we budgeted 120 or 1 1 million250,000.

Are we under budget on this? At at the moment we're tracking on budget. Okay. Thank you. Any further questions, comments? Councilor Sanjief. Thank you, chair. Uh, thank you for the report. Thank you, Darren, for the report as well. I have to before I even begin on any of these things, have to acknowledge the harvest herb working group within the agriculture uh and food uh security advisory committee. They have been vital, critical in their vision, in their activity and extremely generous with their time with them. The contribution of Barb and Ben cannot be ignored in this and as well as the guidance from Darren. So [snorts] given the range of activity that has been involved, the time that the volunteers have put into all this, I have to admire and really think that the council owes it to the community, to the harvest working group and the agriculture committee a big thank you for what they're doing selflessly. They have been traveling to Salt Spring to um Langford in order to get different codes

observe different uh food hubs and the rest. So their work contribution is immensely appreciated. With regards to the funding that was raised, if I'm not mistaken, we did bring in an aspect that the agriculture reserve fund would be used towards an FTE position or a fraction of an FTE position. Could the staff confirm that? Thank you. Uh yes, thank you through the chair. the um the operation cost of operating the uh harvest hub has been included in the budget uh for 2026 and is funded through the agricultural reserve fund um as is partial some of the capital costs through the chair. So if I understand that means it doesn't immediately impact any taxpayer funding uh excess taxes going up for the residents. This is coming from a special grant that special fund that has been created from the sand on properties uh from the platform properties however they it's called. Okay. Thank you.

Yes. Yes, the agriculture reserve fund is is structured to uh take 50% of the property tax revenues from the sandown properties uh directly into that agriculture reserve fund for uh special agricultural uh initiatives of which the harvest hub uh meets that definition. Thank you. Um I would be happy to make the motion if there are no further questions. Go ahead. Okay. uh recommendation that the council receive FIN-26-015 Harvest Hub facility a new service update for information and number two approve the request for expression of interest REOI for an external operator to operate the new Harvest Hope service. Do I have a second? Sorry, I saw councelor Marshall first.

So, we have a first and a second. Any further comments, questions? I see none. Those in favor? [clears throat] Uh, unanimous? Move right on to item three, which is McDonald Park Road resurfacing staff. Anything to add? Uh, thanks. Um, nothing to add, but um, we do have our superintendent of public works here and if if uh, council has any questions on the report. Thanks. Questions? You got questions? Oh, I have a question. Oh, okay. Council DPA. Sorry, I have a question just through you to staff chair. Um, we had somebody at public participation trying to look back to my notes. Um, resident of Sydney talk about I think this project and some sort of crossing.

Is that relevant in here? They were talking about not having to dismount a bike to cross Gleam Morgan. Is that part of this project or no? Uh thank you through the chair. Uh no, it is not. Um this is independent of the multi-use path that was put in uh a couple years ago. So it's a shared joint effort with the town of Sydney. Uh the center line of McDonald Park Road defines the boundary between our municipalities. uh they're leading the initiative uh from about the pedestrian overpass uh to the north driveway of Canadian Tire all the way to Mills Road and uh so it's really just covering our our component is center line of the road to the curb and gutter of the multi-use path.

Thank you chair stock. Uh yes, thank you uh chair. I'd like to make the staff recommendation that council receive staff report number IS-26-011 and approve $250,000 for roadway resurfacing works to support the town of Sydney project for McDonald Park Road improvements seconded and councelor Deatista any further questions comments councelor Sanjief thank you chair a question sorry I should have asked before the motion was made No, it's okay. Um, just wanted to know in the section of the McDonald Road that we're proposing this, isn't there supposed to be a lot of development going on nearby with the U-Haul and the rest which and how would that be impacted with heavy machineries going up and down from there?

Thank you to the chair. Um we can get confirmation of that but as um as far as staff know that this work can be completed without disruption from those properties. Thank you. It's it's not about the disruption from those properties. It's about the wear and tear on what is being built. uh would that get impacted through the process and that is where it would be useful to know what their plans are before we spend the 225 and then find in 2 years time we it needs for the repair. Thank you. Thank you through the chair. Um this is overdue maintenance of the road. The road is degrading beyond its uh useful service life. So, uh, it would just continue to break up and degrade at a at a quicker rate if we were to leave it longer. So, it really is just a rehabilitation of the existing surface.

So, it's not about getting into a debate or a conversation. My question is it could be as simple as can we approach those properties and see if they have any plans of heavy equipment coming there. If not go ahead with the process. If there is then time it such that we can have longer life with the road system. Thank you through the chair. Yeah, we can take that under advisement. through the chair. Um, so would it be sufficient just to report back to council if there's any like active development permits and those three I mean there's one only one lot that's um hasn't been fully developed.

Correct. That would be useful. Thank you. Any further questions, comments? I see none. Those in favor? Unanimous. Move right on to item B which is council is in report. And the first one up is council datista. Anything to add? And if not, please motion. Um, no. Thank you, chair. Obviously, this is related to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference that I just attended. Um, just the one thing to highlight is that UBCM, AVICC, and FCM for the last four years has been advocating for a new funding stream um to get us away from being solely dependent on property taxes. Um we were making some pretty significant progress towards that regard and getting like dedicated funding streams happening directly to the district. Um in fact it was so encouraging at the last like we actually were expecting like a report back saying we are going to get direct funding directly from the federal government for the first time in our existence and that got completely blown

out of the water at the very last second. And the comment from our premier was he's refusing to reopen the constitution to discuss funding models for municipalities. So that has left us unfortunately continually holding the bag with, you know, all of our work being funded directly through property taxes. Um, we're not going to give up that effort and that fight. Um, there's some great working groups that come through UBCM and FCM that I that I've been working with to try and get this to not be funded because the download that happens federally and provinially to municipalities, we see it, we talk about it all the time and yet there's no money that comes with that download. Um so the reason I attend a lot of these events is to go to those meetings and do that advocacy. Um I was really hoping to come back with a good answer but uh unfortunately we did not but the work will continue. So other than that this

was in Alberta or in Edmonton. Um there was a lot of great sessions especially related to AI and how AI can be implemented. There were some really good climate sessions that I attended. Um but yeah highly worthwhile conference this year for sure. So, um, other than that, I'll just, uh, make the recommendation to receive the report for information. Thanks. Second, councelor Stock. Any further questions, comments? I see none. Those in favor? Unanimous. Move right on to item C, which is committee reports. And, um, we got three. Well, I don't know about board of variance, but I'll start with the community planning. Um, councelor McConny, anything to add?

Uh, thank you, chair. No, I would just like to mention though that in through the process of the meeting of uh June 9th, the committee did pass the following motion. The community planning advisory committee recommend that council not support the current proposal regarding the recreation facility in central Sanich on the basis of the project requires more consultation with residents to explain the cost, benefits and implication for council's comfortable supporting the facility. And that motion carried unanimously. And um I would just like to make the motion to receive the report from June 9th, 2026 for information. Um if what I'll do is I'll go to the leaison and then we'll look for one more consent resolution at the end.

Is that okay? Thank you. So now we go to a agriculture and food security. Council Sanjep anything to add? Thank you chair. No, I think there have been robust discussion that has been ongoing especially with regards to the harvest hope and the new policies. So nothing to add. Thank you. Councelor Marshall, anything to add? No, nothing to add. Okay. So I look to one of you to bring a consent resolution and items one to four. Sorry, Council Marshall. Okay. [laughter] Okay. Consent. Um as read. Sure. Yep. As read. I'll move that. Okay. Thank you. Seconded. Council Sanjivie. Any questions, comments? I see none. Those in favor? Unanimous.

Move right on to item nine, which is which is a bylaw. I better make sure I'm not missing anything. Excuse me. Uh, okay. The bylaw. This is the Northish Council remuneration bylaw. And this is um a motion uh recommendation of adoption. So, council, any questions, comments? Councelor Marshall. Yes, thank you. Um, just the same comments I made at previous council meetings. I appreciate all the work that the working group did. I know that their recommendation is different than this. I know they wanted it phased in over time. So, um, I won't support it. Um, I think it should just be phased in over time. Okay. Thank you. Further questions, comments. Oh, councelor McConi.

Uh thank you chair and yes I spoke to this as well and um I agree with thank very much for the committee and the staff for doing the work on this project but uh uh the recommendations of phased in were not followed. Um I think in today's times the average uh collective bargaining um contracts going for about 3% so to accept a 29.9% increase is something that I can't get behind. Thank you. Thank you. Further questions, comments I see none. I'm going to look for a motion based on the recommendation council deisa. Thank you chair that the naranch council remuneration bylaw number 1608 2026 be adopted.

Thank you. Seconded councelor stock. Any further questions, comments? I see none. Those in favor? Oops. Those opposed. Motion carries 43 with councelor mcconi, councelor Marshall and councelor Sanjie in opposition. I'm moving right on to item B which is north signage automated voting machines authorization bylaw number six607. Um staff anything to add? Nope. Simple one. Um look for a motion based on the recommendation. Sorry chair. I've got a few questions. I'm going to come to questions. Okay. Councelor Datista seconded. Councelor Sanjief. Um so we got a motion on the floor. Questions comments? Thank you chair. A couple of questions. We have heard so much about uh electronic voting machines and the rest.

What guarantees are being given for this particular machine? Are they part of the same issue that has plagued the world uh about the voting machines [clears throat] and how do we know what testing is done, what model they are uh who authenticates uh their zero error basis uh through the chair. I would have to get back to you with that information. I don't have it on hand right now. Um this company is a very uh the company that the district uses for the automated voting machines, the tabulators. Um they are um it's it's a very common company that most that many municipalities use. Um but I couldn't give you all that information this evening unfortunately.

Sorry. Uh so do these machines have the certification of authentication or because they all have to go through a certification process that the through a random number of whatever numbers that it maintains the integrity of the voting that takes place. So we have none of those information or does BC elections actually recommend such uh these machines? Again that's not information I have on me this evening. I'd have to get back to council about it.

just through the chair. Sorry, reminder that we moved 11B into new business. That was to be addressed at this time before we got into correspondence. That was the letter from the Minister of Housing. Yeah. Uh so we had moved it into the second portion of new business at this time before we got to conf [clears throat]

is not on. Councelor Mcconkey. [snorts] Thank you, chair. I was just wondering if there was audio or problems there or if the mics weren't on. So, thank you for turning your mic on council. Yeah, I guess I'll just get the conversation going since we got to talk about it anyways. Um yeah, just just at a very um a very high level, um I'm going to say that in my conversation or in my meeting with with CBRE, who was the special adviser, um I just want to say that one of the conversations that regularly came up for for at least me was ensuring that any development that occurred was occurring outside of the rural areas of North Sanich in serviced areas and and and again promoting and protecting our agricultural areas.

So I I realize that there's some directives and I realize that there's some recommendations in here, but what I just wanted to highlight is the fact that even they recommended and and advis, you know, they acknowledge that we have a certain portion of our community that shouldn't and can't be touched, right? And and so they've steered well clear of that, which which I do appreciate. I mean, some of the things that I, you know, when I look at some of the maps and some of the things that they've talked about because there's the CBRE report and then there's the directives and those are actually very different things. So, just so the public is aware, I mean, we do have four mandates, directives, um, a lot related to our zoning bylaw and our OCP, um, which, you know, we're going to continue to discuss and debate, but, um, I just wanted to highlight for for the people cuz it was a concern of mine as well is making sure they didn't touch our communities like our Ardmore community, like our Lanzand community, like our

farming communities, and that's been avoided. So, um, I just wanted to highlight that. Um, as far as kind of comments or, you know, response to the housing minister, um, you know, one of the things that was highlighted for me was this, um, the inclusion of, and it wasn't even really included. It was just the map that included the Dean Park estates. Um, but that's actually not in the report here. That's rec that's a I can't remember the term they used. should or suggested that we include, you know, should apply to the cap regional districts for minor amendments and regional growth strategy. Um, and they included that map. I do struggle with a lot of that area being included, especially the registered area of Dean Park estates. Um, that being said, there's so few properties in there that would actually be affected by it. Um, I have to question whether the juice is worth the squeeze of actually fighting back on that part of the map because

there's just so few properties that would be affected by it. But um maybe that'll be my my comments for all just for now just to get the ball rolling. Thank you, chair. Thank you, Council Comments. Uh yes, thank you. And I'm sure we all have a lot to say about this. Um and I'm sure we've all read it a couple of times. There are many items on the um on the letter and on the report of course and for me to go through everything that I've I would not necessarily challenge but question um would probably take the rest of the evening. So how do you chair want to um want to handle counselor input as far as uh this is concerned? Um there's so many areas that um that has that has to be um clarified before we fully understand what their directive is. They've put us they've really put us in a in a difficult situation. They've gone against what the community has asked for um in our OCP and they've um turned it into a directive an authoritarian and top down which none of

us really appreciate. So how did you want to handle that? The the way I look at it right now is that there's so many questions that probably all of us have that the time that we have for this council meeting would not be adequate. Not only that, I've noticed that a whole pile of of residents have left. Um that what we may wish to do is um when sorry when's the next council meeting? July 13th. July 15th. July 13th. 13th. Yeah. So that's two weeks away. Special housing. Yes. Good. That's what I'm looking at is a special housing meeting. Is it possible in Well, no. We probably have an in camera that day as well. Um I'm kind of loathed to call a special meeting, but it may necess it may be necessary with only one item on the meeting.

Uh so the July 13th meeting actually because it's a summer meeting is a hybrid meeting. So, it's got a committee of the whole portion and a council meeting portion. So, what we could um what we could plan for is to put this item on the committee of the whole portion that allows for more wholesome discussion. Um staff would endeavor to have the framework of a draft by then. Um and then it could be um approved at the council meeting following prior to the July 17th deadline. That that would make more sense through the chair. I think is sorry it might be useful to have a special meeting on a cow just for this because otherwise it's going to interfere with other activity that we going through on 13 and in camera as well as other items that would be on it. So at least it then gives us a a better understanding of what the community's ask is how we view the application sorry the letters and

the staff can then incorporate that into whatever report they bring forward on 13th and then it goes uh what because 17th of July is when the answer has to be sent. When does the cow start through the chair? Um the cow typically as regularly scheduled would would start at 7:00. Um but we could um endeavor to do an earlier start time for the committee the whole. We don't currently have anything else I don't think slated for that committee the whole so it could be dedicated to this item. Um an earlier special committee of the whole would be challenging just um because of our agenda publishing um deadlines. So that would um so we already have a regularly scheduled committee of the whole on July 13th. Um and we could have that full part of the committee of the whole meeting dedicated to this item.

Is there um a planned um in camera that day through the chair? Yeah, that there could be. We we're not sure if there's any items right now. Okay. I know one of the problems if we start a an inc camera as an example at 4:00 that some council members may not be able to attend which was something we would want to do but I certainly agree that the entire cow should be dedicated uh to this housing initi I want to call it an initiative but that's the wrong word through the chair and it would still allow adequate time that you know any feedback dur during that could be simply that direction could be given to to staff and then we would um like we've done in in the past with responses to the ministry um integrate that feedback.

I believe I usually distribute it out to all of council and then we send it off. So we'd still have time adequate time even if we start if we started at 5:00 and if there was an in camera the en camera could be done after that meeting. thoughts and just oh sorry S go ahead go ahead uh since you've opened that window I would say call in a special meeting where we discuss just this then there is adequate time to incorporate the comments into the report and then on [clears throat] the 13th we get to see what the letter will be drafted to the minister are you talking meeting before the third. Correct. Yes. Staff can't do that in time.

Oh, we So the third I thought we can call in a special meeting through the chair. Um we will likely have staff issues calling a special meeting within before the July 13th like we're heading into summer. So, um, we it I would have to understand what date we have very limited staff to call a special open meeting at this point between now and July 13th. Um, in addition to agenda publishing deadlines that are quite tight, I think we force it for the 13th. It's just a question what time we start. Chair, all all I would put on the floor is that we receive the correspondence for information and we direct staff to put this on the agenda item as the sole agenda item for our committee of the whole on July 13th.

Okay, through the chair and I might just add it would be helpful and this would be helpful for staff is uh possibly that council um document or write out their areas that they'd like to provide feedback on. If that can be provided to staff ahead of time, I can always present that for discussion. we'll have it all so that everyone knows what areas they'd like to provide some feedback on and then we can have a wholesome discussion at the committee the whole meeting. Um I just would put that out there. Um I'm happy to do that and um and present that with our um staff draft response as well and I will note that staff are actively also working on um trying to understand what some of these directives entail. And so I'll bring we'll bring as much as we have available for that 13th meeting. Okay, stock.

Uh, yes, chair through you just off. Uh, do you think it would be a good idea to have a meeting on housing between now and the 13th? But we got the problem with staff. Oh, okay. All right. We're into the summer months and just chair maybe to assist staff that in that motion. So, we received the correspondence dated June 16th because it hasn't been seconded. So, I'm just going to throw it out there again. Um it hasn't we receive the correspondence issue 16th for information. We direct staff to include this as the sole agenda. I'm on the committee of the whole and that council endeavor to provide um conversation or points of clarity or recommendations for alteration or inclusion into the letter to staff by July 6th. Okay.

And that way it's in time for publishing. Is that okay staff? Does that make sense? Did I get the date right? Yeah. I have a second. Okay. Yeah. Oh, council stock. Any further questions, comments? Council mintto just to advise um council and staff that I'll be out of the country on that date. So, I'll make sure that I have my recommendations to staff. Okay. Excellent. Council Sanjief through the chair. I I'm just worried that we are not going to have enough time to process the feedback that we'll get from the community. uh we have gone through a very extensive OCP process which has had lots of engagement and at this critical stage it would also be useful to do the same kind of service of having further engagement with the community that's my concern that I have uh I understand the staff feels uh that they don't have the capacity right now uh to do it but even if we did it a day before the 13th or

the 11th or sorry the 13th might be a uh Friday is Monday pardon me so Friday before that it would help uh to create additional input from community members that's where I feel we owe it to the community this is a sensitive issue this is an urgent issue this feeds into the zoning bylaw that's going to come soon as Oh, [clears throat] thank you. Okay, we have a motion on the floor. I don't see a second motion now. Council Ki, sorry, Arin's got her hand up. Uh, thank you, chair, and um I echo councelor Sanjie's concerns. This is something the community has been dealing with for literally years as far as the OCP process itself. I feel this is um a rush. I do appreciate um staff constraints. However, this is in my opinion far too big of a an issue to for us seven members of council to just send our thoughts to staff and have them draft something and then start uh basically negotiating at that point. I think it's critical that the community

uh has their feedback and I think we need to move heaven and earth in trying to accommodate that. So, um I wouldn't be in favor of what's been proposed. I think we have to um allow the the community more time and uh hopefully we can pull this together somehow. Thank you. Further questions, comments? I don't see any. We have a motion on the floor. Those in favor? Those opposed? Uh motion carries 52 with council me and councelor Sanjie in opposition. Uh we go back to item A which is um correspondence from Croom. Any questions, comments? U look for a motion. Um obviously this to receive and any further any questions?

Yeah. Um I mean I'll I'll obviously as the representative Spack I mean I'll make the motion to receive the correspondence but that um I know when we spoke to Mr. Martin, he was willing to come back and actually meet with SPACK and present the overall plan so that um council direct staff to have the director of infrastructure attend the next SP back meeting which I believe is in September um to do a presentation on the park. Thank you. Seconded. Do I have a second? Yeah. Oh, council Sanji. Any further comments, questions? I see none. Those in favor? Unanimous. Uh again, I got to make sure I'm not missing anything.

U if we move on to item C, which is um I can't pronounce the name unfortunately. Uh but I say founder um Oak Tree Love. Um again, any questions, comments? So look for a recommendation based on staff. Just a question for you to the chair. Um, are you aware of any other conflicts on October 15th? There's a request to [clears throat] illuminate the municipal hall and I'm just wondering if we have the ability to do that with the appropriate lighting and is there another conflict on that day. staff. I don't know if we usually do any of this through the chair. Thank you. At this time, I am not aware of any um conflicts and we do have lighting equipment to light up the hall. However, I'd have to check on the colors.

Thank you. U council McLint talk. I I certainly would support this. Um I I did a little research into their uh into their organization and um they are genuine and um the cause is universal and that's what um what appeals to me is that it's a uh a a universal um type of I'll call it an event, but I'm not downgrading it to an event. It's um it just could cross all all boundaries there. There it's it's got no uh no discretion on who it who it touches. So uh we did light up the hall. Um I think when the king was announced, we I think we lit it up in blue or something like that. And so I I don't think it's uh it's it's a it's a it's a reach. Uh and I'd certainly be I'd certainly support it through the chair. Uh yes I would support it. I think we let it for epilepsy day or with purple if I'm not missing awareness. So okay okay for a motion based on

recommendation of staff counc seconded counc sanjief. Any further questions comments? I see none. Those in favor unanimous. Move on to item D um which is from C. Davis with regard to speeding our traffic caling on Shalley Road and Lans End Road. Um, anyone got a motion B sorry a motion based on the recommendation? Just that we receive for information and direct staff to consider it when looking at traffic cal measures in the future. That's easy one. Seconded. Council Sanjie. Uh, officially question comments. There are none. Those in favor? unanimous. Now we move on to a late item which is item E which is appears to be some letters with regard to what number of people at the public participation were talking about as short-term license requirements for that particular part because it's a consent there are a couple of letters in that could we actually uh direct staff to think of deferring the um their enforcement? Uh well perhaps the first question of staff is what

instigated um the licensing issue for the for these residents in North Sanage because if you know they they've been operating for many many years with no problems and then all of a sudden there's these letters of no business. Yes, your worship. these letters of non-compliance, but it basically the province has new regulations in effect and the non-compliance uh standard that some of these properties used to enjoy, they can no longer enjoy because of the changes at the provincial level. And so that's why these non-compliance letters are going out. But the but the simple response to that is is that is it the district for whatever reasons delayed in meeting the requirements of of the new provincial requirements? And if that's the case, why didn't we simply defer it? Be again, they might instantaneously be in non-compliance.

What's the harm in give them, you know, um six month repeats or three month reprieve until we can catch up with them on our bylaws? Sure. Oh, staff. Sorry. Thanks to the chair. Um, so it's a reason it's a it's a reasonable concept because we you know we are midway through our zoning bylaw update. So in theory once these bylaws are updated um then these short-term rental um operators will be under a different regulatory framework. So but I will say that right now we are only just simply enforcing our bylaws. So, we would have to if council wishes to provide um some uh you know leeway for a period of time until our zoning by is updated um council would have to provide um direction to staff to not enforce. That's where I'm going.

And and that's the that's otherwise we you know staff enforce our bylaws that we have in place right now although they are in progress to be updated. So yeah, and we've done this before and other situations where we've asked staff not to enforce. That's right. Okay. Questions? Oh, sorry. I was through the chair. Just the motion being that the staff defer the enforcement of the short-term rental bylaw for the next 3 months until everybody has got the opportunity to say six months. six months because sorry chair I interrupted but things often take way longer uh and so I'm just I'm echoing councelor Shustava because I think it should be I agree with you and but it should be maybe six months to give time it's not to enforce the bylaw for six month period correct thank you for completing the motion [laughter] thank you you're welcome sorry council motion councelor Marshall Yeah, thank you chair. Um, I would definitely support that. And just to confirm, I think a number of speakers commented that they couldn't comply with it if they wanted because we don't offer the correct business license at this

time. So it's a little bit difficult to ask people to comply if we don't have an option for them to do that if that correct in what they're saying. But I definitely would support the six months extension. Okay. Thank you. Um, so we have a motion on the staff. Is that motion uh read okay? Yep. Okay. Thank you. Seconded. I'll second. That's council Debatista. Further questions, comments? Council Mcnto. Does that apply to all breaches of the short-term rental or just something in specific? I think that's just the business license. And was it the business license that was that we were um strictly enforcing that we were receiving so many complaints about it? And if it's just that, then I get it. That's for sure. Through you to staff.

Through the chair. Um I believe that was that should be the only compliance that we are waving enforcement on. That's correct. All right. Certainly I'll be in support. Okay. Thank you. Uh so any further questions, comments? I see none. Those in favor? Unanimous. Uh do we have any moaning item 11? Nope. That's just those correspondents. Uh we got item 10, item 12, which is information. So look for a consent resolution which sorry I asked for item 128 to be Oh City Lions Club. Okay. Sorry it's been a long night. [laughter] Okay. So um so you moved that to 12 uh to 11D. Oh the old 11D. Okay. So we got this one. So it's Yeah, that's right. [laughter] So it's correspondence dated March 24th from the Legion Lions Club and Rotary Club. That's correct.

Okay, that's correct. Um for discussion. Correct. Um this late this this letter was dated um March 24th when when the matter was not public. Um, I contacted one of the letter writers and they were having discussions on this about [snorts] this as as early as January 21st when this matter was not public in the in the approximate time of uh January 21st when [snorts] this was not being public or was not yet public. I wonder how it became public. Um I know that um all three organizations um collaborated and and made it made a a suggestion sent the letter to uh the district which was deposited in our outside mailbox I think a day after the letter was written. It went it went missing. I understand that things happen that's for sure. It's a bookkeeping thing and but it has since been added to um for information for the whoever's handling this file. But what is disturbing is the um the early hours that this was out there in the public before it was made public. That is extremely disturbing

and um hopefully that can be that can be resolved. Council St. Um, yes, I have spoken to the representatives and I um I really didn't even know that they were being spoken to um about this. I I mean, I'm not saying it's not a good idea, but I think that council should have approved this to reach out to these organizations. Um, sorry, which organizations? at the the uh Ryan Talford with the Legion, the Sydney Lions Club, and the Sydney Rotary Club. And the question, but we didn't know that. But the question becomes is was there outreach from any counselor? And perhaps that can be answered.

Well, I'm not sure, but someone they're writing back, I don't know, says it has come to our attention that counselor on behalf of North is working with the center of plant health. Anyway, I I also my secondary questions very quick. The CFUW doesn't operate activities for seniors and I know councelor Sherto is very concerned about seniors and their activities and but from this letter it appears that these three groups want to use it the pavilion that is as a place for them to have their activities. So I'm wondering how that fits with councelor Shrivevesta and our council's notion. Anyway, it doesn't have to be. You don't have to answer tonight. We can do it through the chair. I think I'll reserve my response for now. Um I will give um there are this three organizations I have not reached out to. They reached out to me. Oh, okay.

That's where the difference is. Thank you. Yeah. Council D. [snorts] Thank you, Chair. Um, I I'm because this is now for information and consideration. Can I make a motion that we receive this letter dated March 24th for information and that we direct staff to keep this on file until any further determinations made about a lease agreement or anything else and that it be brought forward for consideration at that time? Yeah, I think there's an answer seconded counc in favor opposed. Nope. Unanimous. Now, now I finally get to the consent resolution that I wanted to do. Sorry that we had that, but there's hardly any items there. So, consent resolution uh B and C. So moved.

So moved. Seconded. I'll second. [laughter] Okay, I assume no questions, comments. Those in favor? Opposed? Oh, no. Unanimous. So, we've done the rising report. So, we move for a motion of adjournment. Councelor Datista and councelor Stark. Those in favor? Those opposed? Motion carries. 61 with councelor Sanjie in opposition. [laughter] So first time in opposition.