Transcript: Council Meeting - 2026-07-06

Speaker A · Good evening, everyone. Welcome to your Council Chamber. I'm going to call this evening's meeting to order. It's Monday, July 6th, and we are gathered for the purpose of a Council meeting. We're going to begin, as we always do, in a good way, with a territorial acknowledgement and inclusivity statement. And to deliver that this evening, I'm going to turn it over to Councillor Phelps Bondaroff.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. It is appropriate that we begin by acknowledging that the district of Saanich lies within the territories of Lekwung peoples represented by the Songhees and Esquimalt nations and the the Saanich peoples represented by the Tsartlip, Paquichin, Sewet, Sachem and Malahat nations and that we are committed to celebrating the rich diversity of people in our community. We are guided by the principle that embracing diversity enriches the lives of all people and we all share the responsibility for creating an equitable and inclusive community and for addressing discrimination in all forms.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Phelps Bondarov. Public input has always been an important item on our Council meeting agenda and welcomed here in person. Saanich encourages public input via email or written submission in person or on video via Ms. Teams for those who wish to address Council this evening via Ms. Teams. The link is available at Saanich CA Agendas. The Deputy Corporate Officer will provide further details on providing input prior to the public input portion on the agenda. This meeting is being live webcast and by participating in the webcast you're consenting to being recorded. Personal information, including your image and personal opinions, may be collected and disclosed as part of Council's proceedings on the video. The recording will be available on the District's website for future access.

Speaker A · When presenting to Council, we ask that you please do not provide any third party information, including talking about others, as you may be disclosing other people's personal information without their consent. The Council Chamber is a place for respectful dialogue and behaviour or language that is disruptive or harmful will not be tolerated and we reserve the right to stop your input or remove you from the meeting meeting if you're not abiding by that conduct. We also ask that you consider others when listening and reacting to any comments this evening, whether you may support or oppose a particular item. We want to ensure everyone feels comfortable and welcome to participate and share their views.

Speaker A · But I know it's not going to come to that. We're going to treat each other with kindness and respect and we're all going to get through this together. And with that in mind, I'm going to turn it over to our deputy corporate officer, Ms. Froud.

Speaker C · Mr. Mayor, just prior to the meeting started, Councillor Chambers indicated that she wishes to put forward a waiving of the council procedure bylaw to rearrange the order of an item on the agenda. I don't know any further details beyond that though.

Speaker A · Okay, I'll turn it over to Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Good evening. I was hoping that when it comes time for the consent agenda, I plan to pull an item and I hoping that that item can be discussed, debated at the same time as my motion that is on the agenda tonight. About nothing. About us, without us. If I have a seconder, do I need a seconder?

Speaker A · Let me just confirm with DCO Froud. Just as it is going to require two parts, as one is already part of the consent agenda and the second would require a motion from council to rearrange the order of the agenda. So, DCOfro, if I could get your guidance on any. An appropriate motion, should it be possible for Councillor Chambers to proceed.

Speaker C · I should start by just acknowledging that typically when an item is removed from the consent agenda, it's typically discussed by council immediately following the consent agenda. So we would be looking for a motion to waive the council procedure bylaw to consider the. I believe I know the item that you are wanting to remove from the consent agenda. Perhaps it's the Sanich affordable housing reserve fund application for it to be considered immediately preceding the nothing about us without us notice a motion.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Ms. Raab. That's exactly what I meant to say.

Speaker A · Okay. Is there a seconder for that motion that's seconded by Councillor Harper. Can you confirm for me, Ms. Froud, if that requires 2/3 support of council.

Speaker C · It would require 2/3 support.

Speaker A · Okay. All right. I will give Councillor Chambers an opportunity to motivate so council understands the rationale for rearranging the agenda.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. These two topics are logically related and it would be well deserved and respectful of the public input that we received today. Discuss them at the same time. And there's many people here tonight that are for both items and it would be really good if we could hear them at the same time. And so whether that means. Yes, well, just rearranging to hear them at the same time.

Speaker E · Okay.

Speaker A · Are there any other speakers to the motion before I call the question? Councillor Phelps Bond.

Speaker B · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think I need a bit more development on the. The two items being connected because I think one of the challenges I face is one is decision around allocating funding now, and one is a request that staff review an item in the future. And so unless the idea is that one of those items would necessarily stall the other item, I don't think. I haven't seen a case being made that the two items are connected in any way other than ideational, and I'm a little bit concerned that one item could potentially. Yeah, I think that's just the challenge. I'm not seeing the connection between the two items in this stage. I might need a stronger case to be made.

Speaker A · I share your concern, Councillor Phelps. Bondoraff. Are there any other speakers? Councillor Harper.

Speaker F · I seconded it because I come from a tradition in other places of work and so on, where topics that are substantially the same are dealt with at the same time, which is quite different than what we do. So I thought it might actually save us time if we did this, but obviously it's up to the meeting.

Speaker A · Thank you. Okay,

Speaker G · Sorry.

Speaker A · If we could just remind folks to please mute their microphones until it's your time to present to council. Councillor Plant, you wish to provide a comment?

Speaker G · I'd actually just like to ask a question. And assuming this does pass, is it accurate to understand that we would consider them still as separate agenda items or would this now this motion put them into one giant uber motion situation?

Speaker A · Go ahead. DCofroud.

Speaker C · They would be treated as two separate agenda items. They would just be beside one another in the agenda.

Speaker G · And which one would be first, please?

Speaker C · Ultimately, that would be up to council, but how I read it in would be that the Senate Affordable Housing Reserve Fund application would proceed the nothing about us without us notice of motion.

Speaker G · Okay, thank you. I'm actually not seeing them as being connected. And I think the comments can be made by the public on both items when they wish to. And I'm not sure the items need to be considered back to back. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. I am of a similar view. Councilor Plant. I believe Councillor Chambers wish to speak to the item again. I'll just confirm that no one else wishes to address this motion. Okay, back to you for a second time, Council chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to speak with Daisy Froud and I was hoping that the my motion could be read first. That is what I was anticipating.

Speaker C · I think that could be considered just a friendly amendment to consider the notice of motion first. Unless there was an objection from council.

Speaker D · Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, and so before I call the question, I'm just confirming it will require six members of council to support if it's to succeed.

Speaker C · That is correct, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Oh, Councillor Westhaver.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think I'll just make a comment. As much as I do want to accommodate the request. Having read the reports, I don't see the connection. I think we might be setting a precedent. So I just wanted to say that now as I know you're coming from a good place. But that's why I'll be voting the way I do.

Speaker A · Okay. Thank you, Councillor Westhaver. If there are no other comments from council, I will call the question. This is on. Rearranging the agenda as proposed. Those in favor and opposed? Councillors Bryce, Phelps, Bondoff, Brown Off Myself, Westhaver, Devries and Plant are opposed. The motion is defeated. I will turn back to Ms. Froud. If you can introduce the next item for us please.

Speaker C · The first item is the reconsideration of council resolution related to proposed short term rental regulations. There is a memo from the Director of Legislative and Protective Services, the Corporate officer. And it is to advise that the Mayor has requested reconsideration of council's June 15, 2026 resolution related to proposed short term rental regulations. Public input for this item is closed. Well, Council has already debated this motion. So the recommendation would be to move immediately to calling the question.

Speaker A · Thank you. So I was just going to reiterate the final point that Ms. Froud made. Which is that there's already been substantial debate on the motion. So I don't think it's necessary for us to engage in further dialogue. But rather we'll just be revisiting the question. As you recall, with Councillor Westhaver's absence on June 15, the motion failed on a tie vote. And I felt it was appropriate that we reconsider the motion to determine whether or not it would get the support of a majority of council or if we should proceed with another alternative direction. So with that in mind, the motion is active because it is a reconsideration. So I believe you've all seen the memo. You know that the points that we're considering. This will be for the 91 night limit.

Speaker A · I am going to call the question. Those in favor and opposed? Councillors Bryce, Westhaver, Harper and Plant are opposed. The motion carries. Okay, we'll move on. I will turn to DCO Froud. Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Mr. Mayor. I needed a bit more clarity about what we were voting on. Exactly. I know we've already voted. I really needed a bit of clarity rather than just saying so. The motion on the floor. I just Would have liked it read out again, please.

Speaker A · Okay. Can we for certainty we can do that. I will return to DCO Froud, if you could read the the wording of the motion for us please.

Speaker H · Okay.

Speaker C · The wording is also in front of council on their green sheets and it is that council direct staff to develop regulatory bylaws for council's consideration for the regulation of short term rentals. Consistent with the recommendations in this report, but including a 91 night limit per property per year. And report back with a two year implementation review of short term rental regulations.

Speaker A · Okay, so I can recall that question. Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you.

Speaker A · Now that it's been read for certainty, I will call the question. Those in favor and opposed? Councillors Bryce, Westhaver, Chambers, Harper and Plant are opposed. The motion fails. Thank you for the clarity. That was a pivotal point. In order for us to proceed with that decided, council, there is now an opportunity to propose an alternative motion. I see a hand from Councillor Plant and I will turn to you if you wish to provide an alternative.

Speaker G · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to move. The alternative being that Saanich Permit up to 160 days.

Speaker A · Seconded by Councillor Harper. I'll give you the opportunity to motivate on that point, Councillor Plant. I just wanted to seek clarity. If you also wish to have a two year review as part of that motion. Yes. So we'll take that as assumed that the second part of the motion will be captured as part of Councillor Plant's alternative. Councillor Plant, I'll turn to you to motivate.

Speaker G · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don't want to spend a lot of time because I have a hunch that many of my council colleagues have already come to this meeting with what they believe is the course forward. From my perspective, we still hadn't found the sweet spot. Which is why 91 just failed. I am interested in 160. As I was back prior to the last meeting where we were looking to emulate the city of Victoria's number. And while our type of short term rental will be different than the city of Victoria, I think the number of days is appropriate. I will support 160. I will not support an unlimited should this fail.

Speaker G · And so I'm offering this as a way forward.

Speaker A · Colleagues, thank you. Councillor Plant. And Councillor Harper is the seconder. I'll give you the opportunity to speak to it next. Just for clarity. Councillor Plant, I know you can't see this, but for everyone in the room, we do have staff from our planning and bylaw departments in front of us. If we Wish to ask any clarifying questions. Go ahead, Councillor Harper.

Speaker F · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'll keep it brief as well, because this is now the third evening, and I think we've all said a great deal about this. And while my preference would have in the provincial program, I think it's most important that we get a program in place. And this is a number that I think is sufficient that it can meet many of the goals for both our residents and for people wanting to visit. So I think, and it has the two year review still built into it. So in the interest of having a program in place for both visitors and for our residents, I'm prepared to support this at this time.

Speaker F · And the two year review, in my view, will at that point have something to consider because I think it's enough time in a year. It's not quite half a year, but close that it will give us some meaningful data to consider. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Next to speak is Councillor Chambers, followed by Phelps Bondarov.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Well, I've certainly been around the block on this one. I've gone from one decision to another, and as soon as I made my original vote on the 90 day and put that motion forward, that was what would have sort of really captured what I had learned about the housing crisis. But since that time, I've learned more. And with the vacancy levels and the concepts of, you know, buying 2,200 buildings and just the state of unaffordability that everybody is experiencing in Saanich, I have decided to open this up. And I really believe that, you know, right now, you know, our own personal economies, vegetable stands inside the urban containment boundary, short term rentals.

Speaker D · You know, I think if everything goes well and nobody takes advantage, I think we can really serve our own local economy here in Saanich. So for those people that used to defer property taxes and experienced different other ways of shifting around their situation, their economy, now this is another option for renter, for owners that are being made more financially insecure by the increased taxes. So I'm. I'm happy that I went through this process. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Next to speak is Councillor Phelps Bonderoff.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I'll be voting against this. I think 160 is far too high. I said the same thing about 90, but it was acceptable. 120 may have been palatable, but it's not really. 160 is not supported by the research that I've seen, nor is it supported by our staff report. Just to reiterate, our very detailed staff report included the reiteration that we should not be tinkering with the numbers several times in the staff report because of the complexities of the issue. That was kind of an underscored line that I picked up on. And so I think if we're doing exactly the opposite of that, it seems contraindicated.

Speaker B · And furthermore, when it comes to affordability, one of my biggest concerns is of course affordability for our residents. And the more, the longer we've dragged this process out, the more chances I've had to read more research on the topic. So just the other day I was reading Balanced Supply of Housing from a research team from the University House at McGill explores the impact of short term rentals on housing supply and affordability. This one's specific to British Columbia. Some of the studies that I was looking at were mid sized towns in other jurisdictions or larger cities. So it's harder to compare say Amsterdam with Saanich. But this is one that focuses directly on British Columbia.

Speaker B · And one of the things that really jumped out to me looking at the executive summary is at the end of spring 2022, commercial short term rentals were removing 14,560 units from BC's long term housing market. A 38. 5% year over year increase. And so my biggest concern is if we set the nightcap too high, it disincentivizes people from actually offering these units in the long term rental market. We know the long term rental market is still challenging. Yes, vacancy rates are slightly better than they were, but that's not a reason to undermine that work with poorly thought out short term rental policies, but rather it should reinforce our need to have a slow, careful approach where we adopt a lower number and then after a few years we can tinker with it based on evidence we see in the community.

Speaker B · I think if we set the number too high, we risk overshooting and it's very hard to roll that back as opposed to it's much easier to expand it in the future. So for these reasons, I won't be supporting 160 days. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Are there any other speakers? First time speakers to the motion, Councillor Bryce.

Speaker C · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's oftentimes an issue like this that

Speaker E · does consume a tremendous amount of public

Speaker C · and council time and there is no absolute answer. We kind of put out there what we think is in the best interest of the community. I guess the issue raised by the

Speaker E · public at the time when we were

Speaker C · having public input that had quite a

Speaker E · compelling influence on me was the point

Speaker C · that there wasn't necessarily the same market for person who is likely to provide

Speaker E · short term rental as just normal rental. In that short term rental is highly

Speaker C · time intensive and a tremendous amount of work preparing the rooms and doing the laundry and so on. So I don't perhaps see them as closely connected as maybe some others. I am prepared to support the motion on the floor.

Speaker E · I also support the two year review.

Speaker C · I don't think we can say it is easier to gear up than gear down. I mean I think that will be what it is and it will be determined by the council of the day

Speaker E · what makes sense to the community, what

Speaker C · the experience has been. So I'm prepared to go with the

Speaker E · 160 at this time.

Speaker C · Give the community a chance to deal with the opportunity and see what impact

Speaker E · it has and make some decisions for the go forward.

Speaker A · Thank you Councillor Price. Next to speak is Councillor westhaver.

Speaker E · Thank you Mr. Mayor. And I want to start by thanking staff and actually I guess I'll thank the colleagues for waiting for me on this vote. My inbox reflected it. I think I was noted as being away. So I will say whether before that or after that, the feedback from the public is really wanting this. And as we look at trends, whenever we have a bylaw in place that always then imposes something. So if something does have to be clawed back, I don't see that as an issue. I do have a question through you Mr. Mayor to staff and I appreciate staff's time not just in the report but further conversations I had. Can you give an idea of whether it's.

Speaker E · I'm just going to use plan A, B or C, the implication of staff time and resources, how, how would that be affected any differently or regardless this is going to impact staff or what option we go to.

Speaker C · Thank you through the mayor to Councillor Westhaver. So we have conducted analysis on the resourcing implications for the recommendations that were proposed in the report. So 60 and 90 days, the nightcap in concert with the other components of the regulation make it a very cost effective approach to regulating STRs. We have not conducted extensive analysis on what the costs would be if the nightcap would be higher than 90 days.

Speaker E · And thank you for that. One more question to you, Mr. Mayor. If the 160 days passes, there still will be a regulatory program put in

Speaker B · place

Speaker C · through the Mayor to Councillor Westhaver. If this motion passes, council would direct staff to draft the zoning bylaw amendments and we would bring those forward for your consideration.

Speaker E · Okay, thank you for that. I'm leaning towards supporting the motion that's on the floor. I want to give the opportunity for homeowners and for everyone to continue to be able to operate. And yes, I am concerned if people start to change their home and how it looks to short term rentals. But I have a feeling once people realize how much work it is that the attraction will be continue as they are and definitely support the two year review. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you. Next to speak is Councillor devries, followed by Brownhausen off.

Speaker I · Thank you. A line I keep hearing through this discussion is the idea of, and I accept this, some residents in our community are only interested in the short term market and would have no interest in the long term market. I accept that as being fundamentally true. I think the same can be said about the long term market. There are people out there who are only interested in offering on the long term market. The broader picture I see here, and the analysis backs this up, is that there's a broader incentive that will influence the choices that people make on whether or not there's an emphasis on the short term market or the long term market when it comes to rental.

Speaker I · And I fully support giving opportunities to homeowners in this way. And I think we've been just debating on how broad that opportunity is. Whether it's 90 nights, the 60 nights that were recommended by staff or another number. Right now we're discussing 160 Nights. My concern is that 60 Nights was the break even point for the long term and short term market in terms of the revenue that was possible. And obviously there was assumptions in that. And so I was willing to go so above that at 90. Obviously in a close vote we saw that 90 was not the right number for councillors around the table.

Speaker I · I think, you know, increasing that another 70 or put another way, 100 nights more than has been recommended, I think is too much. So I'll propose a motion that we amend the motion to 120 nights.

Speaker A · Okay, so there's now a motion on the floor to amend to 120 knights. You're welcome to motivate Councillor Devries.

Speaker I · Yeah, I'll keep it very brief. I think that clearly there's an interest among all members of council to provide the opportunity of being able to offer short term rental. From my perspective, I think it's very important to protect the long term market as well and the many residents who are looking for rental accommodation in our community. It's a very tough market. 3 bedroom units is still at a 0% vacancy rate and others are very Low. The only one that is quite high now and just really in a healthy range is the studio size. Everything whether it's one bedroom, two bedroom and beyond is still not where it needs to be to have a healthy market. And housing is the foundation of a happy and healthy life.

Speaker I · I don't think we should be putting negative pressure on the market at this time. I'm willing to see how it goes at a two year review, perhaps increase it from there. 90 wasn't enough clearly for council. I hope 120 is and it will be, I think, much more balanced for all residents.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. I'm going to give Councillor Phelps Mondoroff, who's the seconder, the opportunity to speak to the motion to amend.

Speaker B · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think this is more supportable than 160, given my previous comments. A couple numbers I didn't mention from the previous study which I think are worth noting with respect to affordability. That same aforementioned study notes that using a mixed effect regression model, they found that an increase in one dedicated short term rental per 100 rental units in a neighborhood predicts a $49 increase in average monthly rents. And furthermore, that if the province's short term rental market returns to its pre pandemic trajectory by the end of 2023, the loss of housing to short term rentals will be expected to drive up an average monthly rent in minimum and large cities in the province by $63 above the levels from spring of 2022.

Speaker B · So just additional numbers to speak to the question of affordability. So to me, as I mentioned, I still, I think 90 was on the edge of being acceptable. 120 is much more palatable than 160. And so if we're looking for a sort of number that is slightly more palatable to other than a scarce majority of counsel, my vote would be for 120. It's much more preferable to 160.

Speaker A · Okay, I'm going to look for council support to call the question on the amendment as I think this has been canvassed repeatedly and I can foresee where this was likely to end up and so I'll need a seconder for that. The motion be called. Thank you, Councillor Harper. I am going to call the question on calling the question. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. I will call the question on amending the main motion so that it's 120 knights rather than 160. Those in favour and those opposed? Councillors Bryce, Westhaver, Harper and Plant are opposed. The motion to Amend carries. We're now back to the main motion as amended. We're now at 129th. Councillor Brownhoff was next on the speaker's list. I'll give you the opportunity to speak to it.

Speaker H · Thanks very much, Mr. Mayor. I just. If I could just ask staff a couple of questions to clarify. One of the concerns that I've heard from neighborhoods is how many could actually be set up in their neighborhood. Would there be any signage or something that would delineate what homes are having a lot of strangers come and go sort of thing in the neighborhood?

Speaker J · Through the chair to council Branoff? No, there would be no signage. This is all. This is an online universe. We're in here. So it'll be visible online but there would be no signage.

Speaker K · No.

Speaker H · Okay. And my other question is around all of these would have to have business licenses. So does that mean fire and building inspection will inspect them to make make sure there are safe fire exits and things like that.

Speaker J · Through the chair, council brown off. We will be including a regime around fire and building inspection. We haven't developed the details yet. We're waiting for council's direction to staff and we will bring. We'll be bringing that back to council at the time but it'll be in line with the way that we're looking at inspections these days.

Speaker H · Okay, thank you. So with Those questions answered, Mr. Mayor, I am all obviously supportive of the motion on the floor. I did think 160 was too much after all. We're going to see how it goes in two years. I for one have heard from neighborhoods that are concerned about traffic, taxis, middle of the night, all those sorts of things that carry as well as the increase in rental if these become more popular than typical rentals. So I can support the motion on the floor.

Speaker C · Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Brownhoff. All members of council have spoken to the main motion for a first time. So I'm going to go now to second time speakers. Councillor Chambers, just a reminder, the motion has been amended to 120 nights.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor and I appreciate your allowing me to think about things a little bit. I just wanted to let you know that I had a little bird on my shoulder with the 160. It was a little bit too wide for me. I was just a little bit too uncomfortable. So I think that this is a good balance and my whole thing revolves around the review. And so that is what next council will have upon their table in two years is the review. And I like the review. Stafflake reviews and then and we can change things as needed. We do not want to cause any unintended consequences. We're good at that. And so we want to be precautionary, so incremental increases. So I appreciate some of my colleagues were a little bit uncomfortable.

Speaker D · So I feel that we're in a place of more comfort together. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you for a second time, Councillor Harper.

Speaker F · Yes. I hadn't originally intended to speak until I heard about the studies. And I would just remind all of us that in 2022, we were dealing with Airbnbs and there was no requirement that these be done with a homeowner being in the home. So it's not, in my view, relevant information. And it's exactly what the province banned was having massive Airbnbs. And this is the alternative program to provide both the level of protection for the. By having it be in the home, if it's in your home, you're going to be sure that there aren't weird things happening to you and your neighbors. And so I just, I'm struggling a bit.

Speaker F · I want the program to go forward, so. And I think it's going to go forward. So that part I can certainly accept. But I do think that we have made a mistake in not recognizing that not even half a year is available to owners to provide this, because that still leaves more than half a year for their relatives. Thank you. Thanks.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you for a second time, Councillor Bryce.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker C · It wasn't my first choice, but it seems that I can count to five. And so it looks like I'm going to move from my position and be prepared to find some kind of compromise.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. So assuming the numbers stay the same, it looks like council will now be giving directions for 120 nights. I just want to clarify with staff for anyone who may be under the impression that once this direction's been given, that they then can rent their short term rental for 120 nights. What are the next steps? Following council's direction this evening to you, Mayor Murdoch.

Speaker J · The next process is for staff to develop bylaw amendments and bring them back to council when those are ready for.

Speaker E · For review.

Speaker J · So there'll be no change to the current process around short term rentals. You'll have to go through Colin, don't forget. And so there's no change to the current ban on short term rentals until. Until that time comes.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Appreciate that clarity. Council, if you're ready for the question, at long last, the question will be for 120 nights and a two year review. I will call the question on the main motion as amended. Those in favor and opposed. The motion carries unanimously. That was a long one. Thank you everyone. I am going to turn and thank you so much to our staff for staying with us throughout that process and answering all of the many questions we put to you. I'm going to turn now to Dicio Lagoa.

Speaker K · Wow.

Speaker A · Not tonight. DCO Froud. If you could please take us to the Next item and back to our regular scheduled programming.

Speaker C · The next agenda item is public input and this is going to be on sections E which is consent agenda items F which is bylaws for three readings and G which is reports from members Members of Council. For those wishing to address Council via Ms. Teams, the meeting link is located at Saanich CA Agendas. The information is also displayed on the screen for convenience. For those participating through the Ms. Teams link, please leave your video display off and microphone muted except when addressing Council. If you wish to speak, you must use the raise your hand function to join the speaking queue. Speakers are going to have up to three minutes each to attract Address Council.

Speaker C · When you come forward to address Council or if you're participating on teams, it's always appreciated if you can begin with your name and either your address or your neighborhood or even if you're a resident of Saanich. There are some individuals who pre registered to speak so we're just going to call upon them first. Adam Cooper, if you'd like to come forward. You'll have three minutes to address Council. Please begin with your name.

Speaker K · Thank you. Good evening Mayor and Council. My name is Adam Cooper. I'm a resident of Saanich as well as the Director of Development and Community Planning for Abstract Developments. I'm here tonight to speak to you about Abstract's application for rezoning and development permit at 992 Gorge Road. This particular application has been before the community and the District district for approximately seven years. Over that time the projects evolved significantly in response to feedback from both staff, Neighbors and the Gorge Tilikum Community Association. Our original concept included a six story apartment building with substantially more homes. Following consultation and discussion with neighbors and staff, we completely rethought the project and returned with a proposal comprised entirely of family friendly three story townhomes which pay respect to the character of the Gorge neighborhood.

Speaker K · Today we are seeking approval for 58 homes in a built form that is fully supported by the official Community Plan and the Tilikum Local Area Plan. Staff have concluded that the proposal is consistent with both and have recommended your approval. One of the most important aspects of this proposal is the type of housing being delivered. Of the 58 homes, 44 contain three or more bedrooms, including 38 with four bedroom homes. These homes are designed for families. They include larger second and third bedrooms and they incorporate all of the other lessons we are learning from recent townhome projects in Saanich. The location is well suited for this proposal.

Speaker K · It's located on a major corridor near frequent transit, directly connected to the new separated cycling network and immediately adjacent to some of the community's most valued parks and public spaces. Staff have noted that additional green space would be desirable and we certainly understand that perspective. However, after significantly reducing the number of homes and the overall scale of the proposal, we found it difficult to meet that goal. On balance, however, we believe the proposal is worthy of your support. Every home has private outdoor space. The site contains a common area at the intersection of two pedestrian paths running through it and it delivers family housing adjacent to the incredible public green spaces and beaches found along the Gorge Waterway.

Speaker K · We appreciate the thought, thoughtful review by staff, the feedback received from the community and the recommendation before you today. And we respectfully ask council to support the application. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Speaker A · Thank you.

Speaker C · The next speaker is Katie Olson. If you'd like to come forward. Hi everyone, my name is Katie Ilson.

Speaker E · I'm a resident at 2834 Dysart Road

Speaker C · and our property backs onto the recent development that Abstract have completed on Gorge

Speaker H · Road, the Brook townhouses.

Speaker C · I'm just here to speak to the experience that we had with Abstract. We found them to be a great

Speaker E · company to work with. We've worked with the team members there for eight years since we've moved into

Speaker C · this property and we've had really good dialogue with them. They have been a fantastic company to work with and have present on our

Speaker E · boundary fence for many years.

Speaker C · We found people from the sales team to be great.

Speaker A · The people who were working with us

Speaker D · to consult with what our needs were,

Speaker C · we found them to be very receptive to feedback. There was a tree on our neighbour's property that was going to be cut

Speaker D · down and we were able to convinced

Speaker C · them as a neighbourhood that we needed to keep the tree there and they reduced the number of townhouses in that Brook development to accommodate that.

Speaker D · So a lot of people in the

Speaker C · neighbourhood were feeling pretty good about it. So yeah, I can say from our experience working with them that they have been a great company to work with. Everyone who was there was extremely accommodating to us and our Family and our needs and very receptive to any kind

Speaker E · of feedback that we gave them.

Speaker C · Thank you very much, Erin Dunbar. If you'd like to come forward, you have three minutes to address council.

Speaker A · Good evening.

Speaker E · Hi, my name is Erin Dunbar. Thank you for having me here tonight. I live in the Gorge neighborhood right on Austin street, which is about halfway up from the abstract townhomes on Gorge Road. Having seen the project built, I appreciate how little impact the construction had on the neighborhood with traffic flow. The process was really well managed and the finished development fits really nicely into the area. I am a supporter of the proposed townhomes at 992 Gorge Road because I think it's a great way to bring more families into the neighborhood. My husband and I plan on starting a family and we'd love to see more young families in the area so close to a school as well.

Speaker E · More families help support playgrounds, daycares, schools and other amenities that make our little community there really thrive. These townhomes could also give opportunity for people who want to downsize, don't want to have the big yard and still live in a nice area close to where they're used to. I had the opportunity to look at some of the development plans and I really appreciate the effort they made to keep the charm of the neighborhood. They're going to maintain the rock wall out the front and it feels like it really fits in. The Gorge area is a unique part of Saanich. It has really large, lots of and I believe that it's an area that can comfortably accommodate some thoughtful, well designed densification. So I'm, I'm pro town homes. Thank you for your time.

Speaker C · Next speaker is Laura or Lara Verley. I think you are participating via team, so if you want to unmute your line and please address. Council Hi, Great.

Speaker E · Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and council. My name is Laura Verley. My wife and I live in the neighborhood on Aurelia street and I am here tonight to speak in support of the proposal of the town home development at 992 Gorge Road. Something that I really appreciate, I think, is that the developer is really good at listening to the community and the people who live in the neighborhood. And I appreciate that they've changed the original proposal to what we now have in front of us. I think it will fit very nicely on the Gorge there. I also really love the one that they just recently did at 630 gorge. It's something that I know my wife and I would consider even retiring in a home like that when we wanted to downsize.

Speaker E · And yeah, I think it's a really nice development and I think my experience working with the abstract team has always been very positive. I feel like they, as has been said already tonight, that they consider the neighborhood very well and they take a lot of care and attention to detail. I believe that we need more family friendly, ground orientated housings like this development that is being proposed, allowing young families to put down roots, giving people like myself the opportunity to downsize but also stay in the neighborhoods that we love and even hopefully provide a place for my own children when they're ready to settle down.

Speaker E · And I think it would be a perfect location for them. I also think that this is great to welcome more residents in our neighborhood and to help support all the local businesses as well. So yeah, I'm just here to. I believe the proposal represents a thoughtful growth and for the neighborhood and I really encourage the council to support the application. I'm in full support, thank you.

Speaker C · The next speaker is Dale Jarvis, if you'd like to come forward and address council.

Speaker H · Okay.

Speaker C · The next speaker is Stuart Wooten if you're in attendance. If you'd like to come forward.

Speaker K · Hi, good evening. My name is Stuart Wooten, I'm a resident on Rockwell Avenue and I'm here tonight to voice my support for the development. We're getting close to nine years since the first community review of this project and I don't know how many people in council were there at at that particular time but we've went through many layers of this process. I'm speaking on behalf of myself and my close neighbours and I hope the broader community that we're really happy with where we got to with the development. The townhomes look nice, they present well. It's got a nice streetscape at the front. If anything it's going to help bed in the Amica building with that bright, bright yellow that you either love or hate.

Speaker K · We're really excited hopefully that the DPE will be approved and we can move forward in this because again, it's been a while. The immediate neighborhood unfortunately seems to be aging out a lot. I have two young girls, there's no other kids on the street for them to play with. For Saanich hoping to infuse life and vitality in the area. Really need to do something and do something quickly that way way View Royal elementary, which my girls go to and Craig Flower right across the road. Their intakes are down in the coming year and it seemed to be a trend that's continuing and I'm hoping That we can maybe reverse that and get some life again. The heritage fits really well.

Speaker K · It has a nice, pleasant feel to it. Even when you're driving up Rockwell from the. The renders that we've seen, we don't have any issues with that at all. Secondly, the process has taken so long that the houses that are part of that development are past their end of life and they're starting to become a bit of an eyesore. And we're really hoping that we can get the rubber stamp and get things moving so that it's going to be less of a concern for the immediate street and the immediate neighbourhoods. The last thing I want to say is that, that we have been pleasantly surprised, not pleasantly surprised, but expectedly surprised with the quality of the development, with the brook along the road.

Speaker K · Really excited to see some quality construction in this immediate area because we haven't had that for years and years and years. Again, it's becoming a bit aged. It needs fatality, it needs life. And again, I really hope that the DP will be approved and not be hungry up any further. So thank you for your time, I appreciate it.

Speaker C · The next individual is Kyla Berry. If you'd like to come forward, you'll have three minutes to address. Council. Good evening, Mayor. Council. My name is Kyla Berry and I still live at Mackenzie, 1827 Mackenzie, to be precise.

Speaker C · And I am a resident with vision loss and I've lived with this vision loss my entire life and I am counting myself amongst the absent citizens and it's pretty darn annoying to be keeping in that place. I feel ignored. And that's why I'm here to speak to motion G4 and show you how it ties into consent. Motion E3. We wouldn't need G4 if it wasn't for the experience that I've been having with the development that is going to take away my home. Everything has been done without me. Disability, human rights has been inverted. Everything about us, without us has been the experience. This council has been complicit in failing me at every single turn. I was not notified of the one meeting, the zoning meeting back in 2024, February 26th. People slice that.

Speaker C · That would be my only opportunity to say, do not take my house away. Do not push through this permit when you already have. Campus view that lost 12 townhomes. It's already under construction. Cedar Hill Library, 210 homes, units already under construction. Those structural sequencing timelines are unchangeable now. Did I know that? No, I didn't. Why? Because I was given a Notice on my door by Capital Region housing Corporation on March 1, long after my opportunity to change anything, to make recommendations to show the Gordon has lost data for 60% of the house housing that's going to be wiped out for four to five years in that area.

Speaker C · Nothing about us, without us is the rallying cry of the disability rights movement. I'm in purple tonight. This is the color of the disability rights movement. I urge you not to give money to a corporation that is complicit in obstructing and not hearing tenant voices from the capital planning stage. On to where we sit now. There is a contestation of the permit. That's for this property redevelopment. I have submitted all of those to every single one of you plus the planning department. And I am contesting it on the grounds that Capital Region are failing to live up to their expectations of their policies. Bylaws are stronger than policies and we are exempt from every statutory protection that market renters get.

Speaker C · And that is a two tier.

Speaker A · Thank you, Ms. Barry. I appreciate your comments.

Speaker C · Nothing about us without us.

Speaker A · Thank you, Ms. Barry.

Speaker C · The next speaker is Mauricio Curbello who is participating via teams. Mauricio, if you just want to unmute your line.

Speaker K · Line.

Speaker A · I take it Mr. Cabello is not able to unmute himself.

Speaker C · Oh, I just see his video turn on and see if.

Speaker G · Yeah, I'm, I'm unmuted.

Speaker A · Oh, there you go.

Speaker G · Thank you. My name is Marisa Crabello. I'm a resident on Harriet Road and my Comments are about two items on the agenda. First, 992 Borge. This is in my neighborhood. I'm glad to see some townhouses getting approved. It was originally a rather modern looking, dense condo proposal several years ago that spooked people a bit. And now it's more in line with something that the community I think is okay with. It's unfortunate that it's taken this long, you know, seven and a bit years. But I'm glad to see, you know, a moderate density proposal move forward. I think it'll fit nicely next to the Amica building that's next door.

Speaker G · And it's a nice looking building in a more traditional style that fits in with the older homes in the area. So I think it's the kind of urban form that most people are okay with in that area of our neighborhood. My second comment is on the motion to ask for enforcement powers to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings. I'm not right opposed to this. I just have a few concerns about how we might do this. You know, it's one thing to ask developers to make changes at the construction stage that are cheaper to do at that point than later on as a retrofit, but it's quite another to force upgrade costs onto existing homeowners and building owners.

Speaker G · I would consider, for example, going electric after my gas furnace and water heater die, but the reality is that it would cost me a $5,000 panel upgrade. I'd be constantly heating up water I'm not using and potentially getting into step two rates with BC Hydro. So my hunch is that if these updates made sense economically for existing owners, we wouldn't need to enforce it. They would do it just because it makes sense financially. And so by asking for enforcement powers to do that, this is probably because we have a hunch that they wouldn't. And so we're wanting to impose that cost, which, which I think we should be a little bit careful about. So I think that this motion should

Speaker A · come in two parts.

Speaker G · First, we should determine what we're asking the province to let us do, what we intend to regulate, why people wouldn't make those changes of their own volition, what it would cost people to comply if they wouldn't do it on their own, whether that cost is palatable and what incentive we might consider for electrification. And then, you know, once that's determined, once the nature of what we're asking the province to do is known, then we would have a motion to ask the province to give us those powers. I just think that we need to be a bit careful and slow down a bit when we ask for parallel sets of rules from the province so that we can do things beyond what they already require as part of the building code or the energy step code.

Speaker G · Especially when those things have direct costs for homeowners and they're being imposed on the people who are in those buildings now and not on the developers building them at the beginning stages. So I would just urge, you know, some caution and some rigor and some analysis in what we're asking for when we ask for enforcement beyond what the building code requires.

Speaker A · Thanks. Okay, thank you.

Speaker C · The next individual who pre registered is Liz Cronin. If you'd like to come forward, you'll have three minutes to address council.

Speaker A · Good evening.

Speaker D · Hello.

Speaker C · Thanks for having me. I'm Liz Cronin. I'm the current chair of the Victoria Transit Riders Union, and I'm here to speak in favor of G3 free transit for youth in BC. We are always so thrilled when this comes up because we hear from folks, we talk to all the time about how big a difference this would make for them. I am aware that this has been coming up also as something that maybe Saanich could participate in at the municipal or the regional level. And I want to be clear that we don't want to deter that in any way, but we do strongly encourage you to shame the province vigorously at every step for not doing this themselves.

Speaker C · It is completely ridiculous that they're expecting municipalities to do this for young people. They moved it to 12 and they could move it to 18 tomorrow. Our demand is that they eliminate fare for people on disability and income assistance and for people, youth and for seniors immediately. We are in a situation where more and more people are struggling to afford food and shelter and they need to be able to move freely. We heard some very moving things when it was discussed recently about doing this at the CRD level. Youth who had to choose between walking in the rain and not going to extracurricular activities. And we know that when they did this in Kingston, when they made it available freely for youth, like 10%, more, 10% of youth went to extracurricular activities that they wouldn't have gone to, this would just make such a huge difference for youth across the province.

Speaker C · We met with George Anderson, the parliamentary secretary for transit, and he heavily implied that they expect municipalities to step up and do this and that is unjust. So please fight for your people. Push for them to do this at the provincial level. Please do it for the youth of Saanich if you can, because they all need it and they need it as soon as possible, but continue to push for them. And I strongly believe that it is part of your role to push back on the province when they're trying to dump things on you. And I heard they've been doing that a lot. We're behind you, so please fight for this. It causes such huge moral distress for the youth we've talked to.

Speaker C · When they know that the ones that live in Victoria can get a on the bus for free and the teens in Oak Bay and Saanich and Esquimalt, they can't do that. It causes huge moral distress for drivers when they see a 16 year old get on and mumble that they're 12 and they know that if they tried to do that on the next connecting bus, someone might yell at them and they might feel bad for trying to go to see their friend or go to their job or go see family. This is so incredibly serious. This is access to everything that they need. This is access to social connections. It's access to Activities, please step up and please continue to push the province.

Speaker C · If they get bored of it, that's fine, they should fix it. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you.

Speaker C · That concludes the individuals who pre registered to speak. So we're going to open it up now to anybody else who wishes to address council on the agenda Item Wayne Kelly has patiently been waiting with his hand raised in teams. If you'd like to go ahead, Wayne, you'll have three minutes to address council. Wayne, if you want to go ahead and just unmute your line, you'll have three minutes to address council.

Speaker A · Okay, well it looks like maybe Mr. Kelly's not able to unmute himself at the moment. Oh, there we go. I'll turn it over to you. Go ahead. Thank you very much. Good evening Mayor Murdoch and members of council. Before I begin, Mary and I would like to take this opportunity first of all to thank you for approving our application in February for the on site

Speaker K · stormwater management on our proposed lot.

Speaker A · We're so grateful that you supported our

Speaker K · plan to manage our rainwater in a

Speaker A · sustainable way and we look forward to showing you the completed system. If there's anyone who may be interested

Speaker K · in seeing that when it's completed, we're

Speaker A · hopeful that you can use in the future. This is an example of an innovative way to deal with the on site stormwater management. Tonight, the final step we're hoping in our 6 year journey to subdivide our property is the DVP application 00551 before you. This application to subdivide our property and

Speaker K · vary the lot size of the proposed lot in order to preserve the heritage

Speaker A · home was unanimously approved by mayor and Council in 2020.

Speaker K · So essentially this is a reapplication rather than a new.

Speaker A · Our plans remained the same the entire time to preserve and designate this important heritage building and to build a single

Speaker K · family home with a secondary suite in

Speaker A · a style that is complementary to the existing home.

Speaker K · The report written by Saanich Planning is

Speaker A · very comprehensive and clearly provides the background

Speaker K · information leading to this DVP application.

Speaker A · So I don't think there is a need for me to review it now

Speaker K · given that you have, you have obviously

Speaker G · a long evening ahead.

Speaker K · Mary and I respectively respectfully request that

Speaker A · you support the staff recommendation and approve

Speaker K · our application so we can finally move ahead with this project.

Speaker A · Thank you very much. Thank you. If there's anyone in the room or online who wishes to address council on the items listed under E, F or G, this will be your opportunity. Opportunity to do so. We'll just need your name whether or not you're a Saanich resident and you'll have up to three minutes to address council. Good evening, thank you for being here.

Speaker K · Mayor, council on a lovely warm, sunny July night. I'm sure we all want to be in a barbecue outside, but thanks for being here. Yeah, I just, I just want to

Speaker A · speak to, I just need to get your name.

Speaker K · Oh, sorry.

Speaker A · Yeah, thank you.

Speaker K · Yeah, it's everything I just said, that's my name, it's Bryn and I'm a resident of Sanich on Saanich Road. Thank you. I just wanted to speak to, if I'm saying this correctly, to poll item E3 to allow for consideration of ultimately providing funds to the ultimate tear down of a building that some, some of people have spoken tonight live in. They're disabled, they, a lot of elderly live there. I've had the opportunity to meet one of the residents there and I, I'm sure you can all relate to the stress and trauma of moving your home when you choose to. Even when we have that good fortune when you don't choose to. It's pretty stressful. But I'm sure you can appreciate maybe from your parents or elderly people how stressful and traumatic that is.

Speaker K · So I can't imagine personally myself that trauma of somebody who is visually impaired or physically impaired and knowing your neighborhood and community is so critical. So I understand that by releasing these funds to the ultimate redevelopment of that property at this stage would push them out when there are other buildings coming online that could take them in a couple of years. So I'm just asking council to consider that we don't know the future. We are building for a future state. But as we've heard recently in the news, there's a lot of unoccupied and properties in Vancouver. There's quite a bit in Victoria now. So yes, those are condos that would be for purchase, not rent.

Speaker K · But ultimately that has a trickle down effect and there may be a case in a year, that or two years that there won't be as much of a need. But then these people will have been pushed out and scattered across the region from Sydney to Sooke and very. And I'm just requesting that we pause, give a chance to consider before we fund that the Saanich council and the development permit, the demolition permit, you know, maybe we could just have a breather. I would just, if that was me in those shoes, I would really appreciate it. I just want us to recognize that housing is so important for everyone. Absolutely.

Speaker K · But the ones that are already there aren't going to be dramatically affected. I just hope that we have some consideration for them too. So thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you.

Speaker K · Have a good night.

Speaker A · If there's anyone else who'd like to address council on the items listed under E, F and G for public input, this will be your opportunity to do so. Please come forward or if you're online, please raise your virtual hand. Good evening.

Speaker K · My name is Gus Kirby. I've been fortunate to meet work and even been taught by some of you guys. I'm happy to be here tonight. Throughout the past year and a half, I've been working on something called the Student Youth Council. We take ideas from youth in Saanich and we try and get them to make changes for themselves and learn what youth need in Saanich. It's been an underrepresented demographic in Saanich for many years and I'm happy to bring it to everyone's attention in this way. We have been thinking about transportation and affordability this whole year. We've learned a lot. We know that 43%, I think it was, of youth did talk about wanting free transit for ease of getting to extracurriculars, even to school, instead of spending like $2,400 a year altogether.

Speaker K · And I'm here to talk to G1 and talk item G1 and talk about how we need to accept the report done by Teal Councillor Thiel Fonderoff this way. And we've done a lot of research on transit for youth and affordability for youth and how it's moved in the municipality and other municipalities across the country. And I think it's a really important report to accept this motion. And I also ask you to try and move Saanich Student Youth Council as a permanent fixture of Saanich as it creates a way for youth to have their voice heard and represented in Saanich and also just leads people to feel confident in themselves.

Speaker K · Thank you very much.

Speaker A · Thank you. If there's anyone else who'd like to address council on the items listed under E, F and G, this will be your opportunity to do so. Please come forward or raise your virtual hand if you're online.

Speaker A · Good evening.

Speaker K · My name is Sasha Izard. I'm a Saanich resident. I am speaking in support of motion G4, nothing about us without us. I will also be Referring to item E3, Saanich Affordable Housing reserve fund applications. The idea of nothing about us without us is that no decision affecting disabled people should be made without their meaningful participation. Mere notification does not count. It means genuine participation before the outcome is set. The word democracy means rule by the people. That includes everyone, including all who are to be potentially impacted by political decisions. Item E3 concerns the release of public funds for a project that reached this point without disabled tenant voices at any stage. That is the harm the Motion G4 is designed to prevent.

Speaker K · The following is a brief history of how this came to be. 1. Last month the District of Sanich adopted the Quadra McKenzie Plan. This plan contained the planning framework which supports the rationale for the redevelopment referred to. There was an online engagement process for the plan that a blind tenant could not access with their screen reading software. This issue was disclosed at the podium on June 16. Despite that, without resolving the issue, the plan was adopted anyway anyway. 2. The district enabled enacted SAANISH's tenant protection bylaw, the strongest tenant protection instrument this municipality has ever passed, and then wrote a notwithstanding clause into section 4 that exempts non market housing redevelopments from the entire framework.

Speaker K · Every statutory protection available to market renters in Saanich is unavailable, for example to tenants to tenants being displaced from Rosewood and Willow. The exemption was confirmed in writing as deliberate Council policy by the Director of Planning on June 15, 2026 in correspondence to an affected tenant. The District is currently being asked to approve a development permit, a permit for a project whose capital plan was approved in December 2021 without tenant notification, whose relocation policy was revised in July 2025 without a functioning tenant advisory Committee, and whose permit was filed in November 2025 without prior notice to any affected tenant.

Speaker K · Tonight's consent agenda asks the council to release $360,250 in public funds to the same public corporation, the CRHC, before the permit is approved, before the formal complaint submitted to council on June 23rd has been addressed and before the motion G4 has been considered and or been decided on. The District of Saanich is not a bystander to this process. It is the approving authority. Motion G4 is an opportunity for this Council to establish clearly and formally that it will not approve projects affecting disabled residents without their meaningful participation. I am asking Council to pass the motion item G4 tonight without amendment and to direct staff to apply it to DPR 01101 before the permit is approved. The people this motion is designed to protect are still here.

Speaker K · It is not too late to include them. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you. If there's anyone else who'd like to address Council on the items under E, F and G, this is your opportunity to do so. You're welcome to come forward or if you're online. Please raise your virtual hand on this call one more time. If there's anyone who wishes to address council on the items listed under E, F and G I see a hand online from Mr. Nagiri. I'll turn it over to you. Mr. Najiri, you have we'll just need your name whether you're a Saanich resident and you'll have up to three minutes to address council. Medina Juri 1005 leads place on item E1 permit and application modernization in page 5 staff wrote staff engage with the developers

Speaker G · development industry stakeholders on a a regular basis.

Speaker A · I want to my question is is the ordinary homeowners are part of considered considered as stakeholders and if not why not do you meet with us on a regular basis to talk about this permit application or not? And if not why not on E3 affordable housing reserve fund I believe that we should since we have housing only affordable housing crisis and we don't have and we never had a housing crisis for market housing because right now there is for example more than 4,000 housing units for sale in Greater Victoria MLS list.

Speaker A · So we never had housing crisis and you push all the time to push more housing, more market housing, not affordable housing. Since that now is clear to public we never had housing crisis for market housing. Would you consider to put all the public land signage land that is excess and you want to sell it to developers to build market housing. Would you put those the value of those land in affordable housing funds and consider as an affordable housing funds value because there is one in Royal Oak Shopping center, in Saanich Road, in West Saanich Road and also some of your land in your Saanich Yard and G4 I believe you are not listening to the people with disabilities.

Speaker A · So if the people with disability want to have effect in this council, maybe one of them should run

Speaker H · for the

Speaker A · council in the next election like Kyla Berry on G3 free transit for youth. I think it should be free transit for all low income people, seniors, youth and all the low income people. The people that make less than $40,000 a year should have free transit not just youth. On G2 On G1 Student Youth Council you got rid of the Sanichiev open form. You get rid of this year we don't have any town hall meeting and the point is we the people that live in Saanich and that's your three minutes. Appreciate the benefit of your comments on multiple items. Thank you. If there's anyone else who'd like to address council please come forward. I see a hand online from Ms. Burton. So I'll turn to you as the next person approaches the podium. Ms. Burton, you have three minutes.

Speaker A · We'll just need your name and whether or not you're a Saanich resident.

Speaker E · Thank you.

Speaker C · I am Saanich and.

Speaker E · Oh, there it is.

Speaker C · Can you hear me?

Speaker A · We can go ahead.

Speaker E · Wonderful, thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today. I would like to briefly speak to E3 and to G4. True inclusion means first nations, disabled individuals and marginalized groups affected by issues have actual decision making power rather than just being treated as a token gesture and without involvement involvement. Saanich policies, support systems risk missing the mark. And so I would encourage, encourage that some consideration be given to that and to that end and directly affecting E3. Respectfully, I asked council to consider postponing the approval this evening of the regional. Sorry, my dog joining the meeting. I asked that they consider postponing your decision. And Bailey, move out of the way.

Speaker E · I recognize the importance of the regional housing initiatives and I appreciate the need to secure the funding that addresses our hunting, our housing challenges. However, we also need to make sure that we're not unintentionally causing others to

Speaker C · lose their homes in the process.

Speaker E · And the people facing displacement are more than just statistics here. And I would add, ask that for those who are trying to or will need to be finding alternative housing in today's market, it's extremely difficult and for some it's going to be impossible. So I ask again that a short

Speaker C · postponement be considered with an opportunity to

Speaker E · explore additional options and just an opportunity to allow them consideration as well. Sorry, it's a serious topic and my dog's trying to take over the show, so I will, I will end it with that. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this this evening. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Ms. Burton and Bailey. I did see somebody get up at the back who wished to speak. Please come forward. And then anyone else who'd like to speak afterwards, this will be your opportunity to address council on the items listed under E, F and G. Good evening.

Speaker C · Good evening.

Speaker E · Good evening. My name is Marian Pape and I am the co lead of the Climate justice action research team for gvat. Many of you have heard of gvat. We have spoken before. I'm speaking and by the way, I'm a resident of Oak Bay and I'm substituting for Lynn Beek who is supposed to be here, but I just found out that she has shingles, so not a fun time for her. The resolution that Councillor de Vries is bringing forward to you tonight that the mayor write to the Verntia government, including the Premier, Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions, other appropriate ministers and local MLAs, urging the province to advance the development and implementation of tools that would enable local governments to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing building buildings.

Speaker E · I'm speaking to that in terms of the record that municipal governments have shown in the past as being so relevant and careful about citizens rights and all of the implications that are associated with regulatory frameworks. However, the other reason that this is so important is that we have all kinds of regulations around new buildings and very, very little with existing buildings. And there is a huge, huge amount of existing buildings that need to have some work regarding greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

Speaker K · So

Speaker E · I'm just envisioning that you're going to be more creative than the province. Thank you very much.

Speaker A · Thank you. If there are any other speakers who wish to address council on the items for public input this evening, this will be your opportunity to do so. Please come forward. Thanks for being here. We'll just need your name and whether you're a sandwich resident.

Speaker E · I have evidence and I've asked for help from you before because you're on the police board. I believe that our children should be protected. I believe that our good officers should be protected.

Speaker C · I have proof of Lindsey Buziak's murder.

Speaker A · Can I just ask.

Speaker C · This is very important. No, please don't interrupt me this time.

Speaker A · I am going to interrupt you because you're actually. I'm sorry.

Speaker C · You blocked me from the.

Speaker A · All right, I'm sorry. I'm going to have to stop you. The items on the agenda this evening listed under for public input are under E, F and G. Could you let me know which. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. If you're not here, Council, I'll take a motion to recess until the speaker is prepared to vacate the seat. Councillor devries, seconded by Westhaver on a recess until the speaker leaves the podium. Those in favor and opposed? Chambers is opposed. The motion carries. We're recessed until the speaker vacates the seat.

Speaker J · SA.

Speaker A · Okay, everyone, I'll call us back to order. And I'm just going to. As we were closing public input, I just wanted to confirm if there is anyone else who wishes to address council on the items listed for public input this evening. This will be your opportunity to address council. As I'm not seeing anyone in the room get up and I'm not seeing any hands go up online, we will consider public input closed and I will turn it over to DCO Froud to introduce the next item for us, please.

Speaker C · The next item is adoption of the minutes. This is the council meeting of June 15, the special council meeting of June 16, the committee of the whole meeting June 22 and the special counsel meeting of June 22.

Speaker A · Thank you. Councillor Brown off. Seconded by chambers on adoption of the minutes. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. I believe we have a notice of motion from a member of council, Ms. Froud, if I turn it over to Councilor chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. My notice? A motion that the District of Sage endorse the principle of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Tree, recognizing trees as vital living beings with ecological, cultural and community value deserving protection including the right to life, natural growth, integrity and regeneration.

Speaker D · Direct staff to consider and integrate these principles where appropriate into the ongoing tree protection bylaw update. Forest urban forest strategy implementation Official community plan environmental development permit area guidelines and related strategic planning processes. Explore opportunities for partnerships with local environmental organizations, First Nations, Lake Wangin and Wuzanich people and community groups to advance public education and stewardship of Saanich's urban forest, particularly garry oak ecosystems and staff, provide an update to council as of part part of the next tree protection bylaw update report or the next relevant strategic planning report on potential alignments, recommendations, enhancements and any proposed policy or bylaw adjustments.

Speaker D · Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Are there any other notices of motion from members of council? Seeing none. I'll turn it back to miss Froud for the next item, please.

Speaker C · We're moving into bylaws for final reading. The first one is the Quadra McKenzie plan. This is final reading for OCP plan amendment bylaw 10298.

Speaker A · Okay. I would normally look to the acting mayor for the month to make the motion. I don't expect Councillor Chambers is going to want to read in final reading of the quadrant McKenzie plan. So I'll turn to Councillor Westhaver. I'm sorry, did I have it right?

Speaker E · Wrong?

Speaker A · Oh, my calendar is turned to the wrong month. July is Councillor Westhaver and so you can be the one to turn to make the motion for final reading, please.

Speaker E · Thank you. The bylaw number 10298 be given final reading.

Speaker A · Okay. On final reading, those in favor and opposed. Chambers is opposed and Brown off is opposed. The motion carries. Thank you.

Speaker C · Next item is 3984 and 3986 Gordon Head Road. This is to give final reading to official community plan amendment bylaw 10264. Zoning bylaw amendment bylaw 10265. And council can also consider approving and issuing development permit DPR 01058.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor West.

Speaker D · West Taber.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That bylaw number 10264 be given final reading.

Speaker A · Seconded by Phelps Bondoroff on final reading. Those in favor and opposed? Chambers is opposed. The motion carries. Back to you, Councillor Westhaver.

Speaker E · The development permit DPR 01058 be approved and issued.

Speaker A · Seconded by Phelps Bondroff. Those in favor and opposed? Chambers is opposed. The motion carries. Thank you.

Speaker C · Missing from the green sheet is zoning bylaw giving final reading to bylaw 10265, which is the zoning amendment bylaw.

Speaker A · Oh, I see. So there would be two bylaws for final reading under that item. Okay. So it would be bylaw 10265.

Speaker E · Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That bylaw number 10265 be given final reading.

Speaker A · Seconded by Phelps Mondroff. Those in favor and opposed? Chambers is opposed. The motion carries. Thank you for catching that, Ms. Froud.

Speaker C · Next item is 961Mackenzie Avenue, 3986 and 39960 Sanich Road. This is to give final reading to zoning amendment bylaw 10264. And council can also consider approving and issuing Development Permit DPR 01057.

Speaker A · Go for it. Councilor James. I have West.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. That bylaw number 10242 be given final reading.

Speaker A · Second by Phelps Bondoroff. Those in favor and opposed? Chambers and brown off are opposed. The motion carries. Councillor Westhaver.

Speaker E · That Development Permit DPR 01057 be approved and issued.

Speaker A · Seconded by Phelps Bondroff. And those in favor and opposed? Chambers and brown off are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. I'll turn now to Ms. Froud. For the consent items, please.

Speaker C · Yes, for the consent agenda. In advance of the meeting, there was a request. Requests to remove the Saanich affordable Housing reserve Fund applications from the consent agenda. So the consent agenda items tonight are the permit and Application Modernization Program 2026 Annual Update, 3905 Hobb St. A subdivision and development variance permit application, the appointment of external auditors for kpmg, a revised schedule of meeting for counsel, and then the council procedure, bylaw delegation scheduling. These would be consent agenda items E1, 2, 4, 5 and 6.

Speaker A · Okay. If I could get a motion from a member of council for the remaining consent items. Councillor Phelps Bondaroff.

Speaker B · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I move items E1, E2, E3, 4. Not three, not three. Sorry. E1, E2, E4, 5 and 6, please.

Speaker A · Thank you. Is there a seconder? Thank you. Councillor Harper, on the remaining consent items, those in favor and opposed. None are opposed. That's carried. Ms. Froud, do we now go into the Saanich Affordable Housing reserve fund?

Speaker C · Yes, Mr. Mayor. It's council's practice to consider items that have been removed from the consent age item. Consent agenda immediately following. So this item is the Senich Affordable Housing Reserve Fund applications. It's a report from the Director of Planning and it is requesting approval for grant applications. Pre development grants for Garth Homer Society Pacifica Housing Capital grants to Capital Regional Housing Corporation for two separate developments.

Speaker A · Okay. So our practice is to have the motion on the floor so that we can get into discussion. So Councilor Westaver, could I look to you to make the first motion under E3? And then I. I recorded a number of questions that I'll put to staff and I'll turn it over to council for discussion. Councilor West.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The council approved two pre development grants to Garth Homer Society and Pacifica Housing from the Saanich Affordable Housing reserve fund totaling $80,000 and seconded by DeVries.

Speaker A · Then thank you. I am going to ask the questions that were put as part of the public input. While this is not. While the issues raised were not specific to the first motion, it's relevant to the disbursement of the funds. And so I'll just seek clarity from staff on what was raised this evening. In particular the tenant protection bylaw. Some of the comments that were provided this evening from members of the public were that the bylaw is stronger than policy and a question about why exemption for a non market housing provider. And I wondered if you could clarify why that exemption exists and what policy may be in place for tenants of CRHC housing.

Speaker J · To you, Mr. Mayor, I'll answer the first question and leave my colleague Thomas to answer the second question. We purposefully excluded non market housing providers when we developed the tenant protection bylaw. The reason was we consider that exemption part of the suite of supports that the district offers to accelerate non nonprofit housing development. The reason that they're exempted is because. Because it duplicates efforts. They have their own tenant protection policies and practices and we want to remove ourselves from that process to not slow down approvals. With faster approval times, our non market housing providers are more effective at getting grants from provincial and federal funders because they have a higher chance of success. To see those projects realized.

Speaker J · The funders have responded positively to the district's support and it has been successful. Our permit data shows a high number of affordable housing units that are going through the system moving towards occupancy. So it is seen as getting out of the way and respecting that they have their own tenant practices, relocation practices in place. And I will say that, you know, we're, we evaluate this practice of exempting non market housing providers and the district can change that at any time. If the district felt that that was being abused. I think from staff's perspective, we don't see that happening. But it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a support that could be changed in the future if it was not being respected.

Speaker A · Thank you. We know that CRHC does have its own tenant relocation policy and I just wondered if you're able to provide us with information about what is included in their policy.

Speaker K · To you, Mr. Mayor, I'm not going to go through the entirety of the CRHC's tenant relocation policy, but I can say that, that a lot of the conditions and stipulations in the policy are considered what we would consider best practice. They provide personalized relocation plans to each of the tenants. They have specific conditions for vulnerable tenants who require additional assistance and may require additional needs within their home. They are provided, each tenant is provided with, with multiple, I believe up to three relocation destinations within the CRHC portfolio as close by as is available

Speaker H · and

Speaker K · they're also compensated for the moving costs. There's also conditions about first right of refusal to move back to the redevelopment following the completion of the development. So the idea would be that the tenant would be relocated for a temporary amount of time and then they would be given the option to return to the same, to the same location once the redevelopment was complete.

Speaker A · Okay. So for certainty, there is a policy that there are provisions provided for tenant protection and relocation and that if there were concerns about the. Whether or not the policy met our expectations, we could certainly raise them or intervene. But at this point we're not hearing from staff that there are concerns in respect to that policy. Finally, a number of folks have suggested that we pause or deny the funding that's been requested for this particular project and wondered if you could speak to the effect if that funding were not approved.

Speaker J · Yes, certainly to you, Mr. Mayor. Certainly council could decide to do that. I don't think the funding affects the viability of the project. However, it will affect the affordability that the CRC is able to offer through their rents. So the funding that is provided to non Market housing providers by the district does a couple of things. It demonstrates a commitment from the district and helps non market housing providers be successful getting funding. All of these projects are funded by higher levels of government, so they need that funding and it does help to improve affordability.

Speaker A · Okay, appreciate that clarity. Thank you very much. And finally, just for certainty, there were a couple of suggestions that this is a matter of DP approval. But what's in front of council this evening is not approval of the development

Speaker J · permit to you, Mr. Mayor. That is correct. This is a question of grants from the Senage Affordable Housing Reserve Fund.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. So the only question in front of council this evening is whether or not that particular project would receive 360,200, $250 as recommended by staff. And we've heard from staff that the effect would not be that the project wouldn't proceed, but rather that the funds would have to be made up by the cost that's borne by the tenant. With that in mind, I am going to turn to our mover for the opportunity to speak to it or ask any questions. Followed by the seconder. You're okay. And the seconder was Councillor Phelps Bonderoff. Do I have. No, it was Councilor Harper.

Speaker F · No.

Speaker A · Councillor devries, my apologies. There were a number of motions made over the last 20 minutes. I'm sorry I didn't write it down. Councillor De Vries, you're next to speak.

Speaker I · Just looking for clarity here. We'll have two motions. I think it's probably most appropriate that I save my comments for the next motion.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Same goes, I think, for others. Councillor Chambers, did you wish to speak. Speak to the motion. This is the first motion on the agenda for the Garth Homer Society and Pacifica Housing. Go ahead.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. And yes, of course I'm in support of making sure this housing is affordable by approving these grants. But I also wanted to understand better the responsibility, the legal responsibility of counsel when we delegate our decision making authority to another body that potentially could be impairing or contravening human rights. So I'm just wondering about that because these are human rights that are being implicated. And I'm wondering if. If council is just trusting that these processes are happening and staff is not coming back telling us there's a concern, but yet we're hearing a concern in the public. And this concern, this current concern, is not the first time I've heard this. Last term this very same displacement scenario happened with tenants at Dawson Heights causing extreme anxiety. So that's My first question.

Speaker D · Question is about the human rights and maybe Mr. Reams, I'll give Ms. Hartling

Speaker A · the opportunity to answer.

Speaker J · Perhaps I'll start through the Meredith. Councillor Chambers. I would say that looking at the tenant protection bylaw, the district doesn't add value to this discussion. This issue. The issue is best left between the tenant and the housing provider.

Speaker J · And that is what is happening there. There's ongoing discussion between these parties. So it's not that we don't have authority here, it's just best. The discussion is best left between those parties.

Speaker D · Okay. Okay. Thank you. Through the mayor. What could we do to change the notwithstanding clause or our ability to read this back into something that we do? As you said a second ago, and I can't reiterate it, I have a migraine right now, so I'm. I'm trying to focus. But the last comment you made was about council could change this. How could we change it, Ms. Hartling?

Speaker J · Through the mayor to come. Council chambers. Council's approval of the tenant protection bylaw included an exemption of non market housing providers for the reasons I've mentioned. And it's within council's powers to. To re revisit that exemption at any time if they. If they wish to do so.

Speaker D · Oh, okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a motion arising afterwards. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay. Are there other speakers to the motion before I call the question again? This is on the first motion in respect of funding for Garth Homer Society and Pacifica Housing. I'll call the question. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. Councillor Westhaver, could I ask you to make the second motion, please?

Speaker E · The council approve capital grants to Capital Region Housing Corporation for housing projects at 8987 Oaks Road in brackets. 18551821 Mackenzie Ave. In brackets. 360250 from the Saanich Affordable Housing Reserve Fund.

Speaker A · Seconded by Devries. You are welcome to speak to a Councillor Westhaven.

Speaker E · I'll just make a comment that I was happy to be able to reach this through and appreciate the information provided by staff. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Devries.

Speaker I · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And as you were noting earlier, the question before us this evening is really on whether or not we give the capital grant which really determines how affordable the homes are. As not giving the grant would just pass on costs to the tenants that that will be there. If you'll indulge me, I do want to add clarity to the record as I think there is Misinformation and missing information out there in this dialogue that I think will be a benefit to residents to have. And with the indulgence of my colleagues, I'm happy to provide some of that. For more than 40 years, the capital Region Housing Corporation has been supporting tenants grappling with affordable affordability challenges, especially thousands of families, seniors, single parent households and persons with different abilities through various affordable, attractive and inclusive housing projects over the years.

Speaker I · But our housing is aging, it's in need of repair. And the land that this housing sits on has also the opportunity to support more household holes, achieving the same stability, the same safety and the same sense of belonging. That and community that we have offered to pass and current tenants alike. Over the last number of decades, there's been an under investment in affordable housing by the province and federal government and there's a desperate need for housing in our community. It's funds like the Community Housing Fund that have allowed us a generational opportunity to try to make up for lost time, to support more people in need in our community who are desperately looking for housing that's secure, stable and within their budgets.

Speaker I · This has improved. This has included redevelopment projects like the one at Rosewood and Willowdene, as well as previous projects like Michigan Square and Caledonia. I want to acknowledge that the involuntary relocation in some cases due to these redevelopments does have an impact on people's lives. And that is why the CRHC takes such care and strives to do everything that it can to support tenants through this process. While keeping in mind that this is our opportunity to do more, to meet the moment and to create more affordable home homes and housing for families, more housing for seniors, more affordable housing for single parent households, and more affordable housing for persons with different abilities.

Speaker I · I want to add clarity about how we support tenants at the crhc. The CRHC has a tenant engagement team dedicated to receiving requests for service, supporting resolutions, coordinating responses directly or indirectly through third parties, and building long lasting relationships with tenants. Tenant engagement staff are organizing community building events at the new buildings to help foster community in these new settings. As well as the tenant engagement team is also working to coordinate support for tenants in accessing additional community based resources and support supportive services that they need. Tenant engagement staff are also working directly with households across several CRHC properties to develop individualized tenant relocation plans and rehoming everyone to the extent possible. This includes making any necessary renovations to units to meet accessibility needs.

Speaker I · And further to this, I am proud to say that as of June 2026, every household at Rosewood has been connected to a New home within the CRHC working and the CRC continues to be working to coordinate their moves. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Devries. Next to speak is Councillor Chambers, followed by Phelps Bondor.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I will be supporting this motion for the obvious reasons, but I do have extreme concerns, extreme concerns about the sequencing of this housing. And although I'm so. I'm thanking staff, I'm thanking everyone working on this. And I mean no disrespect, but the facts on the ground are this and the facts are on the ground are some people the highest vulnerability, people that we aim to help as government are being displaced on the ground. And this could have been avoided by sequencing these projects better. And so for me, it does not seem like the levels of engagement with the disabled community and those most vulnerable that government is supposed to be protecting are working.

Speaker D · So I do have a motion arising, but I want to talk about the unintended consequences of this relocation program, which is we've celebrated. We've celebrated the new housing coming without the knowledge or without setting forward the fact that, that people were being displaced in this process. And by rehoming people who have been relocated, it doesn't mean that they get to stay in the same municipality. And that to me is absolutely unfair. It's discriminatory and unfair that someone would have to leave the municipality that they have grown to find their support in to only be displaced because more people can be put in a property. And so I would really have liked to see this sequenced. I really would have liked to see more engagement.

Speaker D · And I don't like delegating authority for human rights to another body when I am sitting here in the chair ready to make decisions. And so one of the unintended consequences is separation of relationships within a building. And those go very, very far if you're a disabled person. And there has been incidents already where one's safety is being impacted by their potential separation of their support network and being put in another municipality. Our municipalities are not apples to apples. They don't have the same sort of accessibility on sidewalks. And so I think we can do better. I became a politician to exactly help this group of vulnerable people find housing.

Speaker D · And so I. I've said my words. I'm very upset about the way that this is. And, and it isn't the first time last term I dealt with the residents of Dawson Heights who were in the same situation. The long notice ahead given gives disabled people or those vulnerable a whole bunch of time to worry and finding a place as a Disabled person with wheelchair accessibility, with roads, with the supports that are needed and the relationships is what we need to be doing.

Speaker D · So thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Next to speak is Councillor Phelps Bondaroff.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I don't think there's much for me to add with respect to the CRHC's relocation policies that are already in place. My colleagues already spoke quite eloquently in those and explained how their supports for existing residents. So instead I think I want to just talk about the two projects. But I do have two questions through you to staff before I begin speaking. So through you, the first question is in the staff report, there's a mention of half having the requested values that the two CRC projects are requesting. And I was wondering staff would just let us know if that will impact the viability of the projects. I think they already have answered it.

Speaker B · I know they've already answered it, but if they could just reiterate, that would be great.

Speaker J · Ms. Hartling, through the mayor to Councillor Felspondroff. I'm not privy to their. To their balance sheets or their pro formas, but what I do understand from conversations with them is that these amounts are relatively small in the cost of the millions of dollars it costs to build these projects. However, they do help secure funding from senior levels of government and they do help with the rent levels that they're able to offer. So they do have a positive benefit. They show commitment from the district, which is pos. Has a positive effect on securing funding in a very tight and competitive funding window, I might add. And these projects were able to get in there before the CHF fund was closed by the province.

Speaker J · And part of the reason they were able to secure that funding was because of the benefits that this council has secured in doing things in a timely way, like rapid deployment. So through the efforts of this council, they were able to secure that funding before that window closed.

Speaker B · Thank you so much. And I do recall some of the conversations around funding application windows being longer than our approval processes and that. Or the other way around, of course, and then impacting people's ability to apply for grants. That's really important. We want our not for profit housing providers to be able to access lots of grants. The second question was, I understand there's a waiting list for CRHC housing. I was wondering if staff might let us know what the numbers were at. I know it was one of our recent housing needs housing report cards, and I was wondering if we have an updated number on that.

Speaker A · Mr. Kempster,

Speaker K · through to Councillor Phelps. Bonderoff I don't have the exact. Well what I can, what I can share is that the housing that makes up the 1800 Mackenzie CRHC proposal is made up of several different types of housing. So they would be accessing different wait lists. The majority of the project being from the BC housing registry which I don't have regional specific numbers but I know is over 5,000 households long across the province and the wait times of upwards of a decade or more to get into some of these units depending obviously on the demographic and the type of need that's being shown by the applicant.

Speaker K · The other two housing types are the shelter rate housing as well as the moderate market rate housing that's included as part of the project. I don't have access to those waitlist

Speaker B · numbers, thank you very much. That's good enough numbers I think to help sort of help with the decision making process. A decade waiting time is a really long time. So I think just some general comments. I think we've had a conversation about folks being relocated from their homes. I know that's very upsetting and I do feel that one of the things about these projects that I think is somewhat reassuring despite those impacts on residents is that we are getting a lot of housing, it's much needed, it's deeply affordable. So we have 134 non market housing units for the first project at Seven Oaks and then I've got 259 non market housing units down at the McKenzie site and that includes 12 four bedroom units and 42 three bedroom units and that is something that really stands out to me.

Speaker B · We know there's zero vacancy rate for three bedroom units and four bedroom units are unheard of. So this is very supportable for those reasons. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you Councillor Phelps Bondraugh. If there are no other speakers to the motion, I am also going to be lending my support. As our staff have indicated, the results of the rapid deployment policy have been significant, dramatic I would say in changing the context for affordability in our community. We have gone from having very few non market housing units approved to numbers well into the thousands as a result of, of creating the certainty and limiting the amount of time that is required in order to move those through. Tonight the question in front of council is one of funding and you've heard staff indicate that if the funding were not provided it does not derail the project but it does add to the cost that would ultimately be borne by residents that likely would not be able to afford any increase in their cost of rent and that's the last thing I think anyone on this council or in this community would want to do.

Speaker A · So I will be quite happy to support it. I also just wanted to point out that while it I am concerned for residents who find themselves displaced as a result of the redevelopment and I fully admit that that is an unintended consequence of redevelopment of these units, these projects. I am comforted by the fact that there are homes provided to everyone who will need to be relocated and importantly they will have the right of first refusal on the new units when they are created. I fully acknowledge that that is an imperfect solution for folks and that it is disruptive to their lives. But I think it's important to point out that there is no getting around the rules for relocation.

Speaker A · The reason an exemption in our bylaw was created is because the policies required of themselves for the CRHC ensures that tenants are given appropriate places to relocate to. Finally, I wanted to celebrate the fact that tonight the first motion approves 230 or is funding that will help support 230 new non market affordable units. And this second motion is 259 for one and 134 for the other. I mean tonight alone we are looking at hundreds of new units being enabled by supporting them. And those are non market affordable units. So for those who made representation this evening suggesting that we're not doing anything to attack all to tackle the affordability crisis, I just want to point out how significant these numbers are and what a difference they will make for the individuals and families who but for these homes would be unable to live in our community.

Speaker A · And that is a very significant achievement and one that I look forward to continuing to promote and celebrate as we see these new units come online. And finally we are so fortunate that we were able to stream the process and move things through to support non market housing because these were not subject to the repacing that the province introduced that has limited so many other non market affordable projects. So it's an opportunity for us to celebrate and remind ourselves the impact that denying or slowing funding has on the creation of affordable homes in our community. I am going to call the question this one on the second part which is for Seven Oaks and 1821 MacKenzie. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you so much.

Speaker A · Councillor Chambers indicated you have a motion arising and so I'll turn to you for that. Go ahead Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you very much Mr. Mayor. My motion arising is to direct staff to include the disabled into our tenant protection bylaw. If there's a seconder

Speaker A · I'm not seeing a seconder. But perhaps you could clarify the wording that you're seeking, Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you. I do have a migraine. It's very hard. I can hardly see right now. So to direct staff to report back on these steps that it would take to include the disabled tenant into our tenant protection bylaw. It's a bit messy, but perhaps I could have an assistant maybe like other folks do on this council when they're a bit jumbled.

Speaker A · So I'll just look to see if there's. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Yeah. I'm just remind you to please mute yourself.

Speaker D · Is that Leo's fault?

Speaker A · No, I'm sorry, Councillor Chambers. I'll just remind you that we're not meant to talk about anyone else or use other folks names during the public discourse. As this is a webcast meeting. I'm not seeing another member of council second the motion. In that case, I might advise that it would potentially be suitable as a no notice of motion that you may wish to serve which would allow you an opportunity to work on what you wish to achieve.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Is it. Is it appropriate to do that with this now?

Speaker A · No, it'll have to be at a future council meeting.

Speaker D · Okay, thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you. Okay, I will now turn to Ms. Froud to introduce the next item for us, please.

Speaker C · Moving into bylaws for three readings. The first is zoning bylaw amendments to improve opportunities for sustainable infrastructure. This is a report from the Director of planning and the purpose is to give three readings to zoning bylaw amendment bylaw 10301 to allow flexibility for residents and business owners in providing sustainable infrastructure. That is Solar collectors, EV charging infrastructure and heat pumps while reducing barriers to implementation.

Speaker A · Okay, I will look to Councillor Westhaver if you could make the motion for first reading. We'll get second reading on the floor and that'll give us an opportunity for any questions or discussion. So I'll turn to you for first reading, please.

Speaker E · Thank you. Mr. Mayor. The bylaw number 10301 be given first reading.

Speaker A · Seconded by Brownhoff. I'll call the question on first reading. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. And if you wish to make the

Speaker E · motion for second reading that bylaw number 10301 be given second reading.

Speaker A · Second, same mover and seconder. If there's any discussion, I'll turn to the mover seeing none. And the seconder, are there any comments or questions from members of council Seeing none, I'll call the question on second reading. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. Back to you Councilor Westhaver.

Speaker E · That bylaw number 103001 be given third reading.

Speaker A · Second same mover and seconder on third reading. Those in favor and opposed. None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. Back to you Ms. Froud.

Speaker C · Next item is the rezoning and development permit application. The address is 986-988990 and 992 Gorge Road West. 280-82812 and 28141 Rockwell Avenue. This is a report from the Director of Planning and the purpose is to give three readings to Zoning Amendment Bylaw 10128 to create a new CD LGR Comprehensive Development Gorge Rockwell Zone to rezone those properties from the RS6 single family dwelling zone and 992 Gorge Road west from the RA1 apartment zone to the new CD11 to construct a 58 three story attached housing units on two lots and a development permit with variances requested for visitor parking, accessible parking and on site loading spaces and relaxation of the transportation demand management plan requirements.

Speaker A · Councillor Westhaver, I'll turn to turn to you for the first motion please.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The bylaw number 1012 be given first reading.

Speaker A · Seconded by Harper on first reading. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. Back to you Councillor Westhaver.

Speaker E · That bylaw number 10128 be given second reading.

Speaker A · Same mover and seconder. Did either of you wish to speak through it?

Speaker E · I would love to.

Speaker A · Go ahead. Councillor Westhaver.

Speaker E · It's really refreshing to have a positive experience with a development application. You heard from the community? I was really happy to hear from the applicant that they listened to community, they made changes as needed and as seen as heard. And the community is really welcoming this. The comment about timing. Let's hope the next part of it goes a little faster. And not to anyone's fault, but the process is underway and thrilled to give this my full support.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. The seconder is Councillor Harper. And you'll have the opportunity to speak to it now.

Speaker F · And I'll keep it brief. I agree with everything that my colleagues said. I would just know on July 1st on Canada Day when we had the event at the Gorge. I actually spent most of that time at the Heritage Foundation's table which was directly opposite this location. And I could see all of the places that were being referenced by the various people people and all I Can, and I can say that when I look at it, aside from all the very positive input we had both from the proponent as well as from the community, is it's clearly going to be very consistent with that neighborhood and it really fits in very well.

Speaker F · So aside from it being consistent with the OCP and lap, it really does fit in here. And I would say that although it's always nice if you can have more space in a development, in fact it's directly across the street from the Gorge Waterway and a huge park. So I don't see that as being an impediment one way or the other. And I think it's in fact a great enhancement for people who live there because they are immediately adjacent to one of the more beautiful areas and more beautiful parks that we have in front of us. And the fact that so we have the three bedroom and four bedroom units will help, I hope the community to regain some younger people and younger families, but it also creates a place where older people can downsize and stay in their community as well.

Speaker F · And I think all in all, it hits just so many boxes here that I would be hard pressed to think of a reason why it shouldn't go ahead. It should go ahead and yes, hopefully will be here before too long. Thank you very much.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councilor Harper. Next to speak is Councillor Bryce, followed by Brownhoff.

Speaker C · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I like to repeat the comments to previous speakers and to celebrate 58 new homes into our community. I think this developer has gained a reputation because of previous work in the community and working with these neighbours on this proposed development. Having the community come forth and encourage support of a motion for development, particularly in a beloved neighbourhood, is very heartening and I think it would be a good signal to others in the development world to whenever possible, engage the community, bring them along, have confidence that in the end the project is one that is going to be positive and supported.

Speaker C · So, yeah, well done to everybody, everyone involved.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Bryce. Next to speak is Councillor Brown off, followed by Phelps Bondarov.

Speaker H · Thanks very much. Mr. Mayor, just a question to staff, if I could. There was a comment about the old buildings and I'm. I know that we've had problems in some other projects where old buildings are taken down and there's a rat infestation. Have we talked to the applicant about what could happen or should happen before they deconstruct or demolish the buildings?

Speaker B · Mr. Purvis, through you, Mr. Mayor, to the counselor.

Speaker K · Not that I am aware of, but, but certainly with that direction we can

Speaker B · have Some conversations if council makes the decision that seems to be heading in terms of what can be done at the building permit stage.

Speaker H · Yeah, I think it's an important one. I. We've heard or I've seen from other development where rats come out and then they go to the property next door and it's not a nice opportunity. And I'm sure the applicant is on top of this as he looks at this property. So thanks very much. I first want to recognize that I remember a few years ago the community getting a hold of me and just were up in arms over the development that you were proposing at that time.

Speaker F · Time.

Speaker H · And so I think tonight, as can be seen, the chamber wasn't filled with people complaining about the project. There were some people speaking about how positive it was. Family friendly was a tone I heard a lot of and I agree with that. The idea of you don't have enough space on the site for green space particularly, and each home has a little bit of green space and as some have said, your residents can cross the

Speaker E · street to our park.

Speaker H · I just, at this stage, I don't know. But I would hope that engineering would be looking at whether we needed a crosswalk or something to improve accessibility over there. Because if children, children run across the street, I want it to be safe as well. So I definitely support the project. Thank you for the new design and thank you for being complimentary to the neighborhood and listening to them. Thanks, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Next to speak is Councillor Phelps Fondra, followed by chambers.

Speaker B · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Well, I usually don't speak as late in the queue and so my colleagues have said most things I wanted to say, so rather than repeat those, I'll just highlight a few things that haven't been mentioned or just reiterate a few of them. I think My colleague mentioned 58 units, but I think one thing that's worth underscoring is 38 of those units are four bedroom units. So once again we're seeing really important, much needed family housing. And then of course, six of those are three bedroom units. So we're looking at a good spread of housing that will accommodate a wide range of different types of folks in a beautiful part of Saanich.

Speaker B · And I wrote down in my notes the parking is ample, both with respect to vehicular parking and bike parking.

Speaker K · That's great.

Speaker B · And one thing that hasn't mentioned is the efforts to reduce the massing and the presentation of the building on Gorge Road as well as on Rockwell. They're very attractive. You've got breaks in the buildings you've got quite nice and attractive frontages. So I think that's also going to fit really well with the community. And for the one resident who mentioned it, I do like the yellow building personally I think it's bright and sunny so next door that is. So I think it's going to really be a nice addition to the street and I'm looking forward to welcoming a lot of new neighbors with much needed family housing in the district.

Speaker A · Okay, next speak is Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Well, well, well. I'm going to be speaking in favor of this application tonight and I'm very, very pleased that we, we that there was so much engagement with the neighbors and so much support and I just wanted to say it's my second abstract approval this term and I'm very, very excited about it.

Speaker D · And I just want to think about this beautiful thought because as a person who has taken care of seniors and now I'm taking care of, you know, helping my husband's mother, my mother in law. Isn't it a beautiful thought to think that a senior parent could live in the yellow place and actually have their family live in the townhouses? Isn't that beautiful? To me that's a beautiful thought and a beautiful possibility just to keep it all in an easy area. So I'm very supportive of this and I do think 58 new homes is a beautiful thing and I'm really glad that this came so well advertised and the engagement was done and good job. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay. As I'm not seeing any other members of council wishing to speak.

Speaker K · Speak.

Speaker A · You haven't left much room to say anything new. So I don't think there's much more for me to say other than I'll be supporting the creation of 58 family suitable homes in a wonderful neighborhood. And there's certainly lots of supporters out there who wish to see this come along and we look forward to seeing it built along that Canada Day picnic parade route that we'll be walking next year, in future years, although maybe I'll be cheering you all on from the sidelines. I'm going to call the question. Those in favor and opposed. None are opposed. That is unanimous. Thank you. I'll turn to. Oh, I'll go to Councillor Westhaver for the next motion, please.

Speaker E · Thank you. Mr. Mayor. The bylaw number 10128 be given third reading.

Speaker A · Seconded by Councilor Harper on third reading. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. Thank you.

Speaker E · You councelor Westhaver that Zoning Bylaw 2003 be amended to include a new CD11GR in brackets. Comprehensive Development Gorge, Rockwell bracket zone, same mover and seconder.

Speaker A · Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. Thank you.

Speaker E · That the application to rezone 986-98-8990 and 992Gordon George Road west and 2808, 2812 and 2814 Rockwell Avenue from the RA1 bracket apartment zone and the RS6 bracket single family dwelling zone to the CD11GR bracket comprehensive development Gorge Rockwell zone to construct a total of 58 three story attached houses units on two lots be approved.

Speaker A · Same mover and seconder. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried.

Speaker E · The development permit DPR 00788 be approved.

Speaker A · Same mover and seconder. Those in favor and opposed. None or opposed. That's carried.

Speaker E · That final reading of the zoning bylaw amendment and ratification of the development permit be with withheld pending the approval of the tenant protection development permit.

Speaker A · Same mover and seconder. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. And one more.

Speaker E · That the final reading of the zoning bylaw amendment and ratification of the development permit be withheld pending registration of a covenant to secure the following easement allowing for access to patios as shown on the development permit as required by the Director of Planning, reciprocal access for the drive aisle between lot A and B and the provision of a community amendment amenity contribution bracket CAC totaling 116,000 bracket 2,000 per unit to be allocated to Saanich Parks for the purpose of future improvements and upgrades to any of Gorge Gorge Waterway or Craig Flats Cosapsum Parks.

Speaker A · Same mover and seconder on the final motion. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. Thank you. I'll just very briefly comment before Ms. Froud moves us to the next item. Don't worry, this isn't on the project. Not saying anything more. What has always struck me as really fascinating about council meetings, and believe it or not I've been attending them for more than 20 years now, is how it is so abundantly clear at a governance level how all of the legislative enabling pieces are set out in order so that someone who didn't understand the process could see so clearly what this enabling steps were in order to actually make something happen by virtue of bylaw changes and amendments.

Speaker A · And you can see it all in F2 from motion 1 to motion 8. The only thing missing seen as final reading. But anyone who is interested in the process would understand exactly what is required of it all. So that's just your old mayor feeling nostalgic about the processes that go on here and how there can't be any claim of obfuscation when it's so abundantly clear on the agenda.

Speaker F · Ms.

Speaker A · Proud.

Speaker C · Next items on the agenda are reports from members of council. The first is the Student Youth Council. This is a notice of motion from Councillor Phelps Bondroff, who will read it in shortly.

Speaker A · Councillor Phelps Bondroff, looks like this will be your show for the next few items, so I'll turn it over to you to get us started.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I move that council one, receive the end of term report from the Student Youth Council for information. Two, refer the issue of establishing a permanent Youth Advisory Committee or Youth Council to strategic planning. And three, consider the two motions submitted to it by the Student Youth Council. See subsequent agenda items. That is the endorsement in principle of the reconciliation Corridor initiative and free transit for youth in bc.

Speaker A · And is there a seconder for the motion? Okay, thank you, Councillor Devries. Go ahead. Councillor Phelps Bondaroff.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I first want to start off with a huge thank you to all the students who participated in this amazing project, to the teacher sponsors who showed up regularly to all of our meetings, and especially to Claremont teacher Mark Neufeld and Claremont student Gus Kirby. Their dedication made this pilot project a huge success. So many. Last year, two fine Claremont gentlemen approached me and they proposed the creation of a youth Council. They also approached the mayor and at that time we decided that we would try to make this happen now at our November 3, 2025 strategic plan check in. When I proposed the first formation of a dedicated youth committee, some concerns were raised around how we would structure it, work plans, relationship with schools and outputs.

Speaker B · And so we decided to set up this pilot to address those concerns, to directly engage with those concerns themselves, as well as to explore a model of youth engagement and to directly engage youth in the process of how we want to govern our city. I should note very vehemently that the SYC was established as an independent pilot pilot project by volunteers in the community. And I was working as an independent community organizer in this capacity. It has no formal affiliation with the District of Saanich. This was a passion project between individuals who are passionate about youth engagement. And it's something that's near and dear to my heart since the first time I threw my hat in the ring in federal politics. And I was, I guess, still a youth at the time.

Speaker B · There is a significant youth participation gap in our district Young people are dramatically impacted by our decisions, but we often don't hear from them. Now, we do have advisory committees that offer space for young folks, but we often struggle to fill those positions. And also, even when we do fill those positions, meaningful youth engagement can be challenging in an adult centered sort of youth advisory committee. Whether it's a knowledge gap or power dynamics at play, youth often struggle to feel heard in those processes. We also just don't hear from youth in general. Folks will recall from our 2026 budget survey, we had 307 people respond 0 between the ages of 0 and 18 and 1% between the ages of 19 and 24, and only 6% between the ages of 25 and 35.

Speaker B · So the student Youth Council sought to address this by meeting young people where they were, designing a forum where young people were the primary participants and building learning into the process. The pilot had two reps from following high schools, Claremont Reynolds, Spectrum Mount Doug, Saint Andrews and Saint Michael's and these 14amazing students met nine times between November 26, 2025 and June 10, 2026. There are some large significant key outputs and you'll see this in the voluminous report that's appended to the agenda. The first was our terms of reference and meeting structure. Young folks were directly engaged in this process. They designed a rotating host school system and I had a very proud teacher moment when they voted to double the number of meetings they had so they could get more work done.

Speaker B · And that is a brag for them because they did an amazing job. They designed a student engagement survey that they circulated to their peers that had 319 respondents that identified key priorities for young people in the district, from the cost of living to transportation and mobility, homelessness and housing, mental health, climate change and more. And building on this, they developed policy. They developed policy around transportation, which is a priority that they identified. And you'll see two of those policies later on in the agenda. They also engage in correspondence and public communications with higher levels of government, ourselves included, as well as federal and provincial colleagues.

Speaker B · And I'm grateful to Member Parliament McLean for Esquimal Saanich Souk for being the only member of senior government to respond to the committee when they reached out. They also had invited speakers, including members of this council, members of the community, to learn more about the processes and the topics they were covering. They engaged in advocacy, training and council outreach. I believe they met with many colleagues around this table to talk about their issues. They made recommendations and they made the first following motions. Now, I wanted to flag that the first motion is effectively receiving the voluminous report for the record. The second is referring the issue of a youth council to our strategic planning process so we can have a more fulsome conversation about what that looks like informed by the information developed by this pilot.

Speaker B · And finally the second, the third part is just consistently offering to consider the motion submitted to us by the youth council. I'm really proud of the work of this committee. They worked incredibly hard and I know how important youth engagement is. So I would encourage you all to support this. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Councillor Phelps Bondroff. Councillor Devries is the seconder. You'll have the opportunity to speak to it.

Speaker I · Thank you. As the action oriented aspect of this motion is really to refer to strategic planning, I'm going to focus on that. I want to say this from a place of someone who's been chairman of an advisory committee for the last eight years, essentially in Saanich where we've had youth members on those committees. And as someone who's also had the chance to see this student youth council in action and the discussions that were going on, I saw a stark contrast between the two structures in terms of the ability of these young people to participate in a really meaningful way. Being far deeper involved in the discussion than I've seen in the various committees that I've chaired over that period of time. And so I do think it is a different structure that is worthy of consideration.

Speaker I · As was noted by my colleague, there is a gap in engagement with younger people in not just in the district of the region but across the province and probably across Canada. It's a challenge that any kind of of government level engagement has. And this is an opportunity to start to bridge that gap. And it doesn't set in stone exactly what that should look like or what the partnership should be or the model. And I'm open to having that discussion in a more fulsome manner at strategic planning. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you, Councillor Devries. I will look to any member of council who wishes to speak to the first item. Councillor West.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was just going to make a comment. It's a compliment to my colleague. Just have had worked in community services for years here in Sandich and we were fortunate to have a youth council. And then over time unfortunately things fizzled away and we weren't able to sustain that opportunity. But when it was available it was well received and really benefited our youth. And I was really taken by the youth that did speak. Just they wrapped a bow around it perfectly. It provided A place for them to be able to be a part. And I appreciate you coming forward and speaking and even I think you used the word confidence and it just really was instilled a sense of faith and security for our future. So thank you for that.

Speaker E · So thanks to Councillor Phelps Bondron off for taking the time outside of really your role here and providing this in the community for youth. Really appreciate that, thanks.

Speaker A · Thank you. Next to speak is Councillor Chambers followed by Brown off. And I see a hand online from councillor Plant.

Speaker D · Councillor Chambers, thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. As we know, the topic of a sanitary youth council has been something we all have wanted on this council 100%. And I wanted to talk about the committee of the whole meeting where this was not supported. And I'm just wondering where the direction to start this without all of counsel involved occurred. Ms.

Speaker D · Baines, our officer, corporate officer, sent out an email today and I'm just wondering how, how what that opposition meant was that opposition to the pilot project was. What Was that item? Ms. Baines, could you please speak to this?

Speaker A · Thanks Director Baines, if you don't mind coming forward to clarify the motion that was put and ultimately not supported by counsel.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you to councillor Chambers.

Speaker H · Today I had provided council with some

Speaker E · clarity as requested from member of council

Speaker H · regarding the establishment of a youth council. Back in November 3rd of 2025, a

Speaker E · motion was put in front of council that it be recommended that council add an item to the strategic plan to create a youth advisory committee.

Speaker H · At that time the result failed and advisory committee.

Speaker E · The motion to refer this item to

Speaker H · the strategic plan was not approved by this council. So I'll leave it at that. It's up for council to take any further direction.

Speaker A · Thank you, Director Baines.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Director Baines. Well, I definitely think it deserves to call to strategic planning where we can have a more fulsome look at our finances and et cetera, our capacity. So I can support it going to strategic planning. But in regards to the rest of council having an equal opportunity as councillors to work with youth and not just one member of council writing reports and different things like that, it would be important other members of council have skills and abilities and would like to share those skills and abilities in a nonpartisan but non in an objective way.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you Councillor Chambers. If it's supported, I'm sure council will have an opportunity to talk about the creation of a youth council and who would be the councillor to serve as liaison? I will turn it over to councillor Brownhoff who's Next to speak, followed by councillor plant.

Speaker H · Thanks, Mr. Mayor. So when I was chair of Healthy Sandwich, we actually developed a student municipal council. Ran for three years, and then I was moved on to a different committee. But that student municipal council was really based on engaging the students to understand at local government you can experience change. And so there were 25 students from grade 8 to 12, and they elected their mayor and council. And then each of them picked a topic that they wanted to put on the council agenda and they researched it. They met with the director of engineering about a traffic light. They met with finance about how much would it cost. And there were a number of projects that came out of that.

Speaker H · And then they held their council meeting in this chamber, and the mayor and council and their families, we sat in the audience and then the students debated. And one of the things I had promised them is that whatever motions they passed, I would take back to Healthy Saanich. And we see where we could go with staff. Well, this one student wanted to change voting age, which is not a municipal responsibility. But he was so determined and he'd done a lot of research and his council actually supported it. And so what I arranged was for him and his family to meet with the solicitor General and explain the process. So that's one type of student municipal council. It lasts 12 weeks.

Speaker H · You get the trouble with these student councils is students move on. So there's that. And then I think, Mr. Mayor, you did another one, didn't you? And I'm not sure how that one operated. And I'll just say, on committees, I've always had a youth rep, and this last two years, my youth rep is a student at UVic who's now going to take his master's and he was definitely engaged. So the other one I'll just mention is when Victoria established their youth council council, what they did was they paid BC Healthy Communities, of which I was chair and president of, to provide the facilitator and run the project for them.

Speaker H · And so they did that. And I just looked on their site now, and it looks like the youth council has now been taken over at Victoria Foundation. So there's all sorts of aspects. And so the debate. I don't mind sending this to STRAP Plan, but there is a financial commitment and there is a staff commitment and there is a youth commitment. You know, they've got to be committed to continuing along. And then, of course, students move. Right, so happy to forward this to the Strap Plan for further debate.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Next to speak is Councillor Police Plant.

Speaker G · Apologies, the mute Game on me. I'd like to ask a question through you just to staff to start us off. The way that the agenda is presented is that these are all actually notices of motion from Councillor Phelps Bondroff. The Saanich Youth Council that has been operating as a pilot has no standing to make recommendations to this council. Can you confirm that or have staff confirm that?

Speaker A · Director Baines, if you could confirm through you, Mr. Meredith.

Speaker H · Councillor Plant. That is correct. The Youth Council would not be able

Speaker E · to provide a motion for council's consideration under the notice of motion format.

Speaker H · It's not prescribed in your council procedure bylaw.

Speaker K · Kurt.

Speaker A · Thank you.

Speaker G · So the third part of this first motion, that council consider the two motions. I'm going to ask you, Mr. Mayor, if number three was. If this motion was to be defeated, and I don't think it is, would it not Therefore rule out 2 and 3 to be considered because council had given direction that we would not be considering items two and three as a result?

Speaker A · I'll have to ask for clarification from our corporate officer, but my view is that the next two items are scheduled for council's consideration and so council would have the opportunity to see if there's a motion to put to the floor either Director Baines or Ms. Froud. If you can help me clarify if I've misunderstood.

Speaker E · If I take Counselor's Plant's. Councillor Plant's question. Let's break down item three first. I think that's probably the easiest way to look at this.

Speaker H · And this is regarding the two motion

Speaker E · that were supported by the Youth council and one is endorsement and principle of reconciliation corridor initiative and the second one is free transit for YouthBC. I will note, for council's consideration, those are listed on your agenda already as notice of motions.

Speaker H · The next two items in your council agenda package.

Speaker E · What I would recommend is you just receive this, that portion for information and

Speaker H · you can apply the endorsement of that

Speaker E · as a correspondence item for those two notice of motions. If that's. That's probably the easiest way to go forward.

Speaker H · The first item.

Speaker E · Councillor Plant, can you. Sorry, you were talking about referring the item to strategic plan.

Speaker G · No, all I'm talking about is number three is it says if and if it was defeated in my mind when the next two came up, they would be out of order because we've said we don't want to. But that's. Mr. Mayor's already spoken on that. I don't need to change it. I'm going to spend the remaining amount of time I have just dealing with it. I'm I'm fine with this going to Strategic Planning. I think it's a little bit of. We need to be very careful what we ask for. If we ask for this to become a permanent youth Advisory committee, because, let's face it, our youth are, pardon me, our advisory committees belong to council.

Speaker D · Council.

Speaker G · And we with staff direction set the agenda for those. And what it sounds like what's happened to date with the pilot project that Councillor Phelps Bonderoff did as an individual was student driven. And so that's not how our advisory committees work. So I'm happy to send it to Strategic Planning, but it's going to be very clear to me that this may need its own special set of terms of reference. As far as. As far as the motion being here in front of us, I do think that the number three is preferably. Wouldn't have been there because they were going to come as notices of motions regardless.

Speaker G · So thank you for doing the work. I am of the mindset that I do support in principle the creation of a youth Advisory committee now, even though I voted against it in the fall of 2025. And I thank all the kids and teachers who were involved in the process and to you, Mr. Mayor, and any other member of council, I think it was mainly Councillor Phelps Bondroff who was engaged in supporting these students who clearly have an interest in being engaged. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor. Plan. If there are no other first time speakers, I will go to Councillor Chambers for a second time.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I just had a question about.

Speaker J · About

Speaker D · just the concept of a counselor working outside of their role and it not being inclusive of others and how this was a student initiative, but what is stopping any other counselor from taking any initiative from the public and bringing it to council and writing a report, then maybe they don't have a seat at the table so we have to write the report for them.

Speaker D · So I'm just worried about the fairness and the public optics. There is a lot of support on Saanich Council for Claremont. There's already, you know, different people working there and have relationships there. And so I. And there's also former candidates there and it is election time and I am. I am very concerned that this item is very politically charged as well. We all wanted it, we all wanted this youth council, but I really don't like the way in which it was conducted and it wasn't more inclusive of all councillors at the beginning and that I really wish that we would not have.

Speaker D · Sorry, there's nodding going on.

Speaker A · Is it everything, Councillor Chambers, have you completed your comments?

Speaker D · No, I wasn't. I was a bit distracted by the nod.

Speaker A · I was confirming. Well, I. I apologize if you were distracted while you were making your comments, but I was confirming with Councillor Phelps Bondroff, if he wished to have an opportunity to respond to your remarks, if your comments are complete, I'll give him that opportunity. Opportunity.

Speaker D · My Comments are complete, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker A · Okay. Councillor Phelps Bondroff.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I very much appreciate the. The kind words colleagues have made and also the difference of opinion on how we could organize this committee. I'm very cognizant of what Councillor Plant mentioned, that there's different models and different ways of designing these kinds of committees. And I think we can have a very fulsome conversation at Strat Planning about this. One of my hopes of this pilot was to provide an extra data point to that conversation. I know past councils advisory committees have been run, as Councillor Branoff has mentioned, as sort of intensive workshops with young folks. You could do an advisory committee like UVic, sorry, the city of Victoria, or you could do one like this.

Speaker B · So this is a data point and that was one of the reasons why we worked so hard on the report. And I'm really grateful to my co authors as well. We want to provide as much data as possible so that staff and potentially future councils could have information to sift through. I think a couple other. I think that's. That's gonna be a very interesting. A fulsome conversation at Strat Planning. It might be a conversation for the next council rather than this one. So we might want to defer that not to our August Strat Planning meeting, but rather to a future one with a new council so they can kind of take the report and hit it fresh.

Speaker B · One of the questions is asked, what is stopping folks from doing similar things? Nothing. I regularly present council with reports, motions, UBCM resolutions. I may have the parental record for those. I'm not sure yet. No one's counting. I think Trish might be. But we can always write reports and we can bring issues forward from the community. And this is a really good example of members of the community bringing forward a concern, looking to bring more attention to youth engagement and a couple of us jumping on it and trying to do what we could. I think there's a lot of opportunities in our community for bringing interesting and important issues forward. And as a councillor, I'm always looking for opportunities to do that myself.

Speaker B · And folks will maybe get a bit tired of me bringing those motions forward, but I certainly Think that's an opportunity available to all of us in the report section of our agenda through our procedures and bylaws in that respect. So I think, yeah, I very much appreciate the conversation. And a final thank you to the amazing students who came out. I did get three emails from young folks before the meeting. One of them is stuck in Bella. Bella. One of them is stuck somewhere else. And Summer, I think, caught up with the rest of them. But it was a fantastic group of young folks and I hope that we can explore different ways of really bringing youth voices forward in Saanich. And one final thought. My colleague mentioned the distinction between consider versus support.

Speaker B · So item the third point in the motion, and I think the reason we included that was we wanted to have all the resolutions written in order and the final report was adopted after the initial two motions were supported by the Youth Council. And so they wanted to reflect that. But the wording is to consider the two motions. So in no way does it say support, but rather simply to give them consideration, which would require a seconder. So my take on the procedure, not that it's particularly relevant in this case, would be that it's simply the question of asking council to consider those motions and the idea being a holistic presentation of multiple items that are all tied to the Sandwich Youth Council itself.

Speaker B · But I appreciate the comments and questions and I hope we can have a fulsome conversation at start planning about very interesting models for youth engagement.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Councillor Plant, you wish to speak for a second time?

Speaker G · Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I'm going to propose an amendment based on what I just heard from Councillor Phelps Bonderoff recall regarding when we would consider this. So I'm going to add a subsequent bullet that basically just suggests. And here it comes. And that this be considered at the first strategic planning session of the incoming council so that we're not dealing with it at the August meeting.

Speaker A · Okay, Seconded by Councillor Chambers. Did you wish to motivate Councillor Pine?

Speaker G · I think it's important when someone says this is something we should do, we should usually codify it rather than just have it be a assumed or not assumed. So when we get to August, this is clearly not going to be considered. I think it is appropriate probably for the new council to determine if they want to have this. While this council is certainly saying it's worth consideration, it really will be up to that new council. I hope my colleagues will find that this is meant to streamline our August meeting and not put any cold water on the idea.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you, Councillor Chambers. On the amendment.

Speaker D · Thank you very, very much, Councillor Platt, for the amendment. Thank you. Very supportive of this. We have a very excited council about having a youth council. And so let's go forward with fresh council and let's get our youth council and let's make it strong and thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, I will call the question. Oh, Councillor Phelps Bondorf, did you wish to speak to the amendment?

Speaker K · Yeah.

Speaker B · Thank you. I think my colleague makes a really good point and I appreciate the amendment. It adds strength to the motion. New councils and new mayors will often reorganize the advisory committees in a way that fits their priorities and the priorities of the day. So I think that that makes the most sense, rather than having this at the silliest of silly seasons in August, to instead have it at the more reflective and pensive portion of a new council setting off a new term. So I think it's a good amendment. I know that some. One thing I will note, we did build in some institutional memory into the council where we encouraged high school to have one grade 12, but only one grade 12 and a potentially grade 11 or 10 student in order to have that institutional memory.

Speaker B · So I know we have about a third of the students coming back if they were interested in participating in a similar committee. So there's that potential. I think that's another promising element. And for folks who are interested, there's a full voluminous section of the report on recommendations which I hope the future council will take into consideration.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. So on the amendment that this be considered by the next council at their start strategic planning process, those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. We're back to the main motion as amended. I don't see any other speakers, so I'll just very briefly offer my remarks of appreciation. First to the Claremont teacher that's been referenced, Mark Neufeld, for his work in spearheading this, along with a student who presented us to us this evening. I won't use his name, but I am grateful for his work work, as I know this was largely at his instigating that this came to fruition and very much the product of his hard work and collaborative efforts.

Speaker A · I also want to thank Councillor Phelps Bondoroff, who went about supporting this group really on his own time, outside of what had been expected of any member of council bringing his. Well, I think we were all very aware of Councillor Phelps Bondarhoff's procedural knowledge and expertise, and I think it was very helpful in guiding the youth council or supporting the youth council. So I appreciate your time and efforts and energy in working with this organization, with the students and teachers who supported it. And I am looking forward to council considering this as part of your future strategic planning process. And I'm hopeful that in whatever structure it eventually takes, that there will be some version of a youth council that comes to fruition. As Councillor Brownhoff mentioned, there's been multiple iterations of youth councils in the past.

Speaker A · I had the opportunity to serve as liaison during one of those iterations, and it was definitely a very rewarding experience to see youth engaged in issues that are relevant to our community. And I'm hopeful that that tradition will continue. So my appreciation and gratitude for everybody who helped to make this a reality and look forward to its more formal iteration in the future. I'm going to call the question those in favor and opposed. None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you so much. I'll turn back to Ms. Fraud to introduce the next item for us.

Speaker C · The next notice of motion is the Reconciliation Corridor Initiative. This is a notice of motion from Councillor Phelps Bondoroff, who will read it in shortly.

Speaker A · Councillor Phelps Bondoroff, I will turn it over to you to introduce this one.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I move the Council endorse in principle the Reconciliation Corridor Initiative process and its due diligence work without predetermining the final outcome of that process. Two, Direct the Mayor to write the Federal Minister of Housing and Infrastructure, Prime Minister, Provincial Minister of Transportation and Transit, Premier Local MLAs and MPS, and mayors of all CRD municipalities to express Sanich Council support in in outline clause 1 and 3, request that the incoming Council at the start of the 2026-2030 term, receive a briefing on the Reconciliation Corridor Initiative from district staff and or representatives of the Island Corridor Foundation.

Speaker A · And I will second that. Councillor Phelps Bondoroff, you're welcome to speak to it.

Speaker B · Thank you very much. So we've had the prelude insofar as our amazing Youth Council got together and set priorities. And two of those priorities are the Reconciliation Corridor Initiative and support for Free Trans and for youth. This is the first of those motions, and we brought in a speaker from the Reconciliation, rather from the Corridor foundation to speak about the issue. I should note, and this is very important, that the motion is not an endorsement of a predetermined rail project, route technology or final funding decision, but rather it's an endorsement of the process currently underway, a due diligence process that is intended to assess whether passenger rail service on a portion of the Island Corridor can support regional transportation, housing climate, economic development and Reconciliation goals For folks who are unfamiliar, the Island Corridor is a 289 kilometer rail corridor that runs from Victoria to Courtney and from Parksville to Port Alberni on Vancouver Island.

Speaker B · Passenger rail service I believe ended there in 2011. I know some of you folks are a bit more familiar with it in your CRD capacities, but this rail was built between 1886 and 1914. It's the old E and N Railway effectively, and the project was made possible through federal funding and a federal provincial land grant connected to terms by which British Columbia entered into confederation. The land Grant alienated almost 2 million acres of unceded first nations territorial traditional territories and some sections of the corridor were taken from pre existing first nations reserve lands and this now the land is now held by the Island Corridor foundation which holds the corridor lands and assets in common on behalf of 14 First nations and five regional districts.

Speaker B · The Reconciliation Corridor Initiative is a partnership between the Songhees and Esquimalt nations and local government and its purpose is to explore the potential for passenger rail service in the CRD using a portion of the Enno Island Corridor that runs from Thick west to the West Shore Parkway in Langford. And it's currently focused on due diligence and it's intended to gather information needed to make informed decisions about future positions rather the future of this corridor. So effectively there's an already existing process and it involves a steering committee that includes representatives from the Esquimold and songhees nations and CRD folks, regional governments, CFB, Esquimault I Island Corridor foundation and some local MLAs.

Speaker B · And the entire thing is being situated within a regional planning context. So the question folks might be asking is why are we talking about the Island Corridor now? And this has been an issue that's been reviewed multiple times in the past. A couple things have changed. First, this brings first nations and local governments together to consider the future of the corridor within the framework of reconciliation and mutual benefits, something that hasn't happened as much in the past. Second of all, the regional context for transportation has changed. Our populations are growing, our transportation needs are increasing. We're looking for more transportation options and this is one of those potential solutions.

Speaker B · Third, housing and land use policies have changed. There's now a stronger provincial and federal emphasis on transit oriented developments and on supporting housing close to reliable transportation options. And finally, the climate context has only gotten more urgent and I would gesture towards some of the ongoing fires we're seeing other climate chaos. So effectively there's been a lot of work done to date. They're looking at ridership, they're looking at costing and various other factors. And this is not necessarily something that directly involves us, principally because the Reconciliation corridor does not travel directly through Saanich, but rather the initiative is still highly relevant to us because it's dealing with regional transportation needs.

Speaker B · And you know, we have Saanich residents who are traveling around the region, going to different places for work, school, health, recreation and so on, and they're impacted by transportation challenges far beyond Saanich's borders. We have a direct interest as well in climate conscious transportation, looking at regional solutions that offer people alternatives that are not reliant upon ownership of a vehicle, but rather providing them with affordable and sustainable options to get around. And finally, reconciliation, this process centres reconciliation dealing with some of the past injustices around land that was taken from first nations folks for the original E N railway. So effectively what we're looking for here here is simply an endorsement in principle of the process, which adds one more voice to the growing chorus of folks that are cheering from the sidelines for the process to continue.

Speaker B · We're not in any way presupposing an outcome, but rather cheering on a potentially great initiative for regional transportation. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you. Councillor Phelps Ponderoff. I was happy to second the motion for discussion. I think while it's the case that this is not a formal committee of council, I do think that out of respect for the time, energy and effort that the students provided in researching and supporting this initiative and making a recommendation to council, it was certainly worthy of our time and debate this evening and I'm happy to have it in front of us.

Speaker A · Councillor Plant, I will Turn to you, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker G · I move that we call the question.

Speaker A · Is there a seconder that the question be called? Councillor Westhaver? Okay. I will ask council if the question shall be called. Those in favor and opposed. Councillor Brownoff, who was the next to speak, is opposed. As it required 2/3 support. It has 2/3 support. So I will call the question. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. I will turn to Ms. Froud for the next item, please.

Speaker C · The next item is free transit for youth in bc. This is also a notice of motion from Councillor Phelps Bondrough which he will read in.

Speaker A · Councillor Phelps Bondroff, over to you.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I move that Council direct the mayor to write the premier Minister of Transportation and transit, Minister of Education and childcare and local MLAs to reiterate council's call for the province. Sorry for the province to expand the Get On Board program to cover young people up to and including the age of 18 and to explore working with the Minister of Education and childcare to add curriculum elements that train young people on how to safely and confidently use public transit.

Speaker A · I'll second. Go ahead, Councillor Phelps. Bondoraff.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. This council has been very supportive of calls on the province to make transit free for young people. So I won't reiterate those arguments. You've already heard me talk about how making transit free for young people increases accessibility to education, employment, housing, social programs, essential medical services and extracurriculars. We've talked about the environmental sustainability and how one of our major sources of of greenhouse gas emissions is transportation. We can also talk about equity and social inclusion. We talked about that when we endorsed a UBCM resolution calling for the same thing in 2024. We could talk about the long term benefits of building lifelong transit riders.

Speaker B · And we could talk about how this promotes independence, how it reduces congestion and how it supports education. You've heard that speech from me many times and I don't think it needs to be repeated. Instead, I want to talk about what's slightly different about this motion. There's a few things. The first one is this is coming from young people's voices directly. Young folks, as part of the pilot project we previously discussed, surveyed their peers and identified transportation as a major priority. And when they surveyed their peers, increasing access to transit, particularly transit affordability, was one of the most significant priorities. It was the most significant priority.

Speaker B · The other thing that's changed is we had a conversation at the Student Youth Council about ways of making these kinds of programs even more impactful. And we took a lot of inspiration from the Kingston study. This is a program that was run out of Kingston, Ontario, where transit was made free for young people between grades 10, 11, 12. And this was adopted and studied quite heavily. And it had some really dramatic and impactful outcomes. The program generated 196,000 additional student transit rides per year. And of those 72,000 rides, displaced private vehicle trips. The report also estimated that the program generated 83,000 new cultural and social trips and 16,000 school trips that resulted in fewer missed school days for young folks or delays in school days.

Speaker B · The report also estimated that the program saved 342,000 kilometers of private vehicle trips each year and saved family members 10,000 hours of driving time. That's time driving your kids between activities. And I know a lot of busy parents. That's a really significant number but on top of that, it reduced carbon emissions by 70 tons per year and estimated to save the community around $2 million compared to the cost of rolling out the program. And this is really significant. But one of the things that the Kingston program did slightly differently is they included education in the model teaching young people to be confident transit riders. I know when I first moved to the region and was trying to figure out how to put my bike on the front of a bus, it was awkward. You've got an entire bus of people watching you.

Speaker B · You don't want to mess up. The bus driver has to come out and help you. There's stress involved, and I can only imagine that extrapolated to a young person using transit for the first time or trying to use transit for the first time. These educational programs are so critical to build confidence for young folks. And so that's why we added this element to the resolution. So in addition to this council's past support for free transit for youth, we're adding another call for education associated with that. And one final thing I'll say is my background is in advocacy and research. And one of the lessons I take from that is repetition works. When we ask for something, we have to ask for it over and over and over again.

Speaker B · And this council has been consistent in its voice calling for free transit for youth. And so the young people of Sanich have asked us to once again repeat ourselves. And I know sometimes it sounds repetitive, but we have to keep asking the province to make transit free for young people because it's a critical thing. It's critical for increasing accessibility, for environmental sustainability, for equity and inclusion, for promoting independence, for reducing congestion, supporting education and building lifelong transit riders.

Speaker I · Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Phelps Bond. Again, I was happy to second this one and appreciate the work of the youth Council for making this recommendation, which, if supported, will result in more advocacy for youth under 18 or 18 and under to ride transit at fare free. I saw a hand from Councillor Plant and then there are a number around the table. So, Councillor plant to you.

Speaker G · Mr. Mayor. I move that we call the question,

Speaker A · is there a seconder? I'm not seeing a seconder this time, Councillor Plant. Oh, you're going to. Okay. Councillor Devries, I will call the question. On calling the question, those in favor and opposed? Councillors Bryce, Phelps, Bondroff, Brown off Westhaver Chambers and Harper are opposed. The motion is defeated.

Speaker G · I'll speak to the motion.

Speaker A · Please go ahead.

Speaker G · Colleagues, I find this almost not good use of council time. I appreciate that council is hearing this through a notice of motion that has come through the Sanich Youth Council. There is not enough here that is new to me to not just move this forward at this time. This is a letter of advocacy and I find this a little bit frustrating. There's a nine page report which goes through a whole bunch of this and if people are going to vote against this, let's get those out there on the record as why they're going to vote against this and move on with the meeting. Thank you.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you, Councillor Plant. Next to speak is Councillor Chambers followed by Harper, Westhaver and Bryce.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Well, this is a no brainer to me and a low hanging fruit of the climate emergency and it represents former work that I've brought forward to council. That work was not necessarily supported and defeated and I was told several things but I definitely think that this is the right direction. I believe in free transit for seniors, for disabled, for youth up to 18 and I tried, as I said, I brought two motions forward and they were not supported. And then there was support by council in general. I even tried to make this a developer amenity like putting into transit fund that, you know, one of our community amenity contributions. So you know, I have no back bad feelings. I'm extremely happy to support this.

Speaker D · And let's take get on the bus.

Speaker A · Thank you Councillor Jambers. Next to speak is Councillor Harper.

Speaker F · Thank you Mr. Mayor. And I'll keep this really brief. I support this because it is advocacy to the right levels of government that ought to be paying for this. So that's important because it is something that should be available everywhere, not just in one municipality or another. I would Note that in 2024, echoing I guess Councilor Plant's remarks, the UBCM adopted a resolution regarding free transit for young people in B. C. as well. So there is a long standing precedent for this. I appreciate that this does add curricular elements to it which is slightly new and I think that's all to the good in the sense that that young people being on buses and feeling free to use buses makes them more independent and I think that's something that we really do need to be enabling as well.

Speaker F · So I do support this.

Speaker A · Thank you. Okay, thank you Councillor Harper. Next to speak is Councilor westhaver.

Speaker E · Thank you Mr. Mayor. I think this is important that we do all lend our voices to this in support. Appreciated the speaker and I do think, sorry Mr. Mayor, I was going to second and one because we're kind of laying this on you. You get to ruffle the feathers A little, and I'm looking forward to that. I think this is something that right from the beginning of this term we all wanted to see happen. Can't happen at this level, but we know where it can. So thanks for bringing this forward.

Speaker A · Thank you. Next to speak is Councillor Bryce.

Speaker C · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I will support this motion because obviously of the concept, but also it is asking for funding. Previous motions that have come before this council over the time have asked the commission to consider free fare free transit. That means that a limited budget has to get parsed apart and one good initiative displaces another.

Speaker C · There are families in the greater Victoria area who don't have very frequent transit at all. And in their opinion just more transit

Speaker E · is what they need. Fare free transit would be sort of

Speaker C · icing on the cake. But this I think does direct it to the province to increase the investment in transit and to provide for fair free transit for youth for all the reasons that have been expressed as good outcomes.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Bryce. Next to speak is councillor Brownhoff.

Speaker H · Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I'm going to support this, but I just wanted to clarify. One of the speakers had mentioned the Victoria Pass and I think it's very important to realize how that's paid for. It's paid through parking revenues. Sandwich doesn't have any parking revenues. So if we were to do it, it would be on property taxes. So I can support this motion because it is pushing the province to invest more into these type of passes. But I don't want to see it come to us to have to fund. I think that putting more on the property tax, this wouldn't go well. So it has to be the province. Thanks.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Brownhoff. As there are no other speakers, I've already expressed my support, so I will call the question. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. Ms. Froud, if you could introduce the next item for us please.

Speaker C · Usually around 30 minutes to 10 o', clock, so 9:30. I always let council know that we're approaching that hour.

Speaker A · Challenge accepted.

Speaker C · Okay, we have two more notices of motion. The next one is nothing about us, without us. And this is a notice of motion from Councillor Chambers who will read this in.

Speaker A · Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor and Ms. Froud. Whereas nothing about us, without us is the defining rallying cry of the disabled rights movement, demanding that no policy, program or decision be made without the full and direct participation of disabled people. And whereas Saanich's tenant protection bylaw explicitly exempts non market housing providers and in this way our tenant bylaw package does not cover non market housing, meaning disabled tenants in social housing do not qualify for the same protections as market rent and have different needs, including accessible units, same neighborhood relocation and supports that maintain independence and dignity.

Speaker D · Therefore be resolved that SANIT Council direct staff to formally adopt nothing about us without us as a guiding principle in all housing planning, development and service decisions affecting disabled persons. And further that staff report back to council on how this principle can be implemented, including options for embedding the principle in policies, processes and decision making across municipal operations. Ways to strengthen meaningful participation of disabled persons in planning and housing decisions. Building on the existing disabled representation on the Advisory design panel represent recommendations to review and address the exemption of non market housing in the tenant protection bylaw so disabled tenants receive equivalent or tailored supports for their different needs.

Speaker D · Development of a dedicated vulnerable people tenant protection package.

Speaker A · Okay, I will second for discussion. Go ahead, Councillor Chambers.

Speaker D · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. It's been a hard couple of weeks to hear, well, more than weeks, quite some time now to hear from the disabled community that they're not feeling heard. They feel that they have not been involved in the planning processes that affect their lives so much. This has caused undue hardship for well being and it has caused an upheaval in the security. The security support systems of the disabled community. I think that it is incumbent upon us not to delegate this authority to another body and that Saanich we should be implementing human rights into all of our decision making.

Speaker D · And I do see here that in the Accessibility Plan that this is a future project, which is great. But as we are right here, right now, in the moment, as people like to say in the moment, we are experiencing rapid deployment of housing and we're experiencing housing targets and we are experiencing people who are being displaced.

Speaker D · And so I would really appreciate the support of council so I may represent the public who does not feel heard. And as we remember last term it was my committee, Arts Culture and well Being who Arts Culture and well Being who drafted the EDI statement. And in that we. We did not put it was LGBTQ RS and we did not include disabled people. So later on I have a motion arising that we would include that into our cultural diversity statement. So I'm looking for a seconder and.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. So as the seconder, I'm happy to have this discussed. As council is aware, there is an Accessibility Technical Administrative. Sorry, Administrative Administrative Technical Advisory Committee. Technical Administrative Committee. District's Accessibility Technical Administrative Committee. I don't know why I tripped up on that One, the committee is composed of, of at least half of its membership are individuals with disabilities or representing an individual or organization with disabilities or supporting them. Also, there are individuals who are representative of diverse cultures, backgrounds, ethnicities. Pardon me, ethnicities, sexual orientations and gender identities. It is, I think, for this reason that we have a committee that can provide advice for the district and for council.

Speaker A · And so I think it would be most appropriate if we referred this question for consideration to the Accessibility Technical Administrative Committee. And if there's a seconder, that's a motion to refer. Thank you, Councillor Harper. I don't think I need to motivate beyond that. Under our Accessibility Plan, the committee was struck for precisely this purpose, to identify gaps in service, and I think this would be very appropriate to ask for their opinion and that they can work with staff on recommendations that would improve our processes and policies to better support individuals in our community.

Speaker A · Councillor Harper, you're the seconder on referral. You'll have the opportunity to speak to him.

Speaker F · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, just briefly, obviously, we all support this type of initiative. That's not the issue here. But since we arrived here tonight, we actually did receive an email from our staff explaining some of the information. So I think this is absolutely the right step to take to refer it, because what we are advised, which perhaps not everyone understands, is that the corporate call to action as described is included as a guiding principle on page 17 of the district's Accessibility plan. So I'm very interested in this conversation continuing to occur and to figure out if there are ways we need to refine it in any way and that staff will report back on this. So this is.

Speaker F · This is absolutely accepting that we do want to do this, but it's recognizing that we already do, are doing a great deal as well, and how it might be folded into and not prejudging what ultimately will come out of this process.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Harper. On the question of referral, the next speaker is Councillor westhaver.

Speaker E · Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for bringing this forward. I was proudly the chair of the committee when we went through this process to build the Accessibility Plan and the depth and the layers that we engaged in and we, with multiple individuals in the community. So at first my question was going to be, aren't we doing this? And how does this look different? So I'm happy to support the referral so we can look at maybe what we can be doing better. Okay, thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Westhaver. Next to speak will be Councillor Phelps Bondroff.

Speaker B · Thank you. Very much, Mr. Mayor. And thank you for referring this to the committee that. I guess I am the liaison. Well, I guess I am the liaison, too, actually. I'm really excited to say this committee's been really coming into its own. We've had a couple of meetings and we actually had to reschedule our next meeting because we are getting a special presentation from Stephanie Cadieux, who is the Chief Accessibility Officer of Canada. So it's gonna be a very interesting conversation. So I can't guarantee that we'll be discussing it at that next meeting next week. We'll probably want to do it at a subsequent meeting, but I'm sure that's a decision the staff can make, not me.

Speaker B · I think it's important, but I think the conversation we're having here is an ongoing conversation with inclusion of folks with disabilities in various advisory capacities. And I'm kind of. I'm quite buoyed by the fact that we do already have one representative on the adp, which is very important, and we have some representation in other committees. Can we do more? That's something I think that the Accessibility Technical Administrative community should explore. So I think it's a reasonable request to refer. And I think the question I'd like to explore through the committee would be a broader question about the engagement, not just specifically, specifically to the item that's flagged in the perambulatory clauses, but rather one that takes a deeper dive into sort of the more inclusive element across a broader spectrum.

Speaker B · I think limiting it just to that narrow margin could be seen as somewhat problematic in some contexts or just too limiting. So I think it might be better to have it expansive. But this will be a conversation for the Accessibility Technical Administrative Committee, and I'm happy to support the referral there.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Felmesponroff. Next to speak is Councillor plant.

Speaker G · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm going to start with a question through you to staff or our council liaison is how often does this body meet and does it meet during the summer months?

Speaker A · Why don't I turn to Councillor Phelps Bondroff as the liaison, as I think he may have the best insight into that.

Speaker B · Thank you very much. I know our staff rep is not here. We are meeting next week, so we are meeting into summer, and I don't believe we're meeting. I don't know if there's a meeting schedule between then and the end of summer. At this stage, I believe it's every three months, but as needed. But I will have to defer to staff on that.

Speaker A · Okay, I can see Ms. Froud is looking it up right now, and so we may have that answer for you in a moment. Councillor Plant, did you have another question?

Speaker G · No, that was the main question. Because I just want to make sure that this body doesn't meet twice a year. It sounds like it meets at least quarterly and perhaps it can meet more often, given that there's this item being referred to it. The only piece that I think that needs to be addressed, from what I've heard in the most before it was referred, was a concern about human rights. And I'm going to encourage Councillor Phelps Bonderoff when this comes to the committee to see if there is an opportunity to confirm that everything Saanich does does occur through a lens of ensuring that we are having human rights met.

Speaker G · I have a hunch we are, but I think the suggestion that we maybe aren't is something that I want to have clarified. And if we're not, certainly I want to be on the right side of history and make sure we're doing the right thing for our people and obviously the law. So I'm in favor of this. I think this motion is well intended, but I think referring it to staff is the right step to see where we are in alignment. And in fact, what Councillor Harper even said about it being in the accessibility plan, on whatever page number she said remind 17. Thank you. I can read lips, was really good information.

Speaker G · And so I think referral is the right idea. I have a hunch it's not likely going to come back to this council, though it'll probably be the next council based on the timelines we have. And I do thank you for the referral motion.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. Ms. Froud, if you're able to clarify.

Speaker C · Yes, Councillor Phelpsman kindly gave me his laptop with the terms of reference, and that includes that the committee will meet as required to conduct business in accordance with this mandate, holding a minimum of two and a maximum of six meetings by June 2026. I don't have the actual dates in front of me, though.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you for that clarity, Councillor. Chambers on referral.

Speaker D · Thank you very much. Thank you. Just a quest. May I ask a question through you to the chair?

Speaker A · Councillor Phelps Wanderhoff is the liaison to the chair.

Speaker D · The liaison. May I ask that this topic will be something that is elevated within a reasonable time frame?

Speaker A · Councillor Phelps Mondoff, if you're able to speak to that, as committee liaison.

Speaker B · Unfortunately, I can't. As the committee liaison, I don't have control of the agenda, but I can, I think Staff has probably heard the support for council on this item. And I don't know if the committee will be meeting after our meeting next week before now and the fall. But that's something we can follow up with staff afterwards.

Speaker A · Thank you. Go ahead.

Speaker D · Thank you. Through the Mayor, just to follow up on that last question, it said that the committee will meet as required as needed. What qualifies as needed and how much. Yes.

Speaker A · Ms. Froud, if that's something you're able to provide clarity on,

Speaker C · it can be a variety of factors that can impact as needed. It can be a time sensitive matter that includes a deadline. It could include staff availability. Other projects on that take a need to be addressed first. It. It's quite wide ranging.

Speaker D · Thank you for that. Is there does community concern, community desires, Is that one of the meeting prerequisites or could be used as one?

Speaker C · It's a difficult question for me to answer because I'm more involved with advisory committees, whereas this is a technical committee and the question is better responded to to from actually corporate services. So it's something that I can take

Speaker D · away and relate to them. Okay, thank you. Ms. Froud, if we could find out when staff might have an idea when that reached that committee level, that would be really great for council's information. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker A · Okay, thank you. On the question of referral, those in favor and opposed. None are opposed. The motion carries. Thank you. Councillor Chambers, I think you indicated you had a motion arising.

Speaker C · Thank you.

Speaker D · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do. My motion arising is that Council direct staff to include disabled and improve disabled intercultural diversity statement that is read at every meeting.

Speaker A · I'm not seeing a seconder, but perhaps that's something you could bring forward as a notice of motion. And it may actually be more appropriate for the technical committee to also consider. Okay.

Speaker C · Okay.

Speaker A · Thank you. Okay. I'm going to turn it over to miss Froud for the final item. And as she advised at 9:30. I'll now advise at 9:46. Procedures bylaw hopes for us to be adjourned by 10 o'.

Speaker K · Clock.

Speaker A · Ms. Froud, over to you.

Speaker C · This is the development and implementation of of provincial tools to enable local governments to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Notice a motion from Councillor Devries, who will read the motion in.

Speaker A · Councillor devries, over to you.

Speaker I · Thank you. I move that the Mayor write the provincial government, including the Premier and the Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions, other appropriate ministers and local MLAs urging the province to advance the development and implementation of tools that would enable local government governments to regulate greenhouse gas Emissions from existing buildings.

Speaker A · Okay, seconded by Phelps Bondroff. Go ahead.

Speaker I · Given our time constraint, I'm going to be very succinct. Like communities across the province, building emissions represent Saanich's largest, second largest source of emissions. Some communities in the province buildings are actually number one because they've advanced more sustainable forms of transportation, mass transit. With that in mind, this is something that the province's own climate plans have identified as a need in order to meet GHG emission reduction targets both province wide. And it is highlighted in our own climate plan as well. I've had a discussion with sustainability finding staff about whether or not this is something we've advocated for before or has been advanced. And it's something that hasn't been raised as directly as it should be. In my view.

Speaker I · This is an opportunity to do that. There's going to be an additional opportunity. Victoria has sent this same discussion to UBCM for further discussion and it's just imperative. I think there were some good questions raised by a member of the public about things that will need to be considered as these tools are developed. And that is exactly the kind of work that we'd expect the province to do to ensure that these are rolled out in ways that protect residents both now and into the future.

Speaker E · Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you. The mayor's keyboard is going to be just smoking with all of these letters that I'll be writing. Councillor Phelps Bondoroff.

Speaker B · Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Not too much to add to what my colleague was saying, but I think this item actually dovetails well with one of the ones we explored earlier, the question of some of the sustainability measures that we can adopt that our staff propose adopting and removing barriers that people faced in the consent agenda, rather around things like heat pumps, EVs and solar panels. So I think I do appreciate the comments from the member of the public on this. I think the question here is getting some. Getting the province moving. There's been zero program since 2024. We need to see things moving along and I think the province is in a really good position to start creating those kinds of tools that we could then use to help effectively regulate greenhouse gas emissions in existing buildings.

Speaker B · Some of those tools I think will be incentives that help people and some of the great projects we're already doing, like our heat pump program, some of the retrofit strategies we've seen at different levels of government, I think there's a lot of potential here and I think just nudging the province forward, saying that these are not just measures that help hit our climate targets, but they're also measures that could potentially be well designed that would help with affordability.

Speaker B · You know, we all know that when you make your house more sustainable, you also save money when it comes to expenses like heating and electricity. And these are things the province should be looking at as well. So I think it's very useful. I think my colleagues already explained how this dovetails well and connects well with other advocacy efforts. And I think it's important that we continue to remind the province to take action on climate. And I think it's also really important to nest that within the context and the conversation of affordability.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Phelps. Monrof. Next to speak is Councillor Harper.

Speaker F · Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, and I having heard the conversation, I also wanted to reiterate one of the reasons that I am able to support this in its current form is I'm getting comfort after having heard the remarks that this is not just about regulating. This is about collecting data so we can figure out the best ways forward that may lead to the regulation. But because there are many different possible ways that that could occur and we want to be sure that we're not putting even more burdens on some of our residents who may or may not be able to afford some of the things that they're going to be asked to be done depending on how this plays out.

Speaker F · So I think this is very important step moving forward. But the first step of it, of course, is collecting data. And so I'm absolutely in favor of it moving forward so that we can get to the next steps, next best steps. Sorry, it's not all that late yet, but with data so that we can figure out next steps forward. So I will be supporting this. Thank you.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Harper, Councillor Brown.

Speaker H · Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I just want to reiterate that sustainability has a program where with Victoria, to collect data from buildings, commercial buildings and whatnot, and CRD manages the data. So I think it's a five year program, so we'll be able to see locally some of the data. And I think that's important as well because we've done it in conjunction with not forcing the building owners, but showing them what can be saved. And I think that's a really important program for us. Thanks, I'll support the motion.

Speaker A · Thank you. Councillor Brownhoff. Next to speak is Councillor plant.

Speaker G · Yeah, thanks. Mr. Mayor, I have a question for the mover, which I believe is Councillor Devries. Is the goal in your mind long term that the province would provide tools to each municipality to adopt on their own or that the province would create a framework work that would require each municipality to have some sort of plan to regulate greenhouse gases.

Speaker A · Councillor devries, if you're able to clarify

Speaker I · the wording explicitly, doesn't cover that because I think that would be part of the analysis and discretion of the province. I think when we look at other aspects of clean B. C. and previous climate plans, the attention to use a mixed approach where certain things are required, other things are enabling tools, think zero carbon step code and other things like that.

Speaker G · Yeah, I appreciate that. I am going to lend my support to this because this is the beginning of a journey for Saanich. While I recognize the city of Victoria has already sent something down to UBCM and I appreciate the comments made by the previous speaker, Councillor Brownhoff, I also am a little bit concerned, concerned about the potential ramifications if we were given this opportunity, what it would mean to the current stock of Saanish buildings. So as long as the approach is tools and incentives, and if you don't mind the metaphor, a carrot, not a stick, I'm in favor of that. I think if we start to approach things with a stick approach, we're likely going to find community opposition. But I.

Speaker G · I am in favor of finding out what we can have and I thank Councillor DeVries for bringing this forward.

Speaker A · Thank you, Councillor Plant. If there's no further discussion, I am going to call the question. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. The motion carries. Just before I look to a member of council to make a motion to adjourn, I have to tell you, when I reviewed the agenda last week with staff, I had serious doubt we'd be out of here before 10 o'.

Speaker C · Clock.

Speaker A · And here we are just before 10 o', clock, about to adjourn and not for a lack of debate or public input. So I appreciate everyone's discipline. As we move these forward, I am going to look to a member of council for a motion to adjourn. Thank you, Councillor Harper. Seconded by Devries on adjournment. Those in favor and opposed? None are opposed. That's carried. Thanks everyone. Have a good evening.