Transcript: Regular Council - 25 May 2026

Okay. Good evening everyone. Good evening. Thank you. Thank you. Uh I would like to now call our regular council meeting of Monday, May 25th to order, please. I would like to begin by acknowledging that this meeting in the district of Souk is being held on the traditional lands of the South Nation council. I would like to look for approval of today's agenda. Item 3.1 that the agenda for May 25th, 2026 regular meeting to be adopted as presented. Moved by councelor Betos and seconded by Baitman. All those in favor and that's unanimous. Thank you. Item four 4.1 is adoption of meeting minutes and that would be that the following council meeting minutes be adopted as presented. our May 11th, 2026 regular and our May 19th, 2026 committee of the whole. It's moved by councelor Baitman and seconded by Betos. Any questions or corrections?

Okay. Uh all those in favor of adoption and none opposed. That's unanimous. Thank you. Uh next up is our report of the chief administrative officer. I'll look to Miss Gray to see if there's anything outside of what's on the consent agenda. Uh thank you, your worship. The only thing I wanted to add is um just timely with property tax notices um being distributed this week um is the next up in our annual budget cycle will be um community engagement. Uh so there'll be lots of opportunities over the summer um at various popups and markets and we encourage residents to attend those. Um participate as much as you feel comfortable with um and or correspond with the district to make your voices heard so we can let the new council know what the priorities of the community are. And I'll just leave it at that for now.

Okay. Thank you very much. That moves us into item six, which is our public question and comment period. Uh this section is reserved for members of the of the community that wish to address council. There will be two minutes per speaker allocated. Uh so if you could please come forward, introduce yourself. We just require your name. Uh and if you could please let us know which item in particular you're speaking to. It's particular to tonight's agenda. Thank you. uh on the base of the microphone actually and when you start speaking our staff will start the timer for you. Thank you. Hi Donnie Eve from Souk. I appear today as president of Souk Region Historical Society to speak to item 8.1 Throop Road Phillips Road connection connection project. We were surprised to see Souk Region Museum land mentioned as part of the expansion plan. Uh the staff report under legal impact states for CP6 the land will be derived from private land owners CRDC park and the souk region museum.

Sorry Miss Eve, can you hold for a moment? Okay, sorry. Go ahead, please. Okay. In discussion with staff last year, we shared concerns about Philips Road construction. The area used for parking and accessible parking along Philips Road in front of the museum is actually on District of Souk Road rightway. So plans to widen this road will have a significant impact. It will affect our ability to deliver school and other public programs and events. And as the region's official visitors center, parking is crucial to maintain access, especially considering mobility and accessibility needs for seniors and visitors. We know parking for both Sea Park and the museum is difficult to find even now when you especially when events are at either location. We've heard from construction professionals that widening the road into this area will likely kill the mature trees that boarded the museum grounds. The loss of otherwise healthy mature trees will affect the absorption of greenhouse gas emissions, destroy wildlife habitat, and impact the area's appeal. And this is just if construction extends into the existing rightway. The

staff report infers there plans to go even further to widen the road beyond District of Souk rightway, taking land away from the museum property. We seek clarification on what's meant by land will be derived from the Souk Region Museum. The museum is a cherished public institution. It's an important activity information historical center for residents and visitors alike and a critical community hub and focal point gateway to services, amenities, and attractions for the entire region. The museum serves 40,000 residents and visitors all year long, and maintaining access to these services is crucial. Thanks so much for all your efforts staff and council to improve traffic in our community. And once again, we ask to be notified and included in any discussions that will impact the museum.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Thank you, your worship. Sorry, sir. Can you please turn on the microphone? There we go. Thank you. Thank you, worship. My name is Bruce Barry appearing on a personal and it is regard to in fact item 8.1 and it is to address the impact of what you're looking at on reconciliation. I know it seems what does it have to do with reconciliation? In fact, it has quite a lot and it's not just a local issue. It's a national and panabboriginal issue especially around the issue of the museum. Two months ago, I became a member of the board of the museum, but I'd given thought to this with other folks um to present to you. I'm not a member of the local First Nation. I'm a member of the Sandy Bay Ojiway First Nation in Manitoba. I've lived here for three years and I'm not going back where it's 35 below four months out of the year.

Municipal infrastructure decisions are never purely technical. In fact, their culture and political road alignment, traffic planning and civil engineering shape really whose stories are visible and the history of indigenous people and their stories not being visible is well known. Souk is very conscious and does a great job. But I just want to emphasize consideration of this. In a past life, I was director of the indigenous law program at the University of Alberta. So I'm familiar with the impact of these decisions across Canada. And I'll just leave my written submission with you. The Souk Museum has a key part as a trutht teller and the holder of stories and they're very much involved with the local First Nation in articulating and collecting the history of this area and these people.

And I note that you're doing public consultation and thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. If you do have a written submission, you may provide it to Mr. Lois at the end there. He can distribute to council. Thank you. Other speakers this evening. Where's the button? Okay. My name is Patricia Whitley. I'm a senior as you can guess and I've been here hearing for 15 years that we need a senior center. I haven't seen anything except rented space and it's not very good for us anyway. But they're closer now than we have ever been. We have not nowhere near anywhere. We go, we come, we everybody stops. I want them to stop and get together because this will benefit everybody here, not just me, but everybody here will eventually need it. And wouldn't it be nice to have your names on it?

[clears throat and snorts] That would be nice. And that's my sentence. Now, thank you. Thank you for coming tonight. Thank you. Other speakers this evening, may I ask that any applause be withheld just so we can create a neutral space? Thank you. one. Thank you. Your worship counselors, I'd like to speak to item 12.1. I need to clarify the gathering place is not intended just for seniors. Yes, there's a focus on healthy aging, but youth and intergenerational programs and activities have always been part of the vision and all the discussions over the years. The first part of the motion you're considering in 12.1 asks staff to negotiate with Catalyst. It's unclear where the negotiation is about space, secure securing space or about the cost of space. Getting a yes from catalyst will not be helpful in the gathering place if the gathering place is required to pay market rates for space. Can the motion be clarified to consider the cost of space in discussion with catalyst

with the second part of the motion? If negotiation is not successful, the community is left without the opportunity for a plebite. So we're back to zero. That's a slap in the face quite frankly for all the thousands of hours and thousands of dollars that have been invested in this project to date. Yes, costs are a concern for everyone, but it's imperative that we get answers to access to lot A. With that, we have leverage to engage funders, builders, developers, donors to support this project. We all agree that's the way that costs can be brought down considerably. And with that kind of community support, we won't need to put $5 million to the community taxpayers.

Please consider any idea of cancing the plebesite at this time as a no. Without this community process, we wouldn't have a pool today. We wouldn't have a golf course today. We wouldn't have sewers today. I encourage I am encouraged to know that every person on this council is in favor of making gathering place a reality and sooner rather than later. So I thank you. So can these two ideas now move forward concurrently and in parallel at least until the staff reports come forward and we have a better understanding of the costs and the negotiations and more information about both options. I thank you. Thank you.

Other speakers this evening, Ellen Lures. I also like to speak to uh 12.1 uh like to speak to taxes period. I've heard nothing but grief from a lot of people with the taxes. U people coming in in near and tears wondering how they're going to pay their taxes. So another 5 million is not acceptable or the 50 million for a road. But there are other alternatives. We've uh we have talked with the seniors about it before. The we have all those uh modular units which I believe all the counselors know about uh on on Butler's property and the price has dropped drastically and there's 33 units that are 720 ft each. There's a full full kitchen in there worth worth probably $2 million. The price has dropped so drastically that we could put it on lot a easily cuz it'll cover a quarter of an acre and still have lots of space and it would and it would cover a lot of people. It would cover seniors, youth, the the I

made a list here. um uh different events, the orchestra, arts, food, food bank, um band, choir, um it it uh food chi, it would just be such a wonderful space space for the whole community. We know that the suit community hall is maxed out. You cannot get a place there. But if we had this unit on lot, it would be a new community center and and for a price that we could afford and it would serve all the community. I don't think we need to have more housing for seniors, but if a gathering place or what a gathering place for everybody because we just are lacking space. So, and and rental space would be there.

people could storage the the bands could store the equipment there or orchestras but we don't have that so I think this is a great opportunity that we should be looking at and I think we need to look at alternatives thank you okay thank you other speakers this evening and you'll just need to turn the microphone on when you're ready okay my name is Dorothy Anderson and it's been weighing on my mind the last while with all these um fires and everything. It's happening more often and everything else. I'm concerned about the people in Sun River as there's should be an alternate route for them to get out of there if there should be a fire happen possibly to the other um to the south part of Souk Road going out towards Shirley or whatever because if there's a fire there and it happens below these people are not going to get out of there.

Thank you. Thank you. Veronica Pam Villain. I live in Souk. Um I'm also going to speak to item 12.1. I want to thank Mrs. lures for coming up with an alternative and a creative alternative because I know I say this all the time, but the tax bills arrived and they're shocking when they arrive and I know council is doing the very best and staff to make everything work. So, I understand the pressures, but I do not think we can put more on the tax. I I just don't think people are struggling as it is. As I've said, a million Canadian families will have their mortgages renewed in the next uh this year or next year, and most of them won't be able to make that. And as I see the tax bill, I look at what I need to do as a senior. I now, you know, question whether I can visit my grandchild in Montreal. That's going to need to change. People are making real decisions on this on on what's coming

down. And from everything I've seen and heard, it's going to be get worse. my house is worth less than I paid for it and many people will find themselves in negative equity when they need to renew. So I will say that I'm supporting uh councelorne's motion to not do the plebite to cancel the plebite and uh and thank you to Mrs. Lewis for coming up with an alter an alternative. So thank you. Okay, thank you. It's on. Uh Rob Pierce, Souk resident, soon to be senior. The senior I've been out here for 15, 20 years. Um and that's all I've ever heard is a senior center.

I think Councilman Haldane's on it. He's got a good idea here to talk to somebody that's willing to build a building, you know, right? I believe you wanted to do talk about a a tax swap or a shift or something. Even if there was a plebicide or a referendum, whatever you want to call it, we still got to win it. Then you got to find the land. I don't know if there's land like lot A seems to be talked about a lot. Are there plans? We can't afford it. We really can't afford it. When I pay my tax bill comes in and it's over four grand and I look and see what I get for my taxes. Quite frankly, it's disgusting. really disgusting. So to even think about adding five more or 50 more to put in bike lanes that the majority of the time don't get used is ridiculous. So my two cents.

Okay. Thank you. Other speakers this evening. Is this on? Okay. Hi. So I'm Sher Rob. I am uh the president of the Souk Arts Council and I'm a director on the Souk uh region chamber of commerce. I've been on the Souk gathering place fundraising committee for the last four years. And in that time, our small group of volunteers has ignited a vision and inspired our entire community to rally behind this initiative. And so far, our community has come together. We've held regular themed costume dances and theatrical events. We've hosted three spectacular seniors contests. We've brought the National Grand Parade to Souk. Now we're entering our third year raising funds for seniors. We've partnered with other service organizations to host a senior fair.

We'll have another one this June. We've collected and sold literally tons of books. We've organized plan air art events and art sales. We've sold trees and raffled handmade quilts. We've baked thousands of dollars worth of holiday treats, and that's a lot of cookies. We've encouraged businesses to challenge one another to raise funds and donate prizes. We've received incredible support from the Rotary Club, which raised over $16,000. We've witnessed complete strangers, people we don't even know, hold yard sales, clothing swaps, knitting sales, and bottle drives to support this building. We've raised almost $300,000 just by doing this. The point is, our community has worked incredibly hard to demonstrate support for the Sue Gathering Place. People have donated time, money, energy, creativity, and heart because they believe this project matters. They have earned a say.

Thank you. We're at time. Okay. Thank you. You may please refrain from clapping again. There's different viewpoints that we'd like to hear from. Thank you. And next speaker. Thank you. Nick Dickinson Wild and William. Uh, so I'm here to speak about item 8.1. The connector honestly should have been built 15 years ago. It can't be changed, but it should have been. Regardless of any of the options, I do not believe that 20% tax increase is a all a star. If that goes on the ballot, it's basically deciding that you do not want it to be passed. Uh that said, I encourage a complete but onesided buildout of the route. So currently the options provided in the appendices include various options, but they all have some degree of sidewalk on both sides.

When Watoms was built out, it was one side. It didn't have a sidewalk and a bike lane. It had a multi-use pathway. This route could also have a multi-use pathway. Currently, the route is basically take going to be going on a bike route. So, I strongly do say we need to have a bike and pedestrian accessible pathway, but can be one-sided. Additionally, given that the schools multiple schools are accessed from Helixen, I believe that C4 and C5 have to be done at the same time or at least sequentially. And given traffic on Phillips, that will inevitably increase. I think all three do have to be sequential, but that that 20% option is a non-starter. So make the initiative on the ballot based on one of the lower options and try and reduce the costs. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Other speakers tonight. Hi Noah Dawi Souk. Uh I guess this is also regarding 8.1 through Phillips Road Connection Project. Um I agree with Nick. one-sided is all that's needed along this whole thing. Um, for now, uh, I'd also like to suggest reducing the width to 20 m throughout a center median or lane is not necessary, at least in section CB4, CB5, in my opinion. Uh, furthermore, with regards to options for the referendum question, I'll note that the $50 million price tag being talked about, it's it it's not just the section between Phillips and the skate park. It's Souk Road to Sea Park and then all the way up to church.

I think many would be far more supportive um and have a much better chance of going forward if the scope of the referendum was limited to funding CB5 on its own with the other sections to be upgraded at a later time. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Mayor, Council, uh, citizens, staff, Dave Saunders. I'll be speaking to 7.4, 8.1, and 8.3. Um, 7.4, the emergency management strategy here. Um, many people for years now have been talking about Highway 14, so that's not new. And so I really don't see that uh we needed a high-paced consultant to do this work when we have hired new staff and we have a great fire chief. Uh more importantly, the Canu uh Nation haven't been included in that report. They have a comprehensive development as you know in the OCP. They should be included in the report to 8.1.

I've looked over the designs. I'm a excavator operator, builder of roads developer. the current current plan put forward is it's basically unrealistic. It's it should be absolutely basic in relation to the current needs of this community uh being affordable. I see uh $50 million price tag failing. You have no backup plan. I've been asking for quite some time about a backup plan. There is no backup plan. We still don't know what the province's plan is for Highway 14, and that's 20-year buildout. We need to know that I can talk a long time about this issue because I've been working on it for the last two terms. Seems that nobody wants to listen to me. I'm here to help. I think the community is here to help. We need to get back to the basics.

Uh to 8.3 UBCM costs. There was some comments made by a counselor that I won't even repeat, but I would offer this is that you need to to speak with some other councils that are reviewing the strategy related to UBCM and conferences attendance. Some of them some of those counselors uh being the Highlands councelor Baird in fact has made statements similar to the citizens statements that looked at the budget constraints that they're providing and they don't see a lot of benefit in these conferences. So it makes sense to downscale some of the costs. So thank you very much for your attention to these. I'm happy to help if you want help.

Okay. Thank you. Other speakers this evening? Uh your worship. My apologies. I did just uh want to advise that um the public input session is typically limited in the procedure by law to 20 minutes and this is currently been going on for exactly 20 minutes. Uh so the council may wish to considering that I believe two people just indicated they are heading to the speaker podium you might wish to take a vote on extending that in order to I'll extend it as my privilege of chair and if council disagrees they can challenge. Okay. Thank you. Please proceed. Miss Dunn. Thank you your honor. Uh my name is Mary Dunn and I am with the Sou Region Community Health Network. Uh wanting to speak to item 12.1. Um just reiterating a lot of what's already been said. There is obvious support in Souk for the gathering place to take forward that it is more than a senior center. It is also space for youth. It's also space for community to meet the needs of a lot of

those that aren't able to or have difficulty providing their services because of lack of space in souk. So wanting to address that um addressing the motions that are put forward we are always interested in looking at alternatives and have all the way along we've spoken I have spoken to the president of the community development or the developers in souk that new group um that did express interest in working with us but only if we had something in writing from council saying that we could build this on lot a once that occurs then we can move forward looking at ways of decreasing the cost of building um to me makes sense that this be a community build that the community be involved that it be um something that they have ownership in. We are also you know continuing to fund raise once we have a settlement on exactly where this can go. We can also go after bigger funds to help augment and not cost the

taxpayers much money. We have now raised over 300,000 as of today. We are well we are quite a bit over 300,000 and are getting more in um all the time. So continuing to work forward on that. I'd like to see both these motions go forward um parallel the motion the plebesite motion um to continue to be looking into that but also to have discussions with the uh new build that's going in to see whether that's an opportunity or not as well. So encourage those to go forward in parallel. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. other speakers. Hello, Jeff McDonald. Um, it's a difficult time to talk about spending obviously and so this is about the gathering place. I think creativity is uh key to a lot of problems. So um there's a saying that uh deadline is the oxygen of ch of fundraising and um it seems like there might be an opportunity here if we are at a bit of an impass where a deadline could be put into place where x amount of money was raised by the community. it could serve as a sort

of a pseudo referendum for this project and that you know the outcome of that could be cost matched with the town finding a creative solution to it and to get the result that clearly everybody wants but is a little bit of a raid to fund. So uh it's just a suggestion along those lines. Um and then the other one I just mentioned about the the transportation um a lot of discussion there's a lot of fear around traffic in souk and stuff like that. I'd just like to put forth that any thought about the future of shoot of souk should really be uh considered in the context of where uh transportation is going with uh automation and stuff like that. 20 years down the road is going to be a very very different uh look at how cars are going to move back and forth from Victoria. Cars are going to be much like trains.

They'll all be banded together. Uh so the transportation situation is going to be very very different than it is today. so we don't have to be as terrified about traffic in the future as perhaps we think we need to be. Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any other speakers this evening? Any other firsttime speakers? Okay. My name is Rosand Day and I'm here with permission from my better at home client who sat three years in a wheelchair during CO [gasps] who [sighs] when she had the senior bus she looked forward to that trip every every month that she said getting to know the people sitting with them for 7 8 hours those were the people that she had tea with.

Those were the people she went to lunch with. Those were the people she talked to at night. She goes to the grocery store now. There is a cost, but there's another cost that's bigger. Thank you. Thank you very much, mistake. And does that in conclude all the speakers this evening? Oh, we have one more. We'll introduce have our final speaker and then we'll move on into tonight's agenda. My name is Sinclair Phillip. I live in downtown Souk and I'm a strong supporter of the gathering place and like to keep the plebvisite um on the ballot. Um it is something that our community really needs as we grow older quickly.

Um, I would like to see the through road connector costing 40 to 20 to $50 million um taken off the um off the agenda, off the ballot. Um I I'm concerned about uh as as already been expressed the very negative impact it will have on the Souk Regional Museum. I do not believe that it will impact um traffic in any significant way. I only see traffic as getting worse. Um we have some very big new subdivisions going in in Souk that may uh bring a thousand more cars on the road in the near future. Um I was very fortunate to attend um an expert uh discussion in including Levi Megan on affordable solutions to transportation [clears throat] and his recommendation and I have a lot of respect for him and his senior level in transportation and his his analytical abilities and research. Um he he recommends that we put in an HOV lane. I'm talking affordability here coming back from Victoria towards Souk. And I hope you

will and the municipal staff will um try and take a minute to study that. And just one last comment, I'm I am I feel crushed by the increase in municipal taxation, but at the same time, our taxes go to support a number of community groups. And I think that it would be honest for anybody proposing tax reductions to before the election tell us exactly where they're going to cut so we will know who to vote for. Thank you. We're at time. Thank you. Okay. Oh, yes. Go ahead, Mr. Anderson. The the mic is on. Oh, it's all on. Excuse Me guys. Good to see everyone.

Uh, concerning uh the Sorry, you just need to introduce yourself for the record. Thank you. Steve Anderson, president of Souk. Um, concerning the 12.1 uh the issue of the the gathering place. Um, just a little perspective uh from my almost 20 years in the performing arts scene in Souk. Um all the groups have always had problems getting access to places to use and including the with with [snorts] uh the school district cuz you know it's shared places. Same with the community hall all these different venues. I would hate to see the same thing happen with the gathering place and seniors programs in the future if it's shared with a medical facility. And I think it's a good idea having that would be a good plan B having it shared with a you know in that space rented out whatnot. But I would very much love to see a standalone gathering place building not with housing or anything attached. Some that would be managed by the searching group and the seniors and the youth. And as far as cost that can

always be subsidized by rentals to the different user groups. There's ways around that. There's lots of crafty business businessminded people around Souk who can make that happen. And as far as saving the taxpayers uh money, Habitat for Humanity style build that could be that's could be something that could go on the long-term history of souk have our nice gathering place building done. An epic building built well by volunteers in the community. Not just fundraising money, but also fundraising material. And there's lots of professional people here who would love to come and volunteer and help all the you know all the workers get it done. So just just some ideas and thoughts there. Um and that's all. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. Uh this concludes our public input pro uh section today. I just wanted to advise folks on process. Uh at a previous meeting, council uh discussed the plebite and the outcome of that decision was to direct staff to report back on the next steps and then and how we include this on the ballot. So, we are still in the process of waiting for that staff report which will be coming uh soon to council because we need to then have time once it's approved to send it off to the inspector for municipalities to approve the question before it goes on to the ballot. So, we are one step.

There's various steps along the way. Uh in terms of councelor Heldane's motions or the ones uh that were provided by members of council that was read in at a previous meeting. It will receive a second tonight. it can be amended and discussed and then be actioned on or withdrawn uh to be determined. So there's more to come. You're more than welcome to stay. Uh and there's also the meeting is recorded on YouTube. You could watch the outcome from that. And of course it's uh or check in at a later date or reach out to any member of council. Um but I'll just pause now as I think some folks are looking to leave.

So we'll just give it a few moments for folks to uh disperse and then we'll carry on. Thank you.

Okay, if I can have everyone's attention back here, please. We'll move on to item seven, which is our consent agenda. And that would be that the following items on the consent agenda to be adopted by consent. 7.2 correspondence. 7.3 report of the chief administrative officer. 7.4 for climate adaptation and natural hazard risk assessment. So that's moved by councelor Haldane, seconded by councelor Betos. Okay, councelor Heldane, did you have anything to withdraw? Councelor Bettos. Yeah, 13A. I'd like to get brought to the next meeting. 13A correspondence. Yeah. Provincial response to 2025 resolutions union municipalities. Okay. So 13.8 to come to the next. Is there anything other councelor Baitman?

Yeah, I'd like uh 29Q, annual report of the Victoria Family Court and 30R, local government climate action program funding. Okay. Is there anything else? I will request uh item 28 which the is the all soup day family picnic sou community association uh to go to the next meeting. And just in regards to item 30, correspondence, uh there's just a typo. I think it's the mayor of Sanich and not the major, but it's a material, the new title. Uh is there anything else from anyone? Okay. Um I'll just comment briefly on the climate adaptation and natural hazard risk assessment. Uh yes, a lot of that information in that high level report was something that we all know, but this is now a requirement of the province that every local government in BC provide this particular reports, which is why they provided the funding to hire the consultant and it also will deem us eligible for future funding. Without it, we are ineligible for funding. It was similar to their approach with bill 44.

All right, on that I will call the question. All in favor receipt. Any opposed? None are opposed. That's unanimous and those items will come to the Rex regular meeting. We'll move into item eight is our report section. And first up is 8.1 which is the throop road Philips road connection project connector project. Thank you very much your worship. I tried to prepare a very short presentation. I'll see if I succeeded or not. But I am an engineer and I do like PowerPoint. So, we'll try. Maybe we won't. There we go. Okay. So to two master transportation plans uh this quarter has been identified or some variation of it as providing a second east west connector through souk to lands beyond. Um some of this is already being constructed uh by the hut uh waters way um and the c the unfilled circles and that totals about $17 million. So we souk has made a fair investment in trying to move forward with this concept. Um as we've seen uh we did receive from the provincial

government a letter that was fairly blunt in its uh wording where it says unless soup does something internally they're not going to do anything on Highway 14. I mean they will use that as an excuse that if we have not done anything why should they? So this is the specific projects that were looked at. Um there's technically three of them but they were grouped into one in order to go for grant funding. So, you have CP Four, five, and six. And they vary in their cross-sectional widths. Um, from church to charters, it's 20 m, and the rest of it is 25. And that's based off the transportation master plan. Those cross-sections were identified for what arterials look like.

And the main difference is um you don't have a center turning lane or medium or someplace to put trees in the middle of the road. That's the main change between the two of them. Oh, no. Forget it then. Okay. So we're are coming towards the end of the detailed design. Um we're hovering between the three projects between 75 and 85%. Uh we've looked at the roundabout which was included at this time because in about 15 10 to 15 years uh we will have to build something similar to that. So if we're going to go forward with the construction this would be the time to do it. So, we keep a acceptable level of service.

Obviously, active transportation is a component of most grants nowadays. Um, I don't think I've ever seen one just for building a road anymore. It always has to include some form of active transportation. We've been working with our partners um CRD, Hydro, Fortis to see if they can make use of this corridor. Uh there will be retaining walls involved in this. Uh we're working with the province/DFO to how to deal with the section through CP5 and we're already starting to think about what protocols we're going to need for chance find. Now this is very small so [sighs and gasps] I hope you have the report to read. Um essentially it just breaks down the three projects into individual parts and then the total uh the four grants that we have applied for. Uh we have received one for a half a million dollars for active transportation.

Uh we have not received word on two of them. So we're still waiting to hear. If we're lucky, I'm thinking we might hear June, but uh since these are joint federal and provincial grants, uh the federal government sometimes moves at its own pace and I've seen sometimes year or two years for a grant to be approved. on the right hand side based off of the what we have for knowledge for what we have received what's being denied uh what the borein amounts would be and again we would go to the municipal finance authority to do this they have generally a a lower rate than going to your normal bank um it would be a 30-year payback and we use an interest rate of 4% that does vary um on the day you actually go and make the agreement with them.

This is just an example of what a full cross-section as I have called it is. Um so you have two active transportation on each side. You have storm water management. You have a turning lane. You have an island for speed control and beautifification. you have street lighting and such. This is what I would call the reduced cross-section where basically you have just two lanes of road. You might have uh as you go by the power pole there, you can kind of see a bicycle uh symbol there. So, you could have a joint uh sidewalk bicycle lane, but no separation from the road. And on the other side, uh, little or no shoulder, storm water drainage and lighting as well.

Uh, this one will be determined more after we have the initial discussion on what cross-section, which is the real important pro question uh that I need clarified in order to complete this design. Um, so I'll leave these ones just as a teaser out there just to possible questions and basically I would like to confirm the road crosssections complete the uh detailed design tender package that would give us either one mega shovel ready project or three projects that are shovel ready. So when funding does come along uh we can apply for it. Generally shovel ready projects are looked on more favorably than ones that are in the conceptual stage. So it would be helpful for us to have this uh look at it. Same with uh acquiring the land as well. It would be something we could tell the funders that we are serious about this. We've made steps and we've invested in ourselves in order to move this forward.

All I can do with the grant status is try to bother as many people as I can, but they are very tight-lipped about what they do with a with a grant funding. So we can try and hopefully we'll hear in June which will influence what type of question we can ask if a question is going to be asked on the ballot and I am here for questions. Okay. So council is sitting in regular council. So I know there's a lot of thoughts and questions about this. So, the motion I'm going to recommend at this time is that council receive the report for information moved by councelor McMath, seconded by councelor Baitman. In doing so, that opens it up for questions and then we can then potentially narrow it down to another decision point motion. Councelor McMath, you have the floor.

I'm just going to hold off at this time. Okay. Councelor Baitman. in the microphone. Well, um the danger of seconding a motion. Um [laughter] you know, so you've you've argued in your report that um doing uh sections individually will will cost cost significantly more over time. te tell me more about that. So if we were to do just CP4 for example in in this cycle um through the mayor to the counselor um every time we go as if we break these up into three sections we will have to tender each section there will be a mo and demobilization cost by the contractor uh which is depending on what the the project is uh can be fairly significant but is an extra cost being added into the project. There also become smaller projects so they become not as attractive and you'll see contractors raising their costs because of the the smallness of the project. I'm not sure how else to say it. When you put the three of them together, there's uh advantages that we're presenting a very large project to them, which some of the

larger contractors would seriously look at and would be able to get in there and conceivably not cost us those two extra mobes and demobes. they might have lower unit rate prices because they know they have guaranteed work for whatever time frame they think it's going to take to do this. And the third one is we basically if we kept them all as one um we bothered the neighborhood for yes two years or so as opposed to uh spend a year building go away for two years come back spend another year building and such. So though that's kind of a high level view of one versus three.

Okay. Thank you Mr. Miller. Um I'm curious about the uh the missing link in here. You do mention it in the report is of course the charters intersection at Souk Road and um you indicate I think that that is pending available capital to to proceed with that project. I thought that we were in a in a good position with that uh moving forward. I think I heard from your predecessor this year even not going to happen this year through the mayor to the counselor. Um we are doing detailed design right now in conjunction with um once that's done uh once funding comes available on our side and their side then the project can move forward.

My last discussion I had with MOOTT, they have not suggested to us that there is any money available at least this year or maybe possibly not next year, but never say never. Okay. Now, do you believe that that that action um in addition to the the north north south connectors that we have built to date would qualify in the ministry's opinion as uh significant work by the district of Souk on our road network? to your worship to the counselor. Um I think that would really be a political decision on the provincial level and if they wanted to play nice, yes, it would be. If they decided they didn't want to play nice, um they would deem it not.

Okay. One one more before I pass the torch here. Um, in your expert opinion, do you feel charters is capable of handling um, as you, as you well know, there are there's been discussion of right turn lanes off of Souk Road onto Phillips Charters and Church. And if indeed there was, in your expert opinion, a right turn lane leading to that intersection at Charters, would that um serve as a um as a a useful outlet for for traffic on Suit Road. We worship through the counselor. It's moving a little away from the discussion about the connector, but an improved intersection that could handle both right in, right out, left-hand turns um would provide another outlet that um individuals could use Thor Road to bypass that section of Souk Road and get that much further ahead.

um how much significance I wouldn't be able to tell you right at this time. Uh I do know from uh experience driving in on the morning on church the there's a fair significant use of it to left-hand turn on to souk and vice versa on the other way um at afternoon rush hour. So uh probably what would happen is that that load would be spread out between charters and church. Yeah. Okay. Thank you councelor Boss then held. Yeah. Thank you worship. Uh to staff um is there an opportunity in the next little while to uh give us a cost estimate of uh just the CP5 section? I mean, I realize it's going to be just a guesstimate at best, uh, with a reduced cross-section because if if we did it peace meal, and I'm not saying I'm in favor of peace meal, um, that might be enough if we did that section to spark the province into doing something about their highway through our town, which has always been a battle. and and it's frustrating to me

when I hear them, you know, put that ultimatum, you do this or we won't do that. Uh the other thing uh so that that is my one request. Uh the second one is I believe that we were given some money from MOT uh to design that right turn lane, three lanes uh going from uh Phillips uh up to Charter. So there would be uh one lane going down to the bridge and two lanes going up. Uh and uh that to me if we had that third lane uh that would peel off a lot of traffic and uh really alleviate some of the the road uh rage that we're getting. And when we had charters closed the the public made it very very clear they wanted to see us act. So, I'm really really having a tough time with anything going to $50 million to the public. I just don't think it'll pass.

But if CP5 could be carried through, um it's it's not my preferred. I like to do a proper uh streetscape. Uh but I'm also concerned about getting something done to alleviate some of the the the traffic. So, if you could give me some sort of indication on CP5 only and uh uh where we sit with that right turn uh third lane because I think it's already engineered if I believe uh if I remember from your predecessor if you could comment on that too please your worship to the counselor um with respect to CP5 I think the important question is whether or not council would like to see a 20 or 25 meter rightway Okay. Uh 25 m rightway allows you the option to do work later on. Um and that would gives you flexibility in the future. Uh if council could direct me to what part of the elements of the cross-section they don't want to see, then I could get the consultant to adjust that cost down. I can't give you a number right off the top of my head.

That could just uh the council could and that's why I put the the motion to receive for information because subsequent motions could be a direction to that effect. Uh and then my understanding of the design work, it was Phillips to Church Road and it was a right-hand turn lane that was being designed all the way to church. Correct. Not just charters, but all the way to just church is a bottleneck as well. Yeah. With respect to that one, I I don't have an answer because I haven't been briefed on that part of the history of the project. So, I would have to get back to you on that one.

That's fine. That's just a thought for later. But I think there's a procedural piece. Any other you worship on CP5? If council is considering to build a portion of this connector, that would probably be the one to build. and then you would live with the infrastructure you already have. And if we decided that we didn't want to put in bike lanes and such or we just have to make sure we like the cross-section because once we put in the retaining walls and a lot of curb and gutter going back to change those are going to be very expensive to do. That's good information. Thank you, Councelor Haldane, then Pearson.

Um, yeah, a few questions here. So, in your costing here, um, from 22.48 million all the way up to 49.29, is there land acquisition cost in any of that? Worship through the counselor that was captured in the contingency cost because we did not proceed in that direction until we had this discussion about how much rightway we needed. But we're estimating in the 1.5 range for acquiring land for the 25 m rightway cross-sectioned. 1.5 million. Yeah, I believe that's what I wrote. Yeah, that's it. Okay. Yeah, I don't see where that would be even remotely enough. But um given that, fair enough. So in many cases along this route, you've got pinch points 5.2, 15.2 meters, 16.4 meters. I mean, we don't have 20 meters and hardly any of it and we definitely don't have 25. So to acquire all that land to come through a process, I mean, we're guessing at those values obviously and for the people I've talked to along that route and I've talked to most of them, there is no appetite for giving the

district sue any of the land for any reason whatsoever. So I don't see a 20 meter road even being an option or a 25. So ultimately here we've been having to look at what we could do with what we have and 15.2 2 m is the smallest section. And I've done some math on some of the stuff, but 152 would still give us one bike lane, similar to what councelor Betos has talked about, a bike lane and a sidewalk on one side of the road and then some pavement to get cars moving. And at this point, that's the most important part. If you look at Sou Road, there's no bike lanes, there's no sidewalks. This is Highway 14. So we've we come all the way out from Langford all the way out to Souk with what we have which is traffic lanes to get traffic moving from one end to the other. And I think it's important here for us to look at it for that uh aspect because the people of Souk are upset that it takes them two hours to get home

from work. We need to get traffic moving. I don't see a lot of people biking especially in the winter time from Souk to to Victoria to go to work anyway. So if something that we could afford would be the other thing and 22.48 48 million is still a 9.54% tax increase. I don't see that passing in any kind of plebite that we put forward as well. So it leaves us in a situation where do we go through all this work and through all this stuff from what I understand we spent somewhere around $800,000 already on costing out this road with engineering with these plans and stuff like that. So you're getting close to a million dollars already. How much more millions are we going to spend in in this, you know, six cross-sections and stuff to come up with something that may or may not ever get used. So that money would be completely wasted. So there should be more talk around what we think we can afford. What I think we

could afford is pavement at this point and getting a road probably just like councelor that is saying maybe just from Phillips up to, you know, the ballpark or where or the the golf course is up there and that could get another road for people from Sun River to be able to go up town of Souk without having to go out on Sucro, which causes a lot of the traffic congestion that we have as well. and people who live up Otter Point Roadway and up in those subdivisions on Church Road could go that way on their way home from work alleviating a lot of the people going up to the roundabout.

So I think at this point having uh one more cross-section if we're going to do any more further stuff or if we're going to have people vote on it there should be the least expensive based on what property we do have that we don't have to spend money on being 15.2 2 meters and try and come up with a road cross-section for that. And that would just give them an alternative. You can put all the other ones in there, too. But if you give people the option of checking on the dotted line for a tax increase if it was down to 3% or 4%, I'm sure there'd be more people voting yes in favor of the road based on that than they would be for 9.54. And that's the lowest one we have an option for at this time.

And that's all I have at this moment. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Pearson. through the chair. Thank you. Um, so you answered the question on the I've got four questions here. So the land acquisition cost is you estimated according to the report 1.5 I think is something something like that. Um, and is that 1.5 in captured in the 50 million? I didn't kind of see where that linked through. It's sitting in the contingency amounts only in contingency. Okay. What about um you talked about walls being built, the new engineered walls and then we have the new 2025 standard engineered standard for these walls. Are those walls factored in? Because when you think about Phillips Road like coming off the highway, that's a pretty steep decline to the um to the west side of the road or to the east side of the road, I should say. Um is that are those walls because I think they're getting more and more and more expensive all the time because of the new engineering standards.

your worship to the counselor. Yes, the walls were included in that cost. Uh they are engineered retaining walls. Um that would be done to seis seismic standards. Um our consultants feel with their expertise and understanding of mechan soil mechanics that these are perfectly we can construct them and they would be stable. Okay. Good. Um, uh, talked about you talked about and the charter road cost like that intersection at uh, that we have to come forward at some point in the future. Is there any kind of ballpark figure on what our share of that would be that that's going to be over the 50 million I take it through the worship through the mayor to the counselor. Um my understanding is that's a separate project and so yes it would have its own cost um and at its own time frame for moving forward right it's it's just that it there's more and then there's more and then there's more the way I'm I'm looking at this um and you said something about the province playing nice. So, building on what councelor Haldane said, I kind of did

some math this afternoon and if if if we could look at interm and alternate or interm and ultimate kind of roads because currently right now we have a there's a whole bunch of sections that are in that that are that are way less than 20 mters. They're 15.2 15.8 according to the maps anyways. So I if we build a 3 m bike lane on one side, 3 m travel lane, a 3 m left turn or 3.6 m travel lane, which is our standards, 3.6 on the other side with 3 m in the middle and then a 2 m sidewalk that comes out to just over 15 meters. So I think we could build the entire project in the existing rightways that we already have at that if that was something that council could do. Does that kind of understand what I'm I'm I'm asking if that if you think that's a possibility to the mayor to the counselor again uh these cross-sections were chosen through the transport transportation master plan which

again council had approved so that was our starting point. If you want to reduce that cross-section, you're moving basically from the arterial style that the master plan envisions to something smaller. Um, it is probably doable. It it won't be to a standard that we're trying to achieve. And again, I guess the problem would be is into the future, if future councils decide that they want to have basically what the transportation master plan is now, you have to go through the whole process of either acquiring land or going through expropriation. So it and land still keeps increasing in cost. So what could be 1.5 now could be whatever in the future and and my thought around that is is the securing securing um lands or increasing those right ofways at the time of DP because this is going to be a fairly developable corridor for the for the large part of it. The biggest partner that we have to kind of come to terms with is the CRD themselves. That that's that long stretch down at the bottom where we I think there's only 10 meters

right now according to that map. And I think they put a fairly significant price tag on on that piece. Um [sighs] it's it's my questions are leading towards is the pleverite are we running out of time? Like there's a lot of, you know, we're at we're in June next week. Is the question going to be relevant? Are we going to be prepared enough to actually have that question on the ballot for middle of October? Your worship to the counselor. Part of this is dependent on the grant funding because you need to know what number you're going to be asking the public. If we cannot get an answer on the grant funding, um that will determine what that question looks like, whether it's a non-binding one, which is just asking whether or not you support it, or it could be uh one, can we borrow up to this amount? If it's the latter one, again, it would have to go to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval. So, if we don't find out about

grant funding soon, um the decision will be made for us. Yeah. And I and I kind of got that suspicion that's 15 billion in the in the negative side for our province. But anyways, that's my outside voice. Um it's it's important for us to to come up with a logical uh approach to this because I think it's needed. I mean, we we recently had a a petition that said, you know, 4,000 people want to get home earlier and all those things. But interm versus ultimate, I think, is is a way for us to move forward. So, anyway, I don't have any more questions right at the moment, but I probably will.

Okay. Thank you, Councelor McMath. Um, just touching on a comment a counselor made earlier. I would like us to send a letter to the province asking what exactly is the dollar amount that the district of Souk needs to spend in order for them to invest in future planning for the highway because I find that statement so bizarre and then we've already put millions of dollars in but apparently that's not enough. So what is it exactly? I would just like some clarity from them because that would give us direction as well. And you had said that um CP5 that's the most if we're to triage each section that's the highest priority in your opinion your worship to the counselor uh that is the only section that doesn't have a road on it right now. So if we build CP5, we can connect between Phillips and throw uh they wouldn't be at a level of service that one would like uh and probably would decline fairly fast as they start to be used, but it would

allow a secondary exit or access way into the souk downtown. And we've had some discussion about one-sided infrastructure for trails. Do you see grants less successful when someone uses a multi-use trail versus these separate pedestrian bicycle vehicle lanes through the worship through your worship to the counselor? It is it is really what the attitude of the funding partner is at the time. Um, sometimes they want to see a full-blown um, separated sidewalk, bike lanes, and sometimes they will be more forgiving and say just as long as you put a sidewalk on a bike lane on one side, they're fine. If we do receive grant funding and we've changed the scope, I will have to go back and negotiate with them to see if they would maintain the costs um that they're willing to do. Um and that may they may say yes or they may say no. It depends.

Next question. Yeah. Okay. That one I won't know until I talk to them. And how is turnaround time for adjustments on scope? Again, uh I would love to be able to give you a number, but I can only give you depending on the funding agency and how difficult they want to be for a lack of better term. It could be one month or it could be six. Okay. Thank you. I'll go to councelor Helane and then I have some comments and then councelor Betos. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. My last one would be and I'm only going to use I've got a friend in the MFA and he talks about borrowing and and the abilities to borrow. And if you look at Sanich recently they're building the Keading overpass and they've got provincial funding 57.6 million. They've got federal grant funding 16.7 million and their portion was only 2.5 million of that entire 76.8 million build. They're at over $140 million now. There was $ 38.5 million in cost overruns just to get out of the ground. So they're the

Spanish is now on the hook they figure for around over $60 million. Their $2.5 million expectation is now over 60 million. So these borrowing and expectations of any of these builds, the simpler we make it, the the the less challenging it becomes to come up with these walls, these property acquisition funds and things like that. So we have to help people understand that if we talk about a 9.54% tax increase and it turns out to be a 20% tax increase, we pay the price here. So we really have to be really considerate of the taxpayer when we're trying to come up with funding of this how we're going to get there and probably the simplest route again and I'll reiterate I I want to I want the simplest route as possible. I want to get cars moving from A to B and and have some transfer lanes for bikes and and for people, but not at the cost of 20% or losing this referendum because we make it so expensive it's impossible to do. So, I appreciate that. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Just um some comments for myself and I appreciate the work that's been done in terms of conversations with the CRD. Uh it there is a comment within this report. It is an exchange of land. There is no way for us as a local government to expropriate land from the province, the regional government, or any other. It It's an exchange of land. Uh and I'll note that uh to the member that spoke earlier today, a member of the public, um Maz from the museum, uh they commented that when the facilities are both busy, the parking is full. And that isn't just special events. On Tuesday, the parking at Sea Park is full all the time. and uh it's busy all the time, never mind special events. In terms of the comments about just a bike lane or a sidewalk on one side, uh this area, this it's a dramatic who we're not thinking of and who has not spoken at all in this room today are the school kids. This has

hundreds of school kids using this corridor on a daily basis all the time. So there is all of Journey Middle School that will often go through that corridor and make their way home to other sports, the soccer field, to the arena, to the corner store, to the bus, and so on. There's also a lot of students who go to Edward Mil who will cross over from the church road uh all of the main part of Souk. They cross through that corridor and uh go to school on that way. So when you talk about making this easier for commuters, you're displacing school children and then you're suggesting that it's okay for them to walk just on one side of the road or on a bike. They are on scooters, they're biking, they're walking and there are volumes. And if you don't believe me, I would suggest you go down Phillips Road uh anytime after two and you'll see them. You'll stop on Phillips to have them cross

through. They go through down past Sea Park and over. So it's the case there. How will they what are we going to do if we do anything? How will they move? Will they just be the expectation then that they go through the lower field and go up the hill and get over that way or will they be on this road or is it just not a road for pedestrians at all? Uh and then for uh Sun River students, they have some options with a new trail depending uh to get to Journey, but you do have a large volume of ESMCS students. The other part is Sea Park is going through a significant facilities plan, strategic plan for the next several years and what that facility needs because it is maxed out. Which is why at a previous council meeting, council has now given permission for the facility to have yoga outside in the park. Why? because indoors is full. So now they are looking to provide offerings in the summer outside because the facility itself is full. If anyone

here is in the world of hockey, you'll know that that any hockey family is looking for a second sheet of ice, programmable ice, more space. And then where will that ice go? It needs to go beside the current sheet of ice because as we know at the dryf flooror arena and I'm getting off point here but my point is any change or any impact any land we take from sea park will significantly hamper their ability to expand into the future. Any parking that we take away will severely impact the programming of that facility. It's well used. It's not underused. significant and that is in the corridor is highly used by school age children now that the new skate park has uh opened up again significant draw of all ages scooting skating getting there. So now we're going to introduce a lot of traffic onto a road that's relatively quiet right now. It's safe to walk, safe to bike because there is no traffic. There's the traffic that comes

up church or pardon me up charters turns left or those that are at the ball field or those that play golf seasonally. Nothing in the offseason. Uh so it's quiet. It's relatively safe. It'll change once volumes of commuter cars are being added to this corridor on a day-to-day basis. So uh I'm okay to you know receive this for information. Um the other point on this to another speaker that spoke earlier, what is in the ground remains a complete unknown. I'm glad to see that the archaeological considerations have been taken. Uh but we do not know what's in the ground. Uh though we do know when we've done work anywhere around Philips Grove, we have come across midens. We've come across uh sites of significance. We certainly found that on Philips Road and on Charters Road. There's high probability of archaeological finds in this ground.

So then what does that do to the project? It'll escal it'll slow down. It'll stop. It'll escalate. in terms of um an ask of the province, we can always send a letter, we also have another agenda item to deal with UBCM meeting requests and what that uh may look like. But I will share in previous conversations when we were advancing the work of charters, we heard from our most recent MLAs that we need to punch the road through. The problem is not the highway, it's dispersing traffic. Souk needs to get on, punch the road through and get on with dispersing traffic. It's not the highway. It's all souk because the traffic isn't dispersing. Two current our current and previous said that on multiple occasions. I pushed back saying well when school gets out though the slowdown starts in ceinos which is on your side and what are you doing about that? That's where it starts and that's not going to change because there is no plan to do anything with cinos. It uh other than the upgrades to

idle more which will be occurring over the summer hopefully. there's an announcement idle more will change uh and there'll be different access into casinos but when school gets out that's when it starts that's when the bus has to pick up those kids uh and then it continues and traffic will stop all on that side um regardless and I'm interested to see where council lands on this we were waiting and we're running out of time because we wanted to know what the answer was on the grants and as we know of today we only know about one of them we don't know about all three and when that outcome is it's your guess is as good as mine. Uh the federal government has indicated a need to push ahead. Uh and the province is is not is in a deficit position as we all know and there every grant program that's being applied to is overs subscribed and I have a stat somewhere it's like 7 to1

like they're completely overs subscribed so anyone that gets anything is fortunate uh to receive it. Uh so in terms of active transportation to your question councelor Mcmath we received some funds from the province for the uh little river deamial trail connector. Uh the province supported that because the federal government showed up at the table for that corridor first and then they showed up afterwards with the rest. Uh and it's not a paved surface, it's not a bike lane, it's a gravel, but it's an active route to school and so we received the funding for that. So, this is a challenging one, but it's one that has come up every term, every time I've been on council longer than I've been here, certainly before when it was first entertained. But there are some considerations uh that I keep in mind. The school kids and CE Parks facility needs the impact to the museum and now on a quiet road, you're adding more traffic. So, all of

that needs to be considered, I think, regardless of how you go forward on this. Uh I think we have a bit of time. um before we run out of time and I know that our corporate officers provided us with those dates and maybe in the end a question is just a plebite do you support a road in this area or not yes or no because if it's no then we are spending a lot of time all the time every term on a road that nobody wants or maybe it is I don't know what will this do for traffic it remains to be seen uh will it disperse traffic the way everyone wants well we still have one bridge there's still one bridge and I recall when that bridge was shut for 9 hours because of a certain incident that occurred on it. Souk River Road also had an accident that shut everything down.

So it depends. It's it's not going to even if we did somehow land all the grants, the plebeside passed, it's still one bridge and you still have cinos located where it is and all the pinch points along the way. So I don't in some ways I wonder what is the expectation like no traffic like no slowdowns at all ever cuz that's unreasonable. Just try going through Lanford on a busy afternoon and see how long it takes in rush hour. It's always stuck. It's busy. So no traffic is not an answer. So it's one uh to consider uh in terms of other counselors saying uh yes it will dramatically alter. Are you comfortable with higher density development occurring in this corridor? Maybe you are. I don't know.

That's a question we have yet to see. It would be a revision to our official community plan. The next council can take that on and decide if that's where they want growth and development to be. And then we have to talk to transit to get transit there because there is no transit service there. And if there's no transit, people will drive anyway. So, you're still dealing with congestion. But I do like an earlier speaker with the comments of thinking ahead on what vehicle use actually looks like in 20 years. Fascinating conversation. Uh love to see something change. But I also know for over 20 years people have also been trying to get the island rail corridor going. And for over 20 years, we've been sitting here dealing with this road referendum. So I don't know.

The future is open. It's possible. Uh certainly where we are now is not what I have thought where we would be at 10 years ago. But that's the reality of everything. wisdom is hindsight and here we are today count and it's uh it's it's a costly time I hear the angst around property taxes certainly I felt that myself when I opened my bill but I also know we're not alone this is a cost pressure across BC and across Canada and I've mentioned we're dealing with an antiquated system to deal with the modern reality of today and that's not going to change until the province changes that funding model so I'm all over the place but that's why I like the motion is to receive for information and I'm going to call that question and then I'll go to councelor Betos who has another motion that he would like to put forward and then we'll see where the rest of this go because this is all just about receiving this today for

information. So I'll call the question on that. All in favor? That's unanimous. Thank you. Councelor Betos, you have a motion you would like to read in. Yeah. Thank you very much your worship. I just have a little bit of a a preamble is um Do you need to make your motion and get a seconder and then you can speak to it. Drat. Okay. Anyways, I would like to motion that uh we have staff cost out CP5 only and uh that they costed out and for 15.2 20 and 25 meters and that a sidewalk and a bike lane be on that section. Is that I guess I need to know from staff is that realistic.

Okay. So, what we'll do is we'll get that motion on the screen. Okay. Uh and then we can be certain that that is what you read out. We'll look for a seconder and then we can go from there. Okay. That's the process. Speak to it. Yes, you will as as the mover provided we have a seconder. You want us to wait? I think um my understanding and I'll read it out is that staff cut out cost out CP5 only for a 15 20 25 and 25 crosssection that includes bike lanes and sidewalks one bike lane one sidewalk one bike lane and one sidewalk okay that's seconded for discussion I'll just ask staff that you've captured that before I Go to councelor Bettos to motivate. They're good. They are typing.

We're going to watch them type, but I think they have it. I'll go to you, counselor Bettos. Yeah, I uh I've been wrestling with this. I mean, I I firmly believe in in the cross-section that we originally designed, but I'm also realistic and uh this community cannot afford $50 million. And I'm pessimistic that other levels of government's going to come through with any grants. Uh I you know uh provincial government is in a very dire state. They're they're not going ahead with seniors care homes and all these other things that are drastically needed in our province. So I have a feeling that we'd be pretty low down on the uh uh grant funding and the comments from the our MLA is just absolutely mindboggling and I hope people remember that. And uh and I'm not also good for an open-ended plebite saying that you agree in this uh uh this path. Uh I think people want to know what it's going to cost. I'm not going to agree to something unless I know what the dollar value. Same with the the gathering place. I wanted the dollar value. I want

to know what that was. Want to make sure it was sufficient. So, I think if we get this motion through and we get some cost estimates, it does give us an opportunity to put to the the people uh something. And to me, it doesn't even matter if it goes on this October, even if it's next October. The difference is $50,000 to put it on and you're looking at a $20 million project. That that's small potatoes. But I did hear from people uh that they wanted us to get on with it something. And if we do this minimal as it is, it would alleviate some of the traffic and then we can beat up the province a little bit. I think that would be enough to get them to move and fix their goddamn Highway 14, which is sorry, sorry, the god awful Highway 14. Um well I you know just again I I I timed it going through the roundabout there and uh you're lucky if you're traveling at 20 miles an hour and all that traffic that goes up that road is going to back

up and with all these other things that the mayor's mentioned with the school and things. So we do need that bypass route and it's not it's not to get people to Otter Point and and Port Renfruit is to get people to Heldus and it gets people to all that housing in the internal part of town. So I think my motion is is reasonable. I hope staff can do that and uh it would give us something at least uh for people to ponder and then uh we can probably move forward and get something done uh and uh get some traffic moving. So that's my motion, that's my motivation. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. And I just want to confirm that it was not 15 but 15.2 meters. Okay, good. Staff have that right. Uh, councelor McMath is a seconder. I would just make probably one f friendly amendment um to this and I'd like to see the option of a multi-use trail in there. Um, yeah, we we can I think that's friendly. Well, you could go like one bite lane and or one sidewalk and or a multi-use trail just to open it up. Yeah, I think I deem that as friendly as chair. Are you okay with that? Yeah. Um it's funny the biggest challenge like I have found sitting here is that especially being a co council that emergencies have changed and so priorities have shifted. So there was a huge push from the community to fix the issues with traffic and now with the cost of living that to me in my opinion based on the the my assessment of conversations that I've had is that yeah it's still important but the cost of living is more important right now.

That's a bigger priority than having all these buildouts. So it's okay. I don't I feel positive about the work that's already been done. Um because to have those pieces lined up, even if we we do no sections or one section, we're in a spot that should all of a sudden we come come into magically a whole bunch of money, at least we're prepared. We have it. We don't have to go back. We don't have to put all this money. It's already laid out. So if we come back to those pieces, it's already set. So I feel good about that. I feel fine about that. Um, I'm looking forward to seeing the cost spectrum on this because it's going to be challenging as a taxpayer when you get to your election time. And it's do you want to spend money here? Do you want to spend money here? And they're both wonderful ideas. It's either people are only going to choose one, which I I'm struggling with on the ballot, or they won't choose any because it's overwhelming because they're barely getting through with what they have now.

Not to say that like those Texases have gone to amazing things like 247 emergency services which is not always visible to people. So I understand sometimes when they're frustrated. Um but I'm just just mindful of some of those pieces on the ballot. So um yeah, I'm looking forward to this uh this report. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Heling. Yeah, a couple questions then. So maybe another friendly amendment. Um I like the 15.2 two um cross-section that we could come up with pricing, but again for austerity purposes, can we do it just through road portion? If you look at what we've been doing on Philips Road now forever, you've got kids going to high school, going to Sun River and stuff, and they're using that portion road now. Whether it's the best portion or not on the planet, they're still using it and we're not having a lot of fatalities or problems. People are getting to the arena and dealing with that. If we could just cost out the portion between Phillips and that is what this is.

Okay. This is just for the it's CP5 only which is that particular section. Perfect. So the other thing I guess uh would be based on whether or not we decide to do a bike lane or or sidewalks or whatever. I think in this case we could come up with a multi-use trail that would be used for bikes. In Europe, they have people walking on the same trail and they actually have a dotted line and then if you use your bike bell. Yeah, it's a weird setup, but it works fantastic. And really, again, we need this road somehow someway. We need to get people moving. Sun River now has probably a thousand homes plus the ones beyond. And you've got all those people that need to get into to Souk. They need to to shop. They need to do it. And so many people need to get home to that end of town. We we have to come up with a solution here for sure. And you're right, people aren't going to vote for it at all unless it's affordable because

we're at the absolute precipice of where we are with our taxes and we cannot we cannot do anymore. So, I'm I'm of the of the walk. We come up with the most reasonable one possible. I mean, I get the 20 and 25. I think we've already priced it out, so you've already got all the the material and we don't need a traffic circle there. We just need a a turn lane. So at this point, if you look at Otter Point, Grant Road and Otterpoint, I mean, you look at Maple Avenue and S road and stuff, there's thousands of cars that go down those places every day. We've got stop signs there. So we can start with that. Again, it's the most interim solution on the planet and later on we can come up with other ideas if if it comes down to that.

That's where I'm at with it. Thanks. Okay, Councelor Pearson. Yes, thank you. And um this is this is a motion that actually is going to get something done. Uh so I I do support, you know, I I think that we can do it affordable. 15.2 mters I think or 15.2. Yes, that's what I said. Um I'm I'm I'm hopeful this is going to happen. My my questions to staff are, are you going to include if we give if we pass this motion? Um who's going to do the negotiating with the CRD? Um what will that look like? Because that's a significant land acquisition from CRD and and you know to to the mayor's point earlier, are they going to be reluctant to give up this piece for future development down there? So it's it's a lot of lot of complications that are on this section. Um not to mention any of the the other things that there it is.

I'm I'm extremely hopeful and I'm going to support this, but I think it's it's complicated. How much is it going to cost us to get this estimate through worship to our engineer uh through the mayor to the counselor? When you say the estimate, are you talking about the one that's going to be created by the motion or Yes. I'm probably in the range of 50,000 give or take some just to get the estimate. Yeah. Okay. Give or take some. If I may have another question. And what's your turnaround time on having that estimate? Probably within a month or two depending on what their workload is and how soon I can get it going. I would hope I would push him to have the answer by the end of June, but I can't guarantee it right now. Yeah.

If that is true, and and I'm not doubting that it's true. Is that enough time to get that question to the Municipal Finance Authority for a plebeite or for a referendum question on October 17th? We'll ask our corporate officer because he does have a sort of a series of dates. Thank you, worship, uh through you to uh all of council. the I've been in communication with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs who have advised that if we want to uh have a binding referendum on adopting a borrowing bylaw on the October 17th general election day of 2026, we would need to have got the bylaw to three readings and sent to the ministry with background material no later than the first week of July. They would prefer it by the last week of June. So if uh this manages within 1 month, then it would be a theoretical possibility at the very tightest. If it takes longer than a month, then we would no longer be able to make the October 17th uh voting date and we would have need to hold a different date.

And so can I just interrupt like is that for a B is that for any question or is it just for a borrowing one? What about just a general privacy? for that clarification, your worship, that is purely to adopt a borrowing bylaw. Um, if you wish to do a plebite simply to gauge community opinion, then I can add that to the ballot as late uh potentially as late July or even into August if that's the will of council. Okay. So, through the chair, does that borrowing bylaw for referendum require a public hearing through your worship? A borrowing bylaw does not require a public hearing. Uh the process for that would be there is a uh bylaw template on the ministry website which we would use that lays out the uh content which must be in the bylaw which is the amount of uh money we would be seeking to borrow, the term over which we would be seeking to borrow it and the project for which it would be

borrowed. That bylaw would be brought to council with a staff report and at one meeting it would need to get three readings of council and an instruction to send to the inspector of municipal affairs at the ministry in order to get their approval to have the uh referendum. You could view it that the public hearing is the referendum vote itself. Correct. So there is no there's public input but it is like any bylaw. We give readings, we schedule a public hearing. In this case there is no public hearing. It is the ballot question is the public hearing. Correct. So the impact of that borrowing should come to a public hear or public meeting.

It would come to a council to give first we would have to do the readings. Yeah. Okay. But we we would be tight on time. So it'll depend. You know, I think if if council advances this motion, then it's the case where our staff need to work with the consultant. They need to turn this around by the end of June. But then there would be a need for a series of special meetings in order to meet that drop deadline for a borrowing. If it's the case then where that is not accomplished then council could advance a plebbeic question and then the next council could then take the outcome of that plebite and do a referendum with it based on what the community impact or not is. So there is it would be a case where yes you would need to decide then if you are going you know take the outcome and then schedule a referendum.

So that would be up to the next council to decide to do that. And one further question to you here. So the my where I'm going with this is is that are we going to spend $50,000 in effort to get an a question that we can't answer? This might is you're right. We could defer it after the 50,000 to after the next election, but are we going to spend $50,000 now for a study to tell us that we can't we can't ask the question? I I I can't I can't support borrowing or I can't support spending 50,000 on a on a on a question that we can't really have an answer to.

And I and I understand timelines and I'm not I'm not unaware of what that actually means, but I don't think it's wise use of our money. If we can't if we can't get there from here, then I don't think we should spend the money on a on an estimate then to do this report. Yeah. I'll ask Mr. Go to our corporate officer. Thank you. You worship. I did just want to advise you and council as well that um and of course this would have some additional political calculations. I'm not advising you for or against this but just making sure you are aware of it as an option. Although we've typically been discussing this in the realm of having a referendum. Um it would also be lawful to hold an alternative approval process which is significantly cheaper than a referendum. So that would be another possibility for either this or an alternative council. It certainly would not be devoid of issues and as I say I'm not advocating in favor of that. I'm

simply ensuring that you are aware that is a lawful option. Yes, thank you for raising that. I didn't mention it because I don't like them at all and I don't think our community really likes them all that well either, but I appreciate that it is an option that council can consider for sure. Okay. Uh councelor Baitman. H thank you. Thank you, Councelor Betos, for bringing forward a path towards a greater clarity. Uh it it does sound like we're going to be left with another non-binding plebite. I agree 50,000's a lot. However, I I feel we're at this point given the affordability crisis that has been mentioned tonight and we're all seeing it in our tax forms. I had a bit of a shock the other day and um I didn't change my mind about why we are increasing these taxes, police, fire, asset management and uh salaries for our good uh firefighters and municipal staff. However, um I feel that this this would be an opportunity

to again test the pulse. what is is uh the electorate's um willingness how what what is their their pain point? Um through um through this process we will have a better understanding of uh those exact costs and we can um it's interesting. I'm I'm curious to see what the potential questions might be. Um it could be as you know do we go with one A, B or C of these options? Um and for the for the project as a whole, how much are people willing to to commit at this point in time? So, I did come in here today thinking that CP4 was the right approach um to build it out to to count on charters being a a particularly efficient way to to funnel traffic off Souk Road with that new intersection that the province would thereby uh need to step up and and act accordingly given our commitments. Um but I I can see the logic in CP5 alone. It's certainly not an emergency route for Sun River. That is not uh being uh being solved with

this, but um it could how yeah good question maybe. simple. It depends on the nature of an incident and what I just say that if there is a it depends on where there's an incident and if there's massive flooding and Deamu Creek Bridge is damaged or a no pass it is it does nothing for Sun River residents because we are on the other side of that bridge and that bridge is quite dated. So the add-on is newer but if that bridge is out there is no we're we're walking out. I know the area well. Full disclosure, I live there, so I'm aware of when that road has flooded out and Phillips itself has flooded and we're walking.

The fire lane uh out well like near you. Well, you there was a So, there was a question asked about the fire line exit. So at one point we looked at potentially connecting Sun River via Stonewood to Helguson Road. So it's a culde-sac that goes through a forest through a farmer like through a Helguson farm and then you still have to get over to Mom Creek there. So you can you can eventually I suppose uh I don't know go down a gully like it's still steep because the corridor still goes. So you still have to navigate uh that and then go on the other side unless you go very far and then trespass uh through private property onto Pasco Road.

But in an emergency I suppose people were are going to move in in whatever way and the situation changes when things happen. And I think uh you know people are far more understanding. Uh but you would not be able to push a wheelchair through any of that unless really big tires. I I will be voting in favor of this motion. Okay. Councelor Baitman, you also asked what a plebicide question might look like and there are some in the staff report and it would say something like are you supportive of the construction of CP4, CB5, CB6 sections of the three road connectors laid out in the 2020 master plan? If the project is to be constructed, which version of the cross-section do you support? The full multimotal corridor design or a reduced corridor design? That is just a sample that's in there on what a plebite could be. But that is a lot for someone coming in to vote to be like what are you t is CP4 CP5 and people may be inclined to not vote for something they don't know.

Yeah, I think this council is certainly indicating CP5 would be on the ballot which is a more palatable chunk of change for the the taxpayer I would think. But we'll we'll see what these options are. Councelor Haldane and then back to Bettos and Mcmath. Okay, my last question. Anyhow, um so we've spent 834,000 so far to get to what we've got on here now. To spend another 50,000 to at least find out what we're probably going to use down the road would be my guess anyway, even if it's a new council or whatever. So, I could see 50,000 being spent very reasonably here because I don't think it'll go to waste in the long term because that road system's going to be asked about. We had four over 4,000 people now sign a petition and that was petition was about getting traffic moving in souk. It may even include bridges and all this other stuff. But the point is there's a pretty good chance if we come up with something you might get at least 4,000 people out to

vote for a change. So they're on a petition now and maybe there'll be more interest in an an actual you know a plebite because they have a reason to come out and vote. Maybe they don't all care about councils so much, but they do care about getting home from work and traffic and stuff. So, I I think it's a great motion, a great push forward. I I support spending the 50,000 to find out and I'm the taxpayer saving guy and I believe it's good intended money. So, councelor Btos Mcmath and myself and then I'm going to call the question after that. Thank you, your worship. Um, yeah, I thank you for councelor Caldane. I think it's 50,000. We did spend 800,000 to get to this point and I think those are those in the public that will care and will look at uh this CP5 would want a dollar value attached to it. So uh I think uh I got the loud message loud and clear when the charters was closed down.

Get on with it. Get something moving. And this to me and like I say I'm I'm not I'd like to do the full buildout but it's just not realistic. So, we need to get moving and I think this will get us to where we want to go and it would certainly uh once it's out in the public and what the cost would be, it will give uh uh this council and the next council a little bit more to deal with. So, again, thanks for the the discussion and I'd like to get on with it and get this done. Councelor McMath, we'll just get on with it.

Okay. Uh I'll just add um I am in support of this at least the it completes the work. Uh if the timing does not work that council cannot advance to uh we miss the deadline to put in a binding question then we still have the flexibility to go to a plebite and to ask what the community feels about it because there's differing views on this. This isn't a priority for everyone. Many people do not want to see a natural area blown up and turned into a road because that's what it is. You will be displacing uh and impacting a significant portion a significant ecosystem and that needs to be considered. Not everyone is supporting this. There is uh some that would prefer to see funds used in other ways or not at all. So, and not to focus so much on traffic and other investments, but this provides option.

Uh, just further to the province, the province did provide fully funded grants in the past. So, in terms of Church Road and its upgrades and Otter Point and its upgrades, those were all fully funded. There was a time where the province was in a different place and was uh sending out funds to communities to advance infrastructure. And because Souk had detailed design work or at least the design work done, we were eligible for all of those grants and we received it and we were able to do the work quickly. And so in this case, having this work done whenever things change and it may not be the province, it could be through the federal government infrastructure funding. It would allow the opportunity to apply because we have the work done because the turnaround is fast. So, I'll just highlight that. While we like to well, I certainly like to uh hold the province accountable. They have funded uh these projects. We did we were eligible. We did use them and uh we were

able to make improvements for a safer streetscape here in town. So, I'll close on that note. I am in support of this to get the information. We'll make a further decision point on what that's going to look like when it comes back to us. Councelor Baitman, very quickly. These are a separated multi-use trail and a separated sidewalk. It's not a Grant Road West scenario. Is that clear? Uh, and well, I think it's the case of looking the wording on this is a bit we want options. So, I think it's the case cuz obviously on a 25 m cross-section, you can fit everything on that 20 m somewhat 15.2 to not sure what that's fitting. So I think it's the case where we want as many options as possible and what can you include here? It may be the case where you can be 25 crossmeters but here's one and one here's two and two and here's the ultimate and here's the narrow here's a rough. I think we need options

to know and the community is going to expect that you put in we supported a 20 meter road right away and you only put the sidewalk on one side and you have road on the other. So what are you doing to our staff? your worship. Uh the cost estimate could be do a 25 meter wide right away with just two lanes, bike path, multi-lane path, whatever. Um just to secure that land and then do the same for the 20. So I don't see that as an issue. Okay. All right. I will call the question. All those in favor? Anyone opposed? That's unanimous. Thank you. Were there any other motions that council would like to make on this particular item at this time?

No. Nothing. Anyone? You thought about it, but you don't want to do it. Okay. So, there will be an opportunity when this comes forward and we can discuss it then. The current time is 7:50. I recommend that council take a 10-minute recess. So we will reconvene at approximately 8:01 to those viewing online. Thank you. That's 10 minutes.

Okay, good evening everyone. If I can have your attention back please. Everyone could please take a seat. Have your attention back in the room please. Okay, council we are on 8.2 location for a memorial structure. I will turn this over to staff, please. Uh your worship, uh we're looking for direction or acceptance of placing the memorial structure within uh Ed at McGregor Park. Uh we feel it's probably the best option uh out of the two and are looking for direction from council. Okay. So the uh motion that's on the floor then is that council direct staff to erect a memorial structure in Ed McGregor Park as shown in attachment one. Councelor Betos has moved that councelor uh McMath is seconded. Go ahead and speak to it councelor Betos.

Yeah. Well, I've been on council eight years and we've been talking about this for more than eight years actually. So, uh I'm glad that we picked the spot. Um I don't want to get into the weeds about which one would be better. I think staff has made that suggestion and that's where it will go as far as I'm concerned. So that's it for me. Councelor McMath, same others. Councelor Baitman. Well, I I preferred John Phillips uh Memorial Park. Um it is is more suitable site uh green and leafy and it's not next to a highway and it is not in immediate proximity of a potential fullervice shopping mall. So, for me, John Phillips Memorial Park with the very accessible new parking lot we have here um would be a better choice, but I I agree completely with councelor Bettos. We need to make a decision tonight and uh so yeah, all is good.

Anyone else have comments on this? I uh would agree with councelor Betos. This goes back to Mayor Mil's time in this office where we were uh looking at a memorial wall. It then changed over time and then we looked at whiff and spit. I'm just sharing this for the benefit of those in the room. We've now learned we don't actually own whiff and spit. It's we have a license to occupy and there's significant challenges. Uh if you go to this area of Ed McGregor Park um and I'm very familiar with it because uh our former counselor uh Lines and I were there and thought it would be a good spot and that's where we recognize there's also a uh a um a feature to honor uh former Ed McGregor within that park. And then this wall has a number of others in there. There's many different memorial benches, memorial trees, uh, and some of those that have contributed to this park. So, it is starting to break down. So, it's a

good way to repair and rejuvenate that section and to get on with it. It is in proximity to the harbor as well. Uh, and there is it is when you're in that area, it is quiet. So, I know that the highway is busy, but it is quiet. So, I'm in support of this as well. Anyone else? We'll call the question then. All in fa or all in favor and we're unanimous. Okay. I'm assuming that was to vote and not to speak. So we're moving on. Okay. The next up is 8.3 UBCM annual convention. Uh okay over to staff please. Uh thank you your worship. So in your correspondence package uh you'll have read the information from UBCM about the potential ministerial meetings and also you're aware of course that at the convention various resolutions can be brought forward and one of those was sent in by a member of council and so those two things together are the reason for this report. Uh we will also bring

this report to the next I think two council meetings uh in order to make sure that council have the chance to consider any resolutions they would like to make and any meetings they would like to request. So you can either uh endorse resolutions at this point or discuss amongst yourselves if you would like any or request say that future ones be brought forward. And similarly, if you would like to instruct staff to seek meetings with ministries at this point, then you can do that or you can simply start the discussion about which ones you would like. Okay, we'll start with the first one. Uh and that's where that uh that council endorsed the following resolution. We'll do them one at a time. That council endorsed the following resolution for submission to the 2026 UBCM. And this one is called food waste reduction and retail affordability framework.

Whereas clauses food waste contributes to landfill emissions and e economic inefficiency. Many edible pro food products are discarded before consumption. Food affordability challenges continue to affect British Columbombians voluntary voluntary retail markdown systems remaining consistent. Therefore, be it resolved that the government of British Columbia develop legislation requiring large grocery retailers to implement progressive mandatory price reductions for perishable food products approaching best before or expiry dates alongside complimentary food waste reduction and food recovery measures. Would someone like to move that resolution to go to UBCM? Councelor Betos has moved it, seconded by councelor Baitman. Would you like to speak to it, councelor Betos? Uh, no. It's h pretty straightforward.

Uh, I think with the high cost of food, uh, I know I know they throw a lot of stuff out and it's still uh, usable and I know the food banks get some of it, but uh, I think there's a tremendous waste and I think that could be offered at a reduced price to the public would only help people's budget. Councelor Baitman. Yeah, I I'll agree with that. Uh, this is councelor St. 's motion. Absolutely. And uh he's he's got direct experience with um with a um I won't speak for him, but uh I'll just note that in 2023 and 2022, similar not similar uh food waste uh reduction and food security resolutions were brought forward by the city of Vancouver. So under the new uh protocols at UBCM, if if they if it aligns with existing policy, um they they won't accept emotions like that. But this this does seem unique and um absolutely in support.

Councelor Mcmath, I just have one question and it is regarding food banks. Is this going to interfere with that? So then will all of these retailers transition to selling discounted food that normally they would donate to those food banks. Um so that's why um I won't be supporting at this time. Uh councelor Betos has a reply to that. Yeah, I don't I don't mind whether the the people that need the food get it through the food bank or go get it themselves. The thing is the food's made available to the people. uh uh I just assume see them uh go to the store and buy it themselves and uh I think the food bank is going to a little different system. So uh yeah, I uh I still would back my motion.

Anyone else? Uh I'll speak in support of this. Um particularly the mandatory price reductions for perishable food. It's very difficult to pay full price for something that is expiring that day or is Not I don't know like when you see some fruit and produce that uh arguably is full price still when it's you could get home and basically throw most of it out. I don't know. It varies. We'll see. Okay, I'll call the question. All in favor? None opposed? That's unanimous. Oh, sorry. Councelor, sorry, I didn't call the opposed. Counselor McMath is opposed. I'll go to the second one. Uh okay, this one's a bit longer.

Whereas manufactured home communities provide worship, I apologize. Uh the attachment to endorsed resolution is the resolution which came to council at the last meeting through the LUDC committee. So that one has already been endorsed by council to be sent to UBCM and it was attached for information about the resolution which has already been endorsed and will be going forward on behalf of Souk. I apologize for not making that clear. You don't need a motion for this. It's just here for information. So, we'll leave that. Okay. Uh the second part would be and that council um instructs this one is a difficult one. So in terms of this one to open up the dialogue around seeking meetings with ministries, I'm just going to ask that council receive this for information uh this report for information and then we can determine if there's an ask for a ministry meeting because I can't fill in the blank because I'm not a mind readader. So how about the motion re for information councelor Baitman seconded

by Heldane. Go ahead councelor Baitman and then we can amend it. Well, yeah. So, I'll jump in with everyone's favorite, the Ministry of Transportation, the minister, very importantly, because these the early deadline is for uh meetings with ministers and later on we can line up meetings with with uh staff, right? So, the Minister of Transportation and Transit um and I don't have to Yeah, it's been all said tonight. We need to update them on the work we're doing and get some clarity about what is promised to souk in their 10-year capital plan. As a former deputy minister told me once, find out what their their capital plan spending intentions are. So, they have they promise future corridor improvements and we're seeing, you know, the Idlemore intersection and I could go on. I'll stop.

Okay. Thank you. I think Minister of Transportation will be one. So what we'll do is we'll do a a followup because we're on receive for information. Councelor Heldane. No, I'm fine. I don't have any particular ministries at this point. So Okay. Others. No. Okay. Uh I will put forward for myself the solicitor general. uh the solicitor general uh just to discuss our the impact of police costs and our cost pressures and what we have done as a community to advance to 247 our school liaison officer the off the cost impact uh the n the cost of 911 service the advocacy around the Vancouver Island major crime unit the one answered one is with the transition of Siri going to their own force Siri used to pay in and cover off a big share of overhead that we all benefit from being also RCMP. So if they are no longer involved with RCMP, then what then happens to those costs that remain?

Does it get reallocated to participating communities? Does it change? Does the province pick up that gap? I don't know. Nobody knows. So it's an ask and a point just to raise that with the solicitor general. and the other one would be around the minister of health. Uh by then hopefully for any of these uh we won't have much I don't think from the solicitor general but at least with the minister of transportation and transit we can share our update and our work on what is actually happening and going on to a ballot and the other one would be Minister of Health where we're at with our BC builds health center uh that should be breaking ground hopefully on uh the WATMS property. So those are sort of the three that I would recommend. Uh is there others that anyone has that comes to mind? Um we will receive other other ones that may come and if I will be missing the next regular one, but there's other agencies

that come up. One of them that I have an ask out for is ICBC. Uh we continually hear of young people really needing to get their driver's license testing and are unable to secure a test in Sanage sometimes not even Nimo and for a young person that needs that license to drive this summer that is a big impact if they don't get a driver's license test. So what is happening with ICBC to expand the available options because yes it's sanage but it's over it's full. So then what if you don't pass, you're up to Naimo and then what? You're on the mainland to take your driving test. I don't know how that works for families, but that is this is sort of off, but it is one that it will come up is ICBC.

So maybe we can just add this so that it's in there if if it's winning if it's willing and uh we can just think you have time at least to think about others whether it's BC assessment, BC hydro, Fords and so forth uh and other entities. But I wanted to raise the ICBC1 is what I'm hearing from young people. Councelor Baitman. Yeah. I'm wondering about the the Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs if indeed we want to again raise the need for sewer expansion out to Calassin. We're not there with a project right now. Okay. So if we were actually advancing that work then that would be that would make sense but that is currently pending on hold. So it's we don't have that that project to raise at this time.

And yet did did we not with the SAK um advanced to the point where we were seeking grant funding for that project? We did and we were rejected. We were rejected. So why don't we say hey because also have had a change and we are not and then at that time I don't want to make a decision on them without them for them without them and so I think that can come up at a future time. Okay. So the amend the add-on uh uh because we receive for information. So I will ask then for an amendment and that would be and that council instruct staff to seek meetings with the following ministries. Ministry of transportation and transit, Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, Minister of Health, ICBC. Is there a mover for that? Moved by Councelor McMath, seconded by Councelor Pearson.

Uh I'll ask this. Uh do council members know if they're intending to attend are will you be attending UBCM this year? Yes, I'm going depending on work uh because registration at one point will be asking so staff is waiting for the registration date. Uh hotels were already booked and if you're not going they our staff will have the ability to transfer a reservation to another community. So, the sooner we know that you're not going gives them more time to uh pass the room off to somebody else. I will acknowledge I am not running for office again. So, as a result, I'm not sure that my uh time on the district's dime is well spent at UBCM. So, I think my my tendency is not to be going. So, you are still a counselor and you have advocacy work to do. Um, so then it'll be I think you have some time. You don't have to make that decision tonight to think about it, but you signed up for the term. So, your work ends when uh the election happens and this advocacy is happening in September. So, that is up

to you to decide. I'm not running either, but I plan to attend, but I will share that my registration is covered because I'm a life member. So there is already a cost saving to the district uh for those that are concerned. Councelor Betos. Yeah, as I stated, I'll be going and I would hope uh the other councils will be going too because this is our one opportunity to talk one- on-one uh with the the province and uh you heard what we're discussing today with the MOT and uh it'd be nice to look them in the eyes and uh you know I'm for one want to bring that letter that we had from our MLA rather than Oh, spicy. Yeah, that's a good term.

Spicy. And just let them know that, you know, we're willing to work with with all the ministries, but when you get treated like that, it's sort of like what's happening south of the border. You know, you don't need to talk like that. You know, we have we're trying to get things for our residents and uh the province is a big part of that. So, I would hope that uh we would all go, but uh that's just my preference. Okay. And councelor Pearson and Haldane, you're you don't know yet. Councelor Haldane is going to attend and counselor Pearson is is fairly certain that he's going. Okay. So you and councelor Mcmath uh let us know when when you know as soon as you can. Okay.

So on this I'll call the question that these are the meetings that we will start preparing briefing documents. we have to sub make a submission that these are the meetings we want and the reason so our staff need to put some details together within a report and then we wait to see and we'll find out what meetings were successful in getting we can ask but we don't necessarily receive all of them okay I'll call the question all those in favor and that's any opposed that's unanimous thank you okay um bylaw section number 9.1 one sewer use bylaw amendments. Don't we want to report? We do. Anything further from Thank you for moving us along. Anything further to the staff report, please.

Not at this time, your worship, but we're here for questions. Okay. Councelor McMath is moved that council give three readings to sewer use amendment bylaw number 945. Is there a seconder? Seconded by Hal Councelor Haldane. Councelor Mcmath, any comments in the microphone? I have questions. That's it. Um I am a bit of a let out in the sewer world. Um how do you catch someone? Like I understand like if someone deposits a large amount, there's sometimes flags in the system. you would get an alert and you can generally see where it's the source is coming from your worship through the counselor. Really the first indication we have is when it hits the plant at the headwork.

So if there's a lot of inorganics and it happens on the weekend, the screens clog up, we have to call someone in. Uh a lot of this waste is anorobic whereas our system is aerobic. So aerobics with oxygen, anorobics without oxygen. And when the anorobic hits the oxygen, it kills off our bacteria and basically upsets the plant. In which case, we might violate our um our operating permit and depending again how Ministry of Environment is feeling that day and if they want to make an example or not. We'll see what comes of that. So what this bylaw does, it does give us the ability if we can catch someone in the act. Um so pumping at one of our lift stations or just popping a manhole. Um and we can catch them in the act. We have a mechanism now in which to find them basically polluter pays philosophy and we would then try to recover our personnel costs uh chemicals whatever they do to the plant

right let's put it that way and what happens for instance you own a a large piece of property and there there's some sort of access to drainage there and someone deposits there like are you able to trace it back to the property. It really depends on what the what they deposit. Okay. Again, um one of the bylaws I think I will be bringing to the new council is a protection of waterways. Uh I've had success in the past where I've got polluters to pay. Um and it's fairly substantial because doing a cleanup is fairly significant. So, we need to put ourselves in a position where we can prosecute um when someone upsets our system.

Thank you. Okay, councelor Heldane. Yeah, just one thing. It's um we run into it sometimes through the community association and we have a sandy dump down at the campground, but we have vehicles that come and go and we allow somebody to pay a small fee and then they can dump their stuff. But we've had trucks come in in the past and we identify it because it clogs up our entire system with grease or whatever that goes in there. So then we're stuck covering cost. So my thing I guess would be in this bylaw, don't charge the community associated. We don't always we're not always the culprit, but it may we may have to deal with a bunch of this stuff from time to time. So my hope would be that of course you want to be able to catch some people to do it and we do have camera systems and different things. there there might be thing to work together. I just don't want to see it as being wherever the

property is that does it. They automatically are the ones who are culpable or or stuck with the litigation problem. But but I there definitely needs to be something to try to mitigate what's going on. And I've talked to Paul before about what's happening good bugs and bad bugs and stuff. But but I do understand that. But I just thought I'd bring that to your attention so that you understand even we because we don't have sandy dumps anywhere else in Souk either because lots of people do have their trailers and stuff or they have to drive all the way out past French beach to be able to do it there. So um we're we're providing a a huge service but at the same time we're not always the the culprit in case something goes sideways or whatnot. So anyhow that was just I thought I'd bring up just in case because I see it all written into the bylaw here. But I think the problem that we're trying to solve is the case where there has been these

are commercial uses that have gone around and emptied septic fields and then are pouring right into our sewer line. And there has been complaints from residents about the noise as well as the smell on the street uh and the residue of what's been left behind. and that hauler potentially is causing the is charging that customer the fuel the complete disposal at H Heartland the mileage to go and dispose there uh and now everyone in the sewer system is now paying for that and for those that are in the wastewater sewer system it's a bit annoying you're paying already for the operations of your plant and here's somebody dumping everything. It's the same as a as a business that has a uh garbage or recycling and then everyone is using it to dump all their garbage in. It's specific to that business and our waist our sewer system is the same. So this then enables us to begin the process of finding because it is it is costing all of us in the system

an unfair amount of money and that money is not going to restore in the system. It's because somebody is uh disposing in the night or in the middle of the day in some cases and doesn't seem to care about it. So, it's a cost recovery. Polluter pays. I like it. I'm in favor. I'm going to call the councelor Baitman. Yeah. Well, I just say it's a good strong um strong fines here. $3,000 for uh disposal and then a fine could go up to 50,000. Um, I had some questions around that, but I I don't think Yeah. You know what? How How does one qualify for a $50,000 fine? Is it just on volume or on the volume and they keep doing it and the rep? Yeah.

And then just repetitive uh times. 3,000 might be dismissed as the cost of business, right? Oh, I'll do ALF. That's fine. But when it starts to escalate from the same entity, uh it's basically a theft of service. So there's a consequence. And this now gives uh the teeth counsel or um corporate services. Thank you, worship. And I just wanted to add to that correct assessment that uh the uh penalties clause includes the so the the maximum fine that we are authorized to issue as a local government is $3,000. But a uh a competent court of law can impose a higher fine. So if we go as far as civil litigation on a a matter, then that would be the maximum fine that can be imposed as a result.

Okay, call a question. All those in favor? Any opposed? None opposed. That's unanimous. Thank you. Uh the next up is 9.2 noise control bylaw exemption. Okay. So, it is that council's read the report. Uh the motion is that council vary the provisions of bylaw number 485 noise control bylaw 2011 section 3.2E 2E in section 3.2F to permit overnight construction work associated with Highway 14 civil works at 6569 Souk Road between 700 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Monday through Friday during the period of June 29 to August 29th with no work permitted on Saturdays or Sundays or can we add statutory holidays? Is that or no? Do we know people like to work on Canada date?

Okay. I'm just fine. All right. Okay. There's a mover. Who? Councelor McMath is moving it. Someone else second it. Councelor Pearson. Any comments? Councelor McMath. Councelor Pearson. Anyone from anyone else? Councelor Baitman. Well, yeah. I always think in moments like this we should highlight the work that's being done. Um, so this is from 7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Monday to Friday, June 29th to August 29th, new asphalt pavement, construction of sidewalk, installation of a bus pullout, street lighting improvements, and lane configuration adjustments. So that's significant work. And um for those of us traveling after 7:00 p.m. Yeah, just for context. And this is all related to the Beayshore development at 6569 for egress in and out of their site. So I guess you can do it during the day and disrupt all the commuting traffic or do it at night and disrupt the residents. There's no easy win on this one. Good luck. All right, call the question. All those in favor?

Any opposed? That's unanimous. Thank you. Uh, next up is 9.3 or yes 9.3 repeal of section 3.7 density bonus provision zoning bylaw number 944600-118 2026 over to staff. Yeah, your worship. Uh, members of council uh this is a recommendation to provide first, second and third reading to amend the zoning bylaw to bylaw. This is a requirement uh through the uh bill 16 housing amendment act um that requires this to to be done. Um the only way we can keep the density bonusing section within the uh uh the zoning bylaw is if we do a fairly exhaustive financial analysis of the amenities that we want to have uh people charged for and uh how that relates to the increased density being proposed on the property.

So, uh, there's also, uh, a fair bit of public, um, input required as part of this process as well. So, as the deadline is the end of June, uh, we won't have time to do that. Um, also just to make you aware that many of the changes to our zoning bylaw since this original density bonusing section was put in place and our new official committee plan provides the additional density that these density bonusing um uh allows for. So um we're not really losing anything by having this removed. Um we will take another look at the density bonusing section as part of our zoning bylaw review um in the coming years. So um at this point in time it's a requirement to have this removed by the end of June. So that's what staff's recommending and this is the province making this requirement.

So again in in our work. Okay. Uh anyway, uh the re the motion is then that council give first, second, and third readings to zoning amendment bylaw number 944 600-118 2026 to repeal sections 3.7 density bonus provisions of bylaw number 600 zoning zoning bylaw 2013 moved by councelor Haldane and seconded by Pearson. Any comments councelor Haldane? No. Councelor Pearson, anyone else? Okay, call a question. All in favor? Any oppose? That's unanimous. Thank you. Number 10 is new business, of which there is none. Number 11. Are there any notices of motion that anyone would like to read into the record tonight? Nope. Okay. So, number 12, motions for which notice has been given. So, councelor Haldane read this in at the last. So that is that council instruct staff to negotiate with catalyst development group with the aim of including the soup gathering place in the building to be constructed at 6651 Watam's way and that the pleb site regarding borrowing 5 million to construct and operationalize

the suit gathering place be canled. So that is councelor Haldane's motion. Is there a seconder? Seconded for discussion by councelor Mcmath. Councelor Haldane, you have the floor and at this time you can choose to did I make my own speak in favor? Yes, you can make an amendment. You can withdraw it. The floor is yours. You have all options. So I'll remain everything exactly it says except for and that the plebite regarding boring bylaw uh 5 million to construct operational line of suit gathering place be continued. And I say that because are you okay with hold it in order to speak? You need a second or I get to do the other thing later.

They'll be continued or remain remain. Okay. Is there a seconder? Councelor Mcmath is seconding it. Okay. Now, on the amendment, you are switching the amendment to cancel to remain. So, you would be speaking about that part of the amendment, right? Yeah. Yeah. Basically, I mean, I put it out there over the weekend and stuff and and I've been hung out to dry a few times and this is one of those times for sure. But um more importantly, it keeps the democratic portion of our community going. I mean, I five million is a lot of money, and I do believe that. It was never my intention really to stop the vote or whatever, but I wanted to get a a motion out there to deal with maybe doing something with Catalyst or in conjunction anyway. And I kind of got ahead of myself, but no problem. It's not a huge change here.

and it keeps in place something you guys had done. I was away the day you did the the um vote the last time and and I would have realized how important it is to some of the seniors in the community to at least be heard. So I'm happy to leave that in place. Okay. On the amendment the councelor McMath I'll support the amendment. It was the only thing truly to cause me hesitance in moving with your original motion. Okay. Councelor Pearson in the microphone. Just and I'm just going to clarify to our through the chair to our corporate officer. We've already approved the plebite. Yes.

So would we not just simply remove this clause at the request of the we have a report to come back to us. So this is on. So basically now if this passed then staff would abandon that work, right? Uh but now this is here. So in some cases it is kind of it doesn't really need to be here. It's Yeah, it's gone now. I know. But I think the maybe for the counselor would could wants to just have it remain and so nothing changes in terms of the work for staff. It's not really needed because the report's coming, but he is looking to change his motion. So, is it one motion or two?

It's one big motion that we've just amended. So, if it was two, he could withdraw. He could withdraw. But because it's one Okay, so we're on the amendment. Um, okay. Councelor Betos, because there is the option to sever and then to dispose of the second part. Yeah, I I would certainly like to sever and uh I'm really not happy with the first part of that motion motion. We uh unfortunately Mr. Councelor Haldane wasn't with us at the time, but we talked at great length about catalyst development and putting the gathering place in there and uh it was basically dismissed because that would be commercial space.

Okay, we're on the amendment though. So that's what we're discussing right now. So, what are your thoughts on the amendment about remaining uh do you want the plebbeite canceled or to remain? No, I want the ple we've already dealt with the plebite. So, I do I really I don't even think it should be here. That's why I'd like to know but on the floor right now is an amendment to change the language. So, that is what is on the floor and that's what we're discussing. Vote against it because it this this should be reworked right from start. Uh anything that's on the floor? The only thing that's on the floor is the language around to cancelled has been replaced to remain. So that is the amendment that we are discussing right now.

Then you can and then other things can happen depending after that. I can go to you to sever the two but we're dealing with the amendment port. Okay. Yeah. So on the amendment on the amendment I I'll just note that um the plebesite that I put forward is borrowing up to 5 million and I think that's a critical point up to there's no there's a maximum number but there's no minimum and that is up to um yeah so I think if if we so your motion I'd like to see make a amendment on the amendment borrowing up to 5 million. So, we're going to add an amendment to the amendment.

Yes, we've already debated that. Yes. All of that is already discussed. You get rid of this act. Okay. So, I'm going to ask whoever is not speaking to turn off your microphones. And on this one, I think uh I'm going to ask the mover the the amendment would be to to eliminate this entire paragraph. Sure. Okay. So, we're just going to take all that off as an a as as an amendment to the amendment is just to remove the whole thing. Okay. So, I'm going to call the question on that. All those in favor? Any opposed? That's unanimous. And do you need another amendment now or now that that's done, it's null and void? Is that that's good for staff?

I think council's will is quite clear on that. So, okay. So, we will remove that and go back now. Now, we don't need to sever and we're dealing with just this part. Um, councelor Haldane, you still have the floor. Yeah. Um, there's gets to decide what happens to it. And that's why I say, you know, the senior center could be in that building. There may have been some talks earlier on. There may have been some talks about how you'd get a senior center, but at this point, we've come down to we don't know. I'm not asking how we're going to pay for it. I'm just asking that it be discussed of the possibility of having a senior center put in there because this building is going to be getting built most likely in the next few years and there's a better chance the senior center may actually come to fruition if they actually have a place on paper to go to. If we go to a plebite, that was my whole thing to begin with was that could take years,

five years, 10 years, who knows how long. I mean, we've been talking about [clears throat] a senior center from back when I was on council in 2014. So, so obviously this is a a time-sensitive issue and and I understand that if we could work it out with this 5,000 ft that we're all in charge of what's going to happen in it. I know they'd like to see um some sort of medical assist, you know, or or X-ray or something, but it was also talk that if we didn't come up with some people to move into the commercial part of it, they were going to turn it into residential and that was what they were asking. So, I would say we keep it for use for our own local people or local groups here and we come up with a solution for that 5,000 me.

That's my intention of this whole thing to begin with. So negotiate with catalysts just as it says here. Anyhow, thank you. Okay. Thank you. Councelor Mcmath, you have the floor next. I'm gonna wait for now. Thank you. Okay. Councelor Betos, then Pearson, then Baitman. Yeah, I hear all the good intentions by councelor Haldane, but my read of the the seniors that were here tonight and other nights. Um they're they're not really ecstatic about going into that catalyst development. And I understand that they might get it sooner, but I think the desire for the seniors is to have a standalone on Watam's way. And that's that's what the plebite will dictate in in a few uh few months down the road and then we can go to a boring u bylaw in the future. But uh again we looked at the catalyst development and uh it would be very cost prohibitive. Uh I understand we're just going to you know waste some not waste sorry bad choice of words get some staff time to

to have a look at it and uh but uh I I don't think it's an option. We're voting against it. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Pearson. Yes. Thank you. And I hear everything that everybody's saying. I just think that this is another option that can be on the table to get seniors into a place. I promised my mother-in-law in 2010 that I would work hard to get a senior center in Souk and here it is 2026. We still don't have a senior center. This is an option. We do have 5,000 square feet. Maybe it doesn't work out, but I think we ought to explore it because it is our space. And the seniors, bless their hearts for every cupcake and cookie that they've sold to me and calendars and everything else that they do trying to come up with a way. They've got 300,000, which is remarkable from our seniors in our community. This may be an option that is sitting right in front of us. It may not be, but I think we ought to explore it for the sake of the seniors in our community. Okay, Councelor Baitman.

Yeah. So, yeah, I agree with the um the whole point and the language of of the the the motion I made states very clearly borrow up to 5 million to construct and operationalize the suit gathering place on lot A in the town center. So within lot A is the option of of the uh the urgent primary care center catalyst development and also the whole idea of this 5 million is it scalable and my hope would be that the next council would if indeed there is a strong yes vote that there would be a task force created and uh terms of reference a key group of people led by searchin gather together and figure out their options and uh report back to the new council. And as I said the other night, you you could you could go basic as we're going to consider with the uh the road referendum or with uh social infrastructure which is just as important as road infrastructure. we could do something a little special and

that could be a multi-use with the gathering place foundation with um art space the art cooperative gallery uh arts maker spaces blackbox theater possible home of the foundry souk so there's a there's it'd be a pretty interesting process and again I think it would be done in a very cost-effective manner um given the affordability crunch and so when we see 5 million let's always remember that's a maximum come up to. But that's all for discussion as the plebicide approaches. Okay. Thank you. Some comments that I have. So I appreciate uh you know the the desire to get on and get this done. I'm glad that the plebite is going to happen because it's needed and necessary. But I will share that as this process has unfolded and I know it's taken a lot of time. We have already indicated to staff is it possible and that's why in our agreements when we were dealing with the lease language the use of it is it possible to potentially

include this in there. So our staff are kind of already doing this. So now we're telling them and passing a motion to direct them to do work that they're already doing. So and in part we're not necessarily the lead on this because it is an initiative through the province. So in that case we are following their timeline as well. And then meanwhile uh we had when this came about if you go back searchin was already dedicated a different portion of l. So we were working together but independently. So searchin is advancing the elders complex and gathering place with housing above and all of that was the vision on one quadrant. Our staff were working with the ministry with BC builds to advance the health center on the adjacent parcel and that the additional square footage be available for other health related services that would not be covered by the urgent care center. And then it's the case where unfortunately with BC housing and everything, every application collapsed and that

completely collapsed project and so now they were back somewhat at square one again and that's what led to the discussion of will we make a decision as they have made a delegation many times will you please make a decision on whether or not we can go on lot A so that we know what we're focusing on and we have said yes we want to have you on lot A and now it's the case of uh advancing potential funding. So I'm grateful for the the work that you did to get the plebite on. Now the concern I have is okay, we're now doing two things and that means searching has to fund two different projects. So let's say catalyst says okay uh we come to an agreement on what an equitable rate will be then the fit out has to happen. So search and will fund raise for that.

There's no guarantee though. when that lease expires that they will be renewed in that space. There could be options but this is up to the council's will at the day. Council is in control of the site. So what if for example the urgent care because the issue that we had around advocacy for those that are following the health bouncing ball is that what the province is committed to is not enough for our community and our growing needs. It's the same as our schools. They're building on data today, not on what the forecast will be. which is why when the schools opened, they automatically need to bring in portables because they're undersized.

This is a growing community. We all need to attach to more health. Uh so when this urgent care uh advances, it may be undersized and too small and they need to expand. So then what? That displaces the seniors or it displaces healthcare. That is another decision. Then you've got to pull another building out of the ground. And I'll leave you the archive so you can find out how much work goes into trying to get that building out of the ground, but it will be undersized. We know that our X-ray facility is antiquated and not functioning. So, what if there's an actual movement to actually have an upgraded X-ray facility, modern, come in? Would it not be ideal to have it located next to the L center?

What about life labs? They are undersized. You ever try pushing anyone in a wheelchair into the life lab successfully? Not easy depending on the size of the person. It was a nightmare with my father-in-law. So in that case and it's busy but they were another like there are a number of allied services that potentially and the whole idea was to colllocate them together. So in this case we'll tell search okay you need to fund raise for this one and for your permanent buildout somewhere online you need to be working on both but maybe the plebite will take care of that. We'll do the fit out for one and basically be okay that'll be short-term while we're pulling another. So now we're going to throw away that fit out and restart on another one. It's a difficult one. I think it's the case this work it's kind of a redundant motion. I appreciate council you brought this forward. You're relatively you've only been here a year so there's a lot of work that has happened offline.

The other concern I have is what if the province as you read says we are not going to fund this project. that is still a concern of mine then it's a no-go and they are still back to square one but at least the plebicide is happening so in some cases uh I'm a bit torn on this um because our we're instructing staff to do work that they're already doing it now takes uh the capacity constraints in two ways and search and now has to focus on two different projects and not still on one Um, so I don't know. I uh am a bit torn on this one here, but that are just some concerns that I raise on this. Mr.

Marshall, um, just so you know, I have had the discussion with the representative from Catalyst about this space being used. Um, and they're a nonprofit uh, developer. they need to have the rent from this commercial space in order to be able to sustain this development. Um, and in their mind, it doesn't matter whether it's offices and commercial space or whether it's the senior center. So, they're quite happy to include the senior center, but it's with the understanding that it has to be at a market rate. It's not a subsidized rate. It's not a lesser rate. It it because the the finances don't work if they don't get the full market rate. So, so I think what needs to come out of this um is and we've heard that as well is uh I think an amendment to this would I'm looking what I'm trying to get and I'm going to ask staff's assistance on this on what sort of motion may be needed. We hear that and I recall that as well. So in the event that this is

the approach the district wants to do, what then will the district have to pay? Because search's ability to pay is only going to be so much. So if we want to do this, then that's fine on a temporary basis. Then what then will the district be required to pay to top up search and to rechieve that rent? That is the con. That really in the end is is the question is what is that rent going to be and will then the district so then it'll be up to council can you find that money to do that. So in that case is would you require an amendment cuz and basically it's the case of how to search and and then I think we need a report it's a report back not just dealing with catalyst but also dealing with the souk region community health network to see if this is a viable fit and if they say no then that is a reasonable answer for them to give us and then to come back and say no we are unable to afford that

or we really need to focus on a permanent build because their board also has capacity on what they can do. So we are already demanding that they do work in two locations and they may only have the capacity to pursue the one. So I think it's the case of uh that Kath um and so I'm just going to ask staff do you need any other language um if this passes to report back to also include search in because it it's not just catalyst group it is with the souk region community health network I'm just talking I can't talk and think about emotions at the same time I can't multi think that way or is that a or do you need do you need an amendment uh you worship uh Miss Gray and I believe that that would probably be implicit in this and that um the if the council instruct us to negotiate then we would be seeking to have conversations with the all the relevant parties.

Okay. So you don't require a motion then? Uh, no. And I was maybe going to add um I appreciate council can pass this motion or or not, but to uh the mayor's point, I think in this report that's coming back, we will be talking about the plebeside option, you know, for the original idea of the quadrant there, we can we can add um a bit of commentary about this with a bit of high level information we know um or or can get from catalyst at this time because to your point, we've already had a few of these conversations. So we're aware of some of the metrics, some of the market rate for the leases, so we can include some of that information in this report coming to council next month. And that's work you were doing anyway.

So is this motion even necessary? It's up to council. This is already underway and we were going to be addressing it. But I mean it we defer to council if you would like a a dedicated motion to this. They will be wrapped up in the same report. We just wouldn't do a standalone report just on this. Yes. It's all Yeah. So this is all work that's underway. So to uh you know it's just we're just reminding staff of the work that we're doing but maybe we're reminding ourselves of the work that staff is doing already. So it's kind of redundant but it's fine. Call the question.

Anyone else? Oh councelor Helane. Yep. So yeah just a a couple quick thing. You mentioned that there's land been allocated to search and for this other building or place, but yet during the public question comment period, there's no contract for them to be able to go and and look for somebody to build this other building with. So, because we're void of that particular component, they really have nowhere to go with anything because they don't have any guarantee that they get to use this other land. And if they do have that guarantee, then they can go seek out private developers and so on to help them with this project. But there was an agreement, but it was the question that council has been unable to answer has un been unable to make a decision on is do you support a singlestory buildout on that lot or are you comfortable? are you okay with that or must it have density and it's been split all along and council's like no we we need to know we need more we need more we need more

and we have never resolved yes you can build whatever you like in that northeast quadrant no one has been able to articulate their viewpoint on that there has always been a desire we need density it's uh significant and we need these other things they have a contract in place saying that they can go to a private developer right now No, because it was all tied into the larger scaled uh project that was known as the uh the the um the large I'm doing this. It's the the building the multi-use the the one with BC housing. It was all tied in together. So when that collapsed, the whole thing collapsed.

And then it was the case where they have asked council to make a decision on can we proceed with just a singlestory build on that lot and that has been back and forth. So that is why we're here. So, the other thing with this then with my motion is that even if if you're saying that it's temporary space because the the medical center may want to expand one day to 11,000 ft or whatever, no matter who's in there, whether it be nurses, x-rays, or whatever, they will be forced out to accommodate the doctor someday anyway. So, this would be a great opportunity for a senior center gets up working off the ground. They work out of that building until they come up with somebody who can help them build or use that other piece of land.

And again, it happens sooner than later. And two, three, four more councils could go down the road and this other thing never comes to fruition. And then we're still stuck talking about this years and years from now. But the plebsite question will allow them the same thing where then they can take all of their focus and focus on just that quadrant and do their building. says no. If the people say no to borrowing $5 million, they still have the right to take that piece of land. I mean, we we gave up $3 million worth of land to give to Catalyst and we get nothing in return for that other than they're going to build the the medical component for us at market rent. So, I would think there should be something for the three million bucks and we should we should get some some little kick back of of maybe reduced rent or or maybe the 20% on the residential component for for below market gets

squashed. It's all market rent for that and it's below market for our use of the 5,000 ft. My point is I think there could be something worked out here. That deal has already been resolved and what the community is receiving is an urgent care center which is desperately needed for anyone in this community that doesn't have a doctor. Yeah. And that's fine. That's that is what the the intention of what the community is receiving. Uh and then we already made a agreement to your point that this could be turned into housing. No, it cannot. that has already been a decision point by council that that cannot be housing which is why there's a strategy on acquiring the leaseold tenants for that space.

So I think in this case there's still more information to come uh and then it's the case where from that there will be a dialogue on what we can do uh to that. So again our staff is already doing this report it doesn't change their direction on what we have already directed them to do. So they will get a contract on this chunk of lot. No, that is not that is what they've been asking for and we have not deliberated and made a decision on that. So maybe that would be another motion that somebody could make at any point in time. Okay. I'm going to move to councelor Bettos and Pearson.

Yeah. I just remind everybody that the plebite does say law A. Yes. So if the plevisite goes through and there's a a 90% approvement for it, then I would think the council of the day is obligated to put it on that quadrant because we're going to the people to ask them whether you agree that it should be 10 stories there or two stories. That's where uh if the people want it there, it's their land, not ours, then that's what we do. And and I think that this other one and I understand what council wants. He wants options. Uh we're we're getting that anyways. So I don't want to wait. So there's nothing wasted here. Really not put too much more energy in this. I'd like to go ahead with the plevisite. Um I would like to see more money, but 5 million I'll live with that. We've already been down that road and it's on lot A and it's on the quadrant where they want to go and let the people decide. Now, we've talked about it long enough. Let's get it to the people if

they're willing to spend $5 million there and we don't have to worry about them moving in the next. Let's just call the question on the Yeah, that's fine. Councelor Pearson would like to speak to Well, I think those of you who have been around for a while remember the plebite of 2014, whether we build a senior center. It wasn't that. It was should we continue building more community spaces? Exactly. Yes, that's what it was. It wasn't anything to do with seniors. It was community space. Out of that out of that flowed the uh $50,000 per year for the senior center that came out of that plebite. That's why where that was all borne up.

That was before that was when they showed up in a bus. That was in that was prior to we were doing the 550,000 prior to the plebite. The 2014 plebite was motivated on whether or not to upgrade the community hall. Wendel Milm was the mayor at the time and we had a pleb site the question coming that yes that was there and that question was around uh space for the seniors in our community it was local multi-use community center facilities serving seniors and youth seniors and youth so we're asking the same question what I like about this motion is it may not come to fruition but it will give an option in the short term that perhaps will satisfy the seniors having a place to go and fundamentally build their organization. If it doesn't play out well then we have to go a different way and come up with which is what we've been doing for how many years now.

Anyways, um that's all I hope we can call the question. Okay, councelor Baitman then I'm calling the question. Well, my only concern with this, yes, we'll be getting it in the the staff report. The language in this instruct staff to negotiate with the aim of including I would like to see it say something along the lines of staff to explore the possibilities of including the suit gathering place in the building to be constructed. So that keeps it light and um open to possibility. The language now sounds pretty firm. We we want to if it does that make sense to anyone? I'm going to ask Miss Gray to bond because we've she's really been doing this work.

Um through your worship to councelor Baitman. Um I think maybe council's all saying very similar things. Um and I just want to say one more time this motion is already in place. This is already happening. This is already like the first preference is to get I guess maybe what would be different is the first preference right now would be to find medical related colllocatees that was always the original option from council the direction from early days was because going going back in time this is supposed to be 20,000 square feet of of health space now we're down to you know 6,500 plus 5,000 of other medical related spaces so that is the first option but catalyst I know from the meetings I've been at and conversations is aware fair that if they can't find tenants then then as has been stated they will be looking at the gathering place or others as an option.

So I guess maybe the only difference now is council if their direction is gathering place first medical spaces second. I mean that's not the direction we're currently working from. We're working on medical space first which we haven't even started trying to advertise for yet. And then if that can't come to fruition, um, then it would be transferring to me. The gathering place would then be the next viable option to be discussed. Okay. It's redundant, but it's it can still it's it doesn't change the work that they're doing. So, I hear what you're saying, councelor Baitman. Uh, but in this case, the work is already happening. So, I I'm not I appreciate what you're doing, councelor Heling, but I'm not in support of this. The work is happening and we'll wait for that report. There could be a follow-up after that. I'll call a question. All in favor? Opposed?

And it's tied. So, it fails. So, it's a defeated motion. Yeah. Uh, councelor Baitman, myself, and councelor Bettles are opposed. So, that fails. It's defeated, but the work is happening anyway. Okay. Yeah. didn't matter, but that's okay. Thank you. It's still a win. Good discuss. Good discussion and I think it informs everyone about what we're doing because there's been a lot happening and I've been at this for a decade now and it's been a very long big file with little pieces because we don't deliver health care. We advocate for it. Uh 12.2 uh councelor St. Pierre is not here. So, I think uh this should move to the next regular council meeting, but it would be I think regardless of whether he's in attendance or not, because at some point it'll need to be dealt with. Okay, we're moving into correspondence.

13.1 Frances Road speed hump from Gordon Ross uh from councelor Baitman. So, I'm going to put it on the floor that council received the correspondence for information by councelor Baitman. Is there a seconder by councelor Mcmath? Go ahead, councelor Baitman. Okay, so um Whip and Spit resident Gordon Ross, he is writing on behalf of Souk Bay Estates. Um I I ran into him at Sukarama and he he mentioned these these issues and I said write council as everyone has the right to do and I would pull it from correspondence. So I have done so. Um, this of course is not the first such letter we have received on the subject of traffic calming. Uh, I can cite if my memory holds Sun River Way, Road Knight, Maple Avenue South, Grant Road West, with Spit Road, Calassen and Beaton and Phillips. Let's include there are many section stretches of road where people are speeding and in the transportation master plan um action 7.6 seven and we heard about the in progress status report of this action

back in November and it is in progress and this is to develop a um a traffic calming policy to address concerns of traffic volumes and speed on local streets and clarify the conditions necessary to implement traffic calming. So, um, I' I'd just like to ask through you to Miss Gray, the current status of that in progress on development of that policy. It's on a to-do list, I suspect. Through your worship to council brain, still in progress. Um, our new director of operations, Jeff Miller, um, will be, this is on his portfolio, but, uh, yeah, in priorities, obviously, there's been some other pressing, uh, priorities for his time and getting up to speed on. So, this is on the radar, but um I'm sorry I don't have a deadline, a date, an estimated date.

And are are you keeping a running list of of problem areas that the public have identified? Uh yeah, we would use the data um through your through the worship to council baitman. Uh we would use the data through calls for service for example, other correspondents and things that come in um when uh engineering and operations yes are trying to narrow down. Parks does the same thing. So, it's mostly kind of calls for service, correspondence based um would be the items that would be on the staff's radar to be looked at first. Okay. So, definitely the intersection between Bethany Place and Nerissa Road. Please add that to your list. Thank you.

And that's it. Okay. Councelor McMath, any comments? Okay. Anything from anyone else? Call the question. All in favor? Any opposed? That's unanimous. Thank you. 13.2 to reconciliation corridor initiative. So that'll be to receive for information councelor Baitman seconded by councelor Mcmath. Go ahead and speak to it councelor. Yeah. So this this arises out of the CRD. We received a letter from uh view royal mayor Sid Tobias and asymalt mayor Barb DeJardan in their roles with the island corridor foundation and um they are very much encouraging. They've written to all CRD mayors and councils. we encourage your council, quote, to include the ENN reconciliation rail initiative in the district's strategic priorities for the next term. And they state that they have a a fear that momentum over this project. And the project, for those who don't know, is a the ra the um the revival of the EN route from uh Langford into uh into Vic West. And uh this is intended of course to um to deal with traffic uh concerns.

Commuter rail service will undoubtedly um reduce uh congestion. So I do have a motion that I'd like to be brought forward tonight and I'll read that. Whereas the commuter rail link between Langford and downtown Victoria will reduce traffic congestion for suit commuters and encourage both increased BC transit ridership and enhanced intermunicipal transit service levels i.e more buses. Therefore, be it resolved that council recommend that the next district of sue council include support for the EN reconciliation rail initiative amongst its strategic priorities for the 2026 2030 term. Do we have a seconder? This is a an amendment that he's making to his existing motion. Okay. For discussion. Go ahead, councelor Baitman. This is an amendment.

Well, you know, this council does have the right to make recommendations to the next council and the CRD has done this um this very recommendation to its next board. It goes into the hopper for strategic planning and that council can we have no right to determine what the outcome of their strat plan is but we can make directions of this kind and it just strikes me that given our issues on that road we've heard about it our local issues the langford everywhere is just jam-packed so light rail is obviously coming to the greater Victoria region and our council needs to acknowledge knowled that yes, our our citizens will be impacted. Um either they will will um have more room on the roads to to drive their their vehicles into town or they can uh take the bus to the to Langford station to West Hill Station, I believe, is where where the the route will begin and get into town. There's also stops along the way at CFB Esquyimald, the

Esquyimald Graving Dock, and right into downtown. So that's my logic. Councelor McMath. Um I just have a couple questions. So we have a strap plan right now. So really we could just put it in our strat plan and that would continue on. No, it's our strat plan ends with us. Oh, okay. And then if you're making a recommendation for the next group, how are you ranking this? because we have immediate less and then eventually we'll get to it. How are you expecting us to push this forward? Well, yeah. So, I think it it's really a recommendation to the next council to keep this on their radar. It will certainly be on the radar at the CRD.

So, the mayor, the next mayor will be our CRD director. there will be an alternate director who will be um be able to bring back these these ideas and plans to to sue council. However, as Mayor Tobias and Mayor Dejardan have recommended, we and other CRD municipalities need to keep this on the front burner as best we can. So, it's a recommendation and I think it it sets a precedent for us to make other recommendations to the new group. Um you know there there's a number of things which are going to potentially die on the vine unless we um well it leads me to another question which is we say the strap plan dies but when say it is a whole new group say none of us come back and it's a whole new group how is the how does that conversation and perhaps Miss Grey can speak to it the continuation of what was previously prioritized what we are in the midst of with the rest of it. How is that communicated? So, would you not showcase previous strat plans?

Well, yeah. Like what I'm saying I, you know, I said, "Oh, it dies with us. It sounds so morbid." Uh, any council that I've been on, like we are introduced to the strategic plan that the previous council was using. Yeah, that was my understanding. Could we not put it into our current Strat plan? And then that kind of takes care of all of it because they'll have the opportunity to review and then they can speak to it whilst they're campaigning if it's a high priority for them. I'll ask I'm going to go to our staff. Sorry. Um just to clarify, you guys already thought about this and that's why the plan goes till 2027. The strategic plan goes for the term from 2024 to 2027. So the idea being that year transition year these priorities that are in this plan will this work carries on until council gives us new direction and it kind of puts a deadline on hey this is our priorities till in theory the end of 2027. So if you want

to do something different um you know we need to get strategic planning done. So the term does go till 2027 in that regard to keep the continuity. Perfect. So it doesn't die. Not not not exactly nothing new to your point. Yeah. new new initiatives wouldn't be added, new priorities wouldn't be added by staff. It would just be focusing on these and then seeking direction from the new council on on what they would like to change. Perfect. So then I would not support this. Um but I would support putting it into the current strategic plan. Why don't we amend the second clause uh to something of the order of therefore be it resolved that council include support for the EN reconciliation rail initiative in its uh 2024 to 2027 strategic plan.

So that is an amendment to an amendment. So we are making an amendment to add it to our strategic priorities. So let's deal with that on the amendment to the amendment added to the existing strategic plan. That's been moved. Is there a seconder council? Second. I have a question. Okay. There's a question on the second amendment. Um, where are you ranking this in at most? It's an advocacy item. Okay. Advocacy. Absolutely. Okay. Then I'm okay with that. Okay. So, on the amendment to the amendment added to the current strategic plan. Uh, I will any comments from anyone else? Okay. uh councelor Halane will update everyone. Okay. So on the amendment to the amendment I will call the question all those in favor and that's unanimous.

Thank you. Now about the amendment to add this on. Do we have um the comment that I'll make for those that are interested. So we have the CRD that has been funding and supporting this work for a considerable length of time. There is now significant interest in advancing at least the Langford into Vic West portion of this and the mayors involved have been spearheading that along with the nations impacted particularly Kosapsum and Sonis Kosapsum in particular and there is strong support uh and for those of you that are wondering if they actually did a test and it was about 10 minutes to get from Langford all the way to CFBYold that is big deal for anyone that is commuting there as which many of our residents do.

Uh so that is the portion that they're looking to focus on and this is within the CRD and yes both the next potentially the next mayor because it's up to council to decide who sits at the CRD will be uh uh briefed on this as well as the alternate. Now, at the same time, Souk also holds a seat with the Victoria Regional Transit Commission that has been advancing the work along the Douglas Highway 1 corridor with the uh rapid bus lane and the right. So, that will disappear with me. Souk will not necessarily be receiving a seat uh on the Souk on the Victoria Regional Transit. It names me specifically to the end of my service. It'll be up to the province and that's where there's been an ask that another Westshore mayor remain on that. So who that will be is yet to be determined. So that's just a point. Right now the other Westshore mayor is the mayor of Machosen. It was Calwood I believe previously uh and then I advocated I want a seat there too. So okay fine. the province gave me a seat in 2016, but it names me specifically

and that will expire with my term. So, there could be another West mayor uh because Langford and View Royal have never been included on the transit commission, but I don't know who that will be. Uh so, I'm just raising that because I'm trying to tell everybody the information that's in my head before I leave office. But that is the reality of what'll happen is don't expect necessarily to be on transit because that may not happen and it's not your call. It's up to the province. Uh but in terms of this work there is strong drive to get this portion going for our commuting public that goes into Vic West to CFB into shipyards. It's a big deal and DND is already doing a uh process of trying to get their workers to the base faster and so there's a lot of moving pieces. It is important that this actually happens and there seems to be uh some initiative. If you're following the federal advocacy piece, it's all around dual use infrastructure with defense spetting because they are

investing heavily into defense and also want to see infrastructure that impacts adjacent communities expand at the same time, which means this potentially may actually happen with federal funding. So, I'm going to leave it at that. That's on the amendment now. So, I'm going to call the question on the amendment. All those in favor? Uh that any opposed? None opposed. on the main motion as it's been amended twice. We'll now call the question. All in favor? Any opposed? None opposed. That carries unanimously. Thank you. Any items receive removed from consent agenda this evening? I think it was all correspondence to the next meeting. Council verbal reports.

I would like to share if you have not tried the new skate park. I encourage you to do so on Sunday. There will be a big grand opening event with uh all sorts of activities, some um uh uh exhibitions or or um show some youth who actually have talent to do this will be on site to demon demonstrations is the word I'm looking for on Sunday at Sea Park. So encourage you to do that. I will be there not to skateboard at all, but certainly to cut the red, you know, because that would be humorous for everyone, including not me. Um, and Al will be there as the chair.

And that's all I have to share at this particular moment in time. Although I do want to pay tribute to the late councelor Lillian Spock. Uh, I wanted to comment that on the start, but this is a very um it's a very sad event that has occurred. Councelor Spock was a close friend and a dear mentor of mine. Uh I was shocked to receive the news. We had just made plans to connect. Um and I'm grateful that the mayor of Langford called me in person because it would have floored me to have received this news in any other way. Uh, councelor Spock loved her community, uh, loved serving, loved regional work, and was always very supportive to new counselors and and and women as well.

So, she is dearly missed, and I think of her often as well as her family, and I'm grateful for the time that I have had to connect with her. Uh it's incredibly sad for me because I also look and I see the late counselor Brenda Parkinson's uh tribute murals that I know she probably would not like. Um but it just seems uh that these events happen. They are the most challenging part of my term in service is loss and uh we have been impacted in our community in many different ways and also just the loss including that of Nor McKinnus and others that have contributed much to our community. So it is the part um when I uh am asked what I don't like about this work, it's death.

And if you want to hate anything about this work, it's cancer because that is what is devastating and ripping apart families and communities. So I just want to leave it on that. But I found it very challenging to find those words at the start of the meeting when we then have to pivot into the business of the day, which is why I'm saving it for the end. Other members of council Okay. Call for a motion to adjurnn, please. Moved by councelor Haldane, seconded by Mcmath. All those in favor? That's unanimous. Councelor Helane beat you to the adjournment. Thank you everyone for tuning in tonight.