Meeting Overview
The Committee of the Whole meeting focused heavily on financial planning and the future direction of major municipal policies. Key outcomes included approving the West Shore Parks and Recreation budget and receiving the first overview of the proposed 2023-2027 Five Year Financial Plan, which indicated a potential 13.5% tax increase for existing taxpayers. Council determined that the controversial draft Official Community Plan (OCP) should not proceed, opting instead for a facilitated workshop to enhance the 2011 OCP and define future engagement strategy. Council also voted to recommend a revision of the Community Garden Policy to shift management responsibilities to a non-profit society, and agreed to explore options for inclusionary housing/affordable units in new multi-family developments.
Key Decisions
- THAT the agenda be amended to include items 6.3.2(a), 9.3.4(b)(2) and 10(a-b); AND THAT the agenda be approved as amended.
- The adoption of the December 13 minutes was postponed to the March meeting due to a dispute over their wording regarding withdrawn motions.
- THAT the minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting held January 10, 2023 be adopted as presented.
- The Committee recommended that Council approve the 2023 West Shore Parks and Recreation Society Budget.
- THAT the Building Department Report for the Month of January 2023 be received.
Transcript
2681 segmentsThank you, Kim.
Good afternoon, View Royal, and welcome to the Committee of the Whole for February 14th, 2023.
Uh, before we begin, we'd like to recognize the Laquanguin speaking people known today as the Esquamalt Nation and the Songhees Nation, and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.
This afternoon, we're here from the public during the public participation uh period that comes up pretty quick in the agenda.
And this evening we will also hear from the public during the question period portions of the agenda.
For the members of the audience and council chambers, is a safe, respectful, and inclusive space so all members of the audience are asked to refrain from clapping, cheering, or openly expressing your opinions when others are speaking or when you are done speaking.
When it's your turn to talk, do not speak disrespectfully about anyone else, including council and staff, and do not use rude or offensive language.
Do not make statements or allegations that call into question the character of anyone else, and do not speak or act in an aggressive, bullying, or harassing way.
Council wants to hear your views of those participating in the meeting in an open and impartial form.
So can I get an approval of the agenda, including the light items that should be on your blue list?
Seconded.
All in favor?
Any opposed?
None opposed.
Motion carries minutes of previous meetings and adoption of uh request a motion for uh the adoption of A and both uh moved by Councillor Mattsons, seconded by Councilor mcckenzie all in favor yes um uh just a correction uh uh yeah uh correction for committee the whole uh for um the so I'm just trying to get voted up here in um I think it was in December and there was the discussion of the uh council initiatives and I'd indicated that um you know, I believe there was an error in the minutes um for uh the last four.
So if if I can suggest your worship that um we do like um just what we have in in and the budget document in the council um matters and council initiatives use the phrase not endorsed by council or withdrawn.
So if we use that phrase like we've done in in um in the financial package, then that will I think clarify the ones that I did withdraw.
So just to confirm for staff you could unmute or uh mute your microphone now, Council Rogers, because the so just for for staff, then uh we what you're proposing is we use the same wording and the budget document to amend the wording from the last council of the whole meeting when it came to um to to withdrawing um the request staff have a comment yes staff thank you your worship the minutes before you are the amended version we did re-listen to the the tape is that satisfactory counselor rogers need to talk.
I still disagree.
Um there were uh items that I had withdrawn.
It's not a case that they were not endorsed.
I had withdrawn them.
So we need to get that clarification.
I disagree with the minutes.
So the the uh the other option, as I say, um uh Mr.
Bias is to do like we've done in um page 18 of the financial package, where quote not endorsed by council or withdrawn.
That gives a lot better clarity on the matter.
And um there you go.
But otherwise, I'm not uh I'm not in support of adopting the minutes at this time.
Thank you, Council Rogers.
Uh staff, do you see a problem with amending the minutes as councilor Rogers suggested?
We could go back and re-listen to them again and table these until the next committee, the whole.
Please do, and then if you could put that on.
And was that specifically a um which one of the minutes were you referring to specifically, Councilor Rogers?
Uh yes, it was um um the sorry I'm gonna have to go back up at the top.
It was December the 13th uh minutes, and it was in the evening sessions, and I believe it was um 28, 29, and 30.
Anyway, we'll sort that out when we get there.
Okay, so we got a motion on the floor right now to adopt.
We need an amended motion so we can adopt uh minutes of the committee of the whole meeting held January 10th, 2023.
Can I get a motion for that?
That's item B.
I'll move that we table whichever one we should be tabling.
All in the same motion?
So table A and carry B.
Yes.
Can ever get a secondary for that motion?
Second.
All in favor.
Any opposed?
Motion carries.
Petitions and delegations.
We do have one, Mr.
Brown, I believe, from West Shore Parks and Recreation.
Um you're familiar with the microphone, Mr.
Brown.
Okay.
Great.
Uh thank you for inviting me to speak to the 2023 budget for West Shore Parks and Rec Society.
Just waiting for the presentation to come up.
There we go.
Perfect.
As mentioned, so we're gonna look have a look at the 2023 to 2027 financial plan for the society.
Um, in the presentation today, I'm gonna cover some highlights from 2022, the 2022 financial projections and major variances that were that we're seeing um coming through for last year, some of the challenges we faced in in creating the 2023 budget, an overall uh of the financial plan is mentioned, some of the major expense increases that led to the 2023 increase, summary of the capital projects, a bit of a skate park update, five-year reserve continuity, where that sits right now, and then going moving into the requisition impact to each municipality and uh conclusion.
So, starting off with some highlights for 2022.
Um, we're continuing that bounce back.
Certainly by the fall, we were running at pretty much full full uh um capacity compared to the previous couple years due to restrictions related to COVID.
In 2022, we offered 975 swimming lessons to roughly 5,200 swimmers.
As a comparison for 2021.
That was about 2200 swimmers.
So we more than doubled the number of um swimming lessons that we ran in our pool.
There wasn't the same kind of effect on the on the arena.
We had 252 skating lessons.
That was similar to the previous year.
224 licensed care children positions, which works out to roughly 33,000 child days.
And so that's a mixture of our daycare, preschool programs, and after school care programs, which are all licensed.
And a lot of that is to do with the expansion of the upgrade we did to the upper floor of the JDF to turn that into the child care center.
As well as last year, we had 4,000 summer campers go through our programs, mostly on site, but also some of the programs that we do off site as well.
For silly facility rentals, we had a 20% increase in uh field rentals this year, just shy of 9,000 hours in field rentals.
So that's the lion's share of that is one to few soccer, but we also have triangle baseball, west shore rugby, and various other programs and some special events such as the car show.
Over 15,000 hours of ice were booked last year, which was a significant increase to the previous year because part of 2021 we had the JDF arena was closed during the replacement of the floor, as well as we had 4,600 hours in pool rentals for the different swim clubs, scuba, and some of the different aspects there, rehab programs, which is more of a more than a doubling from the previous year, similar to the swimming lessons.
For drop-in programs, we saw 105,000 fitness users last year, 115,000 swimmers, 16,000 skaters, 2800 sports drop-in users.
And one of our big successes was the as we came out of using some grant funding that we received, but coming out of COVID, as we've re-established and added a lot more youth drop-in options, in particular on Friday nights, where they have exclusive use of the pool for a couple hours, as well as they go into our indoor sports complex, can use the turf as well as the basketball courts.
And then we've got a youth room where they can go in and just hang out and video games and that kind of stuff as well, make snacks.
But we saw 3,800 youth drop-ins last year.
So that was been quite success.
It was so successful we actually added on Wednesday nights as well into the arena.
So they have exclusive use of the JDF arena for skate on Wednesdays.
And we saw 34,000 rounds of golf played, which was a slight drop from the previous year, mostly due to uh rainy and wet spring.
So we had a slow start, great summer, great fall, just like got a slow start to the year.
Another aspect we try to do is, and we brought back, which unfortunately didn't happen a bit during COVID, but was the supporting some of the events that happened in the region.
And so we have our community development team will set up tables at these events where they make do set up crafts and so on for kids to be able to participate in.
So around some of them around the region, we were involved with the change makers event in Langford, National Indigenous People's Day at Royal Roads, the Beecher Bay and a school celebration in Machosen, the Highlands Fall Fling, the Langford Lightup, and the Callwood Christmas light up.
And one of the ones I did want to mention there is as far as V Rural goes, there used to be some involvement with your candidate pre-COVID, and actually our community, our communications and also our uh community development program is going to be reaching out to all of our own, all of the owner municipalities and V Rural in particular, to seek out ways that we can try to support some of your events that you uh run within your municipality as well.
For 2022, uh our projection have us one percent better on revenues and two percent um lower in operational expenses, looking at a surplus of 230,000 uh for last year, which is 4% better in budget.
Those major variances for last year, a big part of that, the lion's share at the top is related to unfortunately open positions.
We've been struggling with hiring as many have.
Um, we had eight full-time maintenance positions in particular that sat open for the first seven months of the year, which is a significant significant cost savings, but also challenged the staff to be able to make things to be able to operate the facilities, keep things clean, and so on.
Um, happy to say that right now we've got all but one position filled, and that's posted right now.
It didn't lead to any restrictions or reductions in our services.
So we're definitely making a comeback as far as that goes.
I believe in the we had one day we had to close the pool early, and that was it.
Unlike the unfortunate circumstances many of the in the region have run into where they've had to close facilities early and not offer the same amount of programs related to staff, and we've been having a much better time at that.
Community recreation did a lot better last year compared to budget.
A lot of that was related to a conservative budget coming out of 2020, not or 2021, sorry, not knowing how COVID restrictions would still be in place, as they were still affecting us at the beginning of the year and at the time of making the budget.
Some of the areas that really produced well in community recreation in particular were arts and culture, pottery did really well.
Sports programs made a quite uh rebound in community recreation, as well as the 4,000 summer campers as mentioned, was great, was more than we expected and putting us back into pre COVID numbers.
Fitness and wellness, particularly on the specialty fitness, so that's more yoga, Pilates, spin bike classes, those were really popular through the year.
Sports programs, as I mentioned, a lot of that was on related to the field rentals on administration.
Some of the areas that we spent over budget last year on administration, but most of that was related to those savings that we were realizing, but up above, it's higher revenues and open positions.
We actually went ahead to try to ensure that our requisition increase for 2023 wasn't higher than we ended up bringing forward.
As we did some purchases such as um software or sorry server backup, we had some trans high power transformers in the arena and the Q center that had to be replaced, and they were scheduled to happen in 2023, and we're able to use those funds and take care of that at the end of 2022.
Um, the weights and rehab, so that's more the fitness drop in into the weight room.
Uh, it was down compared to last year.
If you recall, January was still closed, the restrictions still affected us in January, and then we had a slower um uptake of annual pass and uh holders than we expected, just as people were trying to get comfortable with coming back to the weight room.
By the fall, it was full on compared to what we've seen before.
And as of right now, um, staff are quite excited.
We had our first New Year's resolution rush in two or in three years this year, and it's been quite incredible actually.
They uh to see there's a lot of pent-up recreation desire by the public, and so we're seeing that.
Into our dry floor, which is the indoor sports complex, it didn't do quite as well as expected.
The previous year we had a large Netflix um movie rental, so we budgeted a little bit of we reduced what the expectations on that, but we didn't see any movie rentals or uh movie shoots on our site last year, so that was a little bit of a draw up there.
And as mentioned earlier in golf at a slow start to the year with a wet spring, and then some other minor variances through the year.
But all of that wrapped up together, we're expecting about a $230,000 uh surplus for last year, and that goes into our reserve, our capital assets reserve for doing mid-capital projects.
So moving into 2023, some of the challenges that we dealt with, and and this is addressed through our budget is we had some of that restart funding, which was great.
That was carried over that was not used in 2021, used in 2022 in order for us to not bring forward an over 8% requisition increase request for 2022.
But that started off in 2023 as we're doing our comparison against taxation, as putting us roughly 3.22% behind.
But due to our increased performance as mentioned, what we're seeing now, but what we started to see in the fall, we were able to overcome that in this budget.
There was also a number of legislative increases to labor costs last year around employee sick time and statutory holiday pay.
We're very much we're a $12 million budget, 75% is labor.
So it's any labor changes like that have a significant effect on us.
Those two major ones there were uh our full-time staff already have that, but auxiliary staff receiving loop pay.
On top of that, now due to the legislation, they receive five days of pixel of paid sick time, which it was a rough cost of $65,000.
We weren't expecting for last year, and the change into the stat holiday pay was another $32,000 increase we weren't expecting last year.
Again, we've addressed both of those into the budget for 2023 through some of the regional wage increases we put in place.
So I can't remember if this affected V Royal, but some of our partners through the QP development and so on and the much larger increases that were that happened due to the situation in the economy.
So what we negotiated ours ahead of time, so we're not in that same cycle.
And so ours was at a 2% increase, which has now put us significantly behind the region.
And so we're roughly 5% of the region going into when we go into 2024.
So this budget, we've included a contingent wage contingency to help us through that process as we go into the next contract negotiations, which will happen this fall.
And lastly, inflation.
Everything's gotten way more expensive on our maintenance side as far as supplies go.
When we've had roofing projects, we had to do it was astronomical, how much that went up.
So we're not immune to that.
We are, as as I'll mention later on, the the 5% we brought forward, we're happy to say is below where the average has been.
So we've been able to control some of those costs by going through.
So the five-year financial plan 2023 sees a 13.8% increase in revenue expectations for 2023 over 2022, which is significant.
But when you go into if you actually project our fees from 2019 forward and pretend that COVID never happened, it's right in a line of where we should be.
And as mentioned, by the time we hit the fall last year, we're seeing registrations, program use, rentals, everything exactly in a line.
How is it you how it how we would have expected and numbers we would have seen before?
In particular in areas both in our pool field use and in the weight room, we're actually seeing numbers greater than we've ever seen before in some of that demand.
Moving forward, we go back to a conservative three assumed three percent increase year over year.
Um, we saw a budget or an increase of 7.7 percent.
Expenditures.
Some of the the difference there, all that the increased revenue, of course, is driven.
There's expenses that come along with that, increased staffing, supplies, and so on.
The reduction there, why it's not as high as a percentage as the revenue side is related to our ex increased expectations on performance.
And then moving forward, we go into our our um historical three percent conservative expected increase year over year.
Some of the major expense increases that we addressed in 2023 are not in discretionary.
So wage increases is mentioned, it's lower than what others have, but still 2% of a large our large budget budget is 234,000 increase for next year.
Or for non-discretionary increases for the wages, it's 103,000 for regular staff, 45,000 for auxiliary staff.
We have significant rate increases around utilities of 41,000 and insurance of 45,000.
So the insurance is one that we've been mentioning.
The board has been our has been well aware of that.
We're they're struggling right now to find companies who will bid on insuring us, similar to what led to the creation of the municipal uh insurance authority was the same thing.
Years ago, people weren't stopped the risk level for a municipality, so companies weren't bidding on the insurance, so that was created.
We're now running into that.
We're a municipal service.
So we're having that same challenge as far as finding bidders, and which has made it a according to our broker, a hard market, which has made the costs go down.
There's not the competition there.
Last year they went out to 22 different insurers, and only one came back and bid on our insurance.
And we have a significant amount of equipment and so on that has to be insured.
The discretionary increases, we've added three team leader positions into our after-school care position that require class four driver's licenses.
That was one of the positions that has been a big struggle for us and actually and all the license care programs around the city to find people with class four.
So we created these new positions that require it as a training.
That was some extra responsibility to help out with the running of the program, allows us then through our collective agreement to create pay them at a higher wage, which makes it more incentive for people to apply for that.
And that's really helped us out.
Last year, as we were struggling, we ended up contracting out a few of the routes on our after-school care program, which is definitely a lot more expensive than staff.
As mentioned, we included a 1.76 wage contingency to help us out with negotiations that'll be coming around the corner.
And furthermore, the last piece is 60,000 annual transfer increase to our capital reserve, which was direction we received from the ownership back in fall of 2021.
And that's to help ensure that we work our way forward of fully funding all of our capital asset reprovements as they go forward.
So overall, the total expense increase for 2023 was 461,000.
We increased our fees, program offerings, and performance expectations for 184,000, which left a deficit of 277,000, which is the amount of the total requisition increase.
Within 2023, a couple areas that we're looking at for future capital needs.
So we've got a couple feasibility costing studies we've included in the budget, one of which is pickleball.
So that's the hot topic that keeps going around through the province, through the region.
We've spoken to our ownership.
Of course, the a lot of the Victoria Pickleball Association is approached.
The challenges, as you're all aware, is putting those near residential areas.
It's an enjoyable fun game, but it's very loud.
And so that leads to a lot of complaints, which a lot of the region is dealing with.
We recognize on the society's grounds, we don't have that issue.
It's a good place to potentially put those courts.
And so what we've got into the budget this year is to hire a consultant to do a costing study for us so that when infrastructure grants come out, we've got a shelf ready project that we can go for that.
And pickleball ticks a lot of those boxes, outdoors, multi-age, multi-level.
Um, so it's a pretty good chance of getting that.
The other big project on the horizon is the twinning of the JDF arena.
Um, so there's always a high demand for ice.
Uh, and in some of the recent news, although that's not on the West Shores, it will have a somewhat of an effect is the change that UVIC is doing with theirs come 2026, I believe it is.
And so there is going to be a demand for more ice.
So on the West Shore, because we used to have the curling rink, our ice plant can run two sheets.
And so there is the it is cost beneficial to twin our rink versus building another standalone rink.
So we're gonna look at hiring a consultant to help us up with the pricing of that.
The one caveat with that police is it's good our aspect is gonna take away a significant amount of parking to do that.
So we need a parking solution to tie into it, of which we already have a challenge with seeing as though there's the transit parking nearby.
When we do big events, shamrocks games and so on at the queue, it filters through the whole the whole ground.
So we need some solution there.
So that'll tie into that, but we're gonna be going out to a consultant to uh work on some of that this year.
Capital projects into next year.
So we're looking at $2.7 million in projects.
Um, one some of the areas to point out is we're replacing all of our cardio equipment in our fitness room.
In the past, we used to do a small portion every year through COVID because there was less usage, there was restrictions.
We didn't do any of those replacements.
We're now moving into all of everything needs to be replaced, unfortunately, due to wear and tear, um, but it's also going moving into a new plan where we do that process every four years.
So we get a re reboot on it all.
It's all the same make and model, which goes a long way for customer aspect to it.
They get used to using a certain kind of machine, certain brand of machine that way.
We do already contribute to that on an annual basis to reserve, so that's fully funded out of a set reserve we already have for that equipment.
So there's no tax effect on there.
In the major site maintenance, there's a few there.
The one I wanted to point out is the roof.
So we're doing a major roof that covers our pool fit or fitness area, the hallways, change rooms.
It was originally half of that was originally in the 2022 budget.
We went out with it last year.
All of our quotes are more than double what was budgeted.
So we shelved that and put it all together, created a new budget and putting it out this year.
Also with the hopes with some of the change in the economy that we'll get a little bit better pricing.
Unfortunately, because of that large ticket item, we did have to move some other projects into future years.
The hope is we'll get some better pricing this year, and then we can go through the board to bring back some of those projects that we had to push out into future years.
And then the other one in there is the skate park.
So that's the gracious funding through the ownership as well as the federal grant funding.
Portion of the work was done last year, but the majority of it's going on right now.
And as mentioned, so that's covered through reserve.
And then we've got capital reserve that's covering a fair amount of the other pieces.
We also have library work in there as well, as we act as the landlord for that library.
So that's a flow through, in essence, it's a flow through on us.
There's fees based on the library pay contributes to that.
The other foreigners beside yourselves, because you guys contribute to the one downtown, and it flows there is a net zero within our budget, but we act as the landlord for that piece.
Some updates on the exciting skate bar project that took year years in the making, and Vureau was always a very big proponent of getting that in place, which is wonderful.
Um, excavation is complete, construction has begun.
Um, they're doing molds.
There's already parts you can see now.
There's framework up there, and I can't remember the exact what it's called, but the high-pressured concrete where it's blasted high pressure, so it sticks to the wall.
Watching the trial work of those guys is pretty incredible what they can do.
Um it's looking amazing.
Every day you go down there, there's quite uh quite the change into that park.
Uh, as mentioned, the total cost for that was 1.2, um, roughly $350,000 was last year, and the remainder was this year, and we currently sit on schedule to be completed by the end of March.
In the presentation, a couple photos, some renderings of what the project will look like.
So the picture on the left, we will have some picnic areas.
The plan is in the future is to cover that.
That's a view looking from the parking lot that is adjacent to the field house where the PAR3 Pro Shop is for the golf course.
And then looking down the hill more from where the tennis courts are is the picture on the left.
So one thing is when you see it in person, the pictures don't do justice, just how large it is.
So it's it's a significant size skate park, which is really exciting.
That uh will be coming up in just a few months.
Reserve continuity.
Um, if you recall, that's been one of the hot topics when it comes to the society for a number of years, where we've been working towards getting ourselves to be well fully funded eventually, but um getting out of the red.
So we've the society has been really strong for years operationally, but due to due to a multiply of factors, capital projects is a large number, large amount of capital equipment, buildings, and so on on site, the ability to fund that has been a challenge.
Um, if you recall last year, as of 2025, we started to dip into the red if things weren't changing.
I'm very excited to say that we're in the black all the way through 2027.
A lot of that is to do with that increase that happens on an annual basis to the contribution, as well as what we've just been able to do within our budget process, and we keep trying to increase the amounts that we transfer over into the reserve to ensure that we're not running into issues moving forward.
Those growth will the growth on that 60,000, we plan on continuing at some point.
We can look at it, but continuing that so we can stay on top of inflationary increases and so on as we go through.
But very excited to see that uh we're not dipping into the red on that anymore.
So the connection into that um amount that I mentioned before and how it works, the um breaks it up between the ownerships.
So the ownerships uh is based on converted assessments.
So this is updated every year through information that's passed on to us from the owner, the finance departments from the owners.
The average converted assessment increase for last year across the region was 25.43.
Um, to point out, if you see on the bottom, view royals was lower at 21.81, which has resulted in an ownership decrease of 0.39%, and also increase results on the next page of instead of the 5% average, your at your requisition increase is lower than that for the year.
And as mentioned, as the requisition going into it is 5% for the year.
It works out for View Royal as 1.97%, and that's related to that decrease in the overall percentage of ownership related to converted assessments, which is an overall 14,852 increase from 277,022 to 200, 3.9% or 217 is an increase related to operating expenses, and 1.1% is that 60,000 additional capital reserve contribution as mentioned before.
So our estimated taxation impact.
So we just look at we took the 2021 Canadian census on population and looked at the individual owners' financial plans just to give a picture to what that actually means compared to your own taxes.
Again, it's lower than the average.15% related to the society or $1.28 per capita on the expense side.
And that concludes my presentation.
Any questions?
Thank you, Mr.
Brown.
That was uh great.
And it was very concise.
And uh that's really good news with the rebound from COVID and uh good to see you up and operating and obviously in high demand.
Uh for council.
Do we have any questions?
Counselor Batson.
Sure.
Thank you for your presentation.
Uh it's great to see you again.
A couple of questions.
I'm just you mentioned pickleball, and I'm just curious as what sort of um user fees would be associated with something like pickleball.
Um, we probably we would be looking at running it the same way as we do for tennis.
And so the ability to rent the court at a at a fairly low rate, but for the most part, it would just be free access, first come, first serve, um drop into the facility.
And so the right now there are rental that they can rent the courts for.
I don't have the number off the top of my head, but they can rent our indoor courts and the indoor sports um complex, which is indoors, but these will be outdoor courts, so we're looking at somewhere around where the tennis courts are.
So we don't charge for that unless people want to book the whole facility so for example if there's a tennis camp or something like that um and speaking with Victoria pickable they're interested in potentially trying to run programs and whatnot so we'll look at that as we move forward.
Okay thank you and and my last question uh years ago if you were all tried to uh we had a deal with um sanitage so that our kids could go over and use their drop you know on Friday night drop ins and we we got some funding for a bus etc unfortunately nothing ever it didn't seem to work out too well because kids decided not to do that commute.
But I was just wondering what for the drop-ins.
Um youth drop-in, do we do any pickups currently?
We don't, but it's something we could look at.
I mean we have a full we've got four buses related to our after school care programs.
Maybe uh who's our pack person here?
So it is something we could we could entertain for sure.
Yeah.
Are you maybe that's something you could chat with the the PACs about?
Thanks.
And then of course then to thank you Counselor Madison we'll go to Councillor Lemon and then Counselor Brown next.
So Councillor Lemon please.
Thank you.
Thanks Grant that was very concise and better to be asked than Highlands.
A question, Re, the youth youth drop-in.
I think that's terrific.
I I it's wonderful how you were expanded it and is open tomorrow.
Is is there a charge?
And if there is, can it is it still accessible to those that cannot meet the fee?
Yeah, it's at a reduced rate, so it's $3.
Um, and then we've always got the potential.
We have the life program regionally, which is the leisure involvement for everyone.
And so anyone that potentially can't afford or has it sitting in a lower income bracket, they can come in and they get 52 free visits a year.
So that would qualify for that program if they're able to.
And a secondary question that, and this is, you know, I guess it's kind of separate from this, but I'm wondering what the relationship is with the uh senior center.
Is is there a rental relationship?
I know they do their own programming, but but is is there is there revenue from there for you yeah it's sort of it's a a kind of a a lease so we're the landlords and we take care of the maintenance of the facility they run it for the most of the day daytime hours on weekends and evenings we have some programs um their membership fee goes to us which basically covers the renting of the building so they look at it all day long but we've got a mate one maintenance person every day that's assigned specifically to that facility we do all the cleaning of the rooms and any of the um um upgrades that happen during the shut they do a three week shutdown in July, and we do all of those upgrades for them, and that's all covered through that uh membership fee that we received.
If they do any bigger projects, it's usually on a partnership, depending on if our staff have the skill base to do the work.
So, for example, they upgraded their kitchen, I believe it was four years ago.
Um, our staff did some of the work, we contracted some of the work, and they work through us.
They make use of our operations department to find the contractors and and do that work, and they they uh fundraise for those through their membership on that aspect.
Okay, great to know.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Lemon.
Counselor Brown.
Yeah, I really like public private partnerships, and I do a lot of walking in Royal Roads, and I walk by the tennis courts there that haven't been used in years.
Uh it'd be nice to see the pickable people, uh, Royal Roads and Glessher Parks work together to build.
You could build four pickleball courts in the existing two tennis courts.
It's fully paved, it's fully cut chain linked, fenced all around.
Uh, needs some weeding because it's been sitting for quite a long part, and of course, lining.
The pickleball people have players places to play.
Uh, to me, it's a win-win-win.
There's a gym there as well, shower facilities, everything else.
Um, the pickleball people would love it because they got more places, and and and Royal Roads would like it because it's a nice store right now.
And it's a shame to see that space sitting there empty that could be used.
It'd be great to see a partnership between the three groups.
Uh just an idea.
I don't know.
Uh I know I've mentioned it to Counselor Kowalichuk before.
I'm not sure how much discussion has ever come about that, but again, it's just sitting there wasting away, and rather than having to build new ones or build new ones and use those ones as well.
To me, it's a no-brainer.
So I don't know if you could take that back to your your group.
And yeah, we can look and explore that for sure.
Really good.
Thank you, Councillor Brown.
Uh Counselor Rogers.
Yeah, thanks very much for the report.
Um so relieved that uh indeed we are reinvesting and putting um a substantial amount into the reserves uh uh to to look at the difference between um what was 1.2 million down to 170,000.
It's uh it's thankfully we're doing that.
Um question about the fees.
Um are the fees that and I know this has been an adjustment and I I see it's justified.
How is those uh fees stand with uh other regional uh recreational facilities in the region?
We're right in the middle.
So we through that process evaluate, we do a survey actually through through on the program side and also admissions rentals.
Um so some examples are we're on the low end for field rentals, we're right near the middle for ice rentals, we're the second highest for adult admissions, right in the middle for senior admissions.
So we try to make sure we're not the highest and we're not necessarily the lowest.
We try to float right in the middle as best as possible.
Um, in all honesty, for this year, due to some of the cost increases, we did that same process, but we didn't weigh that comparison as much into our decision on where we move the fees for this year as we normally would.
However, we still ended up right smack in the middle of the of the pack as far as um all of our fees go.
Thank you.
Uh, another question.
With respect to the skateboard park, and uh it'll be really exciting to see it open up.
Um, when I was doing my ride along with the RCMP, um uh it was an interesting comment that it might become or be a um um for lack of better term, a security issue being tucked away down in the bowl and all that.
Um so is is there going to be the additional investment of uh security lighting and and uh so forth to uh to monitor the site?
Yeah, there's lighting included.
We also now block and we've actually since um for the last number of years, we actually at night close the gate um that locks down to the lower park.
Um and some of that that wouldn't prevent people from walking in, but it certainly deals with some of the issues we were having with RVs and so on on site.
Um so we've done that, but there'll be lights on site.
We do have a security patrol.
The commissionaires come through our site every night at around two in the morning, anyways.
Um, and then one of the aspects down there is there's the middle of the night issue potentially when we we will have that patrol coming through, but through the day, there's actually pretty much constant foot traffic between the different between staff and different patrons stuff going by that site.
So we're hoping that will hopefully mitigate some of that risk for sure.
Yeah, hopefully.
Uh, I guess the concern is um, and I I hear you above the gate, uh, but that could also block the police car that's been called down to uh you know, you know, to assist or something like that.
So you know that's a factor to consider.
And I guess uh, you know, you mentioned about insurance.
Um, does the skateboard park when that g opened up um present another additional insurance cost?
Um, yes, it will.
It's not significant though, because uh just the our what if from um we deal with Aon and on the the risk assessment of that compared to everything else, it's not a huge change from where we already lie.
So there will be an increase related, just there's more property to insure, uh, more equipment to insure, but it's not a significant change.
Um on that gate, we do have maintenance on site 24 hours a day.
And so those that number, so whenever if there's an emergency or so or whatnot, they do come through and they can contact our maintenance staff because of the um ammonia plant.
We have to have staff on site all day.
Um so there's always always someone there that can come and open that gate.
Thank you, Counselor Rogers, Councillor McKenzie.
Um thank you.
Yes, thank you for the report.
Um, just on the back of um Councillor Rogers' comment there, and the skate part will is there any way to generate uh revenue from that from like rentals as well, or is it um we've actually received a grant from the Canadian Parks and Recreation Association.
So we're going to do learn to skate programs.
Um, and the plan is to run camps through there in the summer, um, as well as that it was designed in such a fact to potentially have events.
So, one of the pieces they want to be able to do it's at a level, it's being designed at a level so that we can actually have skateboard events.
So there is a plan to have some, it's not looking at as a significant like compared to the rest of the offerings we have, it won't be a significant revenue maker, but there is plans to have some revenue generation from it.
Perfect.
Thank you.
And uh just a comment.
I would love to have a tour one day.
So I will get in touch afterwards.
Thank you, Councillor McKenzie.
And I think uh maybe that would be great for for council as well, just to have an offering and we can discuss that at a later date.
Uh, Mr.
Brown.
That sounds uh that'd be fantastic.
Yeah.
Uh to help us uh in awareness.
And staff, uh just wondering if we could have a discussion at some point about how we might be able to advocate with other municipalities uh who have recreation facilities and the insurance issue just to have the discussion.
I'll bring it up with the West Shore Mayors and CRD, but we're not the only municipal recreation uh organization in the province, and and maybe there is some appetite to uh to have the discussion for insurance similar to what we've done for municipalities.
Um so we've got a recommendation on the table that the committee uh recomm or that uh sorry, the wrong one.
Uh that the committee recommend to council that the draft 2023 West Shore Parks and Recreation Society budget be approved.
They have a mover.
Second.
A seconder with councilor with councilor Lemon.
All in favor?
Any opposed?
Motion carries.
So that was their petitions and delegations.
I believe there are no other petitions and delegations staff just to double check my vision.
I'm having to switch between glasses on and glasses off.
It's that wonderful point in life.
Um and I think we can move to public participation period.
Is there anybody in the room that would like to address the committee of the whole?
I see nobody on the room.
Is there anybody on the phone that would like to address count uh the committee of the whole?
Mayor Tobias, we have no callers at this time.
Not as busy as our last meeting.
So I think we I will turn the chair over to Councillor Brown for Protective Services okay uh no chair's report um I don't believe there's any business arising from previous minutes um and can I get someone to uh um uh move the staff report or the the staff recommendation that the building inspection report uh be received for information councilor Matson and Councilor Rogers all those in favor approve so inspector rose can you update us to what's happening at the West Shore detachment how are the electric vehicles going?
Thank you uh counselor brown uh the electric vehicle, I guess, is in play um we're currently training our staff on the nuances that are associated to the operation of the new Tesla that's been added to the detachment fleet.
It does come with some nuanced differences than your regular vehicle, certainly as many of the operation or ways in which it's operated are voice activated.
And of course, that that's something that we need to adapt to.
We also have loaded a lot of equipment into the vehicle, which doesn't go into a regular uh vehicle for personal use, and so we've had to adapt our equipment and storage.
But by and large, uh the feedback has been pretty positive, certainly from the public.
Some of our officers are, you know, working through those nuanced differences, but the public has been extremely receptive of the vehicle and the movement to the potential for adding e-vehicles to the police fleet.
As you can appreciate, we use a lot of fuel annually, and so any cost savings we can have there is certainly a movement in the right direction.
And it's consistent with both provincial and federal expectations around reducing carbon emissions.
So it's it's a nice addition.
With respect to the detachment uh crime figures for the January 1st uh to 31st period, I can provide a general overview.
And I'll certainly uh if I forget, I'm sure Council Rogers will remind me uh to differentiate some of those mental health calls uh from the town of Uroyal proper uh from those at the hospital, as we've now modified the report to ensure that that's captured uh to see the difference.
Uh so last month uh in View Royal, we had 253 uh total general occurrences uh within the municipality of View Royal, and that's a 5% increase over the same period last year.
182 of those uh were founded offenses, and that represents about a 17% increase over January of last year.
Uh did you say founded occurrences?
Founded, that's correct.
Does anyone else have a not know what that means?
Okay.
I get it, but I'll let you explain.
Uh so we report all of our calls for service to Statistics Canada, and we have to categorize those so they can be compared across jurisdictions.
Um when I say general occurrence, that means somebody called the police and a police file was created.
Uh not all of those police files are reportable uh to Statistics Canada.
Um, for example, something like a bylaw complaint is an occurrence that the police attend.
The file is dispatched and an officer deals with that, but that's not something that's reported to Stats Canada.
It's not included in the crime severity index when calculated annually and compared across jurisdictions.
So the slight difference there is comparing the total number of files that our officers attended in the 30-day period to those that were reported to Stats Canada by way of substantive reportable criminal offenses.
So that would be the difference between the two.
Only 10 of those founded occurrences were violent crime.
And of course, violent crime is inclusive of things like common assaults or uttering threats.
Violent crimes within View Royal did increase from 2019 through 2021.
However, so far in 2022, we have a, or in 2022, sorry, we had a slight decrease overall within View Royal.
If we further look at the types of calls, property crime accounted for 25 founded occurrences, and that's about a 32% increase over the same period last year.
The main offenses captured there include mischief under $5,000, fraud and shoplifting being the top three types of property offenses.
Property crimes decreased from 2019 and into 2020.
There was a slight increase in V Royal in 2021, but fortunately it decreased again in 2022.
In keeping with an earlier question for the previous presenter, when it comes to property crime, and that may be what's a consideration with the new skate park, I can say that that will be an area, of course, that we will patrol.
And despite the presence of the gate, uh, which I'm sure our friends at the fire department will help us uh traverse if needed in case of an emergency, uh, we definitely have the ability to be on foot, and we also have our four-member uh bike unit uh that will certainly spend some time uh in this particular area, uh even more so after hours and at night.
Um if I speak to a couple of the drivers or I guess more common locations of offenses, uh of course the casino is one that we touch on uh each month.
Uh there were 12 uh calls for service there in January, and that's a 250% increase over the same period uh last year.
Uh when we move over to the hospital, uh 14 of the calls for service occurred there, and there's uh no increase from this year over last.
So January last year was also 14.
Of note, only two files, only two of those 14 involve mental health considerations, despite the fact that there were 14 mental health calls overall within View Royal in the month of January.
That is a 40% increase over the January last year.
So specific to the question that came up at Council of the Whole, or sorry, Committee of the Whole from last month, certainly those calls are attributable to View Royal proper and not necessarily the hospital uh specifically I am very happy to report uh despite those mental health calls uh there were no reports of suicidal persons uh within the jurisdiction in the month of January that is what I have uh with respect to the um common statistics of course that we provide at each of the meetings and I'm certainly open to any questions that council may have.
Thank you Inspector Rose does anyone have any questions for the Inspector?
Uh counselor Lemmon Thank you very much thank you Inspector Rose um a couple of questions um one regarding the casino uh and a two hundred and fifty percent increase over last year.
Was the casino open last year at this time?
Yeah.
Yeah I think so maybe just barely, because that's quite alarming.
Um and I'm wondering about uh uh the RCMP have had terrific presence on Burnside Road um in response to, you know, our our request and uh but I I have heard from property owners who on the pr you know next next to the property that or the property that was most impacted, um, saying they're they're not aware of um police presence in the middle of the night in the in the wee hours.
Are you present?
Is there is there what they they hear the roar of the motors and and the gunning of the engines and and uh just wondering if there's more presence at night as well as the ticketing during the day.
That's a tough uh tough question to answer, to be honest, uh Council Lemon.
I I can certainly advise that we have as many officers working during the day and night and throughout that 24 hour period.
Um, where they are in the jurisdiction is sort of call dependent, depending on, of course, the volume and where those um files are being reported as occurring.
Um but each of the officers uh on day shift and night shift are also in designated zones.
So daytime and nighttime, uh the watch commander of the day does assign each person on shift to a particular area on the west shore that we police.
So is there a presence consistently?
Yes.
Is it on a particular street or road each and every night?
I can't speak to that beyond saying, you know, the officers are present where we have an increased volume or calls for service where they're asking for additional patrols.
I can't speak specifically to how much time or you know how many officers are on each road within uh the jurisdiction.
Mayor Tobias, you had a question?
Uh firstly, thanks for your patrols there.
Um, I've noticed um I've had to slow down a few times, and ironically, um there was uh a neighbor that was implicated of the complaint initially uh who got a ticket from uh from so it's obviously working.
I'm not sure if it's slowing people down again.
I'm meeting tomorrow with uh the mayor of Saanich to discuss that whole kind of road because it it is dangerous.
But to uh counselor um Lemon's remarks, I I just live a little bit down from that, and I can certainly hear the the engines gutting.
And I think what what where the safety issue is is somebody either potentially impaired or not used to driving, a little bit wet, uh, bad traction, going around a corner that's slow grade that turns quite sharp, and they're ending up in the rhubarb.
So uh anything that you could do to kind of uh provide a bit of presence at uh after hours, I think is that because coming this way during the day, there is no such thing as speeding because it's pretty much traffic jammed.
So uh it's the after hours part that I think is is the dangerous part.
Um but thank you.
Thank you for your uh your patrols and everything that you're doing.
Counselor Rogers, you had a question?
Yes, thanks.
Uh thanks for the report and and coming back with these statistics relevant to uh on the mental health and and in view.
Um I also want to thank uh the RCP for the ride-along um that uh you invite us to.
It's really very helpful.
And and uh one of the practical examples was uh were um Councilor Brown and and uh management RCMP management managed to sort out the uh enforcement of um uh speeding in the school zones at the equal view elementary so my compliments to to both for getting that addressed and i know the crossing guards there will be uh are is is also very happy that it's been addressed thank you just just one quick comment on the Teslas the uh I know a lot of people have concerns about the well the range of course but I know the vehicles there have have an extra battery pack I believe to to allow for vehicles to be sitting long periods of time with lights uh all the emergency equipment line of course is gonna draw on the battery but what I understand is extra battery packed than a normal person would get buying off a car a lot.
Uh I can speak to that um the Tesla model that we do have the model y does have the extended um battery uh additionally all of the auxiliary equipment that has been installed in that vehicle run from a separate battery so it's not tied to the main battery that's installed um during the manufacturing of that vehicle it's ran from a secondary um battery that's stored in the trunk any further questions if not gonna be a motion to accept the uh inspector's report just just one question so somewhere along the line, I'm gonna be getting a call for a ride along.
Can I ride along in the Tesla?
Uh Councilor Matson, we can definitely facilitate that.
Um, I will caution you though, uh, there's not a lot of room in the passenger seat of the Tesla, uh, unlike some of the other vehicles that we have in our fleet.
Okay, thank you.
I I've lost a few pounds, so I should be all right.
Are you making a motion to accept the inspector's report?
Approved.
Second by counselor Rogers.
Approved moved by Councillor Matson.
Uh all is in favor.
Unanimous.
Thank you, Inspector.
Thank you.
I won't take a ride along.
I've spent enough time in police cars.
Thanks.
The ride along is certainly uh is certainly valuable.
And you know, it's one of the old adages that uh until you've walked a mile in someone's shoes, you can't truly appreciate uh what that path uh can be.
And so we definitely encourage our elected officials and community members, you know, uh under the right circumstances to come and speak with the police to participate in a ride along to gain insight into what our men and women do uh daily so uh thank you to counsel for participating in that and and allowing us to uh to show you what the role does bring chief hirst do you have a report for bylaw fire no okay great uh can he talk to us about his uh our linking up with the sister city in Argentina that just came back that's the end of the uh my my uh committee meeting then.
Thank you, Councillor Brown, and we can uh turn it over to Councillor Lemon.
Thank you very much.
Uh just a um uh uh the Greater Victoria Public Libraries um system we had the the board held its inaugural meeting a couple of weeks ago, and uh we voted for a new chair and vice chair.
New chair of the board is Andrew Appleton, counselor for Oak Bay, and the vice chair is Shahira Carr, who is a citizen rep from Sanich.
Um committee appointments will happen.
I think the next board meetings next week or the week after.
Um committee appointments will happen then.
And I have thus far been on the planning and uh policy and planning committee, and I hope to stay on it because I bring more value there.
Um and uh well we'll see, and and the committee chairs and vice chairs will be selected then too.
I don't I've not decided whether I would let my name stand or not, probably not.
Um, but we'll see.
Um and um you will see on the agenda that um we have a copy of the proposed budget for the GVPL for the coming year.
Um it does reflect an 8.5 percent overall system wide hike, um, bringing it to 22 million lots, lots.
And that would mean a 7% increase for pure oil.
I do hope that you know the committee of the whole will approve it and pass it on to the board or to to council.
And just as an aside, our beloved reading center will be coming to us for a grant in the next couple of weeks or a few weeks.
For those who are unfamiliar with it in general, it's it's very likely the oldest volunteer run, continuously volunteer run library in in British Columbia, I would argue, is 80 years old, still entirely volunteer run and depends pretty much entirely on us, apart from my late fees, um for its for its survival.
I will be asking the CEO of the GVPL if there's a way that they can help the uh I as a on an you know a side conversation a few years ago I had a comp I spoke with Maureen Sawa, who's the CEO, and she said, you know, we can help, you know, to keep it going keep it strong you know bring it you know in any way we can bring it into you know more current modes or whatever we could do so I'm going to I'm going to renew that conversation and see what can be done because it's it's a it's it's a gem um very likely underused often unrecognized but I I think it's I think personally it's it's worth supporting.
And arts commission um Marianne Alto, Mayor of Victoria um is the new uh chair of the arts commission, and she's challenged us as directors on, well not directors, we're trustees, no commissioners, that's what we are, commissioners, to push board members, CRD board members and member municipalities to encourage and celebrate arts and culture within the communities.
And I think a part of that, perhaps not a small part, is that the arts commission, which and and the the role is very much a um supporting small arts organizations, community arts organizations, and and and um approving funding requests that have been um uh have gone through the the eyes of and approval processes of an arts council.
So people who are very familiar with the arts bring it to us and say and say we recommend you approve the funding for this, and we generally do on their recommendation.
Um but there's only nine commissioners, and there that's just over half the representation of all of the the the um the regions and areas and municipalities that are part of the CRD.
So I I think perhaps um this uh request that we encourage um arts and celebration of the arts in the region would also be you know in encouraging the other municipalities and regions and and areas um to participate so at at the last meeting we we um approved six about six hundred thousand dollars in operating grants for smallish um arts organizations across the region and that's my report.
Any questions?
So we will be discussing the budget, etc.
afterwards?
Um I think well, I think that the budget is in, you know, if if there's a request for um the CEO and board chair to come and speak to council, um, I'm sure certainly they would do that.
I don't know that would that's been done before, but um, I know they've come.
No, I was just curious whether was that the chair's report and the item on the agenda for for the library will is another item.
Yes.
Okay.
Yes.
Yes, that was that was my report.
So is is there any questions about my report, and then I will see if there's any questions about well, I do have a library question and it may as well come now then in the budget.
So, how far away are we from getting out of the book business in terms of library and just having it all electronic?
Because I know there's like there's a million dollars for which I guess is mainly new books, et cetera.
And I'm just wondering how that transition's going.
I don't think we'll ever get out of the book business.
Um so I there's not a move to get out of the book business from, but there is a um I mean hard copy books.
Yeah, yeah.
People still read books, you know, people still go to the library.
Yeah, I do.
I pick up a book.
Yeah.
Um, and as for the library's financial plan, um what's your what's your pleasure, people?
Do you do you want to have someone come and speak to it or are you comfortable with with approving it as it is now?
I like to move the staff recommendation that the committee recommended council, the Greater Victoria Public Library 2023 budget and five year financial plan be approved.
Second.
And before we go to vote, if I can uh just add my concern is not about the budget at all for the library.
My concern is that not enough people in View Royal know that they can go to the Greater Victoria Library.
And if there's a way to cross-pollinate our modest library with offerings that would promote the greater Victoria Library or maybe request a book there and have it dropped off there or or what have you, I think there's all kinds of options.
I uh we we the the town invests a lot in the library.
I sign things um uh every month and it's a significant amount of money.
Uh like the West Shore Parks and Recreation, there are some incredible services that were um responsible for governance and and funding.
And I would like, you know, council to do as much as we could to promote it.
That's my point.
If we're gonna spend the money, then let's make sure that everybody knows that they're entitled to.
Um thank you.
Um Councillor McKenzie.
Thank you.
Um I have a question for staff um so how much discretion does council have on these budgets so for the library and equally to the the uh um parks and rec um with regards to the budget is it and the increases council can choose to explore further the details of the budget presented by both organizations we do have obligations to provide an approval of the budget by the end of February.
Okay, so if if council um just wanted to ask questions, I guess, regarding the certain amounts, that's what we would do before making a decision.
We could uh engage the library and have them do a presentation similar to the presentation received today from um from Grant Brown.
I think given the amount, it's quite a significant increase.
I would prefer to have a presentation.
I found the one for Parks and Rec um quite helpful in in seeing the reasoning why.
Sure.
So um that would be my preference.
But sure.
Okay.
That was what I was gonna ask.
We are putting in six hundred thousand dollars a year, so it'd be good to have a presentation in terms of how the money's spent and just to ask whatever other questions we have.
Okay.
All right.
Council Rogers, you had a question?
Yeah.
Um, well, see how the motion goes, and I I thought the uh the information uh provided um um basically said it all, and I think one of the key points, of course, is the uh the province's failure uh to increase its amount, they haven't increased it since 2009, and it uh it's still what six hundred and forty-two thousand since that time, no percent increase, and um uh despite the pleas um from all the municipalities.
Uh so I I know it's a it's a steep call, um, but uh I think um uh the report indicates and gives a good rationale as to to why that's uh that's this the situation.
Um with respect to the reading center, um uh in the years uh gone by uh we know that um um the unionized GVPL is really not going to respond to a volunteer um organization um and how they uh uh so I I I know we've we've had that discussions when I've been on on the uh uh library board we've continued to have that discussion with uh no success.
We've gone to the province to no success.
So um I think it's still going to be on our hook um as far as the reading center is concerned.
I hold no hope um despite best intentions.
So I'm I'm certainly uh I understand the the the um the need for a a rear a report but I'm happy with but it's been presented.
Okay, so called question all those in favor of but that so are we approving the budget or or are we requesting a presentation before we approve the budget okay all right all those in favor approving the budget all those opposed i want to report first to be clear the motion is that we're recommending the council that they approve the budget right not really approve the budget uh at the end it's referring so all we're doing is referring this back okay council for legal approval at the same at the same time, I recommend that we could um uh I don't do we require a motion to have them come and do a presentation.
Council Lemon, your best.
I think I can I think I can simply just ask.
Okay.
Okay.
Prior prior to the council meeting that this shows up on.
Okay.
Perfect.
Thank you.
Okay, then I then I can screw it.
Okay, great.
And I'm passing the chair to Mayor Tobias.
Thank you.
Um this is a fun week, of course.
If you don't know, we have a couple of extra days of uh of finance and and budgeting and some some good discussions and uh uh I said so in my email, but thank you very much for staff for reporting for getting that tremendous amount of work together, uh, including you know the options that are available and really made it clear to us to discuss.
Um I just finished uh a financial round with the province, so I'm just looking forward now to do this one.
Um, but I'm I'm in gear for it.
Um I've reached out to a number of mayors in the area, and just so council and staff are aware, um those mayor meetings are are uh almost monthly now, and that includes Suk, Machosen, Langford, and Callwood.
And there's no agenda for it, it.
It's just getting to know each other with wanting to find out more.
Good things come out of these things, mutual aid agreements, CREST cooperation.
One of the items on the topic right now is the potential of doing some.
Corridor where they touch other communities, doing some cooperative looks at what that might develop as.
For instance, it could be mutually beneficial if West Shore Parks and Rec puts in an arts and culture place, and there's a hotel that's required that happens to sit on View Royal property where we've got the space, being able to have those discussions as a complete community to me makes a whole lot of sense.
I think if we treat the boundaries as a wall, we're not going to keep people happy, including our own residents.
And I particularly see that as important on the Esquimall Admiral's Road corridor with our borders with First Nations there as well.
So I don't have any nefarious agenda here to say is that we're talking.
Has already invited Leanne and I into a cooperative session with Langford about kind of the Callwood Triangle and just having some open discussions there about it.
Callwood has also reached out to the same consultant, uh PhD Eileen, who's the um who's currently, I believe, doing the negotiations or coming up with some data for the Esquimalt Victoria policing scenario that, if you've seen the news, has been kind of a bone of contention that's bounced back and forth through the province.
So, what she specializes in uh is municipal data.
And uh so Callwood is hosting a mayor's discussion because uh all of us newbie mayors have questions about how our DEDI is being used and and that it's being used uh consistently.
So the first meeting will be for mayors, and then the second meeting will be for councils, and they'll organize that but it's just uh a comparison of of the strategic documents and data that we have on our shelves and I'm quite looking forward to it because it's going to be a fascinating dive deeper into uh into where our data lives and how we can better make use of it.
That's all I have uh for kind of an update uh uh lastly um there is a large concern right now uh with the biosolids for um CRD and uh we've got a meeting tomorrow, as most of you might be aware and watching the news.
Um Lafarge, the way we handle our biosolids from the waste treatment, the initial plan and only plan was to send them to a cement uh processing plant uh called Lafarge in in uh Surrey, and they would be used in the manufacture of cement.
That plant has not been able to accommodate all the biosolids historically, uh, is closed more often than not, and is just coming out with a four-week remediation plan where it might be able to accept our solids again.
CRD, because it had no other options, uh, has been landfilling it against provincial regulation since that time.
Um, so that's not a happy place to be that we're landfilling 10 tons of biosolids a day, meaning that it's landfilled sand, landfilled sand, so it's eating up a lot of space really quickly.
Uh CRD has passed a notion of uh or a motion that uh no biosolids would be spread on lands in the CRD.
Um that is currently going against provincial directive that they're saying in order to create a a circular economy, we need to do that.
And of course, none of this stuff goes on agricultural land, even though they are.
So the only option that we had at the time um was to truck the biosolids to Nanaimo, where they did permit the spreading of biosolids on land.
Um I'm not sure how that will go over with Nanaimo.
Um, however, that's kind of an option that got voted in.
One of the promising things, and we we are literally between Iraq and I don't know what hard place, but um one of the interesting options that is emerging is gasification of the biosolids.
It tremendously reduces the mass of it.
And if you could think of something like literally compost that you would buy, that's what it's coming out as, as well as eliminating many of the heavy metals.
Um, so one of the things that Vancouver did is invest heavily in a gasifier.
And there's no good option here.
There's no brilliant option that you make all risks go away immediately.
But even Europe is turning to gasification and creating biochar.
This project is magical for growing absolutely anything.
Um and uh is relatively safe, particularly with monitoring, right?
To ensure that it's tested before it goes into a bag.
So the city of Vancouver now is in the position that this gasifier is in the point of making money or the potential to.
So right now the CRD pays to ship all of this stuff wherever it goes and has to pay people to take it.
So if we get to a point where we don't have to ship, that lowers our carbon footprint from just the shipping because it's shipping to a ferry, the dump truck's going onto a ferry, the ferry's burning carbon all the way to Vancouver and then driving to Surrey and then coming back, right?
So any way that we can reduce that will be good.
So staff is coming to us next month with some data on a gasification plant and what that might look like.
Some of the product is also being sold for the um used like coke and the um construction of steel right now.
So some of the biochar is being used for that.
So if you hear the difference between biosolid and biochar, you now know.
Um if I've helped educate anybody in the process, and uh just looking forward to coming with a long-term solution uh for for um our problem that is not going to go away.
That's only going to increase with our population.
Uh, there needs to be some stability and it affects us.
Uh so I just wanted to add that.
Um, and uh there is an opening of the Victory Hill Daycare that I'm attending on Sunday, which is, I believe, in your neighborhoods for three of the counselors here that live in the harbor district.
Um, so that's uh gonna be happening Sunday with I think the uh Minister for Education as well.
Um so I had a what time are we looking at?
About quarter to five.
I'm gonna go through things really quick because I know Don's eager to get on to financial stuff, and uh as is Kim.
Um there's a couple of slides that I want to highlight.
Would it be possible to bring up my committee restructure plan?
Thank you.
And you could gently flick through this, and when I say stop, maybe that'd be the best way to go.
Otherwise, I'm used to tabbing through it myself.
Uh so yeah, so the rationale for uh the committee restructure as this uh as discussed.
We've decreased the number of committees uh we've had for the last decade.
Uh there are now just two uh remaining committees.
Uh we've referred and I've heard back from uh the committees and kind of an open, I didn't want a um, you know, a motion.
I wanted people to say positive negatives for the experience they've had on committees.
Um and the current structure consumes significant staff resources, and I don't want an expansion of committees to further um uh impede uh those those resources that could be used in other places, and I don't want to burn staff out.
Um so the problem with condensing committees is that some of our applicants may just be interested in environment or parks or rec.
Um and when we combine them, they're we're not best able to use some of their talents or their interests, and they're donating their time.
So that needs to be uh better defined.
Um, and too many meetings are canceled.
We've got people that are coming out to volunteer their time, and meetings are being canceled where they would like to dig into things that matter to the town, and I believe that staff and council could use them.
Uh, next slide.
So what I wanted to come up with was something we could discuss.
And you know, the end state for today that I'm requesting is to go away and look at it.
I'm very willing to take people's comments back and retool this thing to a point where it's workable that we can start to actually get into the business of using those committees and the committee members as uh uh with as much respect as possible.
Um so um yeah, we want to be able to encourage uh committee members uh to talk to their neighbors to get out and see the things that the council is concerned about.
If you're in an instances for somebody who's going to be on the transportation committee, I'd like to see a variety of people there.
Some that bike, some that might have accessibility problems, some that commute by bus every day.
Um but having having folks in there that never have used a bus or rode a bike, I don't think is going to add us the variety.
You'll also see I'm I'm recommending a youth member on each one of the committees because I think uh uh many other municipalities do it.
I think it's a great way to get folks involved with um the exciting prospect of committee work for later on in their career.
Next slide, please.
So the current advisory structure, we all know and love them.
So they're the community development advisory uh committee, CDAC, and the Parks Recreation Environment Advisory Committee.
Where certain things come up that don't fit, we try to slide them into either both those groups or one of those groups with uh with something to go ahead.
Next slide, please.
So here's our number of committees.
And granted, yes, it is based on population, but even compared to Machosen, we have fewer boards and committees than a population of 5,000.
Next slide, please.
So there's just another look at kind of our breakdown for boards.
So we've got committees and a board of variants, and there's kind of how the other ones stack up.
And I tried to do some analysis on who has what.
Does everybody have, and they're all over the place.
Does everybody have an environment committee?
There's no consistent things to kind of bleed across that would make sense to it.
However, there are some, and counselor Brown has been, as I'll get to later, uh appointed to an intermunicipal committee for accessibility that's provincially required.
What a wonderful way to do things to share resources with Callwood that's very, very well run by somebody who and chaired by somebody who who has uh challenges with accessibility and has been an enormous benefit in consulting uh new developments and building and making sure that they're acceptable.
Next slide, please.
Uh so need for committee effective restructure.
I I think we collectively sit on 25 boards with no real interface to the public.
So I sit on a lot of CRD boards and wonder where a report that I would like public feedback in, and I've got nothing.
Really no way to say I want some opinions or options on this that's now before CRD.
And I've got no real way to exercise that with our current committee structure.
And and as we've seen, I think with the convoy protests and everything else, that the lack of information provided by all levels of government provide the misinformation and speculation.
Because if you don't know the truth and we don't have it ready and we haven't communicated it, and people haven't been involved with the process, they're gonna go to Facebook or wherever to find the truth, quote unquote.
So it's important that we allow as many opportunities for citizen engagement as we possibly can.
And one of the methods of doing that is committees.
Who has sat on a committee for counsel before they became a counselor?
And it doesn't have to be within municipality.
Has anybody sat on a committee before they became a counselor?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So not a lot of committees outside of the town in View Royal are options for committees that are part of something.
All I'm saying is it's a it's good for the leadership of the future to have access and experience in those committees.
Um, and that's my point there.
Next slide, please.
So here's some of the benefits that we've gone down, and all of these benefits have come out of the provincial government's recommendations about having uh community advisory committees.
So there's two types of kind of real committees that both the community charter and the Local Government act are concerned with.
One of these are community advisory councils, and they're led by uh a counselor.
We have a counselor liaison, and the other one is a standing committee that the mayor appoints, that there needs to be one counselor to one each resident that is on there to create a balance.
Next slide, please.
And next slide, please.
So the restructure will require more uh after working hours, perhaps for for uh the staff concerns.
That if we restructure this, what are we going to look at?
And I think as we dig into this, um, staff directors would be at the request of the chair or co-chairs of those committees that would be arranged at a date uh prior to the meeting, like a week before.
And it may just be for before a particular agenda item or maybe for the whole meeting, but that I'll leave that up to the committees to request and advise.
Extra funding required to support extra the extra work that might be involved with uh having staff resources that are not directors because they're salary to come in and take minutes and be able to support them.
And uh, you know, the there there may be concern about the benefit uh from a staff perspective that these committees would actually bring.
Next slide, please.
So the residents' concerns, and there's always different sides of these uh equations, is kind of a lack of openness because we haven't uh allowed participation in many committees, and we haven't turned over the people in those committees because we haven't had a lot of applicants to the committees.
Lack of transparency, and they want opportunities to provide meaningful input.
Next slide.
Council needs were being met, then we could determine the frequency by the chair or the counselor liaison and co-chair.
As well, there's an opportunity for staff to use those committees to bounce ideas off.
Next slide, please.
One of the things that I think many committee serving committee members have brought up is the lack of onboarding that's done consistent.
For instance, many have really wanted that if we're doing gonna sit on a committee for parks and rec, that like a Saturday be spent or morning be spent on the history of parks and rec.
Here's what we've got, maybe a walkabout, uh, the same for uh environment, the same for for other areas.
So there's a good familiarity.
And this is a great way for staff to get us going on the right foot with minimum impact.
Uh cracked into that would be minute taking, Roberts Rules of Orders, how to chair a meeting, expectations, all of those other things associated with it.
Next slide, please.
So our current assignments right now, and we can whiz through these pretty uh effectively, but these are the things that the mayor has to do when they're inaugurated and come up with a plan for kind of everybody and what what they would basically sit on and then try to run some sort of logic behind that.
And of course, I did that with consulting with each counselor of their likes and wants, and tried to keep some consistency while opening up opportunities for new counselors to also share that space.
Next slide, please.
So it doesn't always fit in.
I've got a whole lot of things that I don't necessarily want on there, but some of those things come with being mayor, if you're not aware, and I tried to be able to balance it out so that we had a counselor that was on the uh hospital board or the housing corporation board and the meeting just rapidly goes between directors and there's no possible way to to have another appointee for that.
But I've also been appointed as co-chair of the environmental services with Barb Dezurjan from Esquimall and on the governance committee.
And the rest of it I think uh remains the same uh as uh as what we signed off on and announced uh uh on the inauguration.
Next slide please.
If something amazes you in here, Councilor Brown, then I'd be surprised, but I think you're aware of everything on there.
You may be on other committees, but they're not for necessarily a town representative.
And if they're not and they're not reflected on there, uh the then you can just tell me and we can add those things, but those the something that we'd have to go over if you're representing the town on other committees.
Next slide.
And this is for uh counselor Qualitation.
Next slide, please.
And you're and if you're an alternate, I've also listed you there as a gentle reminder of your responsibilities that you might uh have forgotten, and that includes for me too.
Next slide, please.
Next slide.
And next slide.
And next slide.
So that's where I've kind of broken it down into a bit of a portfolio.
Not everything fits eloquently in each one of the portfolios, but at least it um if there's something to do about environment, I know that I'll could talk to counselor McKenzie as an interface to it.
If it was something to do with uh protective services, I could talk to Councilor Brown.
And that would be something that most people would see.
So it's not just the CRD.
There are other certain boards there certainly, but I see this as a resource for both residents and staff too.
Next slide.
So uh the way I broke down and I put an actual mandate that's a little bit more expanded than our current mandates and tried to explore them, but basically it pushes through each one of the committees.
The big changes are there that the the only people to really counsel the meeting are is the chair of that meeting.
And and to defined to define the role of counselor.
When I say chair for that meeting and they would uh um really set that committee to work uh and work with the co-chair uh who may be chairing the meeting but it's the the councillor chair's responsibility to ensure that staff uh that the they set and distribute the minutes with their uh or agenda with their council uh ensures minutes are taken uh that they approve the minutes meaning they're signing them off on behalf of an approval process that the committee approves um and submits the minutes for staff for for posting on the website and the chair sets the uh agenda for council as a whole like we're doing now so you would have input into setting that agenda and if you didn't see anything on the agenda um then yeah then that's something that you work up with staff to make sure that uh uh things arising from the committee would be added to it and I won't go through all of these you could probably whiz through uh a bunch but they're in the agenda package uh and just if you could go through to the end slide uh Doctor So what uh if uh today I'm just asking uh for uh the committee of the whole uh to receive it and recommend that council receives it as well as uh recommending it be pushed to committees for their review of it and and input.
I know we have staff's input coming up.
Um, but uh yeah, some some discussion.
Um approve a motion to adopt after it is refined, um uh and prepare uh intake applications, uh, set the date for those applications to come in as a deadline.
Uh and uh you know it comes to for us to actively promote it, uh not only through staff resources and news clipping, but social media with a pre-formatted communication to uh here's the site you need to hit, here's why it's valuable, and also some indication of the time and the value that we place on it.
Um select candidates.
If we wanted to go with seven for each, we'd be looking at 35 candidates.
Frequency could change.
Counselor Lemon might uh only want to meet three or four times a year, um, depending on on the tempo of arts and culture.
Uh, but maybe uh if if council were to refer something to them, they would have a meeting for that thing.
Um set the date for onboarding, have an onboarding session, and then set the meeting dates and kind of carry on for that and review in one year.
So it would be on a cycle of continuous improvement that we would do it.
So I'm gonna stop now and see uh if there's questions, concerns, uh a small amount of support, debt against it.
Councilor Brown.
Just to staff, I there was ads in the time in the Gazette, uh I think two weeks in a row, I believe.
How many people actually applied to those ads?
So I'm wondering what how many how much interest there actually is just a rough number I believe there were about uh one or two and I think maybe one or two reapplications.
And I would think in honesty, it would be something that builds.
I mean, if the message gets out that actually I'm learning something and having um you know feel like I'm being valued in this committee, that word will probably spread out.
But if it's the opposite, then I don't I I think we we will continually have trouble getting on new people on committees.
Um because in in the current structure uh for committees, we're supposed to refresh that entire committee every so often, right?
There's there's a time-limited spend on each one of the committees, but we haven't had the throughput through and the interest um uh in there, so we haven't had that constant refresh.
And it's not that those people that are on that committee can't apply for a committee, they can't apply for the same committee uh to be given consideration.
Any other thoughts, questions, concerns?
So go to counselor McKenzie and then counselor Matson.
Um so in general, I'm supportive of the the number of councils, uh councils, committees.
Um but what uh I'm concerned with is the role of the counselors and being the chair, um, mainly because the feedback I received from a few of the members was that they want to be the ones setting the agenda and with new ideas that they want to present to council.
And I I fear that having counselors as the chairs um might be um uh coming up with the discussion points too much, like uh there's too much involvement for it to be an objective advisory committee to us.
I also do have a question, if possible, for staff.
And is that something that counselors could take over instead, or is there a reason why that is?
Staff had two roles.
Um there was a staff member appointed, usually the director of the department, who would respond to issues of their expertise and ensure that the committee was informed about policy and the like.
And then of course there was a minute taker.
Okay, thank you.
So I guess my thinking is um potentially that the advisory part that staff play perhaps could come at a later point.
Maybe they don't have to be at every meeting and that recommendations then go up.
Thank you, Councillor McKenzie.
And I I think you bring up good points, and it's something that I um thought about quite deeply before.
And I was um in 2015, I was a member of the uh planning committee, and then after that, um uh elected in chair, and then I left, not because I really wanted to leave.
I thought I was having a good time and I was still learning more, but I also wanted to leave the door open for some new voices to come in.
And I thought that turnover was important.
So that was that's just my perspective.
On the issue of the role of the counselor, maybe there's a better word than chair.
The counselor is the person that is there for the resident person that is elected the chair.
If there's a turnover, if there's um a question, if there's a diffusion of responsibility, who submits the minutes, or has that's the role of the counselor.
The counselor should not be shaping debate or participating in the debate.
The counselor should set the tone and the and the ability, enable that count uh uh chairperson to do their job to effectiveness.
So it might start off that the counselor chair is the initial chair for the meeting before one's elected, so they organize their committee and then sit back.
And I'm okay to define that and put as much structure around that as we want, but I think that may well vary depending on personality and and and how we fit that.
Any other thought on that, Councilor Brown?
Yeah, it's it's to me, yeah, the title of the counselor on that committee is important because um it's not right to have an advisory committee, and and we're chairing that advice, so I I agree with council, Counselor McKenzie.
Uh uh it could be called a facilitator or whatever you want to call or just call counselor.
But I agree there should be non-voting and they shouldn't be the chair of that committee.
If anybody wants to recommend a better word for me than then I've got I'm happy with that, counselorman.
Chair, I think one of the advantages of a counselor there who's also the chair of that that uh you know associated committee on Cal is they should have a firm enough grasp of a number of things, and it actually forces them to have a better have good grasp of the items that are coming on the agenda that is set in conjunction with things that council wants as well as things that the committee members want, that they can discuss, put you know, for most things put forward.
This is what's council's thinking on these items just as an information item for you know to the members of the of the committee.
And similarly, that person would be the one at the minutes come to the council or committee of the whole to explain what the committee's thoughts were.
And so versus uh someone who's actually responsible for you know you know, one who's responsible for chairing the committee.
I agree totally that it's a facilitation role as opposed to a you know a chair role.
Um, the other part that I I always have concerns about is if we don't get enough volunteers, and so I would there'd be think there'd be an expectation that not only what staff does, but also members of council go out to people that they know have interest in those areas to apply.
And if we find that people aren't applying and and there isn't an interest, if it for if nothing else, it will we'll be able to say to the community we gave it our best shot to do what we said at election time is to get more community input.
So even if it doesn't work, I don't think it would be a failure, but I think there's lots of opportunities for us to make this work.
Thank you, Councillor Metz and Councillor Rod.
Yeah, uh thanks for the um uh you know the overhead report I haven't had uh a real chance to have a look at uh staff's concerns um uh but the quick look that I did have I think we can address them part of part of the the concern that uh council had was um cost so um you know to try and offset that cost or that concern about cost was uh therefore uh and you know I think it's important to have a staff as a resource there um but um and you know we've seen other municipalities uh have uh the committee structures doing the minute taking machosen highlands.
So we're just we're small like them.
I think we could do it um and we've done it in the past and uh with with considerable success.
So it's a cost thing.
And if that's going to be a barrier, we do it.
Um the um I I like the uh the different committees, and quite frankly, when you consider CDAC has transportation, planning, heritage, arts, and then all they get is two hours every two months.
Um I think that's far too short a time when they're dealing with really complex matters.
When they've got something like a major uh development proposal and they're supposed to do the transportation and planning, they got no time.
So one drops off, they don't do it.
Um, I'd be much happier to have four people doing transportation alone and separate, and knowing that the the assessment and the evaluation got done on behalf of the community and and the residents were uh involved and uh an asset to both staff and the council.
Um, in terms of uh council, I agree.
Um the uh we don't really have to be chair, we can be a facilitator.
Um we had extraordinary chairpersons um uh in the past, and and I look to uh to seeing those kind of uh skilled individuals help us along.
I see it as a team.
The council is a liaison, you know, who just shops up and sits on the corner, doesn't give a balance, and I think that's a critical perspective that we are able to help them understand the balance and the pros and cons to the issue beyond um you know any printed material they get.
And one of the key aspects of training it's more than an orientation, this is training.
These uh I hope that um you know that when we put these together that we respect these individuals by giving the training so they understand the transportation plan the active plan so they understand the issues in the community that they've gone out and done the walk so um and you see that was one of the problems um and that one of my frustrations in in the current community structure I think this is visionary it's exciting let's rock and roll thank you counselor so I'm hearing that um we need to change from chair to facilitator which I'm I'm fully in support of and I can make that change.
So let's go to Councillor Lemon and then Councillor McKinsey yeah, just quickly, um, yes chair I would have been happy with liaison, but but once it was defined as us sitting in a corner quietly, um, I d I it put me off.
But I but I think we actually are a liaison.
I I don't see us having a role of you know, up there with our whiteboard facilitating.
Um I see this being the committee's committee, and we are there as as a resource, um, to my mind.
But I would also like to see um alternates too for for you know eat with with each of us having a committee.
Um there's possibility of somebody's sick or away or whatever, um, I would like to see alternates made.
Thank you.
And uh just to respond to that before we go to counselor McKenzie, I think there's um a challenge that we had too many counselors on too few committees, right?
And then we've got the issue of alternates.
And what I'm proposing is that and we can't realistically, if we want to do in-house sessions, accommodate them all at the same time on the same night.
So the concept of having right, uh, so what's wrong with having them distributed over the week?
And the committee decides here's your window of the week that you can get together.
Now, if the counselor can still not support that because they may be ill or out of town, um, I think counselor Brown or I could hop in as an alternate because counselor Brown is not assigned to a hard committee right now.
Most of them are are are at different times, and or I can fill it.
So we'll be your kind of constant alternates throughout the the process.
Councilor McKenzie um yeah so the toy I also like liaison but um also throwing out the word champion I don't know if that would be um so yeah and then the other things I would just potentially we can consider is the addressing the costs um concerns so maybe counselors can do the minutes and have less involvement of the staff for that reason.
And it could because if counselors are attending then we can also help provide some of that context as well.
So I don't think staff need to attend every meeting and perhaps we can take on the minutes as so we're not um just sitting in the corner.
That I like that role and uh right now the way I I I proposed it was that the committee um would uh kind of elect its own secretary with people um that would do it and the counselor would look it over to make sure it passed the test.
Thank you.
If we have a hybrid meeting and just to define uh anybody who doesn't live on Microsoft Teams 24 and seven, like I do.
Um, you can have one or two computers open and record and transcribe, right?
So it catches everything that's going on in the room real time if staff wanted to review it and QA it, or you wanted to cut and paste what somebody said into it.
We didn't have that technology a few years ago, but we do now, and it's available to us.
So I think there's an advantage of doing that.
So the the uh McKenzie or uh Councilor McKenzie, what I would suggest is that we leave that open, but this the secretary comes from the committee.
If the counselor wants to do it, that's great.
Maybe a committee member really wants to do it.
I think we apply too much structure on it, then it might backfire.
But just to say we don't require staff to to take the minutes, will um you know, be of savings to to us and probably help staff out as well for timing, if that's amenable.
Um counselor.
Yep, and just when it comes to a big zoning issue or something, then obviously there's a great opportunity to bring all the people together, the committees together to hear one presentation.
So there are certain things that a staff member will have to present, and it's big enough to present to everybody, so you could simply have they could come in for that presentation and then still have separate meetings after that.
And the other thing, just following up on Councillor McKenzie, I know she just wants to be able to say we are the champions.
Thank you, Councillor Matts and Councillor Rudd.
Well, we know the theme song now.
Okay.
Um staff raised a uh a good point that um it it can't be the chair that um approves the minutes.
The councilor doesn't approve the minutes, it would be the committee uh that would have to obviously approve the the minutes of what happened at that their meeting.
So that that's a valid point.
And um uh I I still have faith with um and hope that um the the all important accessibility committee uh that we have to look at um can be done intermunicipally with uh the skills of um uh that we have in in the West Shore.
Thank you, Councillor Rogers.
So I'm not gonna um put any motion on the floor right now.
What I do want to hear from is um uh any staff concerns that uh they have about the structure.
So I'd invite staff.
Also staff recommended that we discuss have this discussion on on this at the uh strategic planning which seems like a good idea.
Absolutely yeah I'm not in a hurry to get this done I am rather get it right than I am in a rush to get everything in place because as it stands now the two current committees just stay uh if we need to do something as a council but I think there's general agreement that we want them to stay there until we replace it with a something else so where it's not that we're without uh having committees right now um but staff uh welcome you to um provide the report thank you mayor to buyas um the the report identifies what we saw as perhaps challenges in the design of the committees that you presented um the obvious one we've council has already discussed the membership engaging the public enough to have enough members of the public to participate and um you know i would hope that it be a true public participation um the chair you've already discussed as well we are concerned that um in past, even in the liaison role, I have had uh comments from committee members as well as staff that the liaison was dominant in the meeting, and that was seen to be um far more than a liaison role.
And if we are to inspire our citizens to participate fully, that kind of domination will impede success.
And so we want to make sure that council understood that concern.
Um in terms of minutes, um, you know, while it is staff time, we are concerned that there be a proper record of the meeting.
And from a statute perspective, depending on the status of this committee, either the minutes have to be done by a process where there's confidence in the outcome by the corporate officer, or the committee needs to be watered down to a point where that's no longer a concern.
Approval of the minutes.
Again, Councillor Rogers already pointed out that it is the committee's role to approve their minutes.
It cannot be the chair.
And that's particularly true if the chair is going to be doing the minutes.
Um quorum, we need to understand when will a committee meet if few members of the committee are in attendance.
You know, if if if uh 80% of the committee is not there, can you have a bona fide meeting of that committee?
That all by itself is a challenge because it's no longer the committee that meets, it's a couple of folks that have a dialogue.
Um we try to strictly adhere to that by counseling meetings where a quorum is not achieved, and we believe that that should also be the process in your future, in the future of these committees.
The accessibility committee is is one that we are we we have been working with other communities to understand what can be set up that meets the legislation.
We understand that uh Sydney has an intermunicipal committee that addresses accessibility issues.
We understand that Callwood has a committee that also addresses accessibility issues, but the legislation is very specific in terms of the makeup of the committee, the rule, um members that have disabilities, uh members that are indigenous, and so we have been working with other communities on the West Shore and elsewhere to establish a common uh ground for our communities.
And so we will be reporting to council in that vein in the near future.
And those are our comments.
Thank you, Kim.
No, uh appreciated.
Um if you check out um page 31 a broken down quorum uh and they're essentially a verbatim off of the procedure that was there before.
It's a smaller print.
But yeah thank you for your input and uh I think there needs to be discussion some as well around expectations of counselor and their role uh more inclined.
I've also put in the uh procedure that at any time if any committee member has a concern about a counselor overstepping bounds that we've laid out then they can come directly to myself and uh and and have a discussion there.
And that that's just good practice anyway.
Counselor Brack.
Yeah workload you have to consider uh count council members workloads as well i know Jerry has her library Damien has his parks and rec on Friday I had the intermediate municipal disability advisory committee on Friday I had the South Island Prosperity Partners meeting today and I have the Crest meeting tomorrow so there's three committee meetings right there so uh anyway that's just my two cents worth but counselor Brown you don't have any committees on this structure that you're gonna have to actually chair.
16 years and and does a really good job.
So um you know, you talk about sharing resources amongst uh municipalities, I think that's a great idea.
Um anyways, you know, select again.
I got the crest meeting tomorrow.
So there's another uh you know, downtown Mary Gold Hotel, 3 30 in the afternoon.
I mean, you know, it's it's time consuming and and and we don't want to burn out staff, counselors, even community members.
Absolutely.
Right now they're they're only meeting um January, March, September, November, and May.
Right.
So I I I think of a two-hour meeting that's spread out over those times.
Granted, you know, it might be on top of your schedule, but I I would propose that that's probably like for a meeting.
Well I like the I like I like the idea of uh the flexibility to like you say have meetings bi-monthly quarterly that's good because rather than setting it up every month at the same time it doesn't always work.
Thank you Councilor Brown any other further comments Counselor Roger?
Yeah thanks I think the um you know the issue of quorum um can be a obviously a challenge particularly when we were going through the COVID uh situation and um uh I think the uh I think the structure should build in some flexibility where um the council um champion can work with the committee chair and it can be the these meetings can be at the call of the chair.
So if if the quorum didn't work that day, that minute, then there's a uh uh the ability to be more flexible and fit get the work done, get the information back to uh the council.
And I wouldn't really, you know, put so much onus on that the meeting has to be here or physically.
If if that's not convenient, I think the committees should be running exactly the way we are, and if it's um uh a child care uh or family member care issue or transit time that they were able to do that online as uh as an ability, and many of the committees have done that for the past little while anyway.
So I think that's another way uh in order to ensure quo.
Council Rogers.
Thank you.
So just to you keep the uh momentum going here, um, when's the uh strategic planning and when do we get uh have this discussion again in the March 6th is when it will have appeared on your calendars.
Okay.
So we may have to do a long meeting.
Okay, we can do that then.
So um if it's uh if there are no further questions or comments on it, and there's certainly be time to discuss this uh both uh at council and at the uh at the next meeting.
Um, can I get a mover that the committee recommend to council uh the mayor's proposed view Royal Advisory Committee restructure um and that it be referred to our current committees for feedback as well?
Council Rogers.
Sorry, I would just take it straight to strategic planning.
There's we've got more to work out before it goes to the advisory committee.
Okay, very well.
I'm looking at it going to strategic planning.
Was that a motion to?
Yeah, I'll second that.
Okay, so motion as amended is that the committee recommend or that the committee uh recommend to council uh that the mayor's proposed view royal advisory committee restructure be referred to the strategic planning session held on the sixth of March.
All in favor.
Any opposed?
Motion carries.
Now we're down to a CAO update.
Thank you, Mayor Tobias.
I don't have a presentation.
If you have questions, staff is here to respond, but otherwise, a motion to proceed would be appropriate.
Oh, and I should advise you that dinner has arrived.
It's uh been set up in the committee room.
Thank you, Campbell.
Move proceed.
Uh second, and I have a question.
Uh go ahead.
Now's a good time before we call.
Okay, thank you.
Uh, thanks for the report.
Um, fairly encouraging to hear all the uh the things that are going on.
Um, and also really um encouraged about um the town's uh staff's work with uh transit on bus shelters.
So really great to see the one at The S Lake, thank goodness about time.
And um what other locations are have staff worked with um uh transit to install bus shelters?
Uh through the chair, we don't have any specifics just yet, but we are in talks at BC Transit every every year.
Uh they come up with uh they are they approach municipalities with respect to bus stops and we uh deal with it at that time.
But I don't have any at the top of my head at this time.
I know that they've done, sorry, I know they've done the work around the handy dart, we put in about uh three best stocks or if not wrong there.
So that's uh obviously a tied in benefit from from that.
But congratulations to get T Slake.
Thank you, Councillor Rogers.
I'll pass on to Staff.
Thanks.
Counselor Brown, I think was first, and then Councillor McKenzie, please.
Yeah, just a quick question.
They I know there's been some significant bylaws come up this week, and I just wonder where we're at.
Uh a closing date for the uh but new bylaw enforcement officer and um when we might expect that to be filled.
Well the process generally is quite long.
Um we post generally for two to three weeks, uh short list interviews.
So I wouldn't expect uh a replacement for probably close to six weeks.
We do have already a line on some promising candidates.
Thank you.
I had a similar question.
Council McKenzie.
Um, so what if there is a gap between um the previous bylaw officer and uh recruiting the new one, what happens in between?
We uh try to make use of the existing staff and the RCMP if there's a serious issue.
Otherwise, the uh vacancy doesn't represent a reduction in service.
Or you could volunteer, Council McKenzie.
Um one point that I took as I was reading through the uh the cost for bus shelters is I think what I paid for my first house uh for a very small thing.
They're really expensive, aren't they?
Yes, it takes into account the bus pad as well, concrete bus pad.
They oftentimes have sleeves for solar power and that, but they're they're pretty scooking compared to many, many years ago for sure.
Yeah.
Yeah, absolutely.
And uh one related question about bus shelters is we're missing one now um in West Burnside because it got a taken out by a car.
Is that covered by insurance or yes, it is?
Thank you, I.
Uh Councilor Brown.
Yeah, we just um what I was saying uh the manager of C or D bylaw, there was occasions where we entered into short-term contracts with other municipalities to provide bylaw services.
So just the thought that that might be an interim measure.
You get someone that's you know fully trained.
Uh I know they'd have to do some upgrade on knowledge of U Royal probably, but um uh it's was quite successful.
City Victoria, we did it with them before, and Sanich and other municipalities occasionally.
Thank you.
I appreciate it.
Thank you.
Any further questions on the CAO report?
Uh seeing the seat.
Move receipt.
Move receipt.
Seconder.
Uh councillor Rogers, second.
All in favor.
Any opposed?
None opposed.
I was hoping to get here quicker, Don, just to so you're aware.
So we've got a budget variance and project update report 31st of receipt.
Move receipt.
Any secondary seconder?
With that.
Yeah.
Seconder.
Uh all in favor?
None opposed.
And then we've got deliberations on the 2023 to 2027 financial plan.
Recommendation.
Yes, Mayor Tobias.
I was wondering if perhaps we want to take perhaps 15 minutes, comfort break to perhaps uh stretch our legs, grab a plate, inhale, and and uh carry on our afternoon session and then delve into the evening session.
But carry on the afternoon session by that I mean get into items uh well on my count uh my agenda is item C.
I know items may have been added, but mine is uh the the uh 2023-2027 five-year financial plan deliberations, which would be the introduction and the overview by our director of finance, and perhaps if time permits, get into some non-core projects.
It may not permit, but uh a 15-minute break for for a bio break and some food, and then finish up our afternoon session before the evening session and perhaps a a little bio break after item item C and before we get into s into uh the evening portion at 7 p.m.
Uh I I like that idea but council uh yeah Mayor Tobias um the I'm wondering if we can do a little rejigging of the agenda we have one person here um he's just stepped out who is here specifically for the community gardens oh and and uh to have him go and then have to come back for what's probably a short discussion I'm wondering if we can slot him in and then and then get to budget.
I know.
I know.
And I I yeah we approved the agenda.
Um well is there how do how do colleagues feel about that.
Well not if you don't talk much.
No, I think that would I think that would change the agenda that we've already agreed on.
So really we'd have to move to change the agenda.
And I'm sorry, but I mean the agenda was pretty clear on timing, was it not?
Because the community garden doesn't come until it comes up in the evening.
And it's pretty clear that it's after the evening break.
And I'm sorry that uh there was some confusion there, but maybe we should have talked about it before.
Should have should have caught it.
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
Under understand.
I'll uh I will apologize.
So I think that uh that's a good recommendation.
Um, but uh yeah.
So I move we uh adjourn now until are we adjourning?
It would be a 15 minute recess if you were fine with that.
Right now I'm showing five thirty-seven.
We could call it five forty and come back at five fifty-five if my math is correct for a fifteen minute recess, but it's more than fifteen minutes to take us to five fifty-five.
Yeah, as long as the public isn't zoomed in and watching us eating while we're uh watching you, I'm good with that.
You can eat in the foyer if you whatever whatever suits your your benefit there.
All right.
So uh move to recess.
I'll move.
Or gentlemen um and invite uh Dawn up to start off with our twenty twenty three twenty twenty seven financial plan deliberations.
She's gonna start with an introduction overview and then we'll get down to some non-core projects.
And I think we can probably let this roll as long as it takes, and we can uh as we're approaching seven, um, we'll make the call then.
Uh just flag me at 102 uh Sarah, if you don't mind, and we'll see how much progress and what makes sense to maybe either keep going or finish up.
Over to you, Don.
Thank you very much, uh Mayor Tobias and members of council for this opportunity uh once again to talk about the budget.
Um I am I am happy to be here, and and I do want to be respectful of everybody's time.
So it's always a little bit of a balance of giving you the information you want, giving you the opportunity to uh ask questions and yet still getting it through it in a reasonable amount of time.
So I do have about uh 19 slides, less than last time, but some of them the content is a little bit perhaps a little heavier than last time, so I don't necessarily want to rush through.
I'm happy to for you to to stop me and ask questions as I go along, as there is a lot of information here.
So you will recall last week we went through uh a little bit of theoretical and and kind of you know even higher level overview of of uh financial planning legislation and some other things to do with the budget.
But what I want to remind you most at this point is when we talked about financial sustainability, because you're going to hear reference to some of the principles that we talked about last week, again throughout my presentation today, especially this little chart in the corner where we talked about taxes versus actual costs and how that looks.
So that was the concept of financial sustainability and how structural balance means that recurring revenue like property taxes pays for recurring expense, and non recurring or less reliable revenue like casino revenue, perhaps, pays for non recurring expense like capital projects.
So we want to keep that in the back of our mind.
We did look at a very highly dramatized and fictional example last week, but what I'd like to do today is show you what it looks like in real life for View Royal from 2018 projected into 2027.
So what you're looking at in this chart here is where the red line is solid, that is the actual operating expense that we experienced between 2018 and 2021.
The dotted red line is the projection that is in your budget package that you have in front of you.
Taxation and user fees is the orange line.
And you can see that in the green shaded areas, those lines are fairly parallel, being that the slope or the increase is fairly similar one to the other.
To me, that indicated that structural structural balance was achieved in those periods.
In other words, your taxation and user fees rightly reflected the increase of cost in those uh in those periods.
You can see a little bit of a divergence, I think not coincidentally around 2020 when COVID hit, and we purposely and thoughtfully reduced taxes out of concern for our residents and what was going on in the lives of our community, right?
And it it had introduced a little bit of a divergence from pure structural balance.
I might, you might think of it that way, where this plan looks to get us a little bit more to that pattern where everything kind of is moving the same direction at the same rate.
So not to not to concern you, because as in our fictional example last week, you don't see the extreme taxation and user fees dropping way below or diverging greatly from our recurring expenses.
So I would say this is a good sign.
This is not to be concerned about, but I wanted you to know that the financial package in front of you takes us closer and closer and keeps in mind these principal principles of financial sustainability and structural balance.
So how much surplus do we actually have and how much do we actually need?
So Government Finance Officers Association has a recommendation, and that recommendation is a minimum of two months of operating expenses.
This is simple cash flow to you know for one reason, if not for others.
I am more comfortable with a recommendation of between two and four months of operating expenses, or those are like our recurring expenses.
And this is so when we say between two and four months, we're saying that of the accumulated surplus that we have, we really need to hang on to that amount of money in the bank to pay our bills as they come due.
To give us a little bit of a buffer if something unexpected happens, right?
So it's just prudent financial sustainability.
So what you see in this chart, of course, is the band of green that is the representation of between two and four months based on our actual and projected numbers.
The red line is our actual surplus or projected where it's, dotted.
You can see it flattening out, and that's simply a function of the fact that we do uh project a budget, a balanced budget, which would be mean no surplus, no deficit.
So to make sure that accumulated surplus continues to be sufficient to support rising costs in the future, it is acceptable and perhaps even desirable to have small surpluses each year.
This forecast assumes no future usage of surplus to supplement taxation other than for very small contingencies and election costs.
So what this slide is telling you is that we actually are okay for now.
You can see that you know, kind of right where we are at at the uh at the end of uh 21, and I'm still predicting for 2022.
We are still at the high end of that between two and four months of retained uh retained earnings, accumulated surplus, retained.
So we're we're okay.
And I I say with very much caution, if council, you know, the package in front of you does not it actually eliminates draws from surplus.
If that was unacceptable to council, we still have a little bit of room, but it would come with the caution that that is against uh principles of financial sustainability.
So we do have sufficient surplus for now, but this position will denigrate over time as costs increase, or to the extent that we are going to use surplus to supplement taxation.
Okay.
So let's get into a little bit of what we know in advance of looking at our budget package.
Let's talk about assessments.
That's always a key input to our budget and especially the taxation discussion.
So the Navy line here indicates increasing overall assessments.
So overall assessments are significantly up for a second year in a row, about 530 million.
The average home in View Royal, and we are primarily primarily residential, I'm sure you know, was 930,000 in 2022, and in 2023, it's up to a million and fifty thousand, or about 13% increase in assessments.
Non-market change, you're going to hear the term non-market change.
What we mean by that, you can interpret it as new construction, but do keep in mind that non-market change is a little bit more than new construction.
Perhaps if a property changes its use, it's going to go from a different, say but business class to a residential class.
And maybe nothing is built on it yet, but that will affect the assessment value and the amount of revenue, tax revenue we get from it.
Um, Councillor Manson, yeah.
Quick question.
Am I reading this correctly?
So if we're looking at a 14% increase in taxes, and one percentage of taxes is equivalent to 100,000, we're talking about an increase of 1.4 million.
That's correct.
And I had a question as well.
Um so following uh counselor uh mattson's logic for a simple guy, if I had and most of a significant portion of this tax increase is related to the uh infrastructure projects we're proposing.
I'm sorry, that's your your question.
If the tax increase is related to new capital, yes.
This is all just operational.
This this is operational, but it's also uh for reserve contributions and the elimination of prior year surplus.
We're going to get into that.
We're going to get into those details a little bit more.
Okay.
Carry on.
All right.
So if council were to approve the financial plan financial plan as presented, the impact to prior year properties, uh, and that would be you know, not the brand new ones, would be about 13 and a half percent because uh the amount of additional revenue from non-market change brings in almost 1%.
For the average residential property, that means about $250 more in the municipal tax bill compared to 2022.
So just to give you a little bit of a relative measure of that.
Pending approval for new debt for the RCMP building, as well as staffing requests.
So that's that's primarily what's driving that.
2023 total operating revenue was about 20 million, which is up about 3.2 million over the prior year.
We are projecting about $2 million per year from Elements Casino for our host agreement from gaming revenue.
Other increases are for garbage and sewer user fees for fire protection service contribution from Esquimalt and Songheese Nations that is based on a formula that floats with our budget.
So as our budget increases, so will their bill.
We are projecting additional contributions of about $1.2 million from developers in community amenity contributions and in DCCs.
We are less certain of future amounts for those, so we you know we we do not project quite as much in the future, but of course that is likely to change.
Sewer user fees include collecting the amount needed to fund the cost to operate and maintain both View Royals system and our share of the costs for CRD sanitary sewer systems.
We are expecting that we will have to raise garbage user fees, excuse me, uh $25 to $30 per household for 2023, and hopefully less of an increase in future years after that.
Sorry, the the rate per single family dwelling or per dwelling in 2022 was $226, and we're we're thinking it could be close to about $253 in 2023.
And we bring that back to you in a bylaw to look at, and we'll have comparative information to make sure we're not out of line with our surrounding municipalities.
About $3 million a year, $2 million, as I said, comes from casino revenue, a half a million from the community works fund.
Amounts past 2023 haven't yet been confirmed.
We will get that information to you when we get it.
We do get about $450,000 from Small Communities Protection Grant, which is from the province and is pretty stable source of funding.
Less stable is the traffic fine revenue sharing as it seems to go up and down each year and is somewhat less predictable.
I haven't been able to accurately predict that one yet.
Not sure exactly why.
The core.
mean by core expense is just those costs meant to support existing levels of service.
This is the keeping the lights on, keeping the building populated by people that provide the service, keeping sweeping the streets, mowing the parks, weeding the gardens and all of those things that make View Royal such a beautiful place to live.
The non-core part, so you see on the top of those bars is a little orange segment.
Those are the projects that are non-core.
So you can see those going up a little bit as we proceed through the five year plan.
They it does include that component of debt that needs to be serviced if borrowing is approved for the RCMP building project.
So that is I'm sorry that's not a that's not a non-core project, uh non-core uh cost, that's in an operational cost of capital, the little yellow bar.
I jumped ahead of myself there a little bit.
So non-core represents those one-time projects or increases to levels of service.
So one of the items on the council initiatives list was for a staffing plan, which we have provided to you in this document.
The non-core projects listing includes these proposals for increases in staffing, which, if approved, would come back as core expense in the future.
Right.
So it's important to understand that, and that's why you see that orange bar getting a little bit thicker as it progresses through the through the uh five years.
Sorry to interrupt.
Just a quick question on the on the policing building.
Uh I I may have missed it, but is there something in there for the a potential referendum cost to to approve the building is it we're probably gonna have to go to referendum I I can't tell you exactly specifically what the cost for that is but I believe the project proposal is all inclusive yes yeah so the operational costs of capital and that again is the yellow bar on on on the top of the graph here um it is the cost to maintain assets in the future and so when you are considering capital project, keep those in mind because your your decisions do have implications for the future.
And the very easiest is that that debt service cost.
Once we start going down that path, it's it's it's um that's uh in in fact approval for those things in the future.
Of course, yes, pending public approval of uh something like borrowing.
There's a whole process just for that.
Do keep in mind that operational costs of capital do not yet include the cost to replace those assets in the future.
Our asset management program is going to help us understand more about that and how best we can reflect that in our financial planning process.
Where does the money go?
The big spend, of course, is on police, fire, other protective services, which are building inspection, emergency planning, bylaw, and of course, transportation.
Those together, those make up about half of total operating expenses.
The split between fire and other protective services as one group and police is about 50-50.
The thing I need to tell you about general government services and the costs represented here is that it's about $3 million annually or about 17% of total operating expenses.
That might sound a little bit high if you just think about administration.
However, what you need to know about that is we do not allocate general government expenses, so that's the cost of council, that's the cost of administration, that's the cost of this building, it's HR, it's IT, it's your financial services.
We do not allocate those costs to all of the other services that we support.
Just because it's it's um, you know, it you can are you can argue many different ways about about doing that.
We do charge uh our sewer and garbage user fee services of administration charge because we want, in fact, our legislated to have user fees reflect the cost of the service, and certainly sending out bills and administration cost is a cost of the service.
So that is included.
I was curious about the very bottom interest on debt.
Uh, is there a uh a section in the binder on the debt?
Not only is there there's not a section in the binder, there are very uh a few places where the uh uh principal and interest payments show up.
I have another slide coming up for that.
And what you see on this chart is what is projected for the future.
Oh, okay.
Right on those years.
Does it also show um you know existing debts of when uh they'll be coming mature?
Coming up.
Thank you.
Transportation services.
Council.
Quick question, Don.
What does that encompass?
That is your yours, roads, boulevards, street sweeping, snow removal, anything to do with roads, um, bridges, bus shelters.
Ivan will fill in where I'm missing.
It's a lot of stuff.
Okay.
Capital spending.
$36.3 million dollars over the over the five years.
This is definitely the largest since I got here, but I think it is skewed a little bit by by that $12.8 million for the RCMP building project, right?
So do keep that in mind.
That's uh scheduled for 2024.
It coincides with our anticipated delivery of a $1.4 million fire apparatus purchase that was pre-approved in 2022 and in is being built, but of course we schedule it in the budget for the year that we think we'll take delivery of it.
The most significant projects in 2023.
In transportation, you've got the six-mile roundabout for $2.4 million.
You've got the Packers Bay Pump Station for $670,000 in environmental services.
You've got View Royal Park, some significant work proposed for there, as well as playgrounds at Nullwood and Chancellor Parks in the Parks Department.
Some of the proposed work is that you'll see as we go through the capital projects.
If you see pending grant approval, those projects will not proceed if we don't get grant approval.
So just do keep that in mind.
And we'll go through that and highlight that for you when we get there.
So, how do we fund our capital?
And I think this hopefully will answer your question, Mayor Tobias, about infrastructure.
We do not fund capital directly from taxation in the current year.
Capital is funded.
You can see the big bar at the top, and I do apologize that some of the words are a little bit hard to read.
We'll go through it.
The top long bar here on this graph is the proceeds from borrowing, and that is strictly for the RCMP building project.
Okay, so that's 12.
The very next one is the funding, which is 30 almost 30% of all funding for capital is funded from casino revenue or community works fund, or formerly called gas tax, right?
So if if we were to, as an anomaly, exclude the West Shore RCMP building, casino revenue and community works fund would be funding 45% of our capital program.
So that's significant.
Casino revenue will pay for $5.7 million over the five years, and community works fund nearly $5 million.
Hi, so the um where would CACs be in those?
Community amenity contributions would be in the transfers from reserves.
Thank you.
Between government grants and transfers, transfers from reserves, including community amenity contributions, and development cost charges are about four, four and a half million dollars each of those.
Okay.
So that should bring us right to reserves because if we're pulling from reserves, how long are they going to last?
Right?
That's always the question.
What you see on the left here in the multicolored, well, I guess they're both multicolored, aren't they?
The vertical bar chart is our uh projected reserve balances.
You have a schedule of this uh is showing the numbers behind this chart on page 43.
The first bar on your left, if I can point at that, is uh where we are at or projected to be at at the end of 2022, at $23.6 million in our reserves in the various types of reserves.
The darker blue is your capital reserves.
I'll start at the bottom.
The smaller, brighter blue slice is the multi-purpose, and that's community amenity contributions is one of those.
The yellow bar is the operating reserves, and primarily that is for policing.
The orange, I think it kind of looks orangey pink on here are the reserve accounts, and that is casino revenue or casino reserve and community works funds.
And the dark purple component is the statutory or DCCs and parks and open space reserves.
Okay, so you can see that over the five years we're going to go from $23.6 million to $22.3.
That's a net loss of $1.4 million.
I shouldn't say loss, use I guess is a better word, right?
Net use of $1.4 million.
This takes into account all of the contributions that are planned throughout that term.
And and for some of them we are projecting, you know, for for example, for DCCs, we are projecting contributions, which are going to change, and we're not going to we don't have a crystal ball, we don't know exactly what that's going to be, but it's our best guess at this point in time.
So the the um horizontal uh bar chart on the right there shows you that funding for capital is 19.1 million, so that represents 72% of all of our capital of all of our uses of reserves are spent on capital projects.
So when we talk about financial sustainability, this should indicate to you that we're we're we're not really badly off.
We are doing a fairly good job of matching our non-recurring or perhaps unreliable or windfalls or surpluses or or you know, whatever you want to think of that.
We are using those for one-time or somewhat more discretionary costs being capital.
Where I am suggesting some caution, and uh the previous counselors or council members who were on previous councils will will know my song on this, and that is where we are using casino revenue to support not some but all of the West Shore Parks and Recreation Requisition.
And trust me, that is really hard to say fast.
I can't do it.
Right?
So, West Shore Parks and Recreation is 100% funded from the casino revenue.
I was very nervous, quite frankly, when the casino shut down.
I was asking the question: how long can we pay for West Shore Parks and Recreation Service at the level that we're paying?
And it's, you know, you just saw $768,000 from casino revenue before that money is no longer available for any other purpose.
And then what?
Right?
So that is what I mean by financial sustainability.
That is our one little chink in the armor of financial sustainability, in my opinion.
So this plan does propose not starting until 2024, a shift to funding West Shore Parks and requisition from casino from off of casino revenue to taxation to the tune of a half a percent a year.
And by that time, by the time we get fully funded by taxation, it will be 2046.
If at that rate, we can go faster if you like.
I think I see a question.
Thank you, Counselor.
So we the example of that, of course, is uh when we started the casino in 2002, um we picked up the library and the West Shore.
So we evolved the library cost from the casino to taxation.
So been there done that.
I agree.
I've been here since 2017, and I think either 2017 or 2018 was the last year of funding the library from casino revenue.
And I fully support the concept that if we were to strengthen our financial sustainability, this is the quick win.
Not painless.
I understand that.
But it's it's a direction in it's it's a step in the right direction.
So overall though, reserves are relatively stable, trending a little bit downwards, but that might be a little bit of a function of our inability to perfectly foresee the future.
It just bears monitoring.
Just diving a little bit deeper into casino reserve.
Um to casino revenue.
Um we are relying that on uh relying on that for the West Shore Proxine Requisition, as I just said.
But of all of the uses over the five-year plan, 50% of the casino reserve will go to capital projects.
Right?
Not all bad.
32% will of all of the uses over the five years will go to West Shore Parks and Recreation.
And then a little bit for non core requests, the red bar you see there is for debt servicing, and we're going to get to that very shortly.
And over the five years, there's a net uh reduction in the casino predicted casino revenue reserve of 1.34 million.
You can see that on the corner on the right.
Here's your debt slide.
So what we see here is is right now, so before this big speak peak, let me get over here.
Right now, our debt service costs for existing debt is just about $530,000.
The spike, which uh you can see happens, starts in 2024, is completely a result of the projected debt for the West Shore RCMP building drop is because one of our two debenture issues is fully matured in 2026, and the next one matures in 2034.
And then all you have left after that is the $1 million of debt service costs for the RCP building if it were to be approved.
On the chart on the right here, you see the dark blue is existing.
You're not going to get away from that.
However, if the project or the borrowing is not approved for the West Shore RCP building, the bright blue bars would go away.
I think is to understand that this line here at the top is our borrowing capacity.
We have, and that is legislated.
That is that we don't just pick a number, that is an actual calculation and formula, and it is legislated.
We do have the capacity to borrow.
Thank you.
So um with the the the building uh if the whole thing of the RCMP and and uh we got approval from the residents, uh the approval process to go ahead with it, the building, and we assume that the cost and the estimate here.
Um how does that translate to for the carrying costs in terms of taxation to you know what is that a yeah per year?
Is it a hundred thousand?
Is it one percent, two percent?
I guess if so, I don't know the borrowing costs and how much uh that would be on taxation.
Or do we put it pay it through the casino?
I would never recommend to pay debt service costs with casino.
Again, it's about structural balance and paying recurring costs with recurring revenue.
So the debt service costs, I think, in the report that was brought to council uh by our CAO a few weeks ago stated exactly what we estimate at this point our debt service costs would be, and that is right around the $1 million per year principal and interest.
So, right?
So so if so that represents a significant increase to taxation, as you I'm sure can can calculate.
Yeah.
Okay.
All right, I'm getting near near the end.
This information is also in your budget book.
Implications for taxpayers.
So changes to revenues.
We have in the package that you have in front of you eliminated draws from surplus based on the principles of financial sustainability.
This is a council discretionary decision.
It is not an easy decision, but it is up to council to decide whether or not to eliminate the draws from surplus.
You now have the information about how much surplus we have.
I've given you information about how much surplus I recommend we retain.
We are on the upper edge of the recommendation.
So I cannot stand here and say it's a horrible idea and bad things are going to happen if we do not do this 2.8% increase of taxes to refrain from drawing from surplus.
However, my recommendation would be that given all the competing priorities that council has about how much to increase taxes, what is the priority about what we can uh defend increasing the taxes for.
This has to be on your list.
I just ask you to keep it on your list because you have a strategic plan that says View Royal will be financially sustainable.
So there needs to be at least a plan, if not all in one year, to get there eventually so that we can say we do not borrow from our future to pay for today.
Okay, so that's my recommendation and comment about that.
Labor costs 5.3% that is the percent of taxes to cover labor costs.
Those have already been approved either by council or by policy.
Um the oh my god, I've had myself in my notes here.
And the next item, the addition of the RCMP member.
If you recall some of you, last year we added an RCMP member starting in November of 2022.
Well, 2023, we now have to cover the full cost.
That's the that's what we mean by annualization.
Started in 2022, didn't cost us very much in 2022, and now that full cost will come to bear in the RCMP contract.
A little bit for non core requests, which of course are at the discretion of council.
Operational cost of capital, you don't do the capital, there won't be any operational costs in the future for that.
Reserve contributions, uh, similar to what I said about uh re uh about eliminating the draw from surplus.
When when COVID hit and we knew we were going to be a little bit stretched, we paused or eliminated some reserve contributions.
Again, this is a decision of council.
We can do it, we cannot do it.
But I will encourage you, my recommendation is to return those reserve contributions to what they were before because we know coming around the corner is going to be some strategies and policies related to asset management, and I can guarantee you they will not say we have enough reserves to replace our assets in the future.
I don't know what that number is, but it's not going to be less than what we're doing now.
So when you look at the labor costs and add the all the other net changes, so the 5.3 and the 2.1, when I translate that to a total of about $741,000 and compare it to 2022 operating expense, I get about a 4.5% increase.
Which, when you compare it to Victoria's CPI, which was 7% for 2022, it doesn't seem terribly out of line.
So we are suggesting that the plan in front of you represents a 14.4% total tax increase.
When we uh take in the anticipated new revenue from new construction, that will reduce that by about 1%, leaving existing taxpayers with about a 13.5 percent increase, which on a residential home worth about a million and fifty thousand is about a third is a uh which increased about 13 percent in assessed value, it's about a 250 dollar increase to municipal taxes in 2023.
Increase of 250.
Correct.
So one has to figure out um yeah, okay.
There's a motion to approve the budget.
Okay.
So I I fully recognize council has some very tough decisions this week.
It those decisions affect your community, our community, and its residents.
We will progress through the various aspects of the budget in the order.
I'm suggesting the order that's listed because decisions made about non-core capital service plan budgets all have implications for reserves and taxation.
So we need to get those out of the way first, which is how we've done it in the past.
Staff will be tracking all of the decisions as they are made.
We you can't see him, but our manager of accounting, Stephen Vella, is is in his office waiting for those decisions to start tracking them.
When we come back at the next session, we will recap those for you and try to give you a live view of where we are at at the point in time.
Do keep in mind that before we actually get to the taxation discussion, uh things can change as well as we always base our actual tax rates on the revised assessment role.
Right now we're just working with what's called the completed assessment role.
So things are not quite nailed to the wall, but we're getting we're getting close.
Really, in order to proceed to public engagement, the the phase of the budget where we ask the public, what do you think?
That starts March 13.
We will need clarity on the changes that council wishes to the budget, preferably by the end of this week.
We have reserved next Tuesday for our final discussions, but we will need clarity as we go through.
That is my presentation, and I look forward to working with you to settling this up.
No, you don't don't.
This is a good, but thank you so much for coordinating again and getting this laid out in a in a format that we can we can understand.
So that's the end of your official one.
Now what do you got planned to referee for the next little bit?
If you would like to continue, we can start with non core projects and start going through.
We usually start with general government services.
If we need a bio break before seven o'clock, I'm gonna suggest we don't have a lot of time.
I'm I might recommend we start this bright and early, six o'clock tomorrow.
That would be six o'clock in the evening, not six o'clock in the morning.
I said bright and early, didn't I?
And I just want wanted to get a general um sense from counsel about how they're feeling about where that percentage of budget and how what their comfort zone would be to go and just request that of the public and and get some idea of of any concerns around that.
I'm ready to go at six o'clock, but perhaps not everybody.
And I'd be happy with that.
Counselor Brown, I see you have your microphone already on.
Yeah, I like the idea of of Satan for the future, because we never know what's gonna come.
I mean COVID was a big one.
Um and that when that fellow from O'Cain gave his presentation on the hundred year plan, I mean that was to me that was really scary.
That's important to have that.
And I personally in my conversations, casual conversations with people, I'm telling people to expect double digit increase.
I I fully expect that.
I I can see things in there that we can trim down or or cut out.
So that may bring it down but definitely I know I personally and and my friends are expecting a double digit increase in taxes.
A lot of people won't be happy with that.
I guess I'm not your friend Councillor Brown because you never talked to me about it.
Counselor Levin I'm hiding yeah, I it's it's um it's a very difficult sell.
Yeah.
Uh councilor Metzger Yeah, I mean one of the things we have to be really aware of is things that people think of it think of as fluff uh and not necessarily not necessary.
So I don't think you know some of the capital projects or some of the things like doing View Royal Park and pouring pouring money into projects, people will see that and they'll remember their 14% tax increase uh will not be appreciative, even if it doesn't have a big impact on the on the taxes, because they'll just see things money being spent and thinking, gee, USOB has hit me for 14%, and look at the stuff you're doing.
Yeah, all all of this is true.
Councilor Rod.
So, you know, it it would um it'll be interesting to look at the core and and the capital projects.
And um, you know, what I kept seeing was um uh study after study after study, 30,000 each, 30,000 each.
And um I I guess if we'd known this and we had different parts, I would have hoped that we could have probably held off on an RFP and uh wrapped up a few parks instead of just one park.
And uh then we could have got uh you know in one study, you know, maybe some uh economy of scale.
So um uh yeah, I think there's certainly some um I think there's some some cuts we can do.
I think we can reduce it, but um you know, we'll we'll see.
But I'm and I guess the question is if we make a whole draft of cuts to the capital, what's gonna give it what's it gonna it's this is simply going to uh I suppose keep stuff in the reserves for a little longer.
Um but it's um I we don't really know what portion of that is is going to um um affect taxation.
So that's what we're gonna have to look at is what are we gonna cut in taxes?
Because it doesn't matter what you cut in capital if it's if it's not gonna affect taxes.
Thank you.
And in terms of a number, I'm thinking nine or ten.
Yeah, I I think the feeling is for um double digits, it gets a little bit scary.
So I just want to invite counselor McKenzie into the discussion.
So we're just talking about in general concerns about what you've heard tonight.
And is it really high?
Could you vote for it tonight and say I'm happy with everything?
Um where might be areas of concern for you.
Yeah, I think the number is very high.
Um, and I actually want to go through like line by line, see where we can uh take away costs that no longer you know suit us, even if it is operational, considered operational.
Um, because I think at this point in time we really have to count every single penny um because I think that's a huge increase.
And I know other municipalities as well have had to do that like they started off with um double digit and they were able to reduce it down to single digits so thank you no that's helpful um so I think that when it comes down as uh I sent an email out and we're about to get a one-time injection from the province for capital uh for those projects and I I think we don't have to do it tonight but some discussion around are there groupings of things that things that we think are important to the community that should be prioritized before others.
I'm talking about do we want to group safety things that are a real concern and prioritize those versus some other nice to haves?
Because it would be hard to justify in my mind if we approved a park improvement where we've known there was a safety consideration at an intersection and there was a major accident, somebody died there.
To me, that's probably good evidence that you made the wrong decision.
So I I think while we go through, and it's not going to help us necessarily all the time for any percentages off reduction of taxes, having a ready made list that could help support staff and what our priorities are when funding comes available, that ready use thing becomes very valuable.
And so I'd ask us to give some consideration around that.
I was also looking at, and I'll throw this out now, and Don, I am supportive of your need for assistance around IT.
You're managing a lot, and the expectations of council and government or uh residents have gone through the roof, and you really haven't been resourced in order to deliver that.
And I live that every day of my life, so I know what that's like.
I also have some thoughts around an economy of scale.
We're asking for a communications director or coordinator, which I support, but I think in modern language they're called an engagement coordinator that actually runs the surveys and engagements for the town.
Callwood has one.
And I look at all the other budget line items that I can dropping, drawing from our operational, and a lot of those are requests for engagements.
There's hundreds of thousands of dollars in there.
Could investing, and those will be ongoing.
We will have either an OCP review or a community survey going on every year for the existence of Town Royal, and the frequency of those things would only increase we've got a decision to hire a coordinator for communications or hire an engagement coordinator that could do our engagements, assist with uh communication, and hopefully in-house those uh public engagements.
If they're surveys, it helps if they're the same question.
And then if you get some more questions, because then you can look at historical trends of data.
But if you get another contractor who doesn't look at historical trends and isn't interested in them, then you get new data sets that you can't compare.
Like how did people feel about Victoria Park five years ago becomes relevant.
So I think there's some thoughts that I have that can actually benefit staff town and council if we were able to kind of put the emphasis on getting enough support in a new world.
Council Demon.
Yeah, um, you know, I'm I'm totally on board of course with communications coordinators, engagement coordinators, you know that.
But again, that would be that would come under our operational budget would be an additional hundred thousand or go another one percent.
But one thing that has come up most you know most most of my in my experience on council is almost every year and and it's a complaint from the public and it's a complaint from some of us is that our our our website really needs updating.
So that might be a first point of consideration should we get the dollars to be able to invest in a you know a a really um refined and and 2023 caliber website that meets the expectations of the public and presumably that would come that would not come under operational budget, would put it on one-time projects are good candidates for right, you know, say use of casino revenue as as a one time, you know, or or infrequently occurring project.
So I would agree, yeah.
Okay.
But I think Don would argue with you that the problem runs a lot deeper than just the website with modernizing our IT.
That means our records management system and everything else that would need to be supported.
Yeah.
Yeah.
No, you're you're with that.
And then had caught comments as well, and occasionally I haven't thrown it yet, but uh there's no fault anybody here.
I just can't find a certain document that I'm looking at or looking for.
And uh it's it comes with the territory of constantly trying to refresh your old IT.
So um that is a thing.
So that's good preliminary discussion.
But I would encourage us to do something.
We have to start back up at seven, not everybody gets a glass of water.
And coming up in the agenda, we do have a question period for the evening break, Sarah.
In the it's got another public participation period.
Is that normal?
It does, yes.
Right at at the start.
There is a public participation.
Gotcha.
So do we need a question period before we can cancel this session?
Uh for the morning?
I mean for the for the afternoon session, we don't we normally have a uh we normally do, yeah, and I didn't see that in there, but we'll be covered off.
We do not.
Yeah, we do.
We we we would have the public participation at the beginning, and we normally would just go into the evening break right now.
Right.
I just see the big focus.
Welcome back uh for the town of you royal committee, the whole meeting for Tuesday, February 14th, 2023.
Just finished an evening break and uh wanted to remind folks uh that I think you've already done in here, but if you're uh calling in today, there'll be two positions on the agenda.
One is a public participation period that's coming up rather quickly.
So call to reconvening, then is there any petitions and delegations?
No petitions and delegations, so we can move directly to the public participation period.
Uh, and I think Sarah's already briefed everybody in the room.
We'll go to the room first and then online.
Is there anybody in the audience here that would like to address council?
So just for clarification for the public, there's no section when it comes to the planning committee for members of the public to speak.
So if you want to talk to Anya Lane or anything else, you should talk now.
Yeah, that's a good reminder.
So if you if you're looking at the agenda and looking at a specific thing on the agenda, your only opportunity is to either discuss now or I've just got to check in the end to ensure that we've included a question period, which has to be, and there is a question period, but that's to ask specific questions and not to make comments.
So if you want to talk on any item of the agenda for this evening, that's your opportunity to do it.
Thank you.
Yes, that these items are before uh the committee for information, and that's why there's no specific piece for for that, but you're you're correct, they could have uh information or that they wish uh the committee to be aware of at the public participation stage, and that's why there's not a specific section within the agenda at this time for those items.
Yeah, but there never normally is until it's more formal.
Thank you, Sarah.
Is there anybody on the line wanting to address the committee of the whole?
Mayor Tobias, we have no callers at this time.
Thank you, Carl.
And I think this goes now to parks and recreation, and I will fill in for Councillor Kualwich.
And we had uh one report from engineering, and that was uh the future of V Royal Park Community Gardens Management.
Uh Ivan.
Thank you, Chair.
Yeah, so the uh I don't have a presentation here, but uh I can provide commentary on the report just to give you uh a little bit of temperature in the room of uh what staff has been doing and working with uh the V Rail Park uh Gardening Society.
Um so the V Row Park, the community gardens has been there for about 10 years and has evolved over the last 10 years.
Um back in the day, if I if if I recall, uh there had been maintenance agreements set, but they were fairly more like a handshake agreement.
It's not, there was no actual real policy or operation agreements.
And that actually worked quite well for those years.
And they were there's a couple of drivers for that.
One was the pandemic and the need to distance.
So that has kind of put slow things down on the community gardens.
But the other thing, too, is that there is a decline of society membership, insufficient fundraising, grant funding, and uh low participation by non-society plot holders.
And what that does is is twofold.
One is that there is a mixed difference in expectations when it comes to the maintenance.
And that can lead to a little bit of uh a little bit of conflict or a little disruption and what's actually required from maintenance.
And then the other thing is that with the decline, the slow decline in the actual society members, uh, there's a lot less um stewardship.
And you know, when it comes to community gardens, it's essentially about community.
And so uh after hearing from the from the association uh staff worked on looking at what other municipalities have done um to see to uh to kind of um curb that.
And uh so Alex from our from engineering department uh she went through a lot of uh at great lengths to look at what other municipalities have done i think she looked through like almost half a dozen and uh the big common denominator there is that uh the town usually just own just acts as a landowner and they uh put the onus on to this uh nonprofit societies to um take ownership of the land and to maintain it uh it usually requires um more in depth operations agreements uh that really dictate uh maintenance times the uh level of expectation um and they also take care of the administration as well.
So that's a membership uh organizing the plots and and dealing with the the day to days, I would say um for staff with this is a recommended direction.
One being because it works in under municipalities, but second is because it does free up time for our staff to look at the bigger picture and start looking at forward thinking programs that can help foster stewardship of these of these lands.
At this time, Alex, she spends about two months of the year just dealing with the administration, the memberships and calling and that, which is great.
And she does a very, very good job, got great comments.
And we think that us as a team can probably take that a step further and start looking at the at the bigger picture, the long-term ability to um to create a great gardens um a third thing that i want to bring up too about this is that uh no over the last year there have been talks about having other community gardens one being in uh burnside uh or the walk is handy dart site around there and so by um by adopting a a more robust policy when it comes to using uh nonprofit societies or having agreements with them um that allows the town to uh allow these to happen without uh too much onus on staff so that's basically my primer but I'm open to taking questions.
Thank you Ivan I I've got a couple of points I'd like to to make right off the bat.
And one is really dovetailing in with your asset management uh thinking, is that um I I know some societies get involved and it's for all the good reasons, but uh we all get old, right?
And sometimes those those good commitments, your body just can't do it anymore.
You have things change.
And so I think we almost need to look at a level of service agreement that if a society can't maintain below this level, then you know you're off the hook.
It's clear to everybody before you start.
If you can't do these things as caretakers of the land, thank you for doing it as long as you can.
But um, you know, that it now becomes a liability for staff that they can't do other things.
Um, and as as as big as my heart is, um, you know, it's just sometimes it it's what they need to say that's okay to.
Right?
It it's like we tried, um, we don't have enough interest.
Like, uh, is there a younger group or is there the school that maybe wants to use some of the plots for growing and demonstration.
There there may be other options there.
But I think um in the future like coming up with that level of service and expectations um management is is key to there being a point in the sand that we say uh and sometimes they're just looking to say okay I I just can't meet it anymore.
I think I'm doing the right thing Ivan thanks for helping me out and reminding me that we can't meet it anymore.
So I I think if we weave that into your plan.
I think that's just recognition that people have done a really good job and and things change as we get older.
That's okay.
Any other thoughts?
Yeah, I I I'm not too sure.
I I understand what you're saying, but I think what staff is saying is under this new uh new new process, if you want to be if you want a garden plot, you have to become part of the society.
And if you have and if you want and if you're part of the society, you have certain things you have to do.
And so I think it makes it much easier for them to carry on because if someone's you know, I'm sorry, but if someone can no longer live up to their responsibilities with the society, then it's up to society to pull in new members.
I just can't see us as a a council.
I mean, one of the reasons we're looking at this now is it's become a a burden on council to sort of vr or on staff to maintain the community gardens and spend the time and energy that they do.
So I think giving a society the opportunity to take it over and force new members to be members of the society if they want to get a garden plot.
And if in a few years or in a period of time we find out that it doesn't work, then maybe we need to look at a new way of handling those, including if it's not giving us school.
I mean, maybe we no longer need community gardens if members of the public don't want to take care of it.
Yeah, no, that was my point.
It wasn't on an individual level, it was at a society level.
Because sometimes societies run out of capable people because of aging out to to do those things, right?
So it's more or less the agreement with the town as to the society.
Our agreement with the town is based on a level of service and they can't meet that over time, then that's the time to have a discussion.
The other thing I was just gonna say is I'm happy to move staff recommendations.
And I think we got a second.
I'm happy to second it.
Call the question, all in favor?
Point.
Council Roger.
Some questions.
So um, you know, yes, I'm in I'm in in support and having uh talked to uh Bill Stabbdoll, I think as a number of us have, and you have but sorry.
Thank you, Bess Kerleck.
Um anyway, great uh to hear that he's um uh in support.
And I think uh I I understand their frustrations because they weren't getting the membership to uh chip in and and do their bit.
They were just there for the plot and leave.
So that uh I think that solves two problems, yours and and uh and theirs.
Um some practical points, just wondering uh the shed.
So the shed will still be town property.
Yes, that's correct.
It would still be town property, and um it certainly will acquire a little bit of uh uh uh engaging with our park staff to see what we can do to help uh make sure that that shed is maintained properly, but also um having that as an asset for uh for the society.
So I'm assuming that uh this the society members will have keys to the shed.
We'll certainly look at that.
There might be some other options as well, but uh I I do uh hear where you're coming from in terms of the the ability for them to uh manage their site independently.
Right.
Because there was like I obviously there was a lot more the staff we're doing, and if we're going to hand it to society, then there's a lot of things that we need to hand to them.
For example, if they're gonna want to deliver compost, they'll probably need key to the gate and all those protocols for the society that they uh they can handle.
So um yeah, no, thank you very much and keep her going.
Any other comments, thoughts?
Council Must I what I forgot to mention to staff is really good work and thank you for it.
Absolutely.
Any other thoughts?
Comments, Councillors, councillor Lemon.
Just that um the society is really pleased with this and it works for staff, so good work all around.
Councilor Rogers, your microphone still.
I think we're on track.
Okay, so we're at uh we had a mover, we had a seconder to um uh endorse the uh staff recommendation.
All in favor.
Any opposed?
Not opposed, notion carries.
So we are down to, I believe.
I don't think there is any other reports associated with parks and recs, so I will hand it to Councillor McKenzie for Environment.
Yes, thank you.
Um, so this month I do have a chair's report.
So, first of all, I'd like to say um in collaboration with the Royal Climate Coalition, uh, going forward, you should see some more um communications around what we what the community can do to reduce our impact on the climate.
So I'm looking forward to that.
Um, I also want to highlight some of the outcomes of a recent uh PREAC meeting.
So one of which was that the town endorsed the recommendation from PREACT that uh we join the fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty, uh, which is actually a really quite a big uh step, and I think it's something that should be publicized.
And the other thing the committee discussed was the climate action strategy and the possibility of the town moving to step five, um step code five more quickly than planned.
There's still work being done on this, but um I hope to see this come to council uh in the near future.
Uh this month, earlier this month, I actually also got to meet with the the green team.
Uh, these are the folks that put on the often you'll see in the parks, they'll be uh cleaning those up.
But it was really interesting meeting and discussing with them to see what else they do to build community.
And on that note, on February 18th, they're going to be in View Royal Park.
So I will also be there for the first time doing that.
I look forward to that.
And um, in the next few weeks, I'm gonna be attending the first CRD Climate Action Intermunicipal Task Force.
So that happens once a quarter.
So yeah, I'm looking forward to that as well.
So lots happening.
So that's all I had for the report.
So on here, uh it doesn't have uh in the updated agenda, there is a motion there, but I'm going to raise a new motion.
And this is going to be to refer to PREAC the development of a demolition waste and deconstruction bylaw or program for View Royal.
If I can get a seconder on that, then I'm happy to explain what that is.
Okay, excellent.
So the amount of demolition materials that goes into Heartland landfill is really significant.
About one third of the landfill is actually construction waste.
So other municipalities have passed bylaws and some programs to address the amount of material that go into the landfill, especially because there's great opportunity to reuse, resell, and recycle this material considers adopting such a bylaw or program, it has benefits not only for our climate, but also those looking for more cost-effective source of materials if they are renovating their own homes.
So while I've cited Victoria's bylaw in some of the paperwork, I actually would like to refer this to PREAC so that they can develop a tailored bylaw or program that is most suitable for View Royal.
Yeah, any any questions or comments on that?
I think this is a great uh initiative, and I um also think there's a cost of servicing that we'll have to look at as well and maybe get an assessment for staff.
So it's fine to have a bylaw, but how many um how often is the bylaw officer called out?
What does it look like when a new site comes under that?
So just some appreciation, definitely uh supportive of it, but just some some understanding about what that what the what the implications would be to our bylaw services.
That's all.
Thank you, yes.
And I I'm hopeful that um PRIAC will also ask for staff um to prepare a report, which will um talk about the some of those impacts as well.
Yes, uh from staff.
Yeah, yeah, thank you through through Mayor Tobias and uh thank you, Councillor McKenzie, for bringing this up.
And uh this is an interesting project that the city of Victoria undertook.
Um I I I uh I spoke with the manager of this of this um at the city today, this morning, and uh he is welcome to he's happy to come to council and present on um the city's program just to give counsel a bit more background information because um it was a process and um and a lot of work went into developing this bylaw um um and uh there's quite a bit of administrative work associated with it as well.
So just to to ensure that council is aware of the full picture, um it might be worthwhile that uh we invite um the um the manager who is overseeing this this bylaw um to come and speak to council just to just to provide some food for thought as well.
Okay, thank you.
Um I think oh councillor Mattson?
Yes, um I was a little concerned when the suggestion seemed to be that we'd send requests off to PREAC to develop a bylaw.
Because anyways, that that just seems not within their scope.
Um and especially when we have we have staff.
I mean, so before we sort of get to a motion, my preference would be to hear from the city of Victoria person.
And basically from that we could probably get a better idea of what's involved and and and and where to move from there before we go to a specific motion, like send it off to PREAC for comments.
The other concern I had, and this was just from somebody who tore down a house in View Royal, and then found out he couldn't use any of the materials in building his new house.
And so there's a big issue about that now because the way the code is you really can't use anything.
He said so his materials he was going to use to build sheds, etc., not to actually include it in the house unless he got somebody to come in and um what what's the word when you determine what the quality of the lumber is.
Anyways, so there was a number of issues around that that I'd like to hear information on before we go thinking that we can just save save all the materials and it can then go into a new house because I unfortunately just it doesn't seem to be the way it is.
Thanks.
Okay, thank you.
And Councillor Lovin.
Yeah, I Ron's right, Councillor Matson's right.
There's lots to learn here.
It's a it's a smart um, it's a smart initiative.
Uh perhaps when if we could invite uh a rep representative from from the city to speak to us, you could perhaps reach out to members of PREAC, Mr.
Brown, and so on, and ask them to attend the same meeting.
I hope they can attend the same meeting and and learn at the same time.
Great, thank you.
And uh Councillor Rogers.
Concur.
Um, great idea.
Um it's a little premature to go to PREAC, but I absolutely agree if um this is a great education for the uh PREAC members to hear from and from us and from staff uh to hear from the city of Victoria what the pros and cons were, what the costs are in terms of staff time and and to uh the developers applicants, uh assess all the pros and cons and uh then we'll all have a better idea of what can uh can work in our town.
And uh yeah, I'd in whether they can come in person or attend electronically.
Um and I also would encourage uh the VO uh climate coalition to uh to participate in listening as well.
So yeah, great idea.
Thank you.
Great, thank you.
So should I uh do a new motion on that or vote uh okay.
Shall I say it?
Um so that we ask um request that staff to reach out to the Victoria City um staff to see if they can come do a presentation um and then we'll proceed after that.
That'd be different.
Yeah, we can't procedurally we could vote on the motion that was on the floor, which was to refer to PRIAC, the demo waste and deconstruction bylaw.
That motion, if council so uh the committee so chooses, depending on how it goes, if it fails, a second motion could be made.
Or it could be withdrawn.
Could be.
Okay, I will withdraw my motion then, my original one.
And you have the second one for for staff to invite City Victoria and the members of the committees.
Yeah.
So you'll second it.
Okay, all in favor.
Excellent.
Approved.
And that is all for the environment committee.
And I will pass to Councillor Mattson.
Thank you.
I'll call the planning development and engagement committee to order.
I have nothing under Chair's Report, nothing under Business Arising.
The next item is uh a presentation by staff on development permit for God, getting old.
305 and of court.
And so when you when sorry, when the presentation, if you could start by just explaining what exactly is happening in a broad overview, like I sort of missed that in the presentation.
It sounded as if the old garage is just gonna be part of the house and we're putting a new garage right beside it.
But if go ahead.
All right, good evening uh committee.
My name is Sterling Scorey, community planner for the Town of V Royal.
Going to be presenting uh development variance permit 22 202301 for 305 Anya Court.
Purpose of the presentation is to uh introduce a new application for a accessory building in the rear yard.
Uh it is for a garage.
The subject property highlighted there, uh 305.
It is zoned uh R1.
It is uh designated in the land use uh map in the official community plan as large lot residential, and the property is not subject to any development permit areas.
But because it is requiring a variance, it is subject to uh uh council review.
Should this application move forward would be that the uh a garage be placed where the uh the two cars are currently.
The existing garage that is a part of the house is being proposed to be uh used in at a later date as flex space, or that space will be transitioned to uh a livable space in the home.
The existing or sorry, the proposed garage would then house the cars.
One other change to make note of is that the existing hedge shown in the rear of the property would need to be removed to accommodate the new accessory structure.
This is because the existing property has a covenant at the rear of the property, making it difficult for any development back there.
It actually prohibits any development.
It's a restrictive covenant.
So there is no disturbance of the soil, no vegetation removal, and no building that is permitted in that rear yard of sorry, the covenant.
So with that being said, I just wanted to take a look at the uh the hedge uh shown here as H1.
I think a little bit of a leg.
There we go.
So right there.
And then shown again in the right hand right hand image.
The applicant has provided an arbust report.
The hedge is not considered a tree protected or tree protect tree protected in the tree protection bylaw.
And the applicant has uh been proactive in uh providing uh replacement landscape screening uh at the rear of the property around the um around the proposed accessory structure.
The covenant uh actually follows the uh the rock retaining wall.
Uh so those trees shown in the uh the image there, uh those cannot be touched and they will not be touched uh as part of the uh the application.
So this is a just a bit of a perspective drawing um showing what the the proposed uh garage will look like uh post construction.
Um the uh design similar to the existing house follows a similar similar roof line, has similar similar building materials.
Applicant has proposed uh cedar planking for the uh uh the siding for the uh accessory structure.
Um this shows uh uh again just a rendering of the um the proposed accessory structure.
The uh bushes there are what is being proposed as landscaping, and uh they would be uh done as part of uh uh improvement to uh uh improving uh the landscape uh uh buffer between the the existing properties.
Um like I said, the applicant is being proactive in providing that knowing that the uh the hedge will have to come down.
And I cannot remember the uh the name of the uh the hedge, but I do see the uh the applicant is here.
So um if it's of uh interest to the committee, we can maybe have the uh the applicant clarify that um with any uh variance application uh what we want to consider is are the variances uh being requested supportable there are two variances that are being requested the first is to vary the minimum setback from the uh between the principal building and the accessory building from three meters to 1.3 meters the second variance is to uh reduce the set minimum setback of the accessory structure to the side yard uh from 1.2 meters to 0.9 meters.
Looking at the site plan uh of the proposed uh accessory structure and the existing the existing uh uh structure uh to answer the chair's question earlier uh prior to the presentation, the existing garage is right here, and this will become uh flux space in the future.
This is the proposed garage uh uh as per the application.
Look gently, just one quick question, and and I wasn't sure about this.
Uh if the proponent decided that they weren't going to close off the garage, the the existing garage.
Would that be an issue?
Any sort of impact in terms of building code in terms of having a garage, a new garage along with the existing garage, or that's just up to him once he gets gets it done.
Or if he doesn't.
The to the chair, the proposed garage, the both both buildings would have to meet building BC building code, uh, with respect to how they would have to be um built, or I guess uh renovated space, the the existing garage, if if the plan is to make that flexible living space, there is requirements in the BC building code to make that such.
Uh right now it's considered an unlivable space.
Um, the if I understand what you're saying, the that the the applicant was not to do that, and they're still to go ahead with the the garage.
Between the two, uh between the proposed accessory structure and the existing uh existing structure, uh I would have to talk to the building inspector to see if there's any additional uh code requirements between two uh uh un uh habitable spaces.
Um I'm not sure.
Right, thank you.
Yeah, just a quick question while you're on it.
What does this back on to?
It seems like a kind of a steep um decline there.
Through the chair, it's uh the the property backs on to a uh another uh single detached family residential uh property that's also zoned uh large lot residential.
There is a uh, like I said, a covenant uh showing uh right here.
This this goes to the back of the property line, and uh in that space there is existing vegetation.
Uh the the property that this abuts uh has uh uh a large vegetative buffer as well.
I don't know if they have a uh a covenant uh in that space as well.
Do we know why the covenant was there in the first place?
Can I help you on that?
Yes.
Okay, so um when the whole development was done, um basically the backspace is a ravine.
So if you looked at a contour map, which we should have had, uh, a contour map will show how the ravine would flow off of the um uh the farm towards the virtual property and then on to uh and there's probably pipe, you know, that goes in too.
So it's an ephemeral stream and uh and we determined that it was a very sensitive ecosystem, hence the covenant.
All right, members.
You had a comment, Councilman?
Just I was just gonna say, just put put your comments through to the chair at ramping discussions.
Thank you.
Yeah.
So staff, have you any questions for staff at this point?
I don't think we've got councilbrandes.
Just the uh calling the old garage flex space.
Obviously, I mean we're dealing with the variances right now, but if they were to convert that to a suite, for example, that'd be a permissible use, creating it like basically putting two residences in the same lot.
The building inspection, correct?
Through the chair, if the applicant decided to apply for a secondary suite uh license, that would be a totally separate application.
And at this time, I don't have enough information to say if that would be permitted in that space.
Um uh it would have to be reviewed upon application.
Yeah, so like I say, when we have it comes back, if we can have an aero view from you know air view, that would show us the contours and the so we can get entirely uh an idea not only of uh the sensitive ecosystem behind, but also of the other homes that uh it impacts because I I don't see any other houses.
I don't know where the lane is and relation to the uh to the court.
So having you know um you know that context of where this house is with Mr.
Birchell's place, um, all really helps to inform the council.
So that would be useful.
Um, but um uh council Brown raises a good point.
Um it's um looks like it could almost be a carriage house.
Is that beautiful?
And um so what maybe not so so now I'm just l let me carry on please.
So um I guess not with this particular applicant or or whatever.
Do we have would there be governance in terms of what um uh roughed-in features like plumbing or wiring um that would go into this garage?
To the chair, uh the zoning bylaw does not permit secondary suites and detached uh accessory structures.
So that would not be per be permitted.
Okay.
Fair enough.
Another question, please, uh Chair.
So um the uh there looks to be a side yard variance of uh 0.3 uh uh meters.
And um my question is uh how will that existing hedge uh be maintained?
Because it's gonna continue to grow and grow um and presumably grow right into this uh new garage.
So how does that hedge get maintained?
To the chair, I have uh a remainder of the presentation that I'd I could get to and I could uh I could get to that point.
Thank you.
Uh so the looking at the variances, there are uh, like I said, a variance to the side yard setback and a variance to the separation distance between the principal dwelling and the proposed accessory structure.
The variances can be supported because the uh variance being requested for the building separation distance does not impact the neighboring property.
In discussion with the uh building inspector, it has been determined that it is not uh going to be in contravention to the building code so long as the applicant can uh meet the building code uh requirements.
And the side yard setback will be propos uh will be screened by an existing hedge, and the proposed building is consistent with the existing form and character of the building, uh, meaning that there's uh little visual impact uh to the surrounding neighborhood.
With regards to the next steps, uh, and I I want to just clarify the the with the proposed uh structure and the hedge, that is a question that I'd like to confirm with the arborist.
Um, so further comment would be provided from them and how uh the hedge will be maintained.
The uh should also provide comment on the proposed uh landscaping that is going to be located at the rear of the property to ensure that that is suitable for the for the area, and um in discussions with the uh applicant, a just a revision to the plan showing the uh the separation distances between the roofs is required.
Um this was confirmed this afternoon.
This would uh require a revision to the variance, however, it's still supported by the uh the variants can still be supported because the uh variants being requested does not have any impact on the BC building code.
And when looking at separation distances between these two buildings, that's the biggest concern.
Um I think that is the uh conclusion to my presentation.
Um there is a recommendation to the committee to uh receive the report for information.
Once uh once these uh items have been discussed, the next steps uh following any feedback that's provided by the committee today.
Um I'll uh staff will continue to work with the uh the applicant and come back at a later time for council's consideration of the development variance permit.
Thank you.
So staff, one of the things I heard it would be very helpful for the committee is to be able to take to see what's on the adjacent uh on the properties.
If you had, I don't know, some sort of overhead picture and especially in the rear of the property.
Um especially if there's a gully or something there, it'd be good to note.
And probably some sort of explanation how if there is a a ravine or whatever's there, a water flow, how this project an explanation of how this why this project won't have any impact on the on that property.
Any questions?
Yeah, in general I support this.
This is the garage going into a backyard and uh and they've got to remove one fence.
It's not an in uh it's not a big tree.
Um so I'm I'm I'm don't see a real issue with this one at all.
Anyone else have any comments?
Oh there you go.
Um so I can see in the in the drawings there is a quite a bit of shade casted to the left um to the neighbor to the left.
Um can I just confirm it is the height of the garage is going to exceed the current hedge height on the left.
Uh I believe that's the case, yes.
Yeah.
Okay.
And then um my other concern is with removing the back hedge, uh and again it goes to Councillor Matson's point.
It would be good to see if possible what the impact from that back side with removing the hedge, because that created quite a cover.
Um, so their neighbors in the back will just have trees, and I don't know if that will be an issue for them or not.
So yeah, though it was just the side, the view and the shade, and also the back.
Oh, go ahead.
Councillor Rogers.
Yeah, thank you.
Yes, um, again, if uh part of um the buy-in from the neighbor 303 um is the ensuring that that hedge will be maintained.
So uh checking with the arborist and making sure that that maintenance will be uh a regular commitment uh of the applicant 305 to uh maintain it for 303.
Um point raised um across the lane, we have um 209 and 211 on your lane um behind.
And I know there's some distance here that they side of the ravine, and I know it's an excellent looking building from the rear, but uh the implications of what kind of lighting um that will be attached to it, um you know that you know that that's an explanation that we have to explore with the neighbors.
Um but yeah, if we can get a contour map of this, um I'd be uh very keen to hear it to come back.
Thank you.
Councilor Lennon.
Yeah, I was I was going to ask about the hedge, but I think that's been answered.
And as long as the neighbors are on board and there's a good solid hedge there in time that is an appropriate hedge, that's great.
It looks good to me, and I'm prepared to move staff's recommendation.
Yes, and just staff when also when this comes back, if we could just have a diagram that shows where the houses, adjacent houses are in relation to this, it would probably make it easier for council to get a good idea of you know.
I think there's the feeling that there's no impact on the neighbors.
It'd be nice if we could actually see it.
So thank you.
All in favor?
Motion to well, staff's recommendation.
Yep.
All in favor?
Against?
Carried.
One more.
Two more.
Uh staff, uh oh, this is a uh environmental development permit variants uh 22 slash eleven three oh two Besborough Avenue.
Staff has a presentation.
Why should we have bring that?
So second presentation.
Purpose of this presentation is for consideration of a development permit with variances for new platforms, uh decking, stairs, a gangway, and a float dock at three oh two Besborough Avenue.
Uh subject property highlighted in uh red in the uh aerial imagery to the uh to the right.
So the site is a waterfront property uh accessed via Limkin Cove, uh zoned R1 detached residential, uh also designated as large for lot residential in the official community plan.
The proposed work is subject to development variance uh sorry, a development uh permit uh guidelines uh subject to the natural water course and shoreline area.
Uh, the reason that is the reason why it is uh subject to council review.
Uh the next couple slides are just showing images of what the existing site is just to get uh the committee's uh the frame of reference for what is there currently and then hopefully that'll help with discussions showing what's being proposed.
This image is showing uh the the top of the bank looking down and you can kind of see uh the existing structure kind of peeking through the uh the the bush there.
The image on the right shows the existing staircase this is a concrete staircase uh this is to remain uh post-development permit.
Um, the applicant is is going to keep the staircase.
Next slide shows uh a bit more context.
So this image uh on the the right hand shows uh what it was being uh viewed from the top.
So just again to go back, um this uh flag again with the laser pointer.
This area here uh is shown in the uh the even chair just showing that uh that existing uh those existing platforms and staircases down to the water.
Uh the reason for taking the image on the the left-hand side is to show the committee largely what the existing vegetation is there in the area.
The uh the slope is made of bedrock, which means that there's very little opportunity for vegetation to grow.
Uh geotechnical report and uh marine How Tat report report both speak to limited uh uh vegetation in in the area uh on the rock slope, limited largely to uh mosses, lichens, and uh some small ferns.
There are no trees going to be impacted by this development.
Um they are without uh outside of the um the proposed uh development area.
So, in review of the uh what is being proposed, the applicant is looking to remove uh three existing plot uh platforms and two existing staircases.
Like I said earlier, they are going to retain the existing stook stone staircase shown in the uh the image.
So the the wooden structures shown were going to be removed, the stone staircase is going to uh be retained.
Uh the image shown here is what is uh existing uh on their property.
The next image shows what is being proposed, uh, and that is, like I said at the beginning of this presentation, uh new platform and decking.
So there's going to be two tiers, new stairs connecting those platforms, a new gangway, and a new floating ramp or dock.
Um the intent of the application is to provide uh uh more usable functional space uh for the applicant for the waterfront uh waterfront property.
The uh the ramp uh shown in the image is roughly 40 feet long.
The uh gang or sorry, the um the dock is uh 12 meters wide, uh 12 meters long, sorry.
This is an image just showing an aerial overview, uh so top-down look at the proposed uh structures.
One thing that uh stood out in the application is that the area of the uh proposed structure on land is actually going to be smaller than what is existing, and uh as detailed in the the professional reports provided, uh there's reason to believe that long term we would actually see a uh regeneration or recovery of the uh the albeit limited uh vegetation in the area because there's going to be less uh built infrastructure.
So when we look at an application, uh so development uh development permit with variances, there's three considerations, particularly for this one.
So the first is uh how the application is applicable to the uh natural water course and shoreline areas, environmental protection and hazards, uh, development permit area guidelines of the official community plan.
The next is uh whether the zoning uh variance is uh supportable, and then finally, specifically to uh waterfront properties that are looking at doing uh dock construction and and uh and ramps, uh the town does have a uh private docks development guidelines uh document.
There are, I should clarify, there are all are some are are uh also guidelines in the uh official community plan that speak to dock development as well.
So looking at the application, there is overall a general compliance with the with the official community plan.
In summary, there's existing uh retention of vegetation, there's no impact to trees in the upland area.
There's not going to be any impact to neighboring properties and their potential future use of their own waterfronts.
There's not going to be any uh negative impact uh beyond what was supported or reviewed by the DND, that's Department of National Defense and Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
And the construction being proposed is in uh in compliance with the official community plan that looks at doing either piling float docks as a preferred method.
What is not preferred is a any type of fixed structure or wharf, which is not the case here.
The construction is within a 50 meter setback, and this is part of the variance that is being requested.
So there's a single variance.
This is to reduce the required setback for a structure from the natural boundary of the sea, also known as the present natural boundary, from 150 meters to zero meters.
So the structures that are going to be are being proposed will be placed at property line where the present natural boundary is.
Part of their coverage of their report was to determine whether the the uh existing slope uh being bedrock would be able to accommodate this type of uh structure uh the final discussion point is then the the town's private dock uh development guidelines uh in general that the the guidelines have been met with the uh exception that there's a uh a slight overage of the maximum uh uh considered length by 0.2 meters and uh just the the width of the gangway would need to be confirmed uh the maximum speaks to in the in the the guidelines is 1.6 meters this is uh information that can be clarified moving forward with the applicant and can be clarified when we come back to uh the uh back to council uh at a later time for consideration um the um the only other thing that would need to be confirmed at this point too is just the uh the plans provided would just need to uh update the present natural boundary um again this all of this information can be can be clarified uh uh prior to consideration uh for council um in the future so staff have a prepared a recommendation that the uh the reports uh be received for information and um uh we will uh work work work with the applicant uh to uh prior to coming back to council good thanks staff uh councillor lemon?
Yeah, thank you.
Thank you, Steph.
From what i can see, this is all a floating concept with the the gang plant and the dock.
So where and how would the piling go in?
But there is a reference to a piling.
Through the chair, there are going to be four pilings for the uh the dock structure.
I'm going to uh highlight them.
So there's one at each corner here.
And um this is to allow the dock to uh go up and down.
One of the reasons to have this type of uh design is to ensure that the dock doesn't rust on the bottom of the seabed, which causes further damage to the uh uh marine and and and marine life.
Um DFO and uh the DND in their in their review considered these types of applications and and have considered this not to be uh impactful to uh to marine life, provided that the uh environmental uh marine report that was provided by the applicant is is followed.
Um there is another image here we can take a look at uh the cross section that shows the uh the pilings and how they um and how they're uh constructed with the uh the floating dock.
So they will they will need to be pile driven into the seabed though, correct?
That is correct.
Right.
Okay.
All right.
So I don't see how the dock can float up and down on a stationary piling.
This holes yeah, this holes and I think what's up here.
Okay.
All right, okay, good.
All right, thank you.
Councilor Rogers.
Excellent report.
This is so explanatory.
You got everything in there.
I really like it.
Um the obviously the applicants have done their homework, DFO is approved, um uh D have approved, you got the letters of support there.
Brilliant.
I'm uh absolutely impressed.
Mayor.
Thank you.
I I'm happy with this application as long as there's a reduction of size, and I would be very interested if the applicant talked to their fellow boating neighbors if there's any increases or if that is extending out.
I know from growing up in a boating community, it's pretty important to talk to your fellow boaters about that thing.
Uh and if there's buy-in there, I'm fully in support.
No.
Um staff to move the staff recommendation.
Second.
Okay.
Before you go on, I still have a question for staff.
So I was curious as to the picture looked like the the stairway was really steep.
And I'm just wondering if uh there's certain for the new stairway, I guess it'll have to meet meet code.
And I guess I'm just curious as to what sort of uh degree in terms of how steep can a stairway be.
Yeah.
To the chair, um I can't speak to the uh the severity of angle for uh a stairway.
There would be a requirement to have a uh a railing as per the PC building code.
Um if uh if the committee feels that we need to clarify that point, I can I can talk to the building inspector and and provide that information uh at time of uh uh council consideration.
All right, so thank you, and I I appreciate your report, good work.
Okay.
So we have a motion to for staff's recommendation.
So all in favor, against, carried out.
So the next one is the official community plan next steps, and I guess we have uh we had a motion at the last council meeting to bring this back, and until some sort of decision is made to just carry on with the 2011 OCP.
Uh one of the things I did hear from uh councillor Brown last time, it maybe it'd be a good time for us to actually sit down and have a like an all day session to talk about the the OCP, and maybe we can clear away some hurdles just in terms of things that we all agree to before making a decision and sort of next steps.
And I think there was also comments that as well as all the things that we thought were really bad about the last document, there's certainly some nice wording around, you know, walkable communities, etc.
So things we can we can we can take there as well as a some of the other areas that probably um, for example, the other side of Parsons Bridge, where there'd probably be agreement by council that it would be a great place for higher density, et cetera.
So what I'd like us to do, and it's a certainly for discussion, is plan on sort of an all-day session where we can talk about the things we where we think we should be going in terms of development, uh what the sort of development should be in different areas and just get an idea of what council thinks because the reality is unless there's some sort of agreement generally um on what we like, it's gonna be hard to decide how to proceed.
So wait, sorry, we'll take names down and we'll go first with uh counselor Lemmon.
Am I the first name?
Okay.
Thank you.
Um I don't I am loud.
I don't disagree that um a session like that would be helpful, but what I heard last week from nearly all of the speakers and and and from the correspondence was about the lack of engagement, the lack of consultation, um the but but people generally felt that what was provided wasn't enough and they they they had they they wished they'd had more opportunities.
And we have two pieces of correspondence in that vein this week saying please please don't go further until you've talked to us, brought it back to us within the community as it is.
And I would really like to see us go out with for a, you know, and and and perhaps we need to, you know, engage somebody to to engagement specialists to take it out there.
But however we do this, I I feel that we need to properly engage with our public, with residents, and um with as it is, and what what I have heard apart from that is the areas there are two quite specific areas of concern, but I don't know about you know people in other the residents of other parts of the town.
I don't know where people and six miles stand on this and where people in on Watkas Way and Riverside and and and down into the Helmkin neighborhoods and Glen Early.
I don't know.
Um so for my part, I would like to see us go out for take take take the draft plan out there.
But more than that, I I would like to see it plain language.
If we had, you know, in in taking it out there, it's it's it's a it's a weighty document.
It's it's a you know, it's a it's a heavy tone, and it's you know, much of it is not a departure at all from the original OCP because that is a draft.
Um, but you wouldn't know that because it's so so hefty.
Um I I think it would be really helpful if it were, you know, more than not the whole document, but if there was a condensed version and easy to read, you know, even more than plain language.
This is what the changes are.
This is how it will affect you and your neighborhood if they were if they come to pass.
This is what this section, you know, the section on transportation proposes.
This is what a transition um area is.
This is this is what this is what FSR is.
You know, and and and the point was brought up last week that um f FSRs are are mind-boggling.
And you know, I've I've been on council for a little while, and I still I can't really picture a 2.5 FSR clearly in my head.
I don't know what that looks like but if you can tell me that's six stories on a half acre um and with with with 80 with 80 suites in it 80 units I get that so you know some some real clear clear descriptions for you know we're right here we're just regular people and certainly out there regular people and almost none of us are urban planners um so I I would I would really like to take out what we've got so people where people can understand it you know in a in a in a in a package that is really accessible and people will residents will get it.
Anyway, that's so before we go anywhere, I would like to do that.
Counselor McKenzie.
Thank you.
So I kind of echo Councillor Lemon's comments.
The feedback and critique of the engagement to date has been the lack of numbers and reflection of public's input.
So I think council going away and writing the OCP or determining the OCP does not address this.
And I think despite our best intentions, we are not the right people to write the plan.
I believe we need an objective expert or group of residents to direct this, as opposed to council driving outcomes that could potentially impact their own backyards.
So we are currently um being informed by a relatively small group of neighbors.
I mean we've last week we heard from uh a number of them but there's more than 10,000 residents that we don't know whether they are for it or against it.
So I think we need to find out a little bit more about that group of silent um uh people see where they're at.
So if I had to propose something instead um I'm actually thinking maybe a task force would be better.
I don't know the term, but with a certain number of people from each of the different precincts to come together and focus on what the next steps for the OCP should be.
So they would advise us essentially.
Thank you.
Yeah, there's a lot of work to be done.
Counselor Brown.
And when I'm talking when I've suggested a one day workshop, uh I'm looking at dates in the calendar.
I'm looking at like dates like March 25th.
So it gives us quite a bit of time to get that community input.
But you know, talking to people, uh some people talk very generically, uh, but actually most of the people come up with one or two points that they don't like.
And even one or two people have come with stuff they actually like in the draft.
So um it would be nice to have a uh a list, and that list could include comments from each and every one of us because I've heard stuff from our council here, things that we like about it, and a lot of things we don't like about it.
But it it's hard to um well gets confusing because again, I've said this before.
I like the the OCP we have now.
I like that.
And maybe that's the document we work at and and enhance and get that community input and work on that.
Um I hate using the expression throwing the baby away at the bathwater, but in some ways, if we if we totally um the money that's already been spent, there is some good stuff there.
A lot of it, a lot of it's repetitive.
I think someone could go, a wordsmith could go through that and draw that, bring that bring that document down to 150 to 200 pages, not 238 pages.
And I like uh Councilor Lemon's idea of having uh a section, I can't think of the term, but the section in the front of a document that gives you kind of a synopsis of the document of a whole.
So somebody can come in there and do a quick a very quick read and then you know go to the sections that they're particularly interested in.
It's a very cumbersome document to read through, for sure.
Counselor Rogers?
Yeah, thanks.
Yeah, I think the um the workshop idea is necessary.
Um we've heard enough.
We've looked at this report.
Goodness, we've looked at it in secret meetings.
So um it's time to um the one thing about the 2011, it had an action plan.
So, you know, the the one thing this one doesn't, it doesn't have an action plan.
And I'm really not interested in just looking at what the kitchen and the living room looks like.
I need to see the whole building.
And so again, this when you're look at the strategic plan, it was all based on housing, density.
And there were a few things put in there.
But that's what when I went out and out into the community there and talked to the residents about this.
Well, not only were they uh really concerned about you know FSR two, three, uh, and whole swaths of redevelopment and uh the uh transition zones, um, but you know, there was no height restrictions.
And you don't have height restrictions because you got an FSR.
So unless we're going to be able to put you know the hieroglyphics into plain English, um, you know, that that that's certainly one of the challenges.
But I've heard enough, you know, when when um you know, I'll just you you take this down to Jedburgh and say, Jedburgh, this is what the plan is.
No, no, your neighborhood that you you envision that you're living in right now isn't going to exist.
And you know, when you you take it to Eltham and you say, yep, on those two lots are going to be 22 buildings, 22 uh units and all those cars.
You know, um I'm really pleased that in the um um budget, we've got a transportation plan update, we got a parking study, we got active transportation, we got all those things that we could probably gauge and use the housing to gauge whether or not we're gonna sink or swim.
But one of the key things I'm hearing from from individuals is that we haven't even got our baseline numbers right.
You know, we look at a um, and uh unless we get those, the public's confidence that we're going to be, you know, we're at what, 12.5?
I mean, we've got to know those numbers because that is really what's driving our um uh our uh costs for this financial plan.
You think 14.4% is a problem?
Well, if you we keep ripping along and we start getting having to get, by the time we get to 15,000, we got 17 cops.
So what's the cost of that since we know that one officer is 1.5 percent?
So, you know, this is what people are, you know, and and when we we hear all these things, we're not even talking about the infrastructure.
So people want to know a plan, you know, how it's going to uh affect their community and and you know we know we talk about affordability.
Okay, there's a good litmus test.
But we better make sure that we're really confident and that's why we have to have this workable workshop.
So we got the confidence that um that we're gonna chart it and we're gonna chart it right from a the correct baseline.
And just from a housing study is just looking at the kitchen.
Mayor thanks Ron I think that it's um I looked at a different way of evaluating um what could go next.
And I think there's a logical pattern that we could do.
I think there's a couple of things.
One is as been pointed out, I think we lost some public trust, both with uh unfortunately with staff and counsel in in the way, and it was a time during COVID, but it was kind of a study that was done up and it was marketed to people.
And it wasn't a two-way conversation, and there were what we heard reports generated out of it, but there wasn't any what we've done reports generated out of it.
So, yeah, we've heard you, and now we'll go about keeping things the same as we already did, but ticking the box for engagement.
That's not engagement, and we lost more credibility every time we did that.
And so now, you know, we're gonna go back and we we've got to come to a conclusion somehow.
What we're gonna do with this document that we've invested 160 grand in, and we got 40 grand left.
Are we gonna spend 40 grand that we're hearing that I haven't heard a whole lot of people that are happy with it?
But to Counselor Lemon's point uh that she brought up, we've got to do something with it, make a decision on what to do with it.
Um to Counselor Brown's uh point is like 2011 OCP was a happy place.
Why do we go to this new thing?
It's a good place to start because it served us well.
And there's some things to learn about it.
And and I think there's some things to learn about this process, but I think we need to make a decision about what we're going to do with this draft.
And I think when we say there's some points in it that we like, there there's an interpretation of, well, let's just bring that back to the public and have them, you know, uh just carry on with the way that we've been carrying on.
And from nobody that I talked to, do I think that's a good idea, but maybe we need to have a discussion right now about what we want to do with that draft document.
I know I would like potentially to take some pieces out of it, but that piece, when we say that, it it's pieces about the environment and some wording around some other areas necessarily, it's not about the core objective of that document, which is a map.
And with the language, Council Lemon, to your point, I can't understand the map.
I can't see it.
And we as a council are going to say, let's move it to the next level where we don't understand a map that we're marketing for tomorrow, nor do we necessarily understand the implications of the density to Counselor Rogers' point about a race toward 15,000.
We haven't managed growth.
We're we're um hoping for success.
And so I I don't know what the the only way to um start fresh, and my opinion, Mr.
Chair, is to probably start over.
Sorry, could you repeat that?
My my only way to start fresh and gain confidence again is likely to start over, but we've got to make a decision about what we're gonna do.
Yeah, yeah you know I I in all good conscience, given the the issues that I know with that document, and the total lack of respect I have in terms of the recommendations that came through there and no no height restrictions and um the transition areas that nobody seemed to want except for the people who sort of wrote this document.
I I just could never I just can't see myself bringing this to the public and saying hey what do you think about what do you think about this you know at this point because some of these ideas are just horrific and they didn't seem that there was that the that that they were actually wanted by the public.
So why would we then force the public to s sort of deal with these same sorts of issues that most of us on on council just just feel are are just totally contrary to what the public's uh wishes are.
You know, we certainly talked to enough people during the election.
In fact we ran most of us ran uh on getting rid of that draft OCP because it wasn't what the people liked and and they were concerned about it.
That's certainly what I heard.
I don't know maybe we need a like I say maybe we need a day to sort of work on this as a council because at at this point I just can't see us taking this document forward at all.
Yeah, I would like to see us continue on with the 2011 OCP and and and work on that.
Work on that.
If if there's one or two things from the other one that we can pull or whatever, so be it.
But I think we the 2011 one's fine.
Um yeah, we can do some tweaking, and I think having that um just one item dealing with that on on one day, maybe a full day, maybe five or six hours, who knows?
But I think it's important for us to express our concerns and and the things we want to see in the document.
The 2011 one is it's it's valid now, so let's proceed from there.
I I hate the idea I I don't like to see people ripping up a document and throwing it all away because that's not what we would do.
I think we would sell anything that we see that was decent in the draft.
We we we we can put it into the addition to the 2011 OC OCP.
Council Rogers.
Yeah, you know, one of the interesting things about the the uh current OCP that the draft, um there was this conceptual um drawings of some places, and it was only conceptual.
So now that we would know, I mean, if we were going to take this out and um uh to a uh uh what open house, I would imagine that uh the people living um around the mayor's place uh would like to see uh what a build-out would happen if there was um the zone and the transition zone with FSR two and three um built on there.
And so, what would that look like um to the remaining neighbors?
And so they'd have a sense, you know, if they would support it.
Um, what would that look like in terms of additional parkland for the uh residents that would be living there?
What would it look like to the signalizations, you know, of the the two intersections and how those people would get out?
So, as an experiment, if we think this this document is worthwhile, test it in that one area.
That might be a portion where we uh could give an assignment to staff and we could use it as an example to um uh to to see yeah the the viability uh at the end of the road.
And then we get a sense, good idea.
You know, just like that beautiful plan of what um on your court looked like, what the garage looked like, we could do an illustration of what um the mayor's neighborhood would look like in 2030 build it up uh counselor rogers all right lemon i know we're confusing um if you're talk if if can if my colleague here counselor rogers is speaking about public engagement if that's what that was I think it was I'm on board um I you know I three of us on on this, you know, of this body live in the two zones that have been most identified.
Um, so I you know, I I think we owe it to, you know, if if those are indeed the most contentious issues, areas, and I love my home, I want to stay in my home for, you know, the rest of my life, um, or however long.
Um, but if but we're in we're not impartial.
Um so if we were to consult with people people in res residents who don't live in those areas and say, what would you like to see along Island Highway between here and here?
What kind of um main strip of Bureau do you envision?
And what would you like to see, you know, up, you know, going up from Eagle Creek?
What do you see for that, you know, access and egress to our town?
Um, you know, perhaps that's some of the preliminary consultation that we do, that we take out, um, before we go into a retreat.
In terms of, I'm just gonna say of a document.
I mean, what we saw was, for example, just arbitrarily arbitrary increases in FSR because some study that was somewhat iffy to start with, just added it on.
And the fact that the document included duplexing and triplexing areas, just because, again, uh the pre person who sort of prepared this document thought it was a good idea.
So I mean there were a lot of things in there that were thrown in there had nothing to do with residents' views.
And this is one of the things I'd heard continually was they were given sort of four options, none of them they wanted.
But you know, which which of these bad options are do you choose?
And so that's my problem with bringing it back, this document back to people.
I'd much rather uh go back to two you know 2011, take some things out uh of the other document that we think might improve things, and then bring something back that council thinks that we can live with to the various areas and let them take a look.
Like we have four or five, six you know, what whatever the precincts are, bring people in to talk about their precinct.
Once they have some a document that's a little bit more representative of what, if nothing else, their council feels they heard from the public when they banged on doors and talked to people.
If I I just want to, you know, I just want to say that if only Erskine Lane had had this opportunity, if we'd had only done, you know, the experiment, so Erskine Lane could have seen what number nine, number seven, number ten, number five, maybe even number two, at least they could see so they would have time enough to move to a bay.
Um I think one thing that we haven't that we've kind of ignored though is also the provincial government's uh new legislation um where we might actually not have a say in having to you know uh increase um density and I would hate to have a plan that doesn't allow us to do that and actually we have to scrap it all together because it's not fit for purpose if we do need to increase.
Um so I just think we need to also take into consideration that.
Thank you, Priscilla.
Yeah, and and that's an excellent point.
And I we don't know exactly what that policy is gonna look like yet.
So putting the brakes on thing, lowering the temperature of our communities, I I think is important too.
Right?
This has been a contentious issue, and we need to uh the message from staff and from the council needs to be we're gonna hear you.
Unfortunately, right now we're not ready to hear you.
That's what we're really saying.
Uh but we're going to do it right this time and get uh folks identified in each one of the precincts, and we're gonna look at those, see what you want, and also with a lens of see what you need.
When I was out talking to people, there wasn't a single community that didn't single some space out for higher density.
Over here would be good, but you need a dog park here.
What they were talking about is or or or a grocery store.
We told.
What they were talking about is completing their community.
And you know what?
This last go, we never asked.
And we didn't complete any communities.
We completed nothing except creating a high density plan across the board.
And there was no answer about why we're doing this.
As I'm beginning to ask questions about what View Royal's growth rate should be, it's pretty standardized from what the CRD tells us it should be.
And it fit in with a provincial strategy as well.
So my point in this being is that I think our job is to design good communities and to manage that growth in proportion to what the the communities can take.
And the current OCP does not manage anything.
It opens the door to all kinds of concurrent development.
But the draft?
Yes, the draft is is is um would be unpredictable to see the results of growth and impact on our population and the impact on neighborhoods as well.
So I think whatever we decide to do if it comes to public engagement, if you're asking me should we take the current document to the public without really listening, not a marketing ploy in engagement, but actually listening to them, I think we got to be prepared to rewrite it entirely.
And if we're not prepared to do that, let's not take it to them because that's not engagement.
Yeah, definitely.
I agree 100%.
Again, stick with the 2011 and work from there.
If you go to the Atkins neighborhood, which is my neighborhood, Allison lives in a different neighborhood too.
If you go to Atkins Road, I'll tell you what people are going to say.
First of all, what's an OCP?
Secondly of all, they're going to want sidewalks in Atkins Road.
They're going to they want the farm to stay at a farm, stay in the ALR forever.
They want Kelvin Park to stay the way it is.
They want to enhance the fish fish spawning grounds down below.
They don't want to, there's no way they would want a high rise.
You kidding?
There's no one in Atkins Road that wants a high rise there.
They would they're fine with it in other areas.
So to go out to different little pocket communities, some people on our street think think they live in Langford.
Because halfway down the road is Lineford.
So yeah, I mean, I I mean, one of the things you just point out is people say, well, if they're told they need development in the town, they'll just say, Oh, well, yeah, sure, we'll we'll we'll put high density all on Island Highway because it's not in our area.
The concept I like that you just pointed out is you have specific precincts and you invite people from that precinct to come in and tell you what they want their community to look like.
Oh, I was just gonna say, um, to build on uh Mayor Tobias's comment.
I think I think I I would be anyway open to a total.
If if people came back and said, you know what, we have comments on all this, I would be fine with it.
I think going to them, this is just my experience in my other job.
You know, when you go to someone with something, it you always get better feedback than if you go with a blank slate.
So I think going with the draft will result in better engagement than saying, okay, tell us from the beginning, like going back to square one.
Sure.
Actually, square one means 2011, which which directly.
I think we'd get more out of it if we went to them with the 2011 OCP than with the draft.
Because the the draft is making all kinds of assumptions that they never bought into.
And uh we'd have to probably go back to square one again.
That that that is my feeling from all of the feedback I I've heard so far.
However, if we went with the 2011, where people were engaged and built it on newsprint at the elementary school, I think you'd get some buy-in there because it was a standing document for one.
Sure.
Thank you.
You know, when um we did a build out of the uh six-mile choco area, and um and we've had to do a lot of transportation things because there's so much uh other uh impacts from uh west shore and up on um up up the Malahat, and that's what's costing us a 1.6 roundabout 1.6 million roundabout it's because of that density so if that's a good indication that we needed a 1.6 fix not as well as we're gonna need sidewalks and then bike lanes on that road um I think that's a fairly good indication of what that traffic uh what that capacity carrying capability uh is and so we have to anticipate that and that again is making sure we get it right this time last thing um I I I with respect, I don't think we should totally scrap the draft um because that would be scrapping $135,000.
So it's so I th I think there are good points in the draft.
There are there are some reasonable um design options in the draft that are worthy of discussion.
And I I don't, you know, starting from scratch would be um fiscally irresponsible.
Thank you.
So what I hear there is there isn't the majority of council doesn't wish to proceed with the 2000 and that with the draft OCP.
There's however in discussions with what we should do with the 2011, if there's good parts of the two of the the draft, that draft OCP that can be taken and used, certainly to use it so it shouldn't be scrapped in that respect.
But when there are pieces that can be pulled out, uh that would be a good idea.
What I haven't heard yet is whether or not it's worth our while to get together for get a a facilitator and sit down with us uh at a at sort of a a day long retreat to sort of work on what we think uh about about uh some of the things that we're in you know where we should go with the OCP in terms of what things should you know how to do it how to proceed how to get those um that input from the various precincts and as well what what exactly you want to take to them i i don't think um we can get her around it and it's gonna keep on coming up I think we've got to call the question on whether we want to proceed with the 20 uh uh 20 or the or the draft OCP that's in place.
And if we don't do that, the push to bring that forward again to the public is not gonna stop.
So I think just for clarification, I thought we'd already decided that last week when all of council voted to start with 2011.
Yes, I did too, but it's obviously not.
Well, I mean, it's still as the motion, but yeah, yeah, and I think we need to specifically include it in the motion to say that and we can still use the the draft OCP language as we see fit, but there still still seems to be a movement of of some members of council wanting to pull that forward.
And I don't think we can move forward if that's always going to be seen as an option for us to entertain.
So I think if we want to start from a bank slate, we've got to call a question specifically on a motion that says council is not supportive of carrying forward with the OC with the current draft OCP as it stands.
I might think that's redundant, but given the last motion.
But if that's your your motion, is there a second or okay?
Do we need more discussion or should we just vote on that?
Just like carry.
Get into the discussion, please.
It's okay.
Well, let's let's do this one first and then we'll.
So the motion is not to proceed with the draft OCP.
Those in favor?
Motion carries.
Opposed.
I'll make a motion that we carry on as we have been with the 2011 OCP.
And to start off for council to have a workshop some date in the future, not too far in the future, to have have a workshop for us to go through that document and make suggestions for enhancements or things maybe maybe there's things we don't like in there.
I haven't seen that yet, but there might be to take it out and then work from that.
Okay.
Second.
Um discuss.
And then the mover.
Yeah, I think well, again, we we're using that document now, so let's carry on.
Um we're not all staff have already told us we're not obligated to to to change it whole wholesale.
So let's work on that and look at things how how we can enhance that document.
And if there's things in there we don't like, we can change.
And who knows, there might be one or two things in the other document I don't really want to talk about anymore, but there may be things in there we may want to.
Okay.
Second or yeah, and I agree.
Um let's make sure we get a full day, not nickel and dime, two hour.
Um, let's get a weekend, a Saturday, and um uh whatever and we're gonna hammer it out perfectly you know and there may be some exercises that we work on so that yes that we can just pull out uh portions of this and bits of that so but let's get a full day's workshop and and uh get it done allison so it's the workshop to actually work on the OCP or is it to say how we're gonna go forward with it because I have great concern if we're writing a document um that's not very democratic first of all and we are not the experts to write the OCP ourselves well we won't be writing the OCP but there's certain things members of council can provide certainly provide comments on and then we can determine how to proceed but the end of the day I think there's an agreement that we would be taking these to individual precincts and working with them to determine what they want their community look like as opposed to what we saw was uh well anyways I don't want to repeat what we've already been saying for so long yeah there there's two ways we can have a meeting because it's not a workshop, right?
It's gonna be open or it's gonna be closed.
And I'd be really reticent to um Councilor McKenzie's perspective of having perhaps another closed meeting about the OCP.
Um, so we can't just run and get together and and and kind of plan these things.
It has to be done in in in kind of a deliberate fashion because that's where we are.
Um, but I I think we're at a point right now where there's some lessons to be learned, right?
And I think we could have a discussion about what do we what worked in the 2011 OCP, maybe what didn't work in the last one.
Uh, and this isn't about content and it's not about rewriting.
But you know, as we are gathering data that we need to supply to government, and this is irrespective of the plan that they're going to tell us about more in detail about housing, is we've got some lessons to learn to low uh about our policy or our population projection.
In 2011, we've surpassed, I think, the set um amount of people that we should have by 2038 now, right?
That's what the 2011 OCP said.
Every document I'm looking at underestimates our rate of growth, our rate of growth effect of a lot of other things to Councillor Rogers point, uh, you know, for adding another officer when we hit uh 2015 to the town's level of staff per population to our traffic, to everything else, and we've completely lowballed that rate of growth, you know, to think that we've got to inspire a lot of growth is going to be you know we're overestimating uh but in some ways we're not and the only way we're gonna find that is we work with our staff and figure out by zone what worked in our our our land use planning that turned into zoning and what didn't like what have we still got sitting there that was a blob that's not developed yet from the 2011 OCP and why not?
Right?
I I think these are questions we've got to ask ourselves.
So if we zone something that is our intent that we'd like that to happen in that area.
And sometimes it has happened, and sometimes it hasn't and and what's our scorecard for making that happen.
So, what I'm proposing is that workshop not necessarily being structured around creating an OCP at all, but what do we learn from the process of doing both?
And that will help inform us on what we do next, I think.
So I would also, in terms of that, I think I don't want to see this.
I I just don't think it'll work if we're all sitting up here.
We need a facilitator to help work us through this.
And I would also think during Oak Day workshop, we can certainly talk about things that we like and don't like or things we think should happen in terms of you know, we're not rewriting it, but we should sort of lay out as individuals what we would like to see.
We've certainly had enough letters and comments from public about reams, and we've had lots of people present here and on the phone about the OCP.
So we've got a lot input, and I think if people know, and and it will be newsworthy that we're working gonna work off the 2011, people will have more comments.
We probably get more letters, and that's great.
And uh made it make it well known.
Actually, we've had more input from those letters than we probably had in the uh start of the draft.
Yeah.
We have a motion, um and we're talking about having a meeting, having it facilitated, which uh I'll just let the mayor work out with staff on a facilitator, and we're gonna within that we'll talk about how to proceed with the OCP as well as getting our off an opportunity for members of council to say you know, provide that information because it we help our council we help our our colleagues to to let us know how each of us feels, as well as we're telling the public what we think, and they can tell us what they think.
And within that plan, within that day, or the the the hope would be we would eventually get to the point where we have uh those precinct meetings so all in favor against carry so I gather that's unanimous why you guys give me the hard ones here okay so I can't even tell where I am on this document oh oh affordable housing.
Okay.
So way back when for the new members of council uh the the previous council uh was brought up the the option for new development where we required a rezoning to require a percentage, and I think we picked 10% of those units, should be affordable.
How you define affordable would be determined.
So there was some staff who's supposed to come back to us with that, but in the interim, what we had was an increase of the CACs by 10%, and that additional 10% went to CRD housing.
So what I'm asking is, and I'm not complaining that it hasn't come back, etc., but what I'm asking is if members of council feel that we should have a discussion on and when it comes to all new multifamily development requiring a percentage to become affordable housing, whether they're rentals or condos and I mean one of the issues would be well what if the developers don't want to do that?
Well if they want to rezoning they would have to do it.
And two I think we have so much development going on now that we've already approved if it delays thing a bit things a bit it's not going to be a big impact on us.
I can support that Ron I I think we need to have a um a a bottom line of you know the size of multi units.
Because for example, if it's it's it's six or you know twelve, perhaps not, but above a certain bar um that they have to they they that 10% has to be affordable.
Counselor Rogers.
Yeah, I I think um and staff can help me, but I think um uh we do have a policy that it was over 40.
If the the building was over 40 units, then uh 10% would have to be no none of that?
No.
Okay.
Uh well then, you know, that's I guess that's what um I and I'd be curious to see what Langford.
Langford doesn't contribute to the CRD affordable housing uh levy because they have made a commitment to um um you know require the developers to put in X percentage for every building.
Doesn't matter if how low the number of buildings was, I think they they it wasn't 40 and it wasn't 20.
So I think there was something of of a an uh requirement.
And um, you know, you don't want to build some loopholes where developer builds 20 so he gets under the wire, and then he builds another 20 two years later or a year later so he gets under wire, some technicality like that.
So I think the intent is a is a is a good one.
And um um so we want to talk about the CACs uh as well.
Well, let's get this one first.
And I know there's other municipalities have have bylaws like this, and so uh I I'm not suggesting staff runs this past us within a couple of weeks, but uh sure, just before it goes.
Thank you.
Thank you, Counselor Mattson.
Uh so um yeah, this is something that uh you know staff can look into for I think it'd be there has been work done on obviously back in have to go back to the report.
Thank you, yeah.
So back in 2021 and um council made some updates to the community amenities contribution contribution policy based on um that uh that direction from council.
So council increased the um amening contribution per dwelling unit and also required a 10 percent um cash contribution towards the um crd's regional housing fund uh incorporating um a certain percentage of or pardon me requiring a certain certain percentage of units as affordable in in a development is um is is definitely um a good yeah as you noted it's is done in other municipalities and um it i mean it's a good way to get units um i think the big question is is that how do we define affordable because municipalities define affordable very differently and um is it 30 percent of um income is it's the city of Victoria for example um defines defines it differently and they define it in their housing strategy so um i think this is something again is is is something interesting something staff can look into for council um so council can sort of consider and it it the whole picture and it could also form part of the community um the community of many contribution policy so at the city that's where some of these housing policies are embedded because it's a provision of density bonusing and then that and that's how we can secure it as part of a rezoning application.
So there are there are measures there are things we can do to to do that and um I think it if if you know if this is something that a council is interested in before making a decision then um that's something that uh development services can bring back.
Um so you can have a big picture in terms of maybe the best way of going about this.
Yeah, I mean one of the things I keep hearing is we want to make make it possible for you know our kids to sort of stay in the community.
The reality is what we're building is all goes to market and they couldn't afford it anyway.
All we're doing is bringing people who don't live in V Royal into the into the city.
We aren't actually helping the people who live here, you know, and having their families move.
So Alison and then Sid.
Um Yeah, no, I I agree.
I think if um even if the downside is that a development doesn't go ahead because of the requirement, I I echo your comments.
I think that's not a big issue because we're just then adding stock, which is unaffordable.
Um I have kind of a rhetorical question though.
Um, I think we need to have uh a variety of homes, not just apartments, but houses as well.
And how do we ensure those are affordable as well?
So I think I mean part of to work towards it is not having um a a set minimum um to it.
But yeah, how do we even one off homes, how do we make sure they're affordable?
I don't know, but Sid Mayor.
Uh uh to Allison's point, uh the city of Portland came up with something really cool.
And yes, they the FSR was on the bottom of it, but they took an existing community and did a visual and say, this is gonna be row housing.
This is gonna be triplex, this is gonna be four cottages.
And and just being able to see it, it really wasn't that bad.
Wasn't that bad at all.
But you know, what we're talking is is do we need to go and the fundamental question here from single family dwelling to six stories?
You know, that this is the questions that we're gonna be getting up that we're gonna be bumping into with the OCP.
There's some lessons to be learned, and one I'll while I'm on this bent too, in affordable housing, is I did have a tour of um a Pheasant Lane.
Uh uh and they're bumping into some same challenges like Lantana is, right?
Um and that's some of the first co-ops CRD put up, right?
And and so the history of co-op housing goes back a significant way in View Royal.
What they are finding now is they're challenged in managing their co-op because that family that moved in there in their 30s and had kids, now she's the only one left after the kids left and there was a divorce and she's in a three or four-bedroom co-op.
Right.
And there's no other one-bedroom or two-bedroom co-op to kind of move her into while they transfer out of that.
And the whole intent, of course, behind co-ops was to get family on their feet and and support it.
And of course the cost of houses just went out of control and those people couldn't do it.
So I I think there they're uh I I look at this for two lenses.
What can we learn from that and and and make it better?
And as these co-ops age, what's our plan to be able to think about that as part of our community plan for apportable housing to maybe build some of that diversity in there?
So then you've got an apartment that's attached to a three-bedroom co-op for a mother-in-law, or it could be closed off if that's now just a single person or a young couple.
So I think there's some lessons to be learned.
And what what I'd uh really like council to consider is in the future inviting the co-op presidents to uh address council on on some of their lessons learned for for the co-ops.
Okay, I don't disagree with any of that, but I think we're sort of getting away from the motion, which is just to have general support for the idea of having a set number of supportive units.
Right.
So we're getting your staff.
And staff will come back to us and then we'll have a more fulsome discussion in terms of how we'd like to go with, but we should know what's happening up there now, and staff will provide us that information.
So all in favor?
Against carried.
So you've did there's the whole point about the CACs, and staff have provided a uh report on um community amenity contributions to the document staff provided.
It's attached.
Yes.
Yeah.
So just um, I guess for for discussion purposes, um, as staff have indicated to us that um back in 2021, um, the uh community amenity funds, and these are amenity funds for uh all sorts of different things um to help a community uh withstand or um deal with the issues that the development happened near their neighborhood.
Anyway, so the whole point was that we increased the target cash amenities um from I think um five, you know, about $500.
So we increased it, and by doing that increase, then uh we added a new policy that 10% of the community amenity funds would be transferred to the CRD Housing Trust Fund.
So again, for background, the CRD Housing Trust Fund everybody pays.
We're all paying a levy.
Every resident is paying a levy.
So what $65,000 that we collected that in uh 2022, $65,000 really doesn't amount to very much at all in terms of what the levy is.
Langford is not in the regional housing trust fund.
I would hope that the CRD with the new mayor and council would approach and invite Langford in to make uh now contribute and be a player.
Then we would be, and I would hope that the CRD would raise the levy from another $5.
So the pittance of the $65,000 that we collected, we can either give back to the developer or we can turn it into another uh for all the 14% tax increase we've got, we can turn that those funds into um uh something that improves our residents and uh the community.
So I think we need to relook at the whole CAC's the contributions, I give it back to the developers, invite Cole or Langford in.
You know, if CRD doesn't want doesn't want to change the levy, fine.
But I think um we should have another look at this policy and um uh in light of our fiscal challenges.
And also once if we actually do have a a policy where we require 10% or you know, for lack of a better percentage to start with, uh affordable housing and all sorts of new developments, then we don't need to be providing the CRD any funds for that.
Exactly.
You're gonna be building or you know, two three units that are gonna be uh six hundred thousand dollars much more uh appropriate and useful than sixty-five thousand to uh the CRD.
All right.
Now with that, I'm delighted to be able to turn the chair over to uh councillor Rogers and Public Works and Transportation.
Thank you.
Uh in in terms of a general um uh report, the um BC Transit Commission, the uh commissioners have been uh selected.
Um I can't name them all, but I do know that the West Shore representative is the mayor of Machosen.
So um, yeah, for some reason, not View Oil.
Hmm.
Anyway, um we uh should work with our uh regional West Shore representative and uh and discuss the issues of transit in all our areas, including View Royal.
Um, as well, if um community members have not seen the remarkable transit uh report it was the Esquamolt View Oil Transit Local Transit Plan and uh 2021, and they talked about the number 40, a new route.
They talked about the 46 being improved and another remarkable uh route and what that was, it was had enormous uh benefit to view oil, sanach, the First Nations, and esquamalt.
So we have no idea when these short-term uh quick hits were are going to actually be implemented, uh, but I've got a call into uh transit and to find out and hopefully we can lobby to get those things happened.
Handied art is having a um uh corner community meeting Saturday at 11 a.m.
So if you're not pulling weeds or doing anything like golf, um you could certainly go and see what Handed art is doing.
I've arranged with Walk on Victoria at 10 a.m to meet at Viewell Elementary School and these uh this walking advocacy group uh is going to uh take some time, three hours, and we'll get some community members, I hope, and members of the council, so that we're with Sally and and her group, we can walk around View All and we can have a pedestrian view and a transit view of uh the draft active transportation plan and and uh some suggestions that um would be I think relevant to this council and to staff.
So, staff, you want to join us?
Love to have you too.
With that, I will now hand it to staff for the active transportation network plan update.
Thank you, Chair.
Uh, yeah, this is just uh another update to where we're at with the active transportation network plan.
Um, the last time you heard from us was probably around six months ago, and we've gone through um basically another phase.
We've just finished phase three of five, um, which was our second round of engagement.
Included a uh bike shop plus another uh survey.
So um while there's no presentation, I'd like to provide a little bit of a preamble on this document in itself, just to kind of give you the the purpose of this um not the purpose of the what we heard, but the purpose of our second round of engagement.
Um this phase is predicated upon what we've done before.
So we've had a background report, we've had the um our engagement within the ENN rail corridor as well as the the Galloping Goose and uh and another survey, and from that we had a what we heard summary report number one.
Um the purpose of this report and the purpose of this engagement is to kind of funnel in what the priorities are.
So um it's basically taking the the high-level um priorities found in the background report and also taking into account what we've heard from the community, taking those two together, and then throwing it back to community and saying, Are we on the right track?
Try to get a temperature in the room.
And so the report and the what we heard summary, uh, based on what we found in general, it there was general uh agreement that we are on the right track in terms of priorities.
To give an example, um, you know, it I don't want to go through all the the factoids in the report, but there's been general uh agreement in terms of the the top three corridors, Abnells Road, Island Highway, and Elmkin uh interchange, not just the interchange, but also probably the whole the whole corridor north and south.
Um, and then there's uh another top 10 four road corridors, the intersections and that um looking at the pie charts there that it looks like there is there is uh strong support and support uh over and above the the non-support so um again this is just uh to obtain a temperature in a room on that uh the next steps for us is to incorporate that into our draft plan and uh present it to yourself as well as to the public through an open house to better obtain a to get at the final draft uh active transportation network plan um the one item that this uh what we heard summary does not take into account is um the the bigger picture so uh it's not to say that we've ignored some corridors it's more or less just trying to identify what the quick builds are and to use that to form kind of the structure of the draft active transportation plan um with that said uh the report is here the what we heard summary is here I'm happy to take questions could we take uh the number one it's great so far and I've been following the your site as you go and I think it's great.
Um uh can we take a look at the hot spots that we know of for lack of sidewalks and and from an active transportation perspective, like get your read on them as well.
That would help out.
We know that there are safety concerns about them or lack of bike lanes, but those are safety concerns.
And what I would like to know is like, are we going to motivate people to use it more?
If we do create it, what does that might look like?
And where does that connect us to?
Um, to some of the discussion earlier, as we've approved previous councils approved developments in the past, and they were kind of not connected with things, or there were it was clunky in connecting them.
And I think you know, the lesson learned there is as we come up with new developments and consider approval, one of the things that's striking me is we have to consider highway noise because we know that's a thing now.
We also have to consider um not only roads and and parking and all those other things, but how is this is this going to take a bike lane too?
Should that go in right at the start?
So um that, and I was walking down Irksken Lane on the weekend, and we're we've approved some developments, but we haven't approved kind of improved the safety of the people that are living there.
So there's no sidewalks on Archie and Lane at all, right?
And so the the people that are living there said, can you put in a sidewalk at least to keep us safe from the trucks and moving things and and as you're building?
So I think we as a council not only have to consider the finished product, but the process of build as well.
Like, how is that gonna work out and impact things?
We have people now in our communities that are going through eight months of blasting, and if you lived next to a blast site, like I have twice now in my neighborhood, um it it it's nerve-wracking.
So what are we doing from active transportation to take care of moving people?
Because that could be a year of build, right?
Um and and so what's our mitigation plan to consider not only cars and pedestrians but bikes now too um like with a spire uh building and then having the gravel and the road stuff on that's bad for a car but it's worse if you're on a bike and you're hitting a big chunk of rock.
So just considerations like that with the active transportation plan to remind us as council to say if we're putting out a warning for pedestrians or cars and bikes are also going to be part of the thing.
So just something to add on to maybe to help us use that plan a little bit better.
Thank you.
Uh yeah, so um good questions.
Uh I could probably answer in two part.
Um, the first part with respect to construction.
Um administratively, yes, we try to keep the the lanes clean and that.
And um, I don't want to get too far down the rabbit hole, but um uh uh staff can um chat together from a development perspective to see what we can present to you at uh Council for a development permits rezoning for consideration in terms of additional safety above and beyond.
Uh that might be an idea, but it's certainly something that we'll have to chat at a staff level with respect to the gaps in the network and whether or not people are going to use the corridors.
Um, yes, great question uh usually you go by the adage if you if you build it they will come gaps closing the gaps uh significantly at least you know given that i i i live transportation and by closing these gaps you do encourage more people to use them that's only half the battle the other half the battle is the consistency of your uh design so what I mean by that is you um going from this feature to another feature to another feature that can also inhibit uh usage of your corridors so um from a staff level and also with our consultants, we're the draft plan will look at a holistic level to find uh not only quick bills, but also long-term endeavors to link these important corridors together.
Uh to give you an example and not to be self-serving, but uh, you know, the Spire, the three Humpkin, uh, they will be providing sidewalks there.
Um, there is a capital project that has been approved previously to fill that gap between that development and Eagle Creek to have a sidewalk.
So um the town has been looking at this in the past, and it's good to hear that um what we're thinking about is actually the right thing.
So and we're gonna keep on on uh reviewing and looking at this from uh from a big picture level as well.
Yeah, just as a follow-up to what Sid or turn it off.
Um walk this road, Stone Ridge to Eagle Eagle Ridge, it's uh eight foot shoulder and a bike path there, yet it's in our financial plan for a sidewalk, and it's not even in V Royal.
You got Atkins Road, which is an extremely busy road.
If I look out in the morning, it's backed up all the way up into Langford, and there's no sidewalk from Anya Road all the way to the Langford border.
And it's a heavy travel road.
Uh I see grandkids and uh grandparents taking their grandkids and parents taking their kids down to look at the farm, check out the horses and the cows.
Uh people walk down that road, and even though it's got a sidewalk with our uh roadway, but this big, and they cut up through uh uh the fellow's um roadway to get onto the trail.
The guy that was here uh a few months back anyway.
He Bud is his name.
And people use his driveway to access the galloping goose.
And and people are afraid to go there because he's got signs, but there are no trespassing.
Yet people walk down the it's scary walking down there.
It's poorly lit, it's very narrow shoulder, and it is in our financial plan, but it's it's based on on grants.
So just an example of two different sideways.
Three guys, uh, we walk down that Watkiss Road to the cheap breakfast of quality foods, the 599 breakfast.
So a little plug for them.
But it's eight foot wide, and there's already a bike path there.
And and talk about pathways.
Uh, people on Erskine Lane.
Uh you could create a pathway to Eagle Ridge.
And people start using that pathway.
You you build your pathways according to where people walk, natural pathways.
Uh John and I did a walk about the other day.
And all under the part, what's it called?
Pars uh bridge was it?
Parsons Parsons?
No.
What's the Craigflower?
Craigflower Creek.
And that bridge there.
I mean, there's all kinds of little pathways from the trail to Watkins and there's gravel, muddy old pathways that people use.
But you know, they should be they should be enhanced.
You know, put some gravel down there and bikes and pedestrians walk down there all the time.
Uh crime prevention through environmental design, the land knows that.
Natural pathways.
You you build the pathways after people start walking them or biking them.
And Erskine Lane.
There could be a pathway built to Eagle Ridge to solve the problem about people getting to that mall.
Thank you, Rodney.
Just to confirm, there is a sidewalk on the books for Erskine Lane.
Yes, through development.
Right.
Through developments, actually.
Yes.
Yes.
Yeah.
So um yeah, just to clarify, the the the one amazing thing that not only do we have sidewalks on both sides of Erskine Lane, but um thankfully we're gonna have a bike lane up the hill as well.
And I really appreciate uh this residents really appreciate that, not only from Erskine Lane, but also from Stone Ridge.
Thank you so much.
There was incredible opposition to that, but that was political.
I'm glad that's gone.
Um, and you know, the other the other really important thing about Erskine Lane, since we're talking about it, is um apparently CRD and municipalities don't have a design uh to show how uh the connection, you know, the off uh how you build uh what designs might be the best design, not only for cyclists, God bless them, but for pedestrians and dog walkers and you know seniors with mobility devices.
So I I think that's a major gap.
And unfortunately, we're gonna wait for unit 10, lot 10 to build that.
So number nine and number seven are gonna have to wait for number 10.
I think there's a problem.
So, you know, when we we've we plan this out because of course number 10 came in a roaring that they're gonna build tomorrow.
Well, they didn't.
So now we're gonna have all those people, 600 bikes, um, creating a hassle going up and down Nurskin Lane.
But to the draft report.
Um, I had a look at it and I am really excited about uh Admiral's Road.
Finally, Stanich and Esquamo and this gap called View Royal is finally gonna get fixed.
You know, hopefully we will.
Hopefully we will have bike lanes and sidewalks because you know, God bless them, the uh the manager of uh Kim of Kenny and Tire wants the bike lanes, wants the sidewalks, and he wants a bus so that his employees can, you know, transit to work or whatever without having to bring a car and put a car on on the on the uh Kenny Ontario site.
So I guess that's my question.
You know, when when the bike people uh did their bike shops and they went along Admirals, did they think about bus?
Unfortunately, I was not there, so I can't confirm.
I what I do know through Chasm's staff and the consultant is that um every single location that they have stopped and to talk about uh went under the lens of uh pedestrians as well, not just cyclists.
And um while I'd be I probably shouldn't say or confirm without conferring with them whether or not uh bus was incorporated, but I do know that uh BC Transit has been in chats with staff about improving transit on Admirals Road.
Yeah it it's really exciting and one of the things that Trans has said uh listen listening and learning and regretting uh the situations downtown Victoria um and making people really nervous particularly the handicap um mobility devices and so forth is having these bus islands you know and um narrow lanes and and so forth so uh I think transit really, really wants to make sure that when we do active transportation, we give them a fair shake.
We give the transit riders a fair shake.
And that's what makes me nervous about the uh vision of uh the Homican Overpass.
We've got a sidewalk there already.
We've got a bike lane there already.
And you know, when you hear Mr.
Brown, Councilor Brown talking about the areas that don't have sidewalks or that are really dangerous, and and we're going to you know focus in on this one particular idea because the cyclists wanted it.
Well, you know, it also begs the question where are they going to move the bus stops or what's the implications of that on the Helmican Overpass?
That's a lot of money, and it's not our property.
So that's one concern.
The other concern that I really have is down here on the Island Highway along Shoreline School, that idea, and we'll call it an idea.
But you know, to have a, you know, we've we've seen the difficulties of the multi-use path on the E and N and the Gallop and Goose.
It's two lanes, and guess who gets to use the two lanes the most?
It's not pedestrians, it's not dogs, and it's not mobility scooters.
So what really makes me nervous is that we're going to this this idea that we would use a multi-use path, I think it's multi-use path, you know, where we have students, and you know, because they are still thinking to put in an elementary school there on Shoreline.
And as we know, Christie Point is going to have to have a long merge lane there.
And this whole idea of, you know, if it's going to be bi-directional bike, why put the bikes all on one side?
I mean, can can you help me with that?
Uh yeah, thanks for the question.
Um, I'll speak overarching with the three major corridors in that if you look at the options there.
Um, we don't have one set option.
It it says this or multi-use path or separated by cleaner sidewalk.
I think Apple's Road had that in there.
And uh these are by design because uh we don't want to fix a uh design into everyone's mind just now.
We're still in public engagement.
Uh we still know that there are options, and we still know that the public has um that we could use the public's help in letting us know what they think on these corridors.
Um, in addition to that, uh the draft plan will provide options and will probably provide additional information for yourselves uh that will help drive the decision.
And that what I mean what I mean by that is that a lot of these assets will require unique maintenance.
So in order for us to really or for council to come up with a decision on how we should proceed, um they should get the bigger picture as to what it would take to maintain these assets.
So that's why we have this range right now.
The final draft report will be provided um in the end of March, April around there with the open house, and we'll have our consultants uh presenting as well so that you can ask um all the questions in the world for them.
Well, you know, I won't let you out the hook just yet.
Um again i'm gonna i'm gonna come back to this.
Again, I don't understand if we have a sidewalk and we have a bike lane why you want to put the cyclists and the bikes together in one it it really it's it's you know it's complex it's costly and fraught with you know liabilities and and accidents and whatnot and um how and because I guess there was all this idea of what we're gonna how we're gonna get up onto the ENN from there.
You know again that's that's um I would hope in fact I would ask that the consultant, I'd love to go to the with the consultant, I'd like to see what he wants, what he's suggesting, because with residents that look at it, they're only looking at concept, and they if they say they're in favor of it, they have no idea what the implications are.
And if it's you know, so you know, that's that's the whole problem.
Um, so I really severely question that's one of the reasons that I'm I need to get the transit and walkers out there so that we get another perspective on this darn thing.
Yeah, and like I mentioned before, a lot of it has to do with uniformity.
ENN is a multi use path in general.
Um, having that uniform uh treatment also helps, but also you we when you look at the actual trans the BC Active Transportation Design Guide, they have metrics as to what's um why uh infrastructure like this works and it comes with usage density and that.
Now uh the consultant has certainly looked into it, and there is another layer of engagement where we can go to the public and um invite them to let us know what they think about this.
It is an important corridor, though it's near the school, near the ENN, it's a certainly important corridor.
It is very complicated corridor, very costly.
Yeah.
Sorry, comments, thoughts?
No.
Okay.
If um if the consultant is uh willing to meet members of council to um actually walk and talk this pro idea on the island highway, would he uh is is he available to do so we are supposed to have our as a condition of uh federal funding, which is an amount of up to fifty thousand dollars, we're supposed to have our plan done by March, uh end of March.
Based on uh scheduling and some other items, uh, we have asked for an extension till about April, and that is basically just staying in the course right now.
So they have asked for a bunch of information on what we're gonna do to stick to that guideline.
Um I would be remiss of my duties to say that uh I we probably should stay the course.
Um, but that said, we do have an open house, we do have in our layer of engagement, and certainly, like before, like we've accommodated the um the other advisory committees on providing comments, and certainly something of the same flavor could happen with this.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Um actually a question for you, uh Councillor Rogers.
The the walking tour that's happening on the 18th, how will that relate to or how will it feed into this plan?
Yeah, a good point.
So my my thoughts are that um Walcome Victoria will look at a few examples.
Um hopefully we'll get some residents that'll um uh consider the points that they've they're raising, and uh that they'll take those points back to the neighborhood.
They'll look around and see what areas when they do come to an open house, they'll say, Well, how come you miss Red Yard?
It's right next to a school.
It doesn't have a sidewalk.
How come you, you know, why did we miss that?
You know, if we think Jedburgh's really important to get for a sidewalk for kids to get to school, what about you know a street that's right next to the school?
So, you know, they're I think they're gonna ask a lot of questions, and maybe we'll have residents from from um uh Atkins, you know, asking questions um why, you know, why that hasn't happened.
It was in the last uh sidewalk master plan of 2008, and it still hasn't happened.
So there's there's gonna be lots of opportunity for people to uh get some ideas, take them away, and really make sure that it's a plan that's um assessing all the fragmented portions of UAL.
And I just want to make a comment Victoria, Esquamo, Oak Bay, they're very old.
They've had years, centuries, you know, almost of being able to build sidewalks.
VR was only incorporated in 1988.
So and we've had fragmented buildings, fragmented sidewalks, bits and pieces everywhere.
We can see that on Helmican.
So I I think that's one of our challenges is trying to find uh you know a ways of better connecting these the um the communities but being able to ensure that we're addressing all ages and abilities.
And one of the things that worries me about this plan active transportation if we're really looking to get people out of the cars is that they need the infrastructure they need to know where the water is the washrooms are electric charging stations for their scooters i mean there's there's all sorts of things that other advanced municipalities are looking at in their active transportation plans to serve their um their public thank you i think um my question was more and it's probably really practical um like as in the timing and how who's gonna give it to who like I what I don't want to happen is that we get to I'm sorry, we get to a point with this plan and then this feedback acquired comes later.
I know.
It was really unfortunate.
Um I it's too bad it's later because um I I guess if we'd budgeted it properly, we could have um ensured that there were walking tours at the same as bike tours in November.
Um, but that didn't happen.
So um it it's it's and we've we've kind of left out you know the the other component, the transit users of the people that are using the trails, as Dawn just mentioned, the hospital trail.
So it's um you know it's it's almost I know it's after almost too late, but better late than never.
And I and I think that um it's incumbent upon us to um uh consider those points and make sure that um we get them because it's happening on Saturday.
You know, we'll get a list and we'll make sure that all those points are are collected and gathered and into that report.
I I guess the other sorry the other point is uh Liam the you know and is the consultants going to be doing a objective evaluation criteria to help prioritize uh the hotspots for like sidewalks or bike plans so that we know what the quick hits might be um one better they'll be providing their professional judgment uh and then just one anecdote about uh welcome victoria uh we have been engaged in them since day one so um and I think they've been to a few of our or taking part in our events.
Um if they have more comments, uh again, more than welcome.
Thank you.
You you Rector Bayesh, did you have a comment?
Yeah, I I just um it occurs to me that I love the fact that staff has adopted an asset management uh framework.
Uh I work for many years creating shelfware.
You know, if you're wondering what that is, it's that um million-dollar document that will never be implemented.
Uh and now I the government's pretty used to putting out contracts uh like that that uh are all kinds.
And something is really useful for me if it's a working document.
I don't care if it's signed off or official, as long as the data is accurate in it and it's been updated and I can see where it's been updated, because that really is an asset.
If we paid 50 grand for it or 30 grand for it, and if we don't update it, it's not worth anything if nobody uses it.
But if everybody is using it and it is being updated, it's like the calculator on your phone.
It's like it doesn't need to be updated, it works every time.
You don't have any users complaining about it.
You don't need to run a tutorial, but it's a go-to and you don't have to change it.
So I'd love to see our documents that we're spending a lot of money on creating kind of come into the same mentality of asset management to say we're gonna have to replace this at some point.
Did we add into it this year?
Have we created a space in our year to uh give some thought to the active transportation plan?
Or how will this new development affect transportation or or or another strategic document that we have?
Just keep in mind, I I I just think that if we're spending this money, uh let's make a useful document, let's make it right.
And uh especially with the accessibility group that uh Don is now have access to, and there's certain areas that will be able to help us out for accessibility that perspective that we don't have.
My only thing is like uh as we do strategic documents for gosh sakes, if uh if we can link them together and and make them better as we go, then that makes it better.
Indeed, and uh uh Sally um when um she's will invite the uh individuals from have accessibility issues to participate on on Saturday's event.
One remarkable takeaway of um of the uh the first report, um I'm sorry, I can't think of the name.
But uh in the first report there is a um bikewalk dot org and it's an interactive uh map where you can plunk in issues uh on the map while I've been going crazy.
Look forward to it.
No, I I I did move recit, I think.
Um but you're you're but this is this is Council uh Rogers.
Motion to receive all in favor?
Dan's carry.
Thank you.
I know folks are anxious.
Question period.
Uh yeah, we've got a few things left, folks.
So uh correspondence, can I get a motion to uh receive A and B?
So moved.
All in favor?
Not opposed.
And question period.
Uh anybody got a question in the room?
Even staff, you can throw one in.
No takers.
Carl, we got uh anybody on the phone?
Mayor Tobias, we have no callers tonight.
Surprised anybody's still awake.
Um sure.
Yeah, please.
Tonight I I saw you guys discuss something and agree and I uh I hope you know so I'm gonna introduce yourself.
Oh I'm sorry, Doug Wilson, 291 B Royal Avenue.
Um I'm I'm gonna ask you to consider this that you passed a another motion to essentially go back to 2011 draft um OCP.
I want you to consider that you also everybody said we need to use the draft as a resource.
It was created, it's been paid for.
It's a it's probably an excellent resource for some things.
It's one of those sort of trust but bear but verify things.
And I guess I asked this a week ago.
John said he wants to be able to see what a development's doing.
And Sid or Mayor Tobias said he wants to be able to see what the effect of the density is going to be.
Land capacity analysis is going to do that at the development scale, at the town scale, everywhere in between.
It'll stand up and tap dance on a map for you.
And if you drive it with your GIS system, you'll be able to see it.
Just ask you to really think about that.
Go to go to the ASRI site and look at their urban development stuff.
It's worth a zillion dollars.
You can't afford it.
But I'd ask you to just look and think of the concepts.
And I'd also like I heard tonight that there's maybe some new information gonna come out about population projections and their utility and and them and methodology, and that's it's good because they've been kind of a trailing indicator at best of what happens um i hope you'll keep an open mind about using metrics other than population projections as your data signal that tells you what the true forecast is the population projection may be the noise I believe it is the signal is what you need to forecast from so I'll just ask you to to think about that there are other other sign there there are more likely signals out there and so don't get please don't get stuck on the population projections.
And I really appreciate having the opportunity to ask these things.
Thanks.
Thanks, Doug.
Always great words of wisdom.
Appreciate it.
So that concludes question period.
We've got no motions, notice the motions, no closed meeting resolutions.
Can I get a motion to terminate?
Second.
And Mr.
Grace.