Committee of the Whole

Hello everyone.

So this committee of the whole meeting is called to order.

We recognize the Lakwangan speaking people known today as the Esquimalt Nation and Songhese Nation, and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.

This evening we will hear from the public during the public participation and question periods of the agenda.

A reminder that council chambers is a safe, respectful, and inclusive space.

All members of the audience are asked to refrain from clapping, cheering, or openly expressing your opposing opinions when others are speaking or when they are done speaking.

When it is your turn to talk, please do not speak disrespectfully about anyone else, including counsel or staff.

Do not use rude or offensive language.

Do not make statements or allegations that call into question the character of anyone else.

Do not speak or act in an aggressive, bullying or harassing way.

Council wants to hear the views of those participating in the meeting in an open and impartial forum.

If you wish to provide comments during the public participation period or ask questions during question period, please begin by indicating your name and street name for the record.

You may then give us the benefit of your views.

To provide a comments virtually, scan the QR code or use the link on the live webcast stream or the town's website under live webcast.

Again, we ask that you provide your name and street name to begin your comments.

Your comment will be read out loud at the appropriate time by a member of our webcast team.

Public participation comments are limited to five minutes for each speaker and must be related to items on the agenda.

Question period is open to any question and is limited to two minutes for each speaker.

You will be timed.

This meeting will be recorded by participating in the webcast.

You are consenting to being recorded, and the recording will be available on the town's website for future access.

So I will move now to approval of the agenda.

Are there any changes to the agenda?

Thank you.

Moved by Councillor Brown.

Seconded by Councilor Lemon.

All in favor.

Any opposed?

No.

Okay, carried.

Moving on to minutes.

Uh are there any changes to the minutes?

No?

Okay, moved by Councillor Brown.

Second.

Seconded by Councillor Lemon.

All in favor.

Any opposed?

No.

Carried?

Okay, now so swiftly onto public participation period.

So we'll start with people in the room.

If you would like to um uh take the time to speak, you may go up to the microphone.

No?

Oh, you're irish, Madam Chair.

I'm not sure how this is uh all works, but the uh committee of meeting.

Can you hear me?

Committee of a whole meeting is uh this is the first time I've participated in one of these, and I'm hoping that it's going to be fun and go uh get to the bottom of what's a conversation to do with short-term rentals.

My goal is to uh have short-term rentals allowable in our area.

And the registry that they created for legal suites, which are part of the primary residence, uh requires a business license.

When we were told at the last minute through an audit that we needed one, my neighbor first found out before I did that you needed one and was denied one.

But then when I was told they give you only a few days' notice to get this done, and I already knew the answer.

So I asked for more time, and they suggested that they weren't giving me any more time, that you either got one or you don't.

But they did say that there is uh another way, and it's case by case.

View Royal can give me a letter or someone like me, a letter that is allowing it to happen.

Kind of like what we're doing for the two-month period for the short-term rental being allowed for the FIFA soccer fans.

So if this is too much or you're worried about too many people doing it, then you can take uh case by case and give out a letter to those like myself who are asking for it.

I checked this morning.

There's four people on MUTUS, which I deal with, the marketplace that I deal with is Airbnb, and there is four in the area operating, and I guess they've slipped through the cracks, or they're not in the registries radar for an audit, but uh eventually they will be, I guess, just like me and Murray were.

Um, it is a hundred dollars that you pay to the to get the registry number, which allows you to run in one of those marketplaces.

I think there's gonna be a problem with the two-month thing getting a registry number for the people that want to participate in that short-term trial.

I don't think it'll happen.

I don't think they'll they'll give them the short-term period that they're asking for, and without that number, they can't participate in any of the marketplaces.

So it is $100, not as previously mentioned $450 per year to to do the registry.

Uh you have to go through Service Canada.

You have to point your fingers at your eyes and take pictures.

You have to figure out how to put a PDF into a JDF to send off all the important information to prove that you own the house.

It was a big task and multiple errors just by simply putting the wrong street number with the street number and the street name on the same piece of paper got us denied, replaced or kicked out three times in a row.

It was a big to-do to get it done and then turn around paid the $100 and then got denied later.

The $100 that we used to pay for a legal suite I'm suggesting if this goes forward that we keep track of all this and pay $150 adding the $50 administration fee like they mentioned what they'd like to do with business licenses because it takes time and effort and filing and pieces of paper.

So if we have the extra $50 so that the view royal is not putting out money to make this happen.

I think that the $100 uh $150 the new rate for the levy will bring out the and only be allowed to have the business license for those people that are previously participated.

So their place has already been checked.

They have off-road parking and all this stuff in place or they wouldn't have got the ability to have the legal suite levy in the first place.

So this is way we can keep track of it and give it to the people that uh abide by the rules to get the suites put in place properly in the first place.

With that in place, it should solve the uh legal or uh the the off off-street parking issue that people that were worried about when we first brought up the short-term rental uh allowability in our area.

So there is no condoms either in the area that's for uh on short-term rentals, and there should never be if because it's not part of your primary residence, there's huge fines that are put out by the government, like upwards of a thousand dollars a day.

So people that did have them that put them up for sale and or they put a long-term renter in there because there's no way they're gonna be able to uh uh participate in the short-term rental or advertise as such.

Already mentioned that and I've already mentioned that.

So I'll just uh sit by now and listen to everybody discuss and hope that we can uh all agree that this is something that's gonna be good.

I think in the good days when there was uh no registry, there was maybe 12 that I could look at in in this area that I could compare pricing to to try and get the pricing figured out.

So I don't think we're talking a lot of people.

And if we do make change back to allow it, well there never was allowed, but people that are doing it right now will probably continue.

But I don't think people are gonna go get rid of tenants or existing tenants, long-term tenants that are they like and are good to go to this avenue that we are.

We find it so convenient for the nurses and stuff, and we're so close to the hospitals why we do it in the first place.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And I'll see if there's anyone online that would like to speak.

Chair McKenzie, we have uh no messages online.

Okay, thank you.

Uh so we'll move on to uh petitions and delegations.

So first we have an update from the chief bylaw officer.

That's you.

My apologies, I was dozing a bit, long day.

Uh thank you for having me.

Uh Mark Groulx, Chief Bio Officer for the CRD.

Uh good evening, Mayor and Council members and View Royal staff.

Thanks again for having.

Hopefully you have before you the stat sheet for I'm gonna cover off basically a year end, because uh I wasn't able to come here, I think in January, so that's why I'm here today.

Um and usually unless you have some questions after, you may just go through some of the highlights, which are the dog bites for that last quarter.

So we had four.

I think one was in October and three in December.

Uh nothing really significant, uh, all of them were uh minor for the most part.

Um uh one of interest was occurred in Thetis Lake Park.

Uh and it involved what we believe is a dog walker who we were unable to identify.

We spent uh quite a bit of time trying to track this person down.

But the irony to the whole story is that the dog that this person had had a muzzle on it, but yet it was still able to engage another dog, uh the complainant, and uh do some uh not serious damage to the dog, but uh significant damage.

So we're still trying to in the back of our mind trying to identify who this person is.

Um the other three that we had were you know everything from uh somebody walking down the road at you know uh engage another person on the sidewalk.

They might have had two dogs, and uh one of the dogs just unsolicited jumped up and bit somebody in the hand, so it was a minor injury, but you know, these are these things happen, and of course the people who owned the dog were just devastated, so they're very cooperative right from the onset.

And I think all three of them that was the case.

Um the thing I want to bring to your attention is that we are we are currently working with uh bylaw uh staff in View Royal because we're making a recommendation because we I think I mentioned this the last time I was here.

We're making a recommendation to maybe look at amending and updating your your animal control bylaw, and we're and and we're willing to help with that.

One of the things we really want to emphasize is uh currently your bylaw has a dangerous dog declaration only.

That's all it is, and statistically, less than five percent of all dogs anywhere are actually considered dangerous.

That's from a an expert uh told us that.

Uh therefore um we're recommending that, and we're doing this with other uh um stakeholders, other municipalities, and they have some of them have already adopted the aggressive designation.

So there'll actually be two.

So it gives us that sort of that flexibility.

You might maybe even in 50% of these, we might have declared the dog aggressive, or we might even have given them a warning uh to say, uh your dog acted aggressive, and you know, if this happens again, it's gonna actually get a designation.

And usually with that, it means it'll always have to be on leash.

Uh, ironically enough, in this one case I explained to you that both dogs were on a leash.

So dogs do silly things, they jump up at people.

Uh, but that's what the whole premise of having a secondary lower threshold um system allows us to actually do something that's a little bit more robust versus just giving a dangerous dog caution.

That's just a document, it's like a warning, and it doesn't really apply in in a lot of the cases, but it's all we have right now.

So we're working with uh your uh bylaw people, and hopefully that will be forthcoming this year, we're hoping.

We think it'll be it'll really help.

Yeah, of course, with it comes fines, like a different fines scheme with it, a little bit higher.

It's to put the responsibility back on dog owners and not on the general public that happen to be used in parks or what have you.

Um short of that, um the only other uh point of interest for you is not really directly related to uh the stats I provided you, but it's just news, I guess.

Uh uh we uh the CRD have just recently uh received the um responsibility for uh the regional trails system, which means the ENN trail, I think, all through uh View Royal is ENN, and of course it's the goose lockside, all 93 kilometers of it.

So I'm just bringing this to your attention.

Or do we just got it?

We're just kind of transitioning, but you may see us uh on these trails and go, what are they doing?

I mean, are they here servicing us and our bylaw?

No, we have dedicated staff for that.

Um, but I think um I think it'll be a benefit.

I mean, uh, they're also looking at changing the bylaw.

We'll be enforcing the current CRD parks bylaw, but the regional trail system, they have a long-term plan and they want to believe it or not, they want to control things like speeding bikes and that sort of stuff.

So uh should be interesting.

Um, but uh we're prepared to step up.

We're growing, and just like all the communities.

That's all I have to say.

If you have any questions about the stats, I'll answer questions.

Thank you.

Uh Councillor Brown, I see you have a question.

Yeah, thank you, uh Mark.

Now you're probably not aware, but a couple meetings ago we already passed a motion to change the bylaw.

Uh it'll come back to us on a staff report to add the aggressive dogs in.

So uh we were I I I believe I called that contacted uh Miss Henderson to advise her of that.

But anyway, um it's been passed, so it's just a matter.

I know there's other things other than the aggressive, you know, the fine schedule and everything else, but we did pass that already, so I'm sure she knows that.

I just maybe forgotten, but all I know is there's there's other things we're looking at um uh updating for your butt like recommendations, so that's good to know that that's been approved.

Thank you.

Do any other uh members of council have questions?

Counselor Mattson?

Sure.

I'm Mike, I'm encouraged to hear that uh you'll now be controlling the the walkway.

Uh I so I both cycle and walk on it, and so I might and my bike, I have an e-bike, and sometimes I'll do 35 kilometers an hour and get people zooming past me.

So I'm just curious to see what sort of speed limits you're gonna put on there and how on earth you're ever going to enforce them.

So that's one question.

And the other is is there anything we can do to as a pedestrian, like the people on road bikes, like there's no bell ringing to let you know they're passing, and they go very quickly and silently past you.

And I've seen people sort of you know just coincidentally make a turn or they hear something turn around and almost get hit by the bike.

Is there any way we can either encourage or force people to start uh acknowledging when they're passing people on those pedestrians?

Like it's crazy, it's dangerous.

Those questions are absolutely valid.

You can imagine our first couple of meetings with the regional trails people for the CRD who just inherited this responsibility.

And of course, we're like many of those questions that you just asked, we're posing those questions.

So it's gonna take some time, but you know, like anything, like even with policing, you often you start with a sort of an educational type program.

Um, you know, I I envision where you're gonna see us setting up with probably um sandwich boards or something like that.

Uh, we may even adopt there's a like we we've spitballed so many ideas in such a short period of time, January, the month of January, um, so that we can sort of present that to the the department that oversees it, and and then hopefully something good will come out of it.

Like there was talk about you know, radars and all that kind of stuff, but you have to remember whenever you start bringing in technology, that adds quite a bit to a bylaw because you know you have to be certified, that kind of stuff.

So we're we're we're gonna be out there doing an educational component probably for the majority of this year.

Um, so you could expect anything.

You could expect that we might blitz a certain area, and I know View Royal has a few of those spots already, but we we may have a number of people there, and this is going to be like what's going on here, and we're gonna invariably we're gonna slow people down just by virtue of our presence.

Uh we're looking at maybe putting in some barriers that sort of uh slow them down, not necessarily a gate, if you will, but there are other innovative ways that other other municipalities have used.

So I'm I'm looking to that as being instructive of maybe we can employ some of those.

So and I am I'm also a e-bike rider, and I ride from my office in Langford all the way to Souk, and you're right.

What I see is incredible.

Like it's nothing to see someone doing 50 miles an hour.

Uh scooters, I didn't even know scooters now are and and except the difference is there might be a nine-year-old on it.

So you can see it's a daunting task, but we welcome all kinds of feedback from everybody.

We do.

Thank you.

Oh, I see Councillor Rogers.

You have a question.

Yes, uh, thank you.

Um I'm I'm pleased to hear that there's gonna be the additional um um education and enforcement um on the regional trails.

How many staff uh will you have uh for all the kilometers you've you've got in trails, these regional trails?

Um looks like we're gonna have one and a half people to start.

That's and you're just gonna put them on the ENN of View Royal?

Oh no, everywhere.

We have to do the we have technically we're gonna do all 93 kilometers.

So we have to become very, very creative.

Indeed.

Indeed.

That's the start that's the start.

Yes, indeed.

It's a start.

Um, will you be providing um some statistics uh on an annual basis?

What you what your results are.

For uh for view royal, um it I could maybe we could.

We could maybe include we're gonna have to have statistics, absolutely.

Uh I guess you're asking for statistics, uh, germane to view royal.

I I think we could do it.

I don't think it's un I think it's attainable.

Well, we'll look at that.

If it's possible.

Okay, thank you.

Uh Councillor Brown.

Yeah, I know uh we contract for animal control services, which makes sense for a small uh municipality.

Uh, you know, running a regional pound and everything would be um astronomical cost to run it ourselves.

I know our contract runs out in 2027, and you're probably not aware, but we have a lot of financial pressure.

So I hope in 2027 you're very kind to us.

I will say this, it's uh valid valid uh question.

Uh we are currently um running a new format, a new uh master service agreement with a work order, and and we've already field tested it on two municipalities.

So there will be change.

Um I can't necessarily speak to uh what the cost may be in 27.

Um, I mean you can understand that we consider things like population increase uh and just the sustainability of the service, but we will have those.

I think you'll be interested in a new model because it's it provides more clarity.

Uh you'll be able to identify certain parks.

What what is it that you really want us to do?

Like it's not just sort of a uh catch sort of do all the parks in so many hours.

Uh we've determined that there's a better way to do business to make it more cost effective and more value added.

We may come to you before 2027.

So that is coming.

We may thank you.

Thank you.

Any final questions?

No, uh, thank you very much, Mr.

Grew.

Thank you, everyone.

Moving on now to staff reports.

We have the 2026 draft financial plan, the operating plan, and we have a presentation from our director of finance.

Thank you, Chair.

Stephan Vella here, uh, Director of Finance for the town.

I have a brief presentation for you today.

Uh the purpose of the report is to provide council with the projected tax revenue increase required to deliver the services council and staff are committed to providing in 2026.

We will discuss the cost drivers that are influencing the 2026 excuse me budget and provide the timeline required to adopt the five-year financial plan and property tax rate bylaws before May 15th, uh legislative requirement under the community charter.

In previous years, initial budget discussions centered on capital and non-capital projects.

These projects are mostly funded through sources other than taxation, and in March, staff will present their special projects, and that will be uh council's opportunity to deliver to deliberate uh those items.

Taxation is the cornerstone of municipal operations, generating over 50 percent of the operating revenue for the town.

So it is with that in mind that we're having this discussion today, and it will form the foundation of the complete five-year financial plan, which will be presented along with projects in March.

Staff are still refining the numbers, so today's will be a fairly high-level discussion.

Carl, next slide.

First, a bit of background.

Uh, as mentioned, the community charter requires that each year a five-year financial plan bylaw be adopted prior to the tax rate bylaw and prior to May 15th.

We often refer to the financial plan as the budget.

Uh, we're currently operating under the authority of year two of last year's adopted plan until the 26 budget and tax rate bylaws are adopted in May.

On November 12th, 2025, uh CAO Somerville provided a report discussing the factors affecting the 2026 financial plan, and it was noted that the budgeted year two increase in 2026 would be 9%.

With the exception of Council Kowalewich, council also provided an acceptable tax revenue increase for 2026 based on the information at the time and responses ranged from 6% to sub-10%.

The taxation revenue in this draft operating budget absorbs the impact of the factors discussed last November and includes any resolutions passed by council affecting the levels of service.

And with that, we can have a look at how 2026 is shaping up, Carl.

So for 2026, we're projecting a 9.11 taxation revenue increase or around 170 dollars to the representative home.

That estimate is based on the interim completed tax role and 2025 tax rates.

The revised role in April may adjust these numbers.

While there is much work yet to be done, this budget is the product of many staff hours devoted to finding operational efficiencies, such the cost escalation is minimal and town reserves are sustainably funded.

Next slide.

So there's a summary here for you, and I'll go through most of these.

Last November, the deputy director of finance updated council on the increased investment in the capital program as recommended in the SERP.

Staff continue to build towards sustainable funding streams with a 1% tax increase to fund capital reserves.

To maintain levels, uh service levels and keep up with engagement demands.5 FTE to 0.7.

Staffing levels in the parks department have not changed in the past 10 years.

Several new parks, playgrounds, trail systems, and other assets have been added to the town's registry during that time to maintain level of service and safety.

In our park segment, we've added one FTE to the park staff for half of 2026 with the full year effect in 2027.

The budget includes the increase of three firefighters on top of the one already authorized in the 2025 to 2029 financial plan.

This is an estimate right now.

We're fine-tuning the numbers.

And once we have more information around start dates, etc., we will uh update council accordingly.

We should uh in in March have a final number.

Expected uh development services revenue has been reduced significantly significantly due to slowing development.

There is a tax impact here.

In 2025, the higher development revenue in the plan was used to offset property taxes.

Now we have the same level of expenses in 2026 with less development.

So, or sorry, less development revenue anyway.

So we will need to increase taxes to make up that revenue difference.

To prevent this tax revenue spike in future years, instead of using budgeted permit revenue increases to fund operations and reduce taxes, staff intend to keep taxation stable and transfer any planned upside to reserves.

RCMP and eComm 911 costs are up due to contract and dispatch increases.

As council are aware, we do see partial offsets when RCMP FTE strength is not achieved, as has been the case in prior years, but overtime and other factors do limit that positive financial impact when that happens.

In 2025, council used $175,000 of accumulated surplus as a source of funding in the 2025 financial plan.

This lowered property taxes by approximately 1.35% since accumulated surplus is a one-time funding source.

So contract negotiations are slated for 2026, and any consultant support will be funded from taxation.

Small communities protection grant, which is calculated by the province based on assessment and population, is part of our general revenue.

As mentioned, staff took a great deal of time to ground truth their respective budgets to ensure that cost escalations are kept as low as possible without affecting levels of service.

It is here also that we see the impact of the decrease in the boulevard maintenance budget.

There is an increase in investment income, and staff are maintaining a conservative approach to avoid subsidizing tax revenue with higher budgeted investment revenue, similar to what happened in prior years with development revenue.

We've got non-market change, which represents property tax revenue generated from new tax base.

Specifically, it's the revenue from new properties created through development or subdivision since 2025.

As a result, the number of taxable properties increases, which contributes to growth in overall tax revenue.

And many of those costs have not yet been realized.

For example, as a town's population grows, the need for additional police officers or firefighters will also increase.

This year, non-market change is estimated at $300,000, and staff propose offsetting new protective services costs from police and fire in 2026 with this non-market change.

Next slide, Carl.

We are dealing with volatile casino and small communities grant revenue.

While casino revenue helps fund one-off projects like fire truck purchases.

There are a number of recurring items like West Shore Parks and Rec and Grant and Aid.

Yeah, I probably should have rounded down on uh those last four there.

Uh let's see.

Carl.

Let's actually go back one, please.

Sorry, to the to the casino and small grants there.

It's the that one right there.

Okay, so we are weaning ourselves off of casino to reduce risk.

Uh in 2026, we are partially funding west shore uh parks and REC by half a percent of property taxes or $65,000 uh dollars.

Okay, next slide, please.

As you know, the town is operating in an environment where external pressures are creating increased costs to the town in terms of protective services.

Examples are a unionization of the fire department, increased service calls and response and training standards, and RCMP contract and dispatch costs.

These are costs that are core to our operations and therefore funded by taxation.

As they go up, increased tax funding becomes more challenging.

The same can be said for development services related costs.

While the province has provided some grant funding to offset certain expenditures, staff workload has fundamentally changed and increased in response to legislative changes.

The employer health tax is another example of external regulation resulting in higher operating costs and in turn taxation.

In closing, this budget reflects the due diligence undertaken by staff to deliver the services council and residents expect as efficiently and effectively as possible during very challenging times.

Carl, next slide.

So with that, I can point you to next steps in the process.

The consolidated financial plan and special projects will be discussed in March, with public engagement being undertaken in the latter part of the month.

Council will see the proposed consolidated financial plan by law and tax rate options in April, ahead of adoption in May.

Great, thank you.

And that is all I have.

Happy to take questions.

I'll start with Mayor Tobias.

Thanks, Stephen.

I realize it takes a while to get all of the data in, and I appreciate all the crunching you've been doing.

Specifically, I got a question about the 2025 accumulated surplus funding of 175,000.

And you kind of factored that in as uh 1.35%.

Can you explain accumulated surplus funding for me in this context?

So the accumulated surplus being a one-time funding source, in that um items that fund uh that are funded by taxation are usually operating items, the the the recurring items uh every year to be funded by recurring expenditures and or recurring uh revenue sources.

And so when a one-time funding source, accumulated surplus, and you know it's I think it was about eight million dollars uh going into 2025.

Uh that is that is a pot of money, and so we're taking 175,000 out of that pot of money using it to fund in that case.

It was it it was directed toward reserve funds funding.

Um in the absence of using accumulated surplus in that moment, we would have been using taxation, which is the um sustainable funding stream for that.

So since accumulated surplus took its place in 2025, what we're trying to do is get back to sustainability and bring it back out of taxation.

Uh that way, next year in 2027, it will already be part of the rolled forward uh budget and and and part of taxes.

So we've essentially in accounting terms taken what we did last year, used it as a loan, and we're trying to replenish that.

Sure.

But if we decide that we don't want to do that and pay that back this tax year, that would be a savings of 1.35%, correct?

Correct.

Excuse them.

That's all the questions I have.

Thank you, Counselor Matson.

Yeah, just back to accumulated surplus.

My understanding was instead of paying increasing our taxes by 1.35%, we just stole some money from another fund.

But now that 1.35, which will carry on forever, we we need to add it to taxes.

That is right.

I mean, council can can decide to not repay it and and uh not fund that through taxation, but then it will be effectively kicking the can down the road again until it becomes part of the sustainable funding stream yeah which is taxes.

Right.

So we just took a an increase last year and paid it but from a different source other than taxes so isn't that the same thing we're doing with investment income like who knows what our investment income will be next year if our investment income is low next year we'll have to come up with no you're you're right if it's if it's if it's lower than projected then we're gonna have a shortfall in in a sustainable in terms of sustainable funding our sustainable funding will be short as we approach 27 if if we anticipate lower investment income now what we've done was increased it conservatively I feel and um you know we're still you know we're still keeping an eye uh toward that conservatism to not let that happen so it it can also be said the other way if if you're under budgeting your investment income then you're then you're taxing for that difference but if you do expect that you can record increased investment revenue then that does take the burden off of taxpayers in that year so so there's that balance with trying to utilize that I mean it is a revenue to the town right so okay and and also again with the non-market change revenue so in theory the 300 000 will keep carrying on because it will form buildings but uh yep so for this year.

So you're able to we're able to do this because the additional costs associated with new development haven't come on to us yet.

So therefore we don't have to do it.

I guess my one of my big complaints about this is in the old days we used to actually spend the money.

We'd spend some of this money on projects that we like, then we we just have no that's gone now.

So but by doing this, it's just money we can't spend on things we wanted to spend on because they're we're using it for instead of a tax increase.

In this case, yes.

I mean you know, looking at the drivers specifically when we're looking at fire and and having to to increase uh members there, uh the one could say that you know the the cause of that is the growth in the town, increase calls.

So therefore we feel it does make sense to direct the non-market change towards those cost drivers in the absence of those.

Uh if if if if that wasn't the case, and um you know some some municipalities just direct the entire amount just yeah, to drop taxes.

Um I I mentioned it should be a a prudently used source of funding.

Another option is to not impact tax rates and contribute it to reserves.

So when that hit does come, then you've got that money to draw down and smooth out taxation increases.

Okay, I just wanted clarification just so I knew I was sure where the money was coming from and where it was going.

So yeah, thank you.

Councilor Brown, you have a question?

I just want to confirm.

I think I know the answer, but uh the fire department, because it's a pretty significant one.

In fact, all the protective service ones, which is my portfolio, seem to be the big big drivers.

Um I I understand because of the uh transition from a hybrid fire department, um, there's some savings in overtime, some savings in paid uh volunteers um to go to full-time.

So it's so that amount of there, is that the net?

Is that the net amount or is that a group?

That is the net.

Okay, that's what I thought.

I just want to confirm people in the public might see that and and wonder.

And we are still working on that.

Okay, agree.

Thank you.

And Councilor Lemon.

Thank you.

Um Steven, the small communities protection grant.

Yeah.

I I don't I don't understand it.

I I don't understand the the the how it's gone from 449 four years ago down to well, we dropped it's dropped over 100,000.

I just don't understand it.

Sure.

How does it work?

The it's the small communities grant is made up of a set portion, 200,000.

Um and and I believe it's communities under 15,000.

Uh I had I had that earlier, but anyways, and then the rest of it is based on uh assessments and population.

And so when they've got this finite pot of money, I understand, they they calculate every year based on shifts in population, shifts in assessment.

And that's why we're seeing the swings.

Um I recall when West Shore uh Grant Brown was here discussing our ownership, and he sort of got into how our proportion actually went down.

So it was sort of to our benefit, where we didn't see as much of an increase in in our own requisition as what they were anticipating for the uh all all the member municipalities.

It was because our population and assessments did not grow or shift such that you know we we didn't uh we didn't um take on as much of that burden, right?

So that we're now we're we're receiving less grant money for the same reason.

That's my understanding.

Okay, so it's based on assessments, population assessments.

Population.

Yeah.

Okay.

I thought our population was going up.

I don't know exactly I didn't get into how the calculations done.

Yeah, I but I think we're good.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thanks.

I'll just look online.

Uh Councilor Rogers, did you have questions?

Yes, yes, thank you very much.

Um, and thank you for the presentation.

Uh some questions from uh like Council Lemon.

I'm a little um confused.

Um uh I can I can appreciate the small community grants going down because that's the way the the uh the funding source changes per capita or whatever, but why do we have to make it up?

If it's gone down from um driven by some other sources, uh why do we have to put 45,000 in taxation um onto taxation?

Yes, that is because it's one of those uh revenues that are uh yearly recurring and um like taxation, uh like investment income um and other revenues like development revenue in the past, it does fund those yearly recurring items.

So now we're left with a shortfall where last year it was used to fund operating and and now we've got a shortfall that we need to to make up somehow.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um my next question.

Um you've you've noted um um you know the staffing uh increases with the the police.

Uh what about salaries and benefits um uh increases uh for 2026 uh from uh the rest of our staff?

I do have uh the total for wages and benefits, and they are in terms of wages.

Uh we have a 7.4% increase in wages and a 14.9 increase in benefits.

That's including the four additional uh firefighters uh in 2026 big driver there.

I have separated that out, and if we're if we net out fire, the 2025 to 2026 wages uh will increase 3.4 percent and benefits 3.6.

Uh thank you.

So how can you translate that to uh how that affects the um the taxation bottom line in your table?

The uh net changes in terms of uh wages and benefits uh not related to fire are part of the cost other cost escalation um segment there, and then the new fire salaries, that line includes everything to do with fire, including those.

Yeah.

So again, um I'm sorry, just to make sure I'm clear.

Um, so the uh general staffing uh wages and benefits um are not um provided in this table yet.

It's still a a uh a taxation increase that we haven't got before us the um the percentages that I quoted you are year over year uh increases in the actual expenditure, not as a in terms of taxation.

Okay, so um it is anything that you see he's given us um affect um what you're predicting as a tax increase of nine 9.11.

Sorry, can you say that again?

Yeah, sure.

Um, you know, is anything that you've said with respect to um the annual uh expected uh staff increases, uh salaries and benefits, um excluding fire hall.

Um have we uh counted all that and um that is not changing or having any impact on the projected tax increase of 9.11%?

We are in the ballpark of 9.11.

We are going to be um working with fire, looking at starting dates, etc.

Um to nail that down.

Um but in terms of where we're at right now, uh that's inclusive of those staffing increases.

Staffing for for all the staff in V Royal.

Correct.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um, I and I'm curious, uh, it's it's nice that we're getting non-market change revenue.

And I'm curious, um, did was 2025 um the year that the Canadian Tire finally got um its full uh renovations done and that uh we've seen an increase in taxation from that commercial premise site.

I did not dig into the specific details.

Business was a contributor, and I believe in the report it does display the amount that the class six contributed, which was 53,000 in 2025 taxes, anyhow.

And okay.

So we'll we'll see that in March.

We'll get the full full details in March uh or in April um when the revised role is out, April 1st, and and those will be final numbers.

This is still preliminary estimated.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh thank you.

Oh, uh question from Councillor Matson.

Yeah, development services, uh reduced development services revenue.

So between 2024 to 2025, we had a huge decrease.

And we're not looking too good this this year.

So I'm just wondering if is the 270 if we sort of underestimated the reduction.

I mean, should we be should it be a higher number?

Is what I'm asking.

Yes, sure.

Um as I mentioned, uh, we're still refining the numbers.

This is where we are right now, and we're going to have further discussion around where we want to finalize uh our our revenues.

It's very important that we do not overstate uh development services revenue uh related revenue.

Uh so that'll come back in March with the final number.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Councillor brown just another quick clarification uh police dispatch is that supposed to be econ correct because police have their own it's e com okay yeah um and again i'll express my extreme frustration that the province and federal government have downloaded it onto the municipality and of course this gone up because I think last year we only paid a portion because it was a prorated for the number of months yeah April 1st I believe it started this thank you thank you okay any final questions for staff before we move to discussion just one chair if I could for clarification so this is the sum of operational impact on taxes are there capital impacts on taxes sure any any um capital uh so there's a phrase I'm um it's um it's escaped me right now operational cost of capital uh is fairly minimal and uh generally what we've we actually had a discussion today uh the director of engineering and I and we discussed how for many many capital projects you know we we really feel it in the staffing and the labor that's where that's where we see it more and so they might spend an extra half hour here but that's that's absorbed in in the FTEs that we have and that's why you're seeing the ask for the additional parks FTEs especially because once you hit a certain threshold of capacity, then to just to to keep at it, you you get to a point where we really need that next person to avoid overtime and and that sort of thing.

So otherwise it's fairly minimal.

I think uh my question more was um is there capital projects that are going on top of your that that are forecasted the next year that are going on top of that, like putting in a sidewalk or something.

Is there more that we're expecting that will come out of taxation?

Uh or is this just a snapshot of operations?

Right, yeah.

C capital projects are generally funded from reserves, not taxation or grants.

So to answer your question, no, yeah.

Great, thank you, Director Villa.

We'll uh now move on to discussion.

There is a motion here to receive if some moved by Councillor Brown, seconded by Councillor Lemon.

Any discussion?

No.

We'll get to fine-tune this later in the next another couple months, right?

Great, thank you.

So uh I'll take a vote on that then.

All in favor, uh any opposed?

None opposed?

That's carried.

Thank you.

And we'll move on to 6.1b official community plan project update, and there will be a presentation by the director of development services.

So good evening, Chair McKenzie and uh and committee members.

This evening I am going to be presenting an update on the official community plan.

And I also have our senior planner Sterling Scorey here as well.

Um, that is will be available to answer any questions that you may have this evening.

Next slide.

So the purpose of this presentation is to uh just to remind council what um and what an what is the purpose of an official community plan, um, what sort of information must be included in official community plan in accordance with the local government act, um, how an official official community plan is used, and um providing you an update of where we've been, where we are today, and where we hope to go in the future.

So just as a recap, an official community plan is a living document that guides high-level long-term vision for the community.

It reflects the community's values, interests, and aspirations for future for the future through a vision statement, goals, objectives, and policies.

It guides decision making in the town.

All future bylaws and master plans and other work undertaken by the municipality is uh must be consistent with the plan.

So the OCP is really the overarching document for for the community.

The OCP also must align with and advance the objectives of the regional growth strategy, which is um prepared by the Capitol Regional District.

Next slide, please.

So there's uh a lot of information that must be included in the official community plan.

But firstly, we have to have statements and maps as designations for residential development to meet anticipated housing need over the next 20 year period.

Present and proposed commercial, industrial, institutional, agricultural, recreational and public utility land uses, proposed public facilities, including schools, parks, and waste man waste treatment and disposal sites, phasing of any major roads, sewer, and water systems, restrictions on the use of land that is subject to hazardous or environmentally sensitive conditions, and targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and actions proposed to achieve those targets, as well as other affordable housing related and special needs housing related policies.

Next slide.

How is an OCP used?

Well, an OCP, as I mentioned earlier, contains an overall vision statement and goals to facilitate that vision.

The OCP is organized into chapters, such as land use, housing, transportation and mobility, parks and recreation, etc.

Each chapter has objectives and policies.

An OCP also has an implementation strategy strategy and action plan, which lists the actions that a municipality will take over 20 years to satisfy the objectives and policies outlined in each chapter.

Next slide.

So as council knows, we embarked on this project in January.

Well, actually, in October on October 8th, 2024, when um staff um presented the proposed scope for the OCP review and update and the draft engagement strategy.

And from and in throughout 2025 um we have had um substantial engagement uh we've had uh what we heard reports prepared uh we um have um we've we've we've made some pivots on some scope uh next slide and um we've also been in front of um committee and council 19 times um since january of 2025 so we have been in front of committee and council um a number of times just to make sure that uh council and the public is um is um where you know is is brought along um throughout this process and making sure we're getting you know valued um input and feedback throughout the process next slide uh and i'm not gonna go through um all of these um rows of information it's just here as a snapshot for council and public to see where we have been and where we where and where we're going in the future uh next slide uh next slide and so um in terms of where we are today um which is sort of bolded in red there uh we are um staff is currently working on the draft OCP um which will um be prepared by the end of well we're hoping by the end of this month um for um engagement in in the spring and to to come to committee of the whole uh and also to be presented to the OCP review advisory committee for feedback as well.

But we're in a very critical point of the OCP process um you know, staff and the public and council, we've all worked very hard to get to this stage and um and so and with the end goal of hoping to have a new OCP prior to the next election.

Next slide.

So I'll dive into the 2026 OCP timeline.

Next slide.

So this graphic is Mr.

Scorey gets full credit for this graphic and putting it together, but it provides a sort of a snapshot of 2026.

So we are currently in February.

So part is phase three of 2026, which is the bylaw drafting.

And we are hoping to have a draft bylaw by the end of this month.

So in March, we would like to embark on engagement, a month-long engagement to seek feedback on the draft OCP, which would involve some uh we're still sorting it out because we have a because it's such a large document, we need to make sure that engagement is done in a meaningful way that is not overwhelming for the public.

So we are sorting that out at the moment.

And we hope to move forward with some bylaw readings in uh June as well as a public hearing we would um we would aim to have a public hearing in June prior to the summer because um it's uh it it summertime can you know it can be a bit of a um a challenging time to hold a public hearing but that is that is that is the goal and um hopefully adoption by by July um it is a um it is we are mid-February uh we are very um uh there's a lot to do in order to reach this but we are mindful of um of some of the other things that we're up against um this year to get this project completed next slide and um just to give council a bit of a snapshot in terms of uh the framework of our OCP of our draft OCP so uh the the different um parts of the the draft OCP as well as um the chapters within it and um and also the implementation so as part of um this OCP review and update uh it's focusing on um the land use and and policies implementation and the development permit areas and design guidelines will be phase three of the OCP update which will be um done in-house where and um will be completed completed after um phase face phase two is is is is done so uh this provides sort of an framework of what the OCP um essentially like a table of contents so to speak of of of the OCP uh and uh it will sort of help uh council when uh you when you're given the first draft to review next slide so the recommendation this evening is um is to receive the report and um myself and uh mr scorey are happy to answer any questions that you may have thank you great uh a question from counselor mattson yeah i have an amendment to that motion and basically that uh council hold a special council meeting uh to act as a a work as an ocp working meeting to get council's input on the western gateway project prior to staff drafting an OCP that includes that information further that okay that the meeting is that meeting is prior to staff preparing the OCP a draft OCP related to that area so you'll have our input and that the OCP advisory committee be invited to that meeting uh so we can also hear their discussion is there a seconder for that motion counselor brown seconds um would you like to sure and motivation I mean one of the issues that happened last time is we waited way too long before you know like four years ago before we got council input and the council wasn't happy with what had come out from staff.

And so I think what staff needs, and given that the uh review or input from the community, like it's like 40 50 people it you just can't do an OCP on the input for 40 or 50 people.

And so given that we were elected by many hundreds and hundreds of people, I really think staff needs the benefit of council's views right away before you go to the trouble of drafting everything related to the Western gateway.

Uh big portions of it you can continue to work on because I don't think staff will have or council have that much input, but the development, the density, we need to get our input in right away.

Councillor Brown, would you like to motivate?

No, it makes total sense.

Um the more input we can get, especially as a small group like uh Councilor Madison's recommending, uh, I think it's a good idea.

Yes, Councilor Lemon.

Um if if we support this, um, we'll have to do it very quickly.

We this needs to be a wrap within what three weeks.

Uh yes, Director Taylor, would you like to respond?

Yeah, thank you through the chair.

Um yeah, this will delay the the project um significantly.

Um, we've we've done in engagement on the Western Gateway Corridor.

Um we've received feedback on that on the Western Gateway Corridor.

Having the draft, I mean, that's the point of bringing a draft forward, um, the first draft, where we would have a meeting with the committee of the whole to seek feedback uh as well as with our OCP advisory review advisory committee.

So I'm questioning why we need to double up on that when we already have those meetings planned.

My comment on that.

Thank you.

Yeah, um, thank you.

Um I I'm fully in support of this um uh councilor Matson's motion.

Uh why would we do this?

Because when we do it at the committee of the whole, we have a whole mess of other things to take care of, and it's only we only get two or three hours.

This I'm I'm I think if uh council matts and I are on the same page, um, I would, and in terms of time frame, I don't care what day it is.

It doesn't have to be a Tuesday, um, and it doesn't have to be, you know, maybe on a weekend, whatever.

Uh, this is critically important, or we're going to have the same scenario as we had four years ago where the OCP did not pass.

And I think um staff would really benefit from um council's input and understanding, because frankly, I do not yet understand what um we staff are envisioning uh for the Western Gateway.

I you know, there's a there's a chart, but I don't see it in big print.

I don't see uh what the individual RS FSRs are or the heights and so forth and the word the rationale.

So you know, if we thought we'd have um interesting fun and problems with the grocery store, imagine what we're going to have if we um try to get this solved in a committee of the whole or try to.

And if we run up against first and second reading that has to be rescinded, we don't want that either.

So I I think um, you know, I I trust staff to be able to put forward the information and uh we all benefit from from this, and the community will benefit.

I'll come to you in a minute, Councilor Mattson.

Thank you.

Um, but uh I I'm not in favor of this motion.

I agree with what uh Director Taylor was saying.

Also, I'm not a fan of us um having these meetings and almost ignoring the work that has been done to date and the engagement that has been done to date.

Uh and we what council ends up changing everything based on the knowledge within this room, which I uh don't think creates an effective plan.

So for that reason, I would prefer to see what staff and the uh consultant come up with based on all the work that has been done to date, and then we can provide our our feedback on that.

Uh councillor Mattson?

Sure.

One of the unfortunate things is the community input at the last.

I mean, we had what 60 or 70 people providing input, and so the main plan there was like 28 people liked.

So we're I'm sorry, I don't accept that as a community vision.

Uh all of us ran on a certain thing and we got elected for our vision of the community.

And so if we don't do this now and get staff don't get our input, and that isn't included in the first draft, all we're going to do is delay things horribly later on.

When council sees a document, if they don't like it and haven't had an opportunity to input before that, that's going to take staff even longer to go and rewrite things.

At this point, we could have a meeting next Saturday.

I'm quite happy to do that.

I'm sure most of us would be happy to have a Saturday meeting.

And we can actually explain to staff what we think, here what they have to say on the vision for the Western Corridor.

We could provide our comments.

And to be totally honest, I think our comments are probably more important than those 40 people who filled out a survey.

Lastly, we'll have the OCP committee potentially there, and they can provide us input.

But if we don't do this now, what we run the risk of, if council disagrees with what staff present us, they'll have to do a full rewrite then, as opposed to us uh just providing comments on what we think is the Western community.

And there may be some other things that we think are important, like what we want to see in terms of density along some of our major corridors.

Uh, we can provide input that too for staff.

I think these things need to come out immediately so that staff has a benefit of our views.

That's what happened last time.

Council was not happy with what staff put forward to us.

Um here we are three and a half years later and hundreds of thousands of dollars later, redoing something which if it would have been done correctly, we wouldn't have had to do.

Thanks, Chair.

Um, I'm generally in favor of this for some of the um lessons learned from the last OCP.

We just came across a portion where um it it had to get punted over and then redone.

Um you know, uh aside from the financial cost, this has been years out of uh Leanne's life as well as um the rest of investment we've had.

It's not the public, it's not anybody else.

So anything that we can do to enable it ultimately council will pass this OCP or not.

So I would agree to it under the condition that it's facilitated.

It can't be a rant for an hour of somebody or one counselor or a mayor's position on something.

It needs to be, it's a workshop, it's a facilitated thing.

Everybody's opinion isn't going to win, but they're going to hear our concerns and address those in the draft.

I would be very in favor of it, but highly recommend that this is a workshop or a special meeting vice setting up here like this as a council meeting.

That way we could have an open meeting.

We could also include participation from the OCP committee that should have a role in that.

That's who uh council selected to uh help get amongst the the um the input that staff is providing.

So in favor in short, and and I think I do think, Chair, that it's critical to do because if you look at the timeline that uh uh the the director of development services has provided, final draft in May, hearings in June, adoption in July, uh, and and maybe a late opportunity to uh uh do something at the end of July.

August is pretty much off, and then there's an election cycle that starts.

So it is tight.

But I also believe that if we don't do this, the risk increases of not adopting an OCP this term.

Thank you, Chair.

And I fully support a facilitator, Councilor Lemon.

My discomfort with this is that this motion, and I don't I don't I don't disagree with it, but you know, it's it's late to the party.

Um we should have had a facilitated workshop with the OCP review committee and with council months ago and and given our thorough input.

So, you know, when we're presented with an almost fate accompli, um we're we're putting ourselves into the mix, and I I think it's unfair.

Um but I think it's necessary.

But it's late.

Uh councilor Rogers.

Yes, um, while it's late, I think we'd had to um uh have the benefit of staff working on the um um all the other research and and information the surveys and workshops and that have been going on out there.

I totally agree that this should be um facilitated the and uh and then and an open meeting as well.

One of the interesting parts of our uh last OCP is that council had an in-camera meeting on the OCP, and um it was you know, and that really and it was last minute too.

So this is not new in terms of doing last minute, but that was really last minute.

So um let's uh let's learn from our our mistakes because otherwise this this OCP won't pass.

Um and um and I guess the other thing that that uh dawned on me was that this OCP will be cast in stone.

It's not, you know, we can say a vision for all the other part two sections, but part one land use.

I think the province has made it really clear, it's cast in stone, no public hearings.

So we owe it to the to the public.

Let's do our homework and really understand, come to the table, re-understanding the um the maps, the drawings, the FSRs, the reports, so that um uh we can make some very conclusive decisions and headway on this vital document.

Um yes, Mayor Tamias.

Yeah, just uh uh clarification, Chair.

So you your motion describes the Western Gateway.

So it's not the full OCP that we're going through in a workshop.

The focus is only on the Western Gateway, correct, Council?

Yes, I mean there's many things that staff will be talking about that don't that aren't really specific on density, FSR, all those other good things.

And that work can continue.

There's no issue with that.

But there's some things that council needs to make a decision on in terms of what we want for development.

That's mainly the Western communities, and there could be, as I'd mentioned before, uh, what we want our major corridors to look like.

We have that's a new OCP, but we could provide comments then too.

Okay, we're we're increasing scope then.

The staff's got to prepare this.

Right.

Yeah, Director Taylor.

Thank you, Chair McKenzie.

So council may recall that um last May there was a um uh a change in scope where the direction was to only focus on the Western Gateway Corridor.

So there's no other proposed land use designation changes to the other corridors in View Royal.

It is just the um it's just the Western Gateway Corridor that we are looking at.

So the the 2011 OCP land use designations will remain the same elsewhere in the community, except for the most recent OCP amendments that council passed in December to align the OCP with the zoning bylaw for so the transit oriented area and the small scale multi-unit housing zoning.

That work has been done.

So it's really just the only new information would be the Western Gateway Corridor.

Should council or sorry, should get the committee um wish to move forward with this workshop style.

Um couple things that council staff will need to know.

One is um if if it wants if if you're looking for a facilitated workshop, there will be a cost to that.

So I'll need to come back um with a budget request to do that.

Um and then also um this it will it will shift the timeline.

Um so if it provide you know committee is aware of that, that um this will have this will have some shifts in in in timeline and uh we likely will it will be a challenge to to um to look at um a public hearing in June just because we want to make sure that um there's at least a month of engage public engagement on this, and uh we were hoping that this would have to um that this can can occur.

So, anyways, there's a few things that we're gonna have to adjust um which is fine staff can do that but um one big thing is is the the budget our cur our current budget does not account for this so it's so through the chair I'm happy just to focus on the Western community we can if there's other things we can deal with that totally separate from this and budget wise something like this last time we wouldn't have had to spend all the money this term on the OCP so it's money well spent for facilitator and then Lord knows we're paying consultants enough mayor Tobias I just recommend that the mover might want to recommend to make things uh more expeditious to put a dollar amount within the motion to provide a facilitator so for instance um up to not all of I don't know ten thousand dollars for a facilitator for the day or five thousand dollars whatever uh we we can do that way staff does not have to go away and do a report to authorize five thousand dollars for the facilitator we've requested that we'll delay it another week okay so I'll add to a maximum of five thousand dollars for the facilitator it should be way less but I'll second that okay um so we have that motion I think we've discussed it enough um I'll do a vote on that then all in uh would you like me to repeat the motion or are we pretty clear what it is?

You would like to repeat it?

Okay.

Um so it's that we hold uh a workshop on the Western gateway with to get council's feedback and that that costs no more than five thousand dollars for a facilitator.

Okay, all in favor.

Uh okay, and opposed.

What were you gonna say?

I need to, yeah, no uh no one in favor.

We need to do it.

Okay.

Okay, so opposed counselor McKenzie, um, but that is carried.

Thank you, Director Taylor.

I think you're here for the next one as well, aren't you?

Um so this is part C, building permit process for part nine buildings.

I think we're just waiting for the presentation.

All right.

So the next presentation on the agenda is on the building permit process for part nine buildings.

Next slide.

Council may recall the committee may recall that at the September 16th, 2025 council meeting, council passed the following motion that processes for building and occupation permits be brought back to a future committee of the whole meeting for discussion.

Next slide, please.

So in response to council's motion, staff prepared a flowchart which basically summarizes the building permit process for part nine buildings.

So part nine buildings include houses, so single family dwellings, duplexes, and townhouses, less than four units.

Blocks of four units, pardon me.

So I'm just gonna walk you through this building permit process flowchart.

So the first step is the application submission and intake review.

So the building permit submissions are submitted to the town, and we staff do a screen of all the documentation to make sure that all the documentation is there and is acceptable for for the formal review.

Once the application passes the intake screening, then it moves on to the application review where all the departments at the in the town review the application.

So that includes building, planning, engineering, and protected services.

And the departments provide comments, and these comments then are sent to the applicant.

The applicant carries out revisions and to the plans in in response to the comments, as well as provide any additional information.

So once the applicant revises the drawings and provides the additional information, this must be done within 45 days of receiving the comments from the town.

So after the revisions are made, the applicant will resubmit the application and it will go through the same review by all the departments and provided that all the staff comments have been addressed in the building permit application, then the building permit will be issued.

At the time of issuance, the applicant must pay all the outstanding fees and provide security deposits.

They must receive their homeowner protection office approval.

All the legal documentation must be approved and registered on title.

And any other additional permits must be issued concurrently.

So that could be connection permit, site connection permits, the tree permit, a demolition permit, a plumbing permit.

Then the applicant starts the project, starts building the buildings, and then there's a number of inspections that occur during the building during the after the building permit is issued.

So there's an excavation inspection, there's a foundation and footing forms inspection, there's a framing inspection, there's an installation and vapor barrier inspection, and then there is a final inspection prior to occupancy.

So the next step is the final inspection notice for occupancy.

So at this stage, uh the building inspector conducts a walkthrough of the building, and partial occupancy may be granted at that time if the building meets the minimum building code requirements for life safety.

And then if there's any um outstanding um issues that need to be completed, um then um those are worked on, and then after all the outstanding deficiencies um from the final inspection have been completed, then a full occupancy is issued.

So this is a snapshot of the part nine building permit process, uh, which is consistent with our our building bylaw and um as well as the BC building code.

Next slide.

So the recommendation this evening is to receive the staff report.

Thank you.

Second, thank you.

So any discussion or any questions for staff?

Uh, Mayor Tobias.

Thank you, uh Chair.

I just had a brief one.

Leon, is any of this um currently captured in digital format, or is this all manual paper applications that are coming in and then tracked somehow internally, or is there uh a way to kind of do intake and tracking and processing digitally with us?

Um through the chair, that's a great question.

Uh we currently um accept digital submissions, but we budget through um through email.

Um and uh we don't have a portal.

Uh there are many municipalities that are have um portals, and uh the province is also working on a universal portal, but it has to be um uh what's the word um compliant, not compliant but it um i can't think of the word right now but it has to it has to work with our um the software that we have um at the town and uh it's uh um so there are a lot of uh software uh companies that are offering different um options out there and I get emailed I think daily with different yeah different ways but um it's something that is definitely on our radar and uh to um move to a a portal system but that will take some time thank you Chair so we have a motion to receive on the floor I see uh counselor Rogers yes yes thank you um yeah this came about uh because of the issues um that the public had raised um on Stewart Avenue the two properties and I appreciate this flowchart uh that's uh been shown as when no problems happen um and and I guess one of the the the issues that um we've seen and and this is also with an instance on Vickery where it was an owner billed and um um complications arose and and so in those complications that where do you where do you put complications where do you have um because this looks like a flow chart that only goes forward how do you deal with and show in the in the flow chart um you know matters addressing issues on through the process um through the chart, great question.

Uh I guess the short answer is we can't, because each project is very different, and we can't um yeah there are there are issues that come up throughout um throughout the construction phase and we troubleshoot those and we try and problem solve and um and we have to deal with them on from a case by case basis.

We can't draft a bylaw based on every you know potential issue that may come up, but what we do have are um we have stop um we have uh uh we have regulations in our building bylaw that also helps us address things that come up and um when we can issue um when um in order you know what a builder must provide to past inspections um to get a final uh uh a final inspection notice, um if there's any deficiencies, uh if um so those are things that we we work with the builders on, but it's really hard to um uh yeah to to think of every every single issue and and and put that into a specific bylaw.

Yeah, the the way I uh thank you staff, and and the way I read um uh the the whole situation with the Stewart Avenue, those two examples, was the expectation and and the request of um the public to get a better understanding of um uh if problems arise through this process, um, that there is indeed uh the level uh um the appropriate level of accountability and and um uh so that uh the community doesn't have to uh to suffer and um uncertainty premises and so forth.

So that's that's one.

Um part nine also deals with townhouses.

Um does council have any involvement with townhouses?

Director Taylor?

Uh through the chair, yes, um townhouses require a development permit, but building permits are not reviewed by council.

Um there yeah, no.

Good.

Okay, thank you.

Then thank you for making that distinction.

So um uh again, the the public is has an interest, maybe not so much it was just the building permit process, but um uh and but the public's uh concern and um kind of need for clarification on the whole process of a new dwelling or new town as a new duplex uh going in, whether it uh it's gonna go to council and so forth.

So it seems like the bigger picture um is is has not been explained to the public.

Okay, uh councillor Matson.

Yeah, not since Councilor Rogers brought this up, and I look at this, and what what we're missing here is that home at Stewart Avenue.

I mean, it's had a the yard's been full of junk for four years, the persons living there.

We haven't done any where does cleaning up the yard come in here?

Like, I mean, because this is very nice, but residents are gonna say, well, the place has been a pig sty for four years in front.

He's got materials there that have absolutely nothing to do with the development, he just stores it there.

And so there's that like we're the teeth in this to do something about that.

And the other thing was just as as an aside, my understanding was when we brought this up, uh council was told that there were enough complaints made about this property being unsightly that something was going to be done and it's still exactly the same.

So I don't know if you can help with those, but uh it's also to Scott if we can do something about because it's it hasn't changed.

Um through through the chair, uh it's I mean this this presentation is more of a um bigger picture, sort of not just one specific property in View Royal.

Um that's uh that particular property has an active building permit right now.

So uh yeah, so it has an active building permit.

Um we have an unsightly premises bylaw um that may deal with other you know issues regarding unenclosed storage, but right now there's um there is an active building permit application uh for this particular property.

Just since you mentioned it, given there's an active building permit, does that mean they can store things that have nothing to do with the development on the property forever?

Um I uh through the chair, I can't answer that question.

Okay, so we have um a motion to receive that was moved by councillor Mattson and seconded by Councillor Lemon.

Um uh sorry, Councillor Rogers, did you have a question or comment?

Yeah, speaking to the motion, um uh I'm happy to receive uh the information here, but um uh I'm not satisfied that we've addressed the uh the uh the real problem um that the the neighborhood is uh concerned about and I would ask that staff um I'll bring back a report on that particular item.

I know it's a case-by-case point, but here is a case where I would certainly um and I think council would certainly benefit from uh wanting to regain the confidence of of uh the community.

Point order, Chair.

Um the uh I agree with the concerns that councillor Mattson and Councilor Rogers just not appropriate for this agenda item.

I think that is a separate agenda item to better address their concerns, but it should not be uh bylaw issue, should not be put on a directory development services to come up with a solution for.

I I think there might be a step within the process to ensure the thing is clean, but I think that needs to be a separate discussion from what's being proposed.

So I just recommend that um you know Councilor Rogers, Council Mattson put in a notice of motion specifically around that to create some some new policy or procedures or around it, but I don't think it's best addressed here.

Yeah, point taken.

Great.

Okay, so we're at um the vote then.

Um are we all ready?

Okay.

Uh all in favor to receive.

Any opposed?

None opposed.

That is carried.

Thank you, Director Taylor.

Um, oh yeah, I do have another one here.

Uh so the next one is volunteer community improvement grant program.

Okay, thank you, Chair.

So I'll just wait for this presentation to come up and then I'll start.

Perfect.

Thanks, Carl.

Um, yes, so this presentation is on the volunteer community improvement grant program.

Next slide.

So council may are the committee may recall that um there was an approved non capital project in 2023, added at the request of council to for staff to develop a volunteer community improvement grant program.

Due to other council priorities and the provincial legislation, the project was not initiated in 2023, 2024, or 2025 budget years.

However, this project is included in the draft 2026 budget.

Next slide.

So the purpose or the I guess the project overview, the program objectives that were approved by council as part of the project summary is to allow individuals or community groups to undertake community building and beautification projects within public space, foster positive connections among residents in View Royal, and that the program would be administered in-house.

The proposed budget has is $2,500, and there would be grants up to $500, which is equivalent to approximately five community projects a year.

Next slide.

Staff prepared a draft volunteer community improvement grant program policy, which is attached to the staff report.

Project objectives in the project, the budget summary, which is to foster positive connections among residents in View Royal, promote community development through activities and celebrations, enhance community spaces, and improve community well-being and strengthen resilience within neighborhoods.

Next slide.

Next slide.

So projects must take place within a specific neighborhood of the town of View Royal and be of direct benefit to residents of the town.

This program is open to individuals or community groups, including nonprofit organizations and schools.

And eligible expenses for funding could include materials such as craft supplies, cleanup supplies, paint, wood, metal, insurance permit and refuse disposal fees, or equipment and room rental fees.

Next slide.

So for projects to, you know, as part of the eligibility projects would have to comply with town bylaws and regulations and policies, documents, including but not limited to insurance, permits, volunteer waivers, license of occupations, owner permission, locations, and locations must be confirmed in writing when submit submitting the application.

So we just have to make sure that all those pieces are in place.

If this is to go forward, applicants would be limited to one application per year.

Eligible projects are ones that do not require town employee supervision or interfere with existing service of contracts.

And this is very important that the projects really cannot increase the level of service or become a risk to the town.

And grants are one-time or one-time approvals and are not an automatic ongoing source of annual funding, similar to our grants and aid.

Next slide.

Just if we end up getting sort of physical elements in the town.

So it's my project maintenance.

So there's a section in the draft policy that speaks to this.

So community members will be responsible for maintaining the projects with a physical nature, such as a library, a free library box.

If the item created through the project falls into disrepair, requires replacement or becomes a safety concern, it may um it may need to be removed, and the staff staff would make sure that happens.

Oh, sorry, next slide.

So there's um so proposed seven steps to this to this review process.

So applications submitted when ready.

Um so applications would be submitted when ready through the intake period.

So similar to grant and aid, we would recommend that there would be sort of a similar sort of time timeline where we would accept applications.

Staff would review the applications for eligibility and ensure they comply with town ball policies, bylaws, and regulations.

Applications that impact public space would be vetted through appropriate departments to assess the project or program feasibility.

Eligible applications are presented to the Director of Development Services for approval.

The recipient recipients are contacted with results of their applications.

Successful applicants will be required to sign a letter of agreement prior to funds being released.

The successful applicants would have one year to complete their project.

And then a final report would be would be provided within 30 days of completion of the project, and we could share that with council.

Again, this is a very small, small grant program.

It's only up to $500.

So it's we really want to make sure that it really has limited impact on staff time and resources.

Next slide.

So yeah, next slide.

So in terms of next steps, I um I welcome the committee's feedback this evening on the draft volunteer community improvement grant program policy.

Um based on the feedback that we received this evening.

Uh staff can update the policy and and then it would be included in the 2026 budget.

Um for and it would be a one year right now, it's a one year pilot.

Um, so it's not um every every year.

So uh it's but it it is in the 2026 budget right now.

Uh next slide.

So the recommendation this evening is to receive the report.

Thank you.

Great, thank you, uh Director Taylor.

I'm particularly pleased to see this come to fruition since I think this initially came from an idea I had.

Um so and I think as you said, a pilot is a good thing because uh with this policy, until we see what people are putting forward and the kind of projects people want to do, it's kind of hard to uh predict and and add that to the policy.

Um so yeah, I'm excited to see what we get from people.

Uh are there any questions?

Uh Councillor Mattson.

Yeah, you for comments.

I mean, conceptually I like the idea, but my big concern is how much time it takes from staff, and we're talking a 250 dollar grant, and I'm sure it's gonna cost hundreds of dollars to to review each one of these, and the process just seems really, you know, it's it's it's gonna be expensive in terms of staff time, and I just really wonder if there's a better way of doing this.

I and I don't know, I I don't have complaints about the process, but given we're giving out so little money, um it just seems like a lot of work for staff to have to go through.

I mean, that's uh so I mean that's my concern.

Um, Councillor Rogers?

Um, yeah, I appreciate what uh Council Matt is saying, and and I guess this is why we're testing it on a pilot.

Um and see, you know, that'll be testing the uh the amount of uh staff's time.

Um a great report, thank you very much.

Um it'll be very interesting to see how it does.

Um staff, a question.

I'm assuming that this um individuals residents can they use actual park space like um well and park or view park or centenni park to hold their events uh madam chair i i would say that it's it's embedded in the policy it really depends on the event and how much staff time to accrue right okay uh on that same vein um thinking of life cycles uh the contractor for um well and park um you know would this be an opportunity for life cycles to have a uh um apply for funding for the benefit of uh view our residents in the park there through through the chair um sorry can you repeat that last part um counselor rogers i i didn't catch it sure um so life cycles is a um a contractor that's looking after well and park for us and um i'm wondering um would they be um uh uh an applicable applicant um to um seek funding to do produce a program for view our residents is this is this um or is this going off too far afield um i it if it's uh yeah it's hard to say it's it's it's hard to uh to say so i mean um the the I mean these are this these are very small scale projects and uh so like cleanup activities or um some or a resident neighborhood hosting an emergency management workshop where um they're looking at um you know how to come together as as a neighborhood to to put something together um also um having like a small i don't like a block party or um a one-time youth event or something like that so uh it's they're very very small scale small scale projects and so uh so and thank you that's great clarification uh the the question then with uh let's say a block party so would um an individual be able to apply for the funding for a block party year after year uh the uh yes that that is correct so um it's a one well uh hold on let me just have a quick uh look at my uh yeah so through the through the chair so the grants are a one-time approval um and are not automatic um ongoing source of funding so they would have to reapply every year um for for a grant um similar to the grant grants and aid yeah you wouldn't want five block parties uh dominating every year repeat okay thank you that's great thank you chair okay thank you uh counselor rogers um counselor lemon no questions um i like this i think it's great i look forward to seeing the uptake and whether you know we give out all the gr all the grant money or need to fill the kitty more next year it's great.

Thank you very much.

Any further questions or comments um so can I get a motion to receive?

Moved by councillor brown and seconded by Councillor Lemon.

All in favor.

Any opposed?

None opposed.

Carried.

Now we'll proceed to E budget variants and projects update to December 31st, 2025.

And that's a report by the Deputy Director of Finance.

Thank you, Chair.

Yes, these are the results to uh December 31st, 2025 on a consolidated basis, showing some operating there as well as projects.

Um happy to take any questions.

Any questions for staff?

Uh councillor Mudson.

I just wonder if you could go through the annual surplus deficit numbers.

Uh I was just trying to.

I was looking at some of the variant, the numbers, and I was just curious as to how we got to got to these.

You know, when I say this is where we land uh there's still significant amount of work to do uh in terms of funding and uh so that would be on the revenue side as well as on the expenditure side with outstanding invoices.

You can see amortization is outstanding as well.

So uh hard to comment right now on this.

We will provide council with a a financial statement analysis for 2025 uh in a in a couple months, but so it looks like we budgeted for a three million dollar surplus.

No, that's where we currently are, but we budgeted for a 1.5 million dollar deficit.

So if you through the chair, if you follow that down further, because this is on a consolidated basis.

There's there's a lot of uh reserve transfers and whatnot that come into play.

And uh down in the bottom of the 2025 budget, you'll see it's zero.

Okay, and that's because we've got transfers from reserve to get to zero.

Yes, transfers uh uh from reserve to fund projects.

We record those as a revenue.

Uh that's where it would hit here as well.

Um I believe we're still in the process of distributing the interest from reserves.

Uh so that's gonna add as well to the revenue lines.

But like I said, there's still some work to do on completing all of the funding and even recording invoices that are still outstanding and that sort of thing.

So still still substantial amount of work left on both sides.

Okay, so this is just preliminary and it'll be clearer in another month or so.

Thanks.

Correct.

Mayor Tobias?

Thanks, Chair.

A question on our uh, and I'm on here, uh attachment number one on the bottom of the first page, and it's principal payments on debt.

Is that 33 uh thousand or 333,000 per year?

Is that the um our protective services building, the fire hall?

Is that through the chair it is?

Yes.

It is and can I ask, do you know when that completes or when we finish payment?

Yes, in 2026, we will be retiring the portion related to the land, I believe.

And uh after that, we that and that's uh that's about 163,000, I believe, a year.

Okay, so that's something we um out of that 333 minus 160.

Um, we wouldn't be paying next year in 2027, correct?

Correct.

Uh and my next question, if I may, chair, is uh uh how much have we got left in the growing community fund as it stands right now?

I'm not sure how much was transferred initially to us.

I can't remember.

It was in the millions, something like three or four, maybe makes sense.

And just wondering if that's a separate line item, or I'm sure we store it in somewhere in reserves of the bank somewhere, but maybe if we could call that out as this for when we deliberate the budget as a separate line item, the amount remaining.

I'm not sure if we drew any down on that.

I just can't recall.

Through the chair, we will have uh that discussion around funding.

Um, I do have uh funding from that reserve and and and where it sits.

I do have, if you bear with me.

Sorry, just one more moment here.

So with growing communities, we entered the year 3.8 million.

We are currently sitting at four.

I believe there's some funding that has to be done still that will uh lower that, but we'll have a better view when we when the time comes in March for sure.

Thank you.

And um I think we've already confirmed that we can use that to potentially offset an unknown cost currently for the um RCMP building, and maybe just a comment to council that we're uh the CAO and I are trying to find out what that amount would be uh should Callwood um uh pass the validation report later this month that um the initial amount might not be the full amount, it might be the temporary boring amount that we're paying against this year, which might look like um payment of our percentage, 12% of 10 million dollars for this year's payment uh to kick in for that larger one, but that's yet to be figured out when we get the uh more detailed costing and the and the loan.

So uh I think we had discussed before, but we should probably have a discussion again around budget time about and we'll probably have a little bit better idea about what that RCMP building funding looks like, how we could apply um a growing community fund to it to offset some of the pressures that we would occur for that.

So just wanted to mark that to help preface for that discussion and make sure Steven has got all those things on the line that I'm sure we'll ask questions about.

Thanks, Chair.

Thank you.

Any further questions or comments?

Okay, can I get a motion to receive?

So we've moved by a councilor Lemon, seconded by Councillor Brown.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

None opposed?

That's carried.

Now we'll move to F council resolution follow-up list for the fourth quarter update.

Is there any report from staff on that?

Um good evening.

Before you this evening is a council resolution follow-up list, fourth quarter update, which will uh outline the uh completed and ongoing uh motions that have been made by council um to date.

Thank you.

Are there any questions uh for staff?

Any any comments?

Move for C.

Excellent.

Uh moved by Councillor Lemon, seconded by Councillor Mattson.

All in favor.

Uh any opposed?

None opposed.

That's carried.

And now on to G, Departmental Update.

Yes, thank you, Chair.

Um, before you this evening is a special double edition of the departmental update, as we did not quite get to uh last month's uh departmental update.

Uh lots of exciting stuff going on, uh considering it was over the holiday break.

But um any questions pertaining to the report, you can either ask me now or uh send me or staff an email from anything that arises from the report.

Great, thank you for the report.

It was it was a good read.

A lot's going on.

Thank you.

Um I see Councillor Rogers has a question.

Yes, yes, thank you.

Very, very good report.

Um, just wondering about um the uh the sidewalk work uh at three Helmogan uh Spire.

Do we have a timeline when um they will actually complete that sidewalk?

Uh Madam Chair, I don't have that information at this time, but staff may, so I can certainly um provide an update to council as soon as I talk to staff.

Great, thank you.

And in the second point, I thank you very much for um pointing out the um the huge amount of work and and I suppose um great inconvenience to the public um on the BC Hydro Island Highway Stewart um traffic disruptions and and the work from February 23rd to March the 6th.

Um what's what's the scale of this?

So can staff give us um some additional information on what's going on.

Uh Madame Chair, sure, yeah, I can certainly provide some information.

It's a the large transmission line that basically serves the region.

So uh BC Hydro has identified a few areas that they need to do renewals.

Um council will recall, or they may see, I think the one that's more indicative of the works um that may happen in the island highway is Burnside Road at Douglas Street.

There's a mass road closure there.

So that's kind of the uh level of probably a little smaller than that.

Um the reason why there's a 24-7 lane closure is because the depth of the asset is fairly deep and there's just no plates in the world that could plate over the roads or uh after hours.

So they had first um asked for a 24-7 closure on on single-lane alternating.

We did do an analysis ourselves, and the better solution that we recommended uh that they look at is uh just an eastbound closure.

So uh we are we're crossing our fingers in terms of uh I think our strategy here is to engage people to death on this one because uh similar to what happened on Douglas Burnside Road, they did early press releases on that.

We're doing the same thing, so hopefully uh by the time the 23rd happens, people get the point.

Um the community will note that there are some changing messaging boards installed.

I think there was a few.

There's one installed in Helmkin by uh Vickery.

Um there will be more on the Admiral's Roadside, Island Highway by the Color Interchange.

We'll do an additional press release after.

We have we have a pretty school map actually we put onto the uh View Royal website.

Uh it's called Municipal 511.

We subscribe to that predominantly for this project as well as a couple of other projects that we have down the tube.

So I think for better or for worse, we're trying to engage people until they're sick of it.

Well, uh better that they're sick of it and aware than um angry and not aware.

Um and I I didn't realize that it would be a 24-7 um uh closure of that section of Island Highway.

So do we anticipate that people would be um taking alternate routes through neighborhoods?

Uh yeah, Madam Chair, we do expect that there'd be different routes to be made.

Uh as part of our press release tomorrow, we're going to make mention that one um that uh shortcuting is a no-no through local streets, so it'll be local traffic only through areas, and we will be noting detour areas, which is essentially taking the highway one instead of taking the island highway for eastbound traffic.

Uh, we do know that there will be a substantial amount of traffic that may travel um along the island highway and then have to make a northbound turn of the Helmkin.

And so we will also, as part of our mass um engagement, the school district will also be uh informed.

Uh emergency services has already been informed.

Um, yeah, so there'll be more to this.

Hopefully, they have the newspapers pick it up too.

And and hopefully um, you know, everyone will be respectful and and uh behave.

Uh will we consider um getting the assistance of police if necessary?

Uh Madam Chair, that's a good question.

I think we will be engaging RCMP is uh at least for day one.

That's uh our history on closures like this is that day one is usually a good time for an RCMP to set up shop.

And then by day two it normalizes.

So um we're continuing to reach out to RCMP to see if they can provide that service uh and we'll continue to do so until the 23rd.

Thank you.

Uh sorry, Councillor Matson.

Thank you.

I was just looking at the annual permit revenue comparison from 24 to 25.

It dropped close to 500,000.

And so uh earlier on in one of our reports we talked about the development services revenue.

How much of the development services revenue is does the annual permit revenue uh like what percentage is it?

Like is it the whole thing or is it fractional?

Sorry, I can't hear you.

Um he he said he would need more time to look into it.

Oh, okay.

Uh the other thing was just uh in terms of that while you while you're looking into it, somewhere in one of the reports today we added like two hundred and seventy thousand dollars for uh development services revenue that was going to be less than last year.

And so if it's only 60,000 in 2025, I'm not sure how we added the 270,000.

You don't have to, you can when you when you when you come back with the other, if you could explain that, I'd appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Mayor Tobias.

Yeah.

Um I I just wanted to point out for council when you look at that annual permit revenue comparison, not looking at the revenue, but just looking at really the um the the starts for development is slid off to kind of a historic low.

I I won't make a comment on how that correlates with the US election.

Um, but it it's uh uh definitely um those things that even council has approved that were ready to go um that might have been awaiting uh a building permit, just are not proceeding right now.

And uh talking with the rest of the West Shore, it's a pretty common trend right now, aside from Callwood uh's development in uh Royal Bay.

Uh Langford seeing like uh nobody starting anything right now.

So uh I don't think it's a view royal problem.

I think it's a province-wide problem and maybe even a national problem right now that uh people are just waiting to start building again.

Um and it's not a source of revenue, obviously, that we can we can count on, but it's a good indicator.

Um, and it does correspond exactly with the introduction of the housing legislation, just saying um that I think was meant to increase this.

But anyway, thanks, Chair.

All right, any final comments or questions?

Councilor Lemon.

Move your seat.

Thank you.

So moved by Councillor Lemon, seconded by Councillor Matson.

All in favor.

Any opposed, none opposed?

That's carried.

So now we move on to portfolio reports.

And the first one is finance and administration with uh Mayor Talias.

I do have a bit of one, and I actually organized my thoughts around it.

Um so just a brief update on the legal review uh of the housing legislation that was passed by council uh um in uh late of last year.

Uh that letter, of course, went out as a call to all municipalities to encourage them to join us.

Uh since um that letter, uh the district of Oak Bay, the entire region of the district of North Okanagan and the town of Spawnchin.

I think I said that right, Scott.

You've been in a colloquial expert of the area.

And all of the municipalities there have approved and submitted commitment letters to participate in the legal review.

In addition, several other local governments are actively reviewing the materials and considering participation, including the city of Port Moody, Municipality of North Cowichan, the city of Delta and Burnaby, along with others at various stages of internal review, both legally.

Of course, the more municipalities we have involved, the less cost it is with ours.

It may be harder to manage kind of a process.

I get asked many times why isn't this a UBCM thing?

And unless it was put on uh the UBCM resolutions, uh, which all occurred after all the housing legislation, then we can't put it on there.

Um, so I haven't made any commitments to do anything until we get a firm or uh idea of how many municipalities will be joining.

My intent at that time would be to bring back how the distributed cost would work, including uh uh an opportunity for a late opt-in if a municipality wanted to join in after a lot of it was done.

So uh council should also be aware that the uh City Hall Watch, a grassroots organization in Vancouver, has organized an informal Zoom briefing for Metro Vancouver councils and mayors this Thursday that I'll be on, and the session is uh intended to provide a background and context for the legal review and the broader implications of the housing legislature uh and is informal in nature.

Um, so but it's meant to be some sort of dialogue where beyond official correspondence, mayors and councils can ask me um uh uh any questions about it.

And there is a significant grassroots movement uh in most of the Metro Vancouver cities that are very much in support of the judicial review.

And that's all open to uh it is open.

Uh but the intent is to uh get folks on there that aren't, but I can send the invite if counselors wish to uh participate.

If you want to listen out, sure, absolutely uh more than encouraged to do it.

Um and uh I can send that out as well.

Just to add, there's a publication called orders of the day.

Uh it's not the parliamentary orders of the day, it's meant to um uh be a newspaper for retired MLAs for BC.

And there was quite an interesting article in there published by the Minister of Municipal Affairs from 1990, who was equally as opposed to this housing legislation and talked about the breakdown of relationship between the province and municipalities.

I'll forward that off to you as well because it's a pretty good read, and it's about yeah, it's about balance and it's fragile and it's messy, and it doesn't always work out that way.

But yeah, there's nothing better if you try to do stuff like this housing legislation, it has a negative effect on trust, not only with municipalities but also the public.

So happy to forward that along too.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh appreciate that update.

Thank you.

Uh moving, oh yes.

Question from Councillor Brown.

Yeah, through the chair to mayor.

Uh so that'll be streamed and and will be recorded so people that can't see it on Thursday can because I know other counselors have already asked me if it would it would be available to them to look after the fact.

Yeah, I think that that will be the intent to uh kind of have a running uh dialogue after even it closes.

So yeah, recorded and then posted probably on the uh City Hall Watch website um that they'll uh put it up there and I can ask the organizer um if uh it's so if there's an ability to pick it up if somebody just wanted to listen to the recording.

Thanks counselor.

Any other questions for the mayor on his update?

Nope.

Great.

Okay.

So moving to Counselor Brown, do you have a protective service?

It's uh my section it's not not all doom and gloom although it seems that all the big budget increases are under protective services.

And we know we know the reason why for most of them but on the bright side I think I have to comment that the RCMP has done a really good job on converting a lot of the regular member positions to civilian members they get paid less uh they don't cost as much for equipment they don't get a gun they don't get a radio blah blah blah and they do a lot of the mundane admin type roles in the police like fingerprinting uh the jailer the court liaison and generally they're retired police officers so um there is some overall saving and and we're still lucky in town of River Royal because we only pay 70% of the cost because we're in that group of 5,000 to 15000.

So if we ever get the uh 15,000 population we'll be paying 90 percent however, uh the way things are going with all the empty condos I see and the lack of or lower number of building permits.

I'm personally I'm quite confident.

I would bet on it that we're not going to get 15,000 in the 2026 census, which would be a good thing.

And I highly recommend people, when the census people come to honk their horns, blow their whistles, and hide their children under the beds because we want to keep it below 15,000 for sure.

Anyway, that's my report.