Council Meeting

Uh good evening, Viewer Royal.

I'll call the meeting uh to order for Tuesday, April 21st, 2026.

And we'll start with a territorial acknowledgement that we recognize the Lekwungen speaking people known today as the Esquimalt and Kasapsin Nation and the Songheese Nation, and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.

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

If you wish to provide comments during the public participation period or ask questions during the question period, please begin by indicating your name and street name for the record, and then you may give us the benefit of your views.

To provide comments virtually during the public participation period or to actually ask questions during the question period, scan the QR code or use the link on the live webcast stream screen on the town's website under live webcast.

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

Your comments will be read out uh 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 uh is open to any question and is limited to two-minute seats for each speaker.

The 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 use.

Um can I get an approval to of the agenda, including the late item sheet uh colleagues that's in blue in front of you, as well as there's another one that is separate for um for our correspondence with staff recommendations on it move moved uh by councillor uh Matson, second by counselor Brown.

Now uh though now we got it on the we do have a consent agenda, so would anybody like to pull something out of the consent agenda okay thank you uh counselor rogers anybody else seeing nobody else so f will become uh the new 11 uh 11a or 111 uh and that brings us uh no we need to vote on it we're so uh aside from everything else in the agenda and uh pulling f out of the consent agenda all those in favor any opposed seeing none opposed motion passes unanimously uh and that brings us right to public participation period so we'll start in the room for anybody with um a comment related to an agenda item on tonight's agenda that would like to address council yes please and just start with it uh with your name and your street name you don't have to give the number great uh my name is Diane and I live on Jedburgh Road um so I have come tonight um thank you for hearing from me today um but I've come here to talk about short-term rentals.

It is on the agenda tonight.

So what's happening right now is not just confusing for residents.

It's putting people in a position where they can't comply with provincial law, even if they're trying to do the right thing.

Council has introduced an amnesty period tied to the FIFA World Cup from June 1st to August 1st.

And during this time, residents are being told that by law is going to turn a blind eye to short-term rentals.

But this problem doesn't really, it doesn't change the underlying reality.

Without municipal alignment, people still can't obtain a provincial registration, and that is what is required to operate legally.

But under the provincial rules, you can't legally offer those rentals at all without registration, and you can't obtain a registration without municipal compliance.

So, even during an amnesty, residents are being directed towards actions that could expose them to provincial fines starting at $5,000.

The situation creates foreseeable legal exposure for the municipality as well as for residents.

And to be clear, many of those of us who want to operate a short-term rental do meet the provincial requirements, including operating within our principal residence.

The only thing that prevents us from being compliant with provincial law is this municipality.

Well, many homeowners are really struggling, and there are a supply of long-term rentals in the market right now.

People have many reasons for needing flexibility in how they use their homes.

They're caring for their aging parents, they're supporting family members, and they want to have space available for visiting friends or relatives, or they're simply trying to keep a property within their family while still being able to afford it.

In my own case, I have a mentally ill son, and I want to be able to maintain a place for him.

There's traveling nurses, there are film workers, there's construction workers, there's other short-term professionals that are taking courses.

There's Royal Roads University that offers short courses.

There are many people who are here on different reasons other than being on vacation that are actually contributing to this community.

Council has already created expectations in the community, and in my opinion, it's too late to step back from that without there being consequences.

So in my opinion, the question now is not whether to revisit this, it's how quickly can you fix this?

The solution is practical and immediate.

Temporarily allow under 90-day rentals through the business license process.

I can tell you that from calling the short-term registry.

Um that they believe that what is required to register the your property with um with the province is a business license in the town of View Royal.

A six-month trial would give you real data, it would give you a meaningful test of the impact while allowing residents to comply with provincial law.

Right now, the system doesn't work.

It exposes residents to risk, it creates confusion, and it undermines the confidence that we have in our mayor and council.

Residents shouldn't be put in this position where following a public direction could result in provincial penalties.

In closing, I would just like to ask you all to reflect on your own experience.

If you've ever stayed in a short-term rental, was it for work?

Was it for travel, or was it for a family need?

And while you were there, were you causing disruption?

Or were you simply working or experiencing the community that you were visiting?

Because that's the reality for most people.

Thank you. Anyone else like to address council this evening on any topic related to the agenda?

Twice, last chance, third time.

Okay. Uh Carl, do we have anybody online that uh would like to address council?

Uh Mayor Tobias, we have no messages on the board.

Okay, thank you very much.

Um moving now to item four, which is bylaws, and this was uh I guess the end of a process that uh Steven, thank you very much for all your hard work over the last um uh months and something that was greater finalized um at the last council of the whole.

So thank you, Councilor Rogers, for chairing that meeting.

So it's a 2026-2030 financial um bylaw number 1168, and uh over to you, Stephen.

Thank you, Mayor.

This report introduces the financial plan bylaw, which is a product of much uh budget discussion over the past number of months uh per legislation.

The annual financial plan bylaw must be adopted ahead of the tax rate bylaw and both before May 15th each year.

Uh each are on the agenda tonight for first three readings beginning with the financial plan bylaw.

Staff's recommendation is to receive the report.

Then next up on the agenda is the bylaw itself.

Thank you. Uh can I get a motion to receive the report from the financial officer moved by counselor brown, seconded by counselor Rogers, all those in favor?

And uh can I have somebody uh advance uh first to third readings for the staff recommendation?

Still moved. Moved by councillor Mattson, seconded by counselor brown.

That's to move uh financial bylaw one one six eight uh to third reading.

All those in favor any opposed seeing none opposed motion just carries unanimously just have one question no yes certainly for the uh for the members of the public could you give like a two-minute synopsis of the the increase in where the money is going stephen over to you uh just to summarize our our current status thank you mayor um initially in um around February I believe it was we started off uh with about an 8.69 percent uh increase over 2025 and uh through uh increased non-market change uh and as well as um um probation of uh budgeted uh proration of positions uh within the engineering department as well as uh council position uh we're able to lower uh the projection slightly uh let's see here when we look at what's contributing to the increase itself we've got about 1.89 percent attributed to our RCMP contracted services we have um police ditch this patch at about 0.85 percent we have our fire salaries, which have increased about four percent with the hiring of four full-time uh firefighters.

So together that's about six and three quarters percent.

Uh let's see here.

Then uh we also um prorated a communications position uh to save a little bit of uh money that way and and with some forced uh growth or inflation, we came to about 7.05 percent.

Thank you, Stephen.

Thank you for the suggestion, uh Councilor Matson.

That's uh hard to make sense of a number on a bylaw when it's relevant to your taxing crazy.

So thanks for that.

And uh that moves us to I think 2026 tax rates bylaw one one six nine.

Uh Stephen, over to you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Similar to the financial plan bylaw, the report introduces uh the tax rates and uh back to you to receive, please.

Excellent. Can I get a motion to receive um the proceedings report moved by counselor lemon, seconded by counselor mattson?

All those in favor.

Any opposed? Seeing none opposed, motion carries, and that will bring us to our tax rate bylaw 1169.

The first to third.

Uh councillor Rogers moves uh first to third reading. Second or is Councilor Mattson.

Um did you want to uh summarize this one as well, Stephen, specifically for any changes notable from the previous year yes just one moment here please thank you mayor so uh it was uh recommended last week that uh the tax burden remains uh fairly consistent uh to 26 from 2025 uh with a 7.05 percent increase um spread uh through all classes and the result of that is a uh increase to the average class one residential property of 167 dollars uh from 2025 uh let's see and then we've got in terms of our class six business that will be uh an approximate increase of about one thousand nine hundred and fifth from an average of about twenty seven thousand six hundred and sixty five so um that's the high level thank you Stephen much appreciated um got a mover and a seconder for it all those in favor any opposed um motion carries that's the first to the third reading for tax rate bylaw one one six nine um and uh the next one up is election procedures by law nine eight nine and that's a bylaw to amend election procedures bylaw in relation to mail ballot voting to bring it into compliance with uh legislation and for adoption.

Um do I have a mover and seconder moved by councillor Lemon, seconded by Councillor Brown.

Uh any questions, comments at this point?

None. All those in favor.

Any opposed motion carries unanimously for that uh update for the bylaw.

Uh mayor's report.

I will not pass one this evening.

We got a significant amount on our um our on our agenda, and I would like to invite Aaron Stone up for petitions and delegations.

And Aaron uh, of course, is from South Island Prosperity Partnership Activities.

Um Aaron, firstly, thanks for showing up this evening and uh representing Set.

Thank you for the invitation and uh and thank you all for the opportunity.

Um I oh thank you so much.

Can't really see the slides, but um so I just want to say good evening.

Um, before we begin, I want to share with gratitude to be on the traditional unceded territory or traditional territories of Lakwangan speaking peoples, and my Lakwangan is coming along but still weak, so I'll say I'll squatchel simnacia.

Um having had a lot of time in Holcominum, uh there's a a little bit of a skip over to Lakwangan, but uh still sharpening up my pronunciation on Lakwangan, but in Lakwangan, that was good evening, my respected friends.

Uh, and thank you for having me here this evening.

It's a pleasure to be back here in View Royal.

Uh, I want to start by acknowledging the high pressure environment local governments are facing today, especially as you move forward on your budget adoption as well as uh concluding work on your OCP, two uh major processes that you're you're concluding right now.

Between the economic uncertainty that we're feeling in the region and the need to deliver on ambitious community global goals, the to-do list is longer than ever, while the cost pressures continue to mount.

Tonight I'm here to show you that SIP isn't just an external organization, we are a capacity multiplier for your team.

By the end of the update, I hope that you'll see that the price is a small fraction of one staff member.

You for this though, however, you have a regional powerhouse working to directly activate View Royal's specific local goals in amplifying the opportunity and impact through our work.

Next slide. Sorry, there should have been a slide previous to this one.

Okay. I'm trying it now.

Just have to win.

So uh I'll skip to this part first.

So this is just by the numbers.

Um, in our letter that we delivered last May after our presentation, this was the request from council for the 2026, 27, and 28 years.

So uh to counselor Rogers, your question earlier.

Um, the founding formula of SIP was $1 per capita and 0.07 uh percent of municipal taxation.

Um, in the years since we've re-indexed it to the previous census.

In the last census, and with uh other data being a little bit fluid, we adopted an annual 2.5% escalation within, which is represented uh on the slide there.

Um, as a partner within SIP, um the partnership investment for 2026 is is under 0.18% of the 2025 municipal tax levy.

Now that you're adopting your budget, I can update that, which will be smaller uh for for based on on this annual budget.

Uh and the increase for 2026 of 2.5% over 2025 equals 572 dollars, and that's roughly 10% per residential unit.

That's calculating just the quick math of 90% residential tax base, 10% of the business piece, and then divided by uh the approximate number of units.

I know there's lots of under construction and coming online, um, but that's a pretty accurate number.

Depending on the numbers used, it went from seven cents to just over 10 cents per residential unit for 2026.

Next slide. So we we stated this differently in our previous presentation because we were trying to put a lot of density of information into a 10-minute slot, but um the economy here is re- is is fluid, and View Royal probably represents that reality fortunately or unfortunately more than most municipalities in the region, being the confluence of the West Shore and the core um the traffic you struggle with.

The upside of it is that the majority of residents within View Royal derive their household supporting incomes outside of the municipality.

So the work in the region to create jobs, to create opportunity, does support and benefit View Royal residents.

On the flip side, the businesses here, whether it's an anchor tenant in a strip mall or the future businesses you're looking to attract, will be relying on outside residents for their customer base.

And so we're working at sort of both ends of that conversation.

Of note, which I'll which I spoke to in my email to all of you, but with your new OCP and looking to activate the sort of West Shore Corridor, there's a significant opportunity for new investment to come into View Royal and to sort of diversify the tax base as is sort of the stated goal and objective within your OCP.

Once that final document is ready, I would love to sit down with staff and or members of council to talk about how we activate that through the 2030 strategy.

And that really speaks to the level of capacity that we can offer, particularly to smaller municipalities.

When you're working with Sanich or Victoria, they have multiples of staff.

We still work together quite regularly, but for smaller municipal partners that don't have the internal capacity at the fraction of the cost of one FTE, we provide the professional insights and the activation.

We are desperate to have more employment lands, investment lands to market through View Victoria Rising through all of our different platforms.

The OCP gives us that sort of fundamental piece, saying it's current, the policy framework is there, and we can market it whether it be passively through Victoria Rising or some of our other platforms, but more importantly, in the direct engagements that stronger integration with us, which is something that I'm focused on operationally in 2026, is getting a more deep involved relationship with all members of staff across all municipal partners.

And that's the real opportunity to leverage the limited resources that you have internally to turn that $25,000-ish investment each year into real tangible results that point directly to View Royal.

Next page, next slide.

And so how does View Royal contribute today?

Well, obviously, the biggest conversation that we have in these moments is how much money and how does it impact your tax base?

We've sort of covered that.

But for that $25,000 a year and to Counselor Rogers, we were set up initially and fundamentally still to this day operate on a one-member, one-seat uh mantra.

Our board is arm's length.

It's a business, academic, and nonprofit leaders from around the region.

But our municipal partners committee, who who councilor Brown sits on currently, is one member, one seat.

So the advisory that we have from the municipal partners and the liaison back and forth between the municipalities' work and our work throughout the region is one seat, one voice, one vote.

That said, um, at this stage, we have varying degrees of participation.

Obviously, there's a number of municipalities.

I think I highlighted view um Esquimalt in my email where we've done some collaborative work that's sort of a yes and on top of our core work regionwide.

Um, so for example, through the Victoria Rising platform and the CAN export funding that we got, we took that opportunity, as we do every year, to shoot more uh video and images in a squai malt that helped them populate the YSQIMOLT website, um, and which I also shared in my email with all of you.

Those are the kinds of yes and projects, if you will, um, that members can have access to for 2026.

We're still waiting because the federal government's in a bit of flux for response on our CAN export application, but we'll be continually growing out the impact of the Victoria Rising platform, which is there to market each municipality, but also the region as a whole.

What we find is the municipalities that are more engaged and more connected, they'll spice up their profiles a little bit more, highlight opportunities more frequently, and we offer that uh that platform as a regionwide marketing tool, but can also be used for your municipality directly.

Um next slide. And so what's changed?

So SIP's always been about innovation.

And um Dallas has got the backcasting perspective, so during questions I may call on him because I've been here just over a year and a half, just about a year and a half now.

But what we looked at in developing the 2030 strategy was input from the Rising Economy Task Force that said that there are local businesses, there are local initiatives that need the attention of an organization like SIP.

So in our 2030 strategy, we've sort of brought that innovation down to Main Street on a more integrated level.

The biggest one that I also referred to in the email was the SME toolkit for small business and small to medium enterprises.

Those are to help assist, again, small businesses with limited capacity, stay competitive, productive, and harness the opportunities that are in front of whether it's technology or AI, business processes, succession.

We're in the center of all these conversations, and we have the resources to leverage to support those businesses, especially as small business BC and other supports have evaporated over the last number of years.

And we're facing generational challenges and opportunities.

I see my timer going here.

I'm too casual.

The reality is that the defense industrial strategy is bringing billions of dollars in investment to this region, as well as the Look West strategy from the province.

Beyond that, there's still continual investments in the ocean economy, which is highlighted by our Coast Initiative and the success we've had with that, and economic reconciliation, which is highlighted in the Indigenous Prosperity Center.

Of note, none of the core operating funding provided from the municipalities to SIP is used to for those initiatives.

They are funded by industry partners and federal and provincial government partners.

But I do welcome questions and discussion.

The more we engage, the more value that we can deliver for View Royal, and we're hopeful that with your support, we'll be able to really prove that out over the next three years.

Thank you.

Thank you, Aaron. Great presentation. I know council has some questions. We'll start with Councillor Levin.

Thank you for coming, Aaron.

I I think it's fair to consider SIP as the economic development arm of the region.

That's correct.

Yeah. And uh so I appreciate that it's not a weighted board, so everybody gets an equal equal say in operations and initiatives and so on.

But you're right, we you know we don't have much capacity, we're little.

Um I I just want to clarify what you said about coming to us and working with us.

Are you or your staff prepared to work with staff and council on an economic plan?

Well, that we have done things like that with a little bit of sweetener from the municipality in the past.

So the Sanich Life Sciences Strategy was done in partnership with SANIT.

We do have two proposals in our CAN export funding that bring in additional funding from the city of Victoria and Sanjay to do a couple of projects within that bigger envelope that that uh that they want to fund.

Um the there's two things.

Either we can contribute to a process.

If you do an open process and you hire a consultant, we'd absolutely be at the table helping steward that process to for the maximum amount of impact and success for View Royal, and then working to activate that strategy on the back end once it's completed to ensure that it's integrated within all of our work.

Um, so it's a it's it's not as clear as yes or no.

It's kind of a yes with some conditions, um, but those are the absolutely the kind of things that we would look at wanting to have conversations about.

And we've had internal discussions and we're doing a little bit of operational review and stuff as well as on a fee-for-service model, where can we provide our expertise to support the economic development strategies of smaller municipalities without internal capacity, et cetera?

So happy to continue to have that conversation with staff if directed to by yourselves and staff being directed to do the same.

Okay, that's great. Thank you. Thank you.

Thanks, Aaron. Uh Alison.

Thank you, Erin, for your presentation.

Um so I think this all sounds really good, but I think for the average resident, um, they might be wondering, okay, what does this mean tangibly for our town?

Like, is are there any examples that you can give as to in the past, View Royal has benefited because of this tangible thing that we've done, or other examples in small towns, as you've said.

So there's a couple of exercises we've done.

So we can't unfortunately knock on every door and ask them where they work, um, if their job was created by our activities or not, but there have been sort of academic analysis done that look at a number of things.

One is the fluidity of the region.

So we sampled the 19 largest employers in the region, and if I had the heat map handy, uh, it was included on my previous presentation.

Um, you can see there is a bit of a bloom around View Royal, which shows that a number of their employees of those 19 major regional employers do work um within the View Royal municipality.

Those those employers engaged with us because they're in our network and continually supporting our work as those major employers, um, and they recognize sort of not just academically, but proven out over time that regions like ours that have a regional economic development body generally perform better economically, um, whether good times or bad than those that do not.

Um so when you look at some of the study work that has been done in the past around SIP, I can attribute some of that to View Royal because it's more of through a regional lens, but there is some other um, like I said, mapping of where they work, where they live and things like that.

We did a survey last year to inform the the rising economy task force and the subsequent 2030 strategy.

Um, and when you looked at either the sort of word cloud that showed the postal codes, or you looked at the heat maps again that we produced from that in a smaller sample size and open to the public, ask them where they live, where they work.

Um, again, there is a bit of a bloom around View Royal.

The residential density in View Royal and its adjacency to the West Shore and I hate to use the word bedroom community, but is it makes it an ideal bedroom community?

It's kind of like where all currents meet to steal a statement from our Indigenous Prosperity Center.

View Royal is for better or for worse, that point on the map.

So the job creation, and I could name, you know, uh probably a dozen companies with Dallas' help, if you would like, um, that moved here and directly engaged with us.

Um, I can also provide a number of dozens of letters of support from organizations across the region that attribute our work to their growth and success, which is creating more jobs in the region.

Um the the reality is though, is we recognize that looking at your OCP, for example, and we haven't done, as I said in my email, the deep analysis.

Um, but we we receive queries and engagements with companies and potential startups and and people that want to try new innovations that don't want to go as far out as their the the area as required to locate their new business or startup.

Um so if the OCP policies are brought to life through our work, that will be something that we relish the opportunity to perhaps go on a tour with your staff, look at those areas of the OCP, get some ground truth and be able to market them.

Um, like I said, passively through our platforms, but also directly through our work.

Um, but I can't say to you, oh, this business in View Royal, that was because of us.

The reality of that reason is there hasn't been a lot of inventory for us to push a business into View Royal.

On the flip side, we can attribute a number of direct business investments in the region, both in growth or relocation to our work over the last 10 years.

And if we ask them, I can almost guarantee that at least a number of those employees would work in View Royal and supporting that sort of fluid regional economy.

Great. Thank you. That explanation is very helpful.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you. I can answer your second email question.

I saw it when I got here.

Do you want me to answer that one first?

Okay. So First Nations do not pay to be members of SIP.

That was a decision made in the formation of CIVA as an active economic reconciliation.

With small population based and no tax base, we would be talking hundreds or thousands of dollars per year per First Nation based on the economic formula that was used to establish the membership fee for all the members.

And the municipal partners of the day saw that as a call to action and truth and reconciliation commission, that not asking them to contribute.

Now that being said, since the formation of IPC just over three years ago, a number of the nations have stepped up on a kind of project-by-project basis to contribute.

Song He's provided the wellness center for the youth conference that was done just last year.

A number of the land steward and ocean stewardship people from both Songhees Squimalt and the Hosanic Nations provide resources to the Blue Economy Day camps and the land stewardship caps for indigenous youth in the region.

And beyond that, the Songhees labor study just done this last year, also was done with funding from Songheese Nation and in partnership with our federal partners at PSPC and ISC.

And just sort of to just kind of follow the First Nations tangent for a moment, we're currently in discussions formulating a scope of work to continue to work with PSPC ISC, now DND and DCC, which is Defense Construction Canada, on ensuring that First Nations businesses and First Nations indigenous businesses and First Nations communities have an opportunity, get the training necessary to participate in the coming procurement process processes, and to steal from our friends at DCC.

That's everything from lawn mowing and facility maintenance all the way up to educating them on how to form joint ventures to take advantage of the major capital projects that are coming to the region.

We're talking hundreds of millions and billions of dollars in infrastructure investment here through the defense industrial strategy.

On the municipal partner thing, I did answer it in email, but I think I should.

It is the same formula: $1 per capita, seven cents.

Now, actually, that's gone down since the that was the forming, the foundational formula at inception.

We recognize that with the rapidly growing tax basis, and you can frame that however you like, but the rapidly growing tax burden that municipalities face, that re-indexing that original formula to the current tax realities and population realities would result in a fairly significant jump.

I did a quick look before I came, just anticipating that question.

But for 2020, it would be 26,759, so about $3,200 more than the current request.

If we re-index to the last census and the current taxation data from 2025, because we recognize the pressure that municipalities are under, we thought by holding the line at 2.5%, continuing to refine our processes to be leaner and more efficient, that we wouldn't show up as another handout with increasing uh burden on the residential tax.

We do have to account for some inflation, but over the time that we've adopted that two and a half percent annual increase, we have fallen behind the inflationary increase and far behind the founding formula for uh the requisition.

Um we have eight municipal partners, so the it's probably easier to name the ones that aren't.

So it's Highlands, Machosen, Langford, uh, Calwood, and Central Saanich.

The rest are currently uh and have been since inception municipal partners.

Uh Langford has never been a partner.

Um we have had uh engagements with their staff at in view in Langford, sorry, um, and we'll be meeting with them upon the adoption of their economic development strategy, which we did sort of consult on a little bit to input sessions to look at ways to activate their strategy on a fee-for-service basis in advance of the municipal election, where we'll revisit their membership within the partnership.

They never have been partners.

Our good friend Stu.

For those who know him, um he can tell you the story better than I can, but uh it's not surprising based on the evolution of Langford's sort of economic development piece.

Um Callwood did step back a couple of years ago when Mayor Kobayashi came in.

Um we've just had a couple of little connections lately, and I want to revisit that conversation with him.

But again, in the sort of hyper pressure moments of municipal election season and the budget realities, um, I didn't feel it was really the strategic time to do that.

Um, and the same with Central Sandage.

And no disrespect to Highlands, I love the mayor and council there, worked with them on climate action initiatives over a number of years as well as uh as uh Machosan.

Their contribution is so minimal and they have I I would say it would be an easy one to be in, easy one to be out, but it's it's uh I hate to use the phrase, but if it's not worth the squeeze, then we don't have the capacity to put the time into to re-engaging them at this time.

Now I think that was all the ones, but happy to answer any more you have.

Okay. Uh thank you very much for uh uh the detailed uh answer.

Um I I think one of the things that impresses me that uh SIP is investing, investing in in First Nations.

It's obvious that you're doing so.

I think I think it's uh also um fair and responsible to also now take dividends of your investment.

And that then, you know, brings them into um, you know, a contr contributing partner, you know, to and support and you know, because that's it.

If you want Colwood and Langford and the others in, they would expect everybody in, everybody pays.

Yeah, absolutely. And I respect that.

Yeah, and and um uh I I think that's that's important.

One of the things VUOL has, in fact, uh the province with their Bill 47 created the um uh Victoria General uh hospital hub.

Now, don't you think that we have enough um medical expertise that we could really invest further with um regional and international partnerships and and start using um the lands that are sitting around that?

Yeah, in the cursory sort of um sort of blender analysis, very preliminary, because we focus our heavyweight engagement on the adopted piece.

But is a region wide perspective on life sciences and and uh medical-related opportunities, and also highlights our work that is not traditional economic development around family doctors and medical professionals attracted to the region.

We've done everything from finding spouses jobs in the region through our network, and we can point to a few specific examples, but also working with the divisions of family practice on more collaborative models to sort of leverage the assets that we have in terms of attraction for residents and talent to help land uh medical professionals here in a good way, but focusing on the VGH piece, um, not Vancouver, but Victoria.

If I may, focusing on on the innovations, bringing those innovations, and that's what uh somehow I get the impression that uh you know, SIP and and the individuals that you're working with, and I hope you're cross-pollinating with uh the equivalents in Metro Vancouver.

Get them the hell over here.

Yeah. You know, and if and you know, hopefully can uh be able to collaborate with uh VHA to really maximize because we've got um, you know, number two hospital way.

Yeah, and we've got the vacant property that you know we could leverage with an ex an extraordinary bill, not just with the Western uh Western Gateway.

Yeah. One of the biggest problems View All has is that we're the pinch point.

So I have no expectation that the regional um transit um rapid transit is going to be the solution.

And fortunately, uh, thanks to Mayor Tobias and Squamoon and CRD and the First Nations, we may have some hope with the uh ENN transportation corridor.

But that is also an aspect of innovation that I would really, really hope that SIP, you know, really gets on the front page, really brings in the international doers and shakers that can then give these people the transportation.

We've seen this congestion outside our road here all the way back.

I'm gonna read really in here.

Counselor Rogers, if I can they'll respond.

So please I'm gonna keep it tight.

The OCP contemplates a number of exciting opportunities that we see in terms of those, just like you said, bringing the innovation, hospital adjacent, developing that area out.

That's great. That meeting where one of the members mentioned that we should be at that table supporting that work.

Um, we're absolutely willing to, and it'd been supporting that from afar to this point.

Um, I don't want to talk about familial connections, but you know well.

Um, and my experience with uh as chair of the island corridor foundation obviously supports my background and knowledge in both transportation and rail.

Um so yes, we are very um supportive of that work, and we are prepared to activate that, if you will, uh, through both advocacy and connections with um both domestic and international partners.

I would say more likely domestic in the by by Canada era.

Um, but there are a number of domestic partners um in eastern Canada that could provide both the rolling stock and expertise to make that a viable project.

Again, let me so I'll reiterate.

When I think of you all, think of the pinch point.

Think of the congestion and think of the inability to move west and east, which stops the goods, which stops you know emergency movement of emergency vehicles and so forth, and it stops the economy.

Yeah, absolutely.

So I look forward to six, you know, I'd like that's what I want to hear.

Yeah, you're preaching to the converted next meeting, you know, that has participated greatly brought in the high rollers, brought in this automation, you know, and whatever.

Yeah. Look at China.

Bring them over.

Yeah, uh, thank you.

Thanks. Sir Rogers.

Uh uh Aaron, uh, thanks for coming again.

And if there's council doesn't have any more questions, they'll bring us back to the first introductory meeting we actually had um where I was pretty candid and and I think this the topic of your presentation was exactly the topic of that conversation is like how do we go about cooperatively showing the value to municipalities and residents for SIP?

Yeah. I I don't think anybody on council will ever question the value that you're bringing the region, the value that you're bringing in innovation.

Um they're just having a hard time, uh, sometimes as am I.

Uh what does View Royal's contribution actually provide for View Royal?

One of the things, because I'm uh a one term wonder mayor, uh, that I was naive about.

So someone changed your mind on that. Yeah.

I I was very naive about in that um uh the there is a regional growth strategy for CRD.

Has nothing to do with the economy, all about population, right?

We've got enough of um other policies going around.

We've got wonderful chambers uh of commerce for business and the West Shore Chamber of Commerce, and they really deal with existing businesses, not so much looking forward.

Your role for SIP is really niche, and it's something that places like View Royal really need.

We spend a lot of money on a land economic use study.

Um and none of the consultants we bring in will have the regional context and the day-to-day dealings that you do, both with business, innovation, academia, and the other municipalities for the growth.

I I would love to be able to see like a fee-for-service thing if it's an option.

If you're a member, uh, you know, you might not have the whole land economic use study, but you might have a good portion of the regional context, right?

I think everybody appreciates that um none of our municipalities are self-sustaining economically, right?

There is a migration.

For instance, it's not only that people in View Royal work other places, there hasn't been a business, including our own municipal staff, where you know, we've got a lot of people from View Royal working in View Royal.

Everybody that I go to in other businesses that are in View Royal, nobody in those businesses live in View Royal.

No, it's just speaking to the migration on a daily basis of how that occurs.

So um, so is uh my question is, is SIP in a position to be able to provide um uh not just an kind of an OCP consultation, but actually provide some regional context.

Here's the things that might work.

Yeah, we work with your staff, and here's a checklist of things, not definitive, because these things are are, you know, they they grow and they evolve with with every action that takes of uh what's popular.

Like it could be a green technical park, it could be something else that maybe View Royal is the right place to do it, maybe it's not.

Um, but is that something that uh would advance SIP goals as well as provide opportunities for municipalities to see themselves in?

So I would say the short answer is absolutely, like emphatically yes.

Um the way you contexted the the statement and the question is the kind of engagement that I'm desperate for.

So we're seeing it more and more across the region, and I'm not taking credit for that, but I've been in your seat for a decade.

I know the challenge and that push and pull between local and regional.

Um, but I've also been an economic development leader across the island and BC during that same period of time and and learned sort of the piece.

So going back to the foundation of the conversation between you and I in this part, the conversation has to be part education, part sort of like tangible flex, if you will, right?

Like this is some things that we can point to that have created opportunities for residents of View Royal and created customers for businesses of View Royal.

Um, to be frank, I don't think in previous um iterations that there was a lot to pull on for us from View Royal, whether it's it's it's that sort of really intense engagement between between staff, I take responsibility for that as the CEO.

Um so I need to reach into the organization and pull those pieces out that we can activate because we look at it as our product, right?

Like what what do we have to do in this region if not to market business and economic development opportunities, right?

So in a region like ours where we're collaborating with the CRD on the employment land use strategy, if you have a document like that already, ready to go, that's something that we need to fold into our processes and start activating right away.

Because more often than not, we're looking for different types of land uses that are available within certain parts of the region, and different businesses and different investors have their own reasons for wanting to be in those locations, whether they don't want to be all the way out on the peninsula or all the way out on the west shore.

Um View Royal's optimally located, if not for the lack of like sheer land base to work with.

But that being said, in the OCP contemplated a number of sort of activations, it's all very smart policy.

Um, and like I said, I would be hungry for the opportunity to develop that more.

And if we're able to build the kind of real collaborative framework that that we're leaning into with the activation of the rising economy 2030 strategy, it is that it is more direct connections with local businesses and employee employees and employers.

It is more integration with our municipal partners.

Um, I've tried to tell this story and socialize it over the last year, but it's a lot of stakeholders to manage around the region.

Um, but these are the conversations where we get an opportunity to show that level of commitment.

And I will continue to, you know, with support of council, explore deeper connections with your own team here.

And like I said in my email, like we belong to you collectively, absolutely, that's true.

But we're as much View Royal's team, like our whole staff and organization, as we are Sanich's or the City of Victoria's.

Now, despite the fact that you know they combine put in two $450,000 a year into our funding model, organizations in smaller communities like View Royal get the benefit of that full investment, whether it's the Victoria Rising, the engagement we did on the rising economy task force, the strategy, all of that stuff would be far beyond the annual contribution just for View Royal to develop that for itself without regional context.

And in the realities of View Royal, land use policy framework, etc.

Location, I would argue that if we can work together to activate the plans and the aspirations of View Royal within that regional context, that's far greater benefit at a fraction of the cost of even one low-level economic development officer, right?

And so that's our value pitch, right?

And I can only say, you know, I've done been on the other side of the table, municipal services agreement framework under the community charter, very prescriptive KPIs, 180-day termination clause, right?

So you're not beholding future councils, but what we asked for was a three-year agreement with the funding that was laid out, less than point well, less than one-fifth of one percent of your annual budgets as of 2025.

Um to sort of show that the shift that we're taking, responding to economic conditions and the realities of our partnership is to not just do that great work we've been doing over the last decade, but also bring that innovation down to main street and SMEs that you're trying to work with every day and be more integrated with your municipal teams.

That's that reserved capacity I spoke about in my email.

When we built the strategy, we said that's set you probably hear this from staff.

The cup is this full, right?

We only filled the cup to 75% on purpose because we knew two things.

Defense industrial strategy was unknown, but we knew something was coming, and that we needed deeper integration with our municipal partners.

So to serve that end, um, we're already activating that right now.

The pivot we made over the last week to come speak with all of you.

Um we're in that sort of thrust of it's April 2026, it's the new plan, right?

Um, so with your continued support, we want to include View Royal in it.

And I would argue that on a cost value basis that View Royal stands to benefit as much or more than any other municipal partner in that work moving forward, just based on the size of the community, the capacity of our organization, and the internal capacity that View Royal has.

Thank you, all right. Much appreciate your presentation, Dallas. Thanks for coming out and backing up.

He's always my backup because he's got the history that I can't always call on.

So you're the moral yardstick, Dallas. So thank you.

Um just if I may, just Mayor Tobias.

Um, so our ask is as was in our letter of November, we're hopeful that you will support that.

So it would be a three-year municipal services agreement.

We're just finishing sort of the framework agreement for the municipalities, um, letting Victoria and Sanich put their staff resources into that.

Um, but a template that's developed through those negotiations would be what we would replicate with the different funding agreements with the termination clause that doesn't, but it gives us the certainty that we need when we apply to Pacifican for a three-year funding envelope like we did with Coast.

So you're talking about $10 million invested in this region over three years.

They need some kind of um certainty with the partnership to say, okay, if we provide this funding, it's it's well invested.

Um that said, if the future councils don't see the value, they can move a motion to terminate 180 days later.

You're out. I would never expect that to be the reality because I know enough about your seats and the the jobs you have to do that I'm want to show up here next year and get kudos, um, not be challenged on the value we offer.

So I take all of this as good engagement and feedback.

Um, and I hopeful that uh for those of you who return to your seats next term, uh, when we have this conversation in the spring of next year, you're like, okay, you heard what we said and you acted on it.

So hold me accountable to that.

And if not, you do have that pressure release valve and you can leave our partnership.

Thanks again, Erin.

Thanks. Appreciate it.

And I think this brings us down to item seven, which is staff reports.

Leanne, is this over to you?

Uh thank you, Mayor Trias. Note uh our community planner, Leah Curtis will give the presentation.

Yeah, I'm sorry, it's you.

Good evening. Thank you, Mayor and Council.

So this presentation is to do development variance permit 202602, which is for 309 View Royal Avenue.

The applicant is requesting variants to increase the maximum building height from 7.5 meters to 8 meters.

Next slide, please.

So please note that this is an introductionary presentation.

A public notification period will be required before a second report appears on council's agenda for consideration.

So next slide, please.

On the screen is an aerial photo of the subject property.

So this application was submitted following a review of a building permit application received back at the beginning of the year for a proposed addition to an existing single-family dwelling.

It was noted at that time that a height variance would be required, and here we are today.

Attachment three of the report, however, is the current COP version of the Arborist report and it will likely be updated.

Next slide, please.

So the existing single family dwelling was constructed in 1961.

Their proposed edition is located on the west side of the existing dwelling and consists of a two-car garage and a suite above, as you can see on the on the slides or the presentation size.

So the R1 zone permits a maximum building height of 7.5 meters, and the applicant is requesting a variance to increase this maximum building height to eight meters, which would align it with the current uh roof height of the existing building.

Next slide, please.

So the proposed variance is supportable for the following reasons.

The proposed addition complies with all other zoning requirements within the R1 zone.

The proposed variants would allow for the proposed addition to have more cohesive appearance with the existing single-family dwelling in terms of roof height to further achieve this cohesive appearance.

Um, which is shown kind of on the screen with like just the white look with the proposed, I believe it's hardy board clotting.

So privacy and overlook impacts are not anticipated with the proposal, as the subject property, as mentioned, is a corner lot, and the proposed addition overlooks the driveway of the neighboring property, and the house in behind is located further back.

It should be noted that staff are currently in discussion with the Capitol Regional District to identify the location of an easement on the property.

Further investigation is required there.

And I will also say that attachment five of the report as well as item O of the consent agenda are letters of support that were received by the neighbors.

Or I should say the applicant circulated to his neighbors for signatures in support.

Next slide, please.

So after giving notice of a council meeting and the consideration to consideration of the application, if council supports the approved variance, the property owner would continue moving forward with the building permit application.

Thank you.

Thank you, Leah.

I guess it's time for questions.

And it would be helpful if the they were numbered.

And I this is my pet peeve for numbering pages on things so I can refer to them.

But it is the side-by-side height slice, I think just before the recommendation slide.

If you can go to that, Carl.

Thank you. Yeah, that's perfect.

So the variance request, regardless of everything else, the only thing in the variance request is a half a meter increase for the variance, right?

On the new property.

Looking at this diagram, it it seems is is the existing structure over height.

That is correct.

It should be noted though that this residence was built way before our zoning by law, and that's why uh it's considered kind of compliant.

So how much higher it looks a bit higher than the already uh over height dwelling is it like how much higher is it than than what's already there um so the current dwelling I believe is at seven meters and ninety eight which is why we've rounded it to eight meters or for the proposed edition the idea is to have the peaks kind of at the same point um okay thank you any other questions for Leah on this no I'm happy to move staff recommendation that we prove the variance request thank you uh seconded by counselor McKenzie any other comments all those in favor uh go ahead councilor yes thank you for uh for the report um I do note that uh there's been a letters of support one that was in your um report and a further uh four more so a total of nine uh um letters of support uh for this application thank you uh all those in favor any opposed seeing none opposed Gary thanks Leah and I think this brings us to business arriving previous minutes which there are none correspondence and those are on um the agenda but as also on the white sheet and the staff recommendation is to receive noting that some of them correspond to other agenda items uh anybody want to move receipt or uh moved uh for those three moved by counselor Mattson, seconded by Councillor Rogers.

Councilor McKenzie.

Uh would this be an appropriate time uh to make a motion around potentially a staff report around the short-term rentals?

Uh we've got that as a separate agenda item under uh counselor brown's got one if you look a little bit past the consent agenda.

Don't there uh we've got a notice uh you're right.

We have no other specific.

So yeah, you can certainly um do that here, and it's an appropriate product, Council McKenzie.

Okay, um I'd like to make a mo oh sorry, I think there was a motion on the floor to receive.

So maybe we need to do that first.

Or uh yeah, uh, but we can do, but if you're pulling one out to discuss, then that's what let's uh do that one first.

So you'd like to pull out B and C for discussion.

Thank you. Then uh yeah, please go ahead.

Okay, I would like to move then that staff prepare a report outlining um or reiterating the current rules and what the town would need to do change to support legal short-term rentals under 90 days.

I'll second. Oh we'll all second. I'll fix it.

Uh thank you. Uh moved and seconded.

I just want to turn to staff and say capacity and timeline for it.

Not that I don't support the motion, but it's always good to get a feel.

Uh Scott, did you want to comment on?

Um it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Uh it will be largely a refresh of the report from January 20th, I believe.

Um so yeah, we can do that in the coming weeks.

Uh move an amendment.

Okay, thank you.

Uh just hold on to your question, we'll go with an amendment first. Uh go ahead, Councillor Rogers.

Um I would also add um and also report on the implications.

So it's it's looking at it, but we need to understand the implications um with our current policy and our intent therein.

I think when we ask for a staff report, I would assume the implications will be part of it, Councilor Rogers, and I think we can do that without an amendment.

One would hope. If I don't see implications, I'll raise it then.

I think I think staff are pretty good at including those and trying to protect ourselves.

Uh go ahead, counselor uh lemon you had a question.

Yeah, yeah. Um staff, could that report include, and I'm trying to find it in her letter, but one of one of the speakers, and I believe she was probably the author of one of the letters, um, referenced a six-month um six-month what?

Six months yeah, six month period to allow restaurants to operate within a compliance system.

Um could could the report address um this request, please.

Go ahead, yeah.

Yeah, through the mayor.

Yes, the January report did touch on uh pilot period for short term rentals.

Uh we would bring all of that back uh in in in an updated report um that we can bring forward in uh a few weeks.

Yeah, thanks. Thank you.

Okay, we got a mover and uh we don't have a secondary yet, do we?

No. Let's uh get a secondary.

What's that? Oh, Daddy, sorry, Joey's second.

Uh go ahead, Councilor Matt.

You had a comment or question?

Yeah, the um I mean, I think we should have this discussion, but one of the things I would need, and then I don't know if staff can provide it, is implications in terms of has this happened before where people have just decided not to have secondary suites, so people who were in those secondary suites are now uh you know evicted or when they leave they they're no longer secondary suites.

We lose that form of housing and for short-term rentals.

So I don't know what the the impact is there.

So I think that's useful too to get some sort of indication.

Uh and I think there for us to do a review is a good idea.

Uh but I certainly haven't got my mind around what's the best thing for the residents.

It's gonna go to the first time. Uh folks, uh, Councillor Brown, did you have a question there, Helen?

Okay, just call it.

It's yeah, it's very confusing when you get multiple municipalities with different rules, and certainly to be in line with the province makes a lot of sense.

It's also very confusing to the public.

Very confusing to me when I came on, and the planning has given me some good resources to refer back to the difference between short-term rentals and Airbnbs, for example, or not, or just B and Bs, because you can get a B and B, but you really have to read through it and make sure your lots are big enough, you're in the right zone, uh, you don't put a stove in, uh, blah, blah, blah.

You know, it goes on and on.

So somehow condensing it, making it clearer for people, and uh and of course our vacancy rate now has gone up considerably.

So all these things have to be taken into consideration.

Certainly our neighbors, I know Esquire Malls recently approved it, and um it's timely.

We are a uh tourist attracted area.

We have uh people do come in the short term for university, Royal Rose, university.

Not time to sell it yet, Councilor Brown. We're just going to refer to this for a staff report.

But which is good.

And it's I understand that the uh reasoning uh behind what some of the other counselors are asking.

Uh you know, what are the implications?

Counselor Rudd.

I've heard implications three times.

Um, so the you know this is not the report a few months ago.

That was only about FIFA.

The what we're hearing from the public is a lot more permanent and a lot more in, you know, uh trying to understand what uh what's going on with the other municipalities, uh, the inconsistencies, and uh trying to get in line with the province.

So yeah, you know, I I um I appreciate where staff is coming from and uh the implications on this, and I really hope that it's not FIFA, it's what are the long-term implications, you know, both in terms of the the individuals that are talking about their business interests uh as well as us understanding the rental interests of those uh individuals that still need permanent accommodation.

Thank you. Uh Councilor Rogers.

Just Scott, a question for you.

So we would receive a staff report back with implications of uh counselors' concerns both for and against the positive for those people that have the opportunity to take advantage of potentially short-term rentals and the implications for the community.

Uh, what would that take as that would change the bylaw?

We would need a new bylaw after the staff report.

And would public engagement be part of that process for that bylaw?

Yes, we would need a bylaw amendment and public engagement would be part of that.

So the report just for my colleagues would come back to us, and then we would make a decision of whether we wanted to uh you know adjust the bylaw one way or another or or keep it the same.

Uh and and then through the process of that bylaw amendment, there'd be uh a more fulsome public engagement opportunity in that process.

That satisfy anybody with implications because I I I get both of this.

There's going to be people that will benefit from it and people that are concerned about it, and it's important that we find uh everybody's perspective and and kind of measure and and getting the provinces perspective on in the report as well.

And and regionally as well, like what are what are our neighbors doing and and uh should we be different or should we be the same?

That would be uh also of interest.

Counselor Matt.

Yeah, and I know I've mentioned this before, and having talked about this forever, I'm still unclear as to how a bed and breakfast difference differs from a short term rental rental.

And so if staff could in the report have an easy to understand explanation because it's still confusing for people because you would think the easy thing was just get a uh bed and breakfast license.

And so right if that could be sort of incorporated into this yeah I think uh I I went on the website to educate myself between the differences and then actually our I can send you the link the resource is pretty good good explanation there right now uh between the two um so yeah staff any questions about the direction at all uh so uh council mackkenzie thanks for the motion thanks for the seconder uh did you I don't think there's any need to motivate um uh but you have the opportunity to counselor Lemon I and that we're doing this anyway presumably but I just wanted to say that the speaker tonight and um a line that she used which is people have lots of lots of reasons um for using the extra space in their homes and it's it's not always you know standard or expected thank you so we got a mover and a seconder to refer uh the short term rental question and the bylaw to staff um uh for report to follow all those in favor any opposed seeing none opposed motion carries and uh can I get a motion to receive uh a please so moved moved by councillor McKenzie do I have a seconder seconded by counselor brown all those in favor uh and uh with that we've made a motion cut but uh councilor McKenzie can you move uh receipt of B and C, please.

So moved.

Second. Um moved by councillor McKenzie, seconded by councillor Mattson.

All those in favor.

Any opposed? Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

And that brings us down to item 10, which was the consent agenda.

Consent agenda.

We have the all except F, which um I think uh Councilor Rogers wanted to pull out.

Do we have a seconder for seconded by Councillor Lemon?

All those in favor.

Any opposed? Seeing none opposed motion carries.

So that brings us to 11 and of F is now the new number one.

So that's the email dated the 14th of April from Linda Jiren on the survey process, the official community plan.

Councillor Rogers, you want the floor.

Thank you. Yeah, I just I think it's worthwhile um uh hearing and and um uh noting um uh Mr.

Ohn's um uh comments, recommendations, and concerns with respect to uh the recent uh OCP survey that we had.

Um in and I concur with her, this was you know, I wouldn't say university, but definitely a college uh entrance exam.

Um the the in-depth preparation that one had to have of um a 250-page report or 240 uh goals, objectives, and policies, reviewing all and and then trying to anticipate what might uh might be on the uh take-home exam.

It um it uh and and I think you know I really empathize and sympathize with um uh Mr.

One, you know, after spending a one and a half hours diligently going through the report and uh having the the whole system freeze and everything gone.

Um I think it's um um if it were me, I'd be apoplectic.

Um so I guess the with uh question to staff um was there a save and exit function where one you know as you went through each of these seven chapters or whatever that one could save and make sure that the work was saved in case um things went awry through the mayor um I am not as technologically savvy to answer that question I don't know if the program had that ability to do that.

Um I understand that and I don't know when you completed the survey did you notice a function of that sort?

You know I I I'm just remember seeing it on somebody but then maybe that was my income tax.

Um it was it was somewhere and I thought if that's a fun piece of functionality that was there um uh and sometimes you wonder what the implications are it's just that we take that home as and and to the next survey on a on a uh lessons learned approach and I think that's um really what um the writer is hoping for and and I I'm sure that staff want to do next time.

So there were two points in that email that I picked up on one was you know it was very um um the level of uh of questions and of course and there's not there's so many ways you can try to simplify the OCB but it is a complex document.

But I get I I definitely get the point.

And the other one is a save function that would be platform centric, right?

And so it would be associated with the platform, not necessarily anything that staff had done.

It's hard to weasel out as well, knowing that I I do this on a regular basis.

Is it somebody's um iPad that they forgot to plug in or incompatibility and trying to source that down?

Yeah, uh well, what whatever the case might be, but definitely took it in.

If there's some way to break it down, probably we can take that in.

Uh staff, did you want uh to comment on that at all?

Okay. Um was there a specific point that you wanted to bring it up aside from raising it uh or Leanne?

So we um we can confirm that there was a save option on the survey and that function was on on.

Okay, thank you.

That that's great to know.

And and maybe um, you know, again, I don't know if that was commented in the front of the page, you know, if you're doing the whole thing, save and save an extra save, save, save.

Yeah, thank you.

Because some folks like myself will start a survey and move on to something else coming up because I'm a bit of a squirrel and do some research and forget to close the window, and maybe even the time to submit the survey is passed before I get around to it.

So there's all kinds of challenges.

But I think uh uh Linda from alerting us, Counselor Matson.

Yeah, I mean, one of the things I've seen in some of the surveys our consultants do over the years is uh they make it so complicated and complex that people just get fed up and don't complete it or quit part way through.

And so if we want to get more detailed information, maybe have like two parts to it, like one you know, the the two-page or three-pager that people can easily point out in sort of the big issues, and then go into some more detail that they you know we'll have to go in and go separately because I think what we do is we just lose a lot of people and they don't bother to participate.

So but uh Liana, will we get a bit of a lessons learn back from uh you know that was kind of one of our last uh surveys for the um for the OCP?

Will we get a opportunity to do feedback about the process kind of as a as a close up?

Through the mayor, certainly we can do that.

I know we talked about doing that with the OCP review advisory committee as well, and so once we've once the OCP project is completed uh and adopted, that is something that staff could turn their minds to.

Um, but right now we we we don't have the capacity to do that.

Yeah, I will just note that um it is very difficult to balance when you're wanting information um to tame it down.

If you get a PhD student who's unleashed on a survey, an hour and a half spent uh on a survey is not enough.

We want to add more questions to get more details, it's the right amount because you'll have a drop-off rate after maybe it's 10 minutes, maybe it's can make multiple choice or yeah, exactly.

So I I mean the there is an art and craft to it, keeping it as simple as possible, of course, is the best way to do it.

But do you get the level of detail?

So uh what I hope we do as a council and staff is that this is the first time we've gone through a full process involving a committee, the amount of engagement we've done.

There's gonna be lessons to be learned.

How do we set up a template, knowing that we're gonna have to redo this every five years to refresh the OCP?

How do we do it more efficiently, both in money and in process, and maybe there's a sweet spot that we learned from looking at our data and says no more than 12 questions per survey or whatever it is, right?

Um, that we can we can uh get a bit better at.

But thanks for bringing that up, John.

Um can we get no receipt?

Move receipts. Uh can we get a seconder for uh F seconded by Councillor Brown, all those in favor?

Uh any opposing, non opposed motion carries, and we've done the rest of that.

So we've got a motion and a notice of motion.

Now we're on item 14, and that was for the South Island Prosperity Partnership.

And Councilor Brown, that is you.

You know, I'm a little bit of an OCP guy.

Um, I was aware that the contract was coming due.

We've done uh five years total, I believe.

I think we did three and with a two-year extension, and of course, it's we're we're we're done March 31st, 2026.

So certainly time to take a look at it.

I appreciate Aaron coming for the second time.

Um and under rep as well, too.

And I'm not gonna pick on SIP specifically, but I find in the hinterlands out here, not only us, but Sydney, Souk, you know, Georgia Rothways.

Sometimes I feel it's like moss in the fire.

Everything gets focused on downtown.

Even the CRD when they created a new building right beside the city of Victoria.

It people having to come in from so many different areas and come to a meeting.

Actually, with COVID, one of the best things that ever happened is electronic meetings.

I wish we had more opportunity to do that with with SIP.

Um electronic meetings.

People have are busy times.

We don't need to have time driving back for driving back and forth.

But anyways, that's my that's my uh um a yarn for the day.

And uh have you got a recommendation um uh at all?

So I know you put it in that we review it.

I think we've done that.

What is your recommendation to come?

Uh personally, I'd like to see us extend, but uh negotiate it maybe for um a shorter term um and get some more specifics.

And they've done very good at having one-on-one meetings, but uh again, I don't think everybody fully understands.

I mean, I've been the rep for the whole time, so it would have been nice to have changed it over.

Thank you.

I I'll s second that.

Um maybe I won't because I I I don't I I just think we extend um without qualification.

So if counselor matsu was going to I ha I just had a comment about the extension.

We we can withdraw in 180 days notice.

So my thought was just simply extend it, have a review every year, and if we don't like what we hear in terms of benefits to view royal, then we can always just terminate.

So I would propose that I'll make a motion that we extend SIP for one year with the focus specifically around reinforcing our plan for the Western Gateway.

We've also got the Atkins hub.

The next council, without fettering them with another three years or two years, we can make it really clear.

It's our opportunity to have them, hey, we're a little guy, we want you to pay attention to us.

We got certain deliverables that we want, and that's not a whole lot we're asking for.

We're asking for a regional contextual plan within stuff that your guys are already talking about, anyway.

So just spit it out on a couple of pages, work with our staff for a bit of time, not a whole thing, but that would be something that I think would demonstrate not only to council to staff, but to our public, that we are um that we can help promote SIP through that process, right?

That this will be the contribution of uh an update for the OCP, that um that's your OCP plan.

Here's our two-pager regional contacts, view royal context on uh whatever the things that might go into that uh you know, uh regional work area or the hospital uh hub or whatever.

Um it's our opportunity to to um elevate that we would like to work in partnership for you, but let's try it for a year and then if the next council wants to come in and extend for three years and are happy with the process that was fine I'll second sort of sounds like mine but the other way around so this is not just let's just continue on doing the same thing this is a line in the sand that says uh we're gonna do this for one year and then uh and then the next council will decide positive or negative we're going to go ahead for one year but it's conditional on uh having some tangible support for the OCP if you are you seconding councillor medicine okay uh councillor Rogers you had a comment or question yeah thanks I know I I could see the merits in both uh both ways um I uh I will support um uh the motion your worship um for two reasons one we'll have an OCP done two um we'll have a a new council where um SIP will be uh motivated to come to the new council speak in context of the um of the OCP the Western Gateway uh our um hubs of um atkins and and uh the hospital and hopefully has have um uh done some work on on both the ENN and uh the the whole regional innovations of um uh hospital and um um services and so on um the I'm I'm you know this is kind of like the arts um that we had you know, we've got now rather when we were just a member of uh CRD arts, um, it was just a few.

And um the region, um, thank god CRD made it a regional service, so now everybody's in, everybody's paying, and uh there's a focus on delivering something to the West Shore.

I don't I don't know, I understood why Langford and Colwood didn't want to jump into that one, because it was going to be super expensive, and there was no um commitment of the CRD uh to consider any kind of art facility because it was all happening downtown.

Well, downtown ain't no more in in terms of the West Shore.

Um, and as long as we can um you know fix this in a in a uh global sense, then I think we'll be able to prove that to Langford and Colwood that um not only are we sticking it out, they will too.

Thank you, Councillor Rogers. Any other comments or questions? Council Lennon?

Well, I'd actually like to extend it for three years, but I will I will support this motion and hope that we support it again next year.

And I we have the proposed new employment corridor along what we used to call the six-mile strip, and there's kinds of businesses we hope will populate it, and uh we need help with that.

And you know, for technology, um medical tech, who knows?

There's you know, there's a world of opportunities there that we haven't got a finger on.

So I think it's critical that we we have the help of the experts.

And uh, you know, if we if we're not at the table, we're you know, we're not that we're on the menu, but we're not at the party.

So thank you. Is uh any other comments?

Questions? Counselor?

The other comment is we could quit right now and we would get the same benefits that I heard that we're getting.

We've gotten over the last five years, basically, more jobs in the area, but again, we wouldn't be contributing and we could still do that.

But so what I hear for our motion is we're actually wanting some tangible results.

And even if the results they haven't come, as long as they can show us that they've been working hard at achieving those things that we wanted them to achieve.

Um yeah.

But otherwise, unless we require these, we may as well just quit right now.

Yeah, I see ourselves fumbling all of the municipalities.

I mean, you know, there's a great deal of energy and expense and and confusion going on with a lot of residential buildings going up everywhere, but there's been less focus on um places to work and innovation and actually thinking about where that goes with Councillor Rogers, where where transportation nodes actually hit.

Does it make sense to put those things there?

Um what are how are we thinking because that all fits into uh our domestic product and how productive we actually are, and you're not gonna get that for two hours waiting in traffic in the West Shore on the same strip that you're talking about.

You know, is there uh what what is the holistic look?

So that you know, not only that View Royal could do it, I'd love to be able to come back and say uh we're a poster child for SIP right now.

Look, we've got mentioned you in our in our OCP, and here's some input in the some really tangible stuff that you've done to help us shape our uh our land availability to meet um uh economic needs in the region, um, and use that as a boilerplate that they could then take to Culwood or Langford or another municipality, and even over and above that to be honest with you if that was a fee for service thing in the future where instead of spending the same amount that we would give just a consultant that doesn't have any context I'd rather give the same amount of money to over and above a membership to somebody who knows exactly what goes on and has some history and depth in the region so yeah that's my motivation for it and I think it's for a year and I know it's not what they're asking for but uh if I always got what I was asking for I probably wouldn't be sitting here right now um so yeah with that thanks for the second um I guess all those in favor of uh your extension any opposed unopposed Ellen is that clear uh Elna uh it's question period time now uh and I we think we skipped over that so anybody in the room want to ask a question of counsel about anything and it doesn't have to be on the agenda but you'll have to go to the other it's conditional you'll have to go to the podium and you'll have to start with your name and at least your street name uh and thanks for coming back up.

Hello um again my name is Diane and I live on Jedburgh Road.

I just want to add one last thing before we part tonight or um the FIFA amnesty is now you've voted on it you've put it out there it's out in the public the BC registry is aware of it.

I know that it's been on the news it's not gonna go away.

And so it's great that you guys are gonna look at the um the bylaw, but in the meantime, there are people that are going to be thinking that they can do this, that they can do it legally.

They're gonna be putting signs in windows, potentially advertising in the gold gold stream gazette, and and it's not legal, and they're potentially going to get fined.

And I think that because the government is aware of it now, and I know that they are because it's it's it's been in the Times colonist, it's been everywhere.

I think that it's a really terrible position to leave residents in.

And I do think that something needs to be done to make sure that people don't get fines.

Like you can't just say it's amnesty and we're gonna turn a blind eye, go advertise, and leave people at such potential risk of violating provincial legislation.

It's just it's just not okay.

It's not okay for our public officials to leave us in this position.

It's just really wrong.

Thanks, Dan. Anyone else want to address counsel and uh any of them?

Go ahead, sir. And again, just start with your name that everybody knows you for the record.

Good to see you again, Gary.

You don't have to hit the green button, just the red button for you.

Lee McGuire, Stewart Avenue.

On May 13th, 2025, I came to council to ask why an old garage at 331 Stewart Avenue had not been demolished.

I asked you that question after I had a long email exchange with your senior planner.

Three clear quotes came from his emails on February 1st, 2024.

I have reviewed the history on this property, and in this case, the garage should have been removed prior to the completion of the new house.

On August 26th, I can advise that a demolition permit has not been received yet and that I will be following up.

On December 20th, as no demolition permit has been received, by law will be able to issue tickets in the new year after a notice of ticketing is sent out.

But then he stopped answering my emails.

Last September 16th, at your request, the same senior planner presented a report to council.

The report showed that the building permit plans had been annotated with a large X through the garage with the letters TBD and the owner's initials.

We were told that TBD means to be determined, but the report did not identify what was to be determined, and that is an unreasonable gap in this report.

At this point, I have documents that tell two contradictory stories about 331 Stewart Avenue.

I don't think the public interest has been served by the incomplete staff report.

My question, will council provide the public with a complete and accurate report.

Thanks for listening to me.

Thank you, Gary. Appreciate that. Hi, Doug.

Doug Wilson, View Royal Avenue.

Also regarding the garage at 331 Stewart Avenue.

The report to council last September included the approved site plan, showing the garage with a handwritten X through it, the owner's initials, and the letters TBD to be determined, we were told.

Through freedom of information, I obtained records that explain why that site plan was modified and initialed.

Here's a sample.

By email, the town told the owner the garage must be removed or a variance was required.

The local government act and the town bylaws were explained.

The email states the submitted plans indicating the accessory building will have to be modified and initialed.

This can be done by hand in person.

The FOI documents I obtained and the local government act itself completely contradict the report you and the public were given last September.

The public came to you for the facts.

It's not what they got.

My question is: will council engage an independent third party to report the truth on this matter to the public?

Thank you. Thanks, Doug.

I appreciate the question.

And noted. Anyone else in Council chambers have a question for council?

Seeing no questions here.

Uh do we have any questions online?

Carl.

Mayor Tobias were showing no questions this evening.

Thank you. Uh Carl, appreciate that.

I don't think we have any notices of motion from anybody that were submitted.

And Elna, I think we have a closed meeting resolution.

That there is the need to have a meeting closed to the public and persons other than the immediate members of council, officers and employees of the town, and those identified under section 91.2 of the community charter shall be excluded on the basis of section 91G, litigation and I receipt of advice.

Thanks, Elna. And no rising report.

And can I get a motion to adjourn, please?

Seconded by the book.

By Councillor Brown, seconded by Councillor McKenzie.

All those in favor?

Any opposed? Seeing none opposed.

Motion carried.