Council Meeting

Good evening, friends and neighbors and colleagues.

I'd like to call the council meeting for April 18th to order.

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

This evening we'll hear from the public during the uh who telephone in during the public participation and question period portions of the agenda for uh the members of the audience, which there are a few.

Council chambers are a safe and respectful and inclusive space and we'll all act accordingly.

If you wish to provide comments by telephone, call 778-402-9227.

And when prompted, enter conference ID 848-100-841 pound.

You will be immediately muted.

Once admitted to the meeting, please do not unmute until you're asked.

At the appropriate time in the agenda, I will then announce the last four digits of your phone number.

Ask you to unmute the live webcast to avoid feedback.

Ask you to not use your speakerphone to ensure sound quality, and ask that you unmute yourself by pressing star six.

To begin, please indicate your name and address for the record.

Speakers will have five minutes each to speak during the participation period and two minutes to ask a question or questions during question period, and 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.

I appreciate that we are in competition with the Stanley Cup playoffs.

So you're encouraged to call in.

Hopefully, conveniently it's located in between periods.

Noting for my colleagues that we do have a blue sheet with the agenda.

Can I get a motion to approve our agenda as stands, including the blue sheet?

Moved by Councillor Brown.

Second.

Seconded by Councillor Rogers.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

I'm even recognizing uh you, uh Councillor Mattson online.

Um, and so that motion passes uh for the approval of the agenda for the minutes and receipt and adoption.

Can I get a motion to adopt the council meeting minutes of the 4th of April?

So moved.

Moved by Councillor Lemons, seconded by Councillor Brown.

All in favor.

I see none opposed.

And now we're down to a mayor's report, and I have a brief one.

Uh it's great to see so many of you out in the boat in our parks and our trails as the weather warms.

I would like particularly to uh thank Ivan and staff for an excellent job that they've done on the active transportation plan.

In particular, building the issue tracking sheet is a highly evolved method of tracking issues uh that council and the public have.

Often the biggest question for participating in a study that you've had a couple of engagement opportunities is what are they doing with my data?

And I think you've really answered the question there, and that's kind of best practice that I've seen with that.

So excellent work on that, Ivan.

Thank you.

By identifying issues and tracking them with mitigations, we can ensure that folks have been heard.

The director of engineering and I also met with entrepreneurs who are who have secured some seed funding and they're looking to run a prototype test of a very light rail system on our existing tracks.

Of course, that doesn't have anything directly to do with View Royal.

That's still the island corridor, but there's interest in us advocating for a simple trial.

The initial trial would be a run between Langford and downtown.

Very light rail is not yet a thing.

It's battery operated.

It is very light rail because it's the tenth of a weight of a normal rail car.

And you can instead of running it just on rail, you can embed the tracks in cement and run them as a tram all the way downtown.

So they're interested in pursuing that as an option, early development stages and discussion, but it's an exciting prospect nonetheless.

The concept of a 15-minute community is often used to describe the ability to walk or roll or get to a place without using a car.

So all the basic amenities that you could do to travel to those things most important to you on a daily basis, like potentially school or daycare or groceries, it has been somewhat contorted on social media that you would be trapped or monitored for how many people are participating in it or in somehow kind of creating a thought that it would be less than voluntary.

The whole concept of a 15 minute community is entirely voluntary as participating in it.

So if we mention it and there are folks out there, I'd urge you to discuss with a counselor, myself or staff, what a 15 minute community really is and what it isn't.

And I can assure you what it isn't is a concept of some uh invasion of somebody's privacy for um uh looking to see if they're participating actively in a plan.

It's just meant so that we have the option not to make uh take a car.

Uh and with that, I think uh we can move to petitions and delegations.

And I would thank Jane for joining us this evening online.

Uh, and she is going to present um uh some zero carbon targets.

Uh Jane, over to you.

Thank you so much, Mayor.

Um, thank you, honorable Mayor and council, for this opportunity to present to you tonight.

Um, I too would like to acknowledge that I'm coming to you from the unceded territories of the Likwangan speaking peoples, who are these squamoul and songhees First Nations.

I am profoundly grateful to be permitted to reside on these beautiful lands.

So, Carl, next slide, please, and thank you.

Oh, sorry, I'm start with this one.

Um, on thin ice.

Humanity is on thin ice, and that ice is melting fast.

Does the UNS uh Secretary General Antonio Guterres?

Our world needs climate action on all fronts, everything, everywhere, all at once.

We all take great pride in setting ambitious targets, but most of us just want someone to just magically wave a wand and make those nasty GHG emissions go away without having a negative impact on our lives.

Scientists have warned us since 1896, yes, I said 1896, about the potential effect CO2 in the atmosphere would have on the planet with the greenhouse gas effect.

No one paid much attention then, as they're all too busy and excited enjoying the many advances being made in various fields like telephones, TV, and rockets going to the moon.

Next slide, please.

Thank you, Carl.

Our Community Climate Action Strategy, or C CCAS, approved by Mayor and Council nine months ago, says we want to prioritize a low-carbon approach, which is heat pumps.

The CCAS says every new building built to minimum code standards and using fossil fuels for heating is a lost opportunity for improved energy efficiency and reduced carbon emissions, and creates just one more building that will have to be retrofitted.

The Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure recently signed off on a new regulation that can be added to the building code, which is the zero carbon step code.

This gives the municipalities the authority to mandate the use of low-carbon energy systems in new bills.

With the BC Energy Step Code, efficiency was the focus, which makes sense for some communities that might be using coal, fract gas, or other fossil fuels to generate their electricity.

Things to improve the building envelope, like sealing up drafts can help reduce fuel consumption, thus somewhat reducing emissions.

However, for View Royal, the electricity is primarily generated by water flow.

So requiring buildings to be electric only greatly reduces emissions.

And in the most effective way, it is urgent that we adopt these new carbon pollution standards, which the zero carbon step code provides, so we do not miss this wonderful opportunity to decarbonize our new buildings as soon as possible.

Next slide, please.

The CCAS said the goal by 2050 is to be at the bottom right corner of this graph where the red line ends.

But the UN has since altered its plea to ask that rich countries accelerate their target for achieving net zero emissions as early as 2040.

Would you consider V Roll part of a rich country?

I know we certainly do.

Next slide, please.

Our CCAS also says by 2030, the vision is that no fossil fuels nor wood are used for heating, and that we have transitioned all buildings to zero emissions energy, such as heat pumps, geothermal, etc.

Now, 2030 is only 6.5 years away.

Does that not sound like an urgency to incorporate whatever tools we have available?

Ultimately, the long-term target is a reduction of 100% below 2007 levels by 2050.

Making more making buildings more efficient by seating up air and energy leaks is not enough to get us there because the step codes themselves will not sufficiently reduce emissions in V Royal.

Next slide, please.

Cutting methane emissions is the fastest opportunity we have to immediately slow down the rate of global warming, and it will have immediate benefits to the climate.

Methane is emitted to the atmosphere during the production, processing, storage, transmission, and distribution of fat gas.

Although this slide is an example from California, you can see in the diagram the various aspects of the delivery system where leaks occur.

In VROil, following the BC Stepco pathway alone does not significantly reduce emissions.

Allowing new gas connections goes against the fossil fuel non-proliferated treaty that Council recently endorsed.

As long as fracked gas is delivered within VROil, harmful gases go into our atmosphere.

For example, gas stoves admit up to 1.3% of the gas they use as unburned methane.

Notably, over three-quarters of methane emissions occur when a stove is turned off.

Did you note that simply igniting the burner releases the same amount of methane gas that would be expected during 10%?

Next slide, please.

If we use the BC step code, this diagram shows you improved efficiency, but only a limited reduction in emissions.

The gray in the houses represents the greenhouse gas emissions at various steps in the BC step code and compares fract gas heating.

I say fract gas because there is very little natural gas left in BC.

So notice even at step code five at the far right, you can see that GHG emissions are only reduced by about 50% if using fract gas.

The BC step code addresses building efficiency only and not the emissions.

Making houses airtight is important, of course, so it is not something to disregard.

But we need to urgently adopt the zero carbon step code as soon as possible to address these nasty emissions.

Next slide, please.

And as you can see in the middle house, that achieves very little in terms of removing greenhouse gas emissions through home heating systems.

Implementing a carbon pollution standard, which the zero carbon step code offers, is imperative if we are to reach our GHG reduction targets.

Next slide, please.

So this slide is just to illustrate how the energy efficiency of a home is tested by a blower door test for air leaks.

Next slide, please.

A low carbon energy system can involve a heat pump that addresses the concerns expressed by the coroner's office, saying it's time to adapt.

To quote the coroner, building codes that require passive and active cooling, such as heat pumps, building materials, insulation, ventilation, greening, tree canopy, landscape permeability, solar reflectivity, etc., can mitigate the effects of extreme heat events.

Next slide, please.

So, what are our neighbors doing?

Through my affiliation with the South Island Climate Action Network, I was informed that our neighbors were pursuing low-carbon initiatives, which led to a conversation directing me to Matt Greeno, the CRD coordinator for local government and engagement.

He was involved with SANITH, Victoria, and Central Saanich in their decarbonization workshops.

Matt continues to be supportive of all municipalities who are exploring the options of opting into the new Zero Carbon Step Code and invites municipalities to reach out to him.

Next slide, please.

In Victoria, GHG emissions modeling has shown that to achieve their target in community wide emissions, all new construction must be built to use 100% renewable energy by 2025.

However, on April 6, 2023, the City of Victoria unanimously passed a motion to expedite implementation of the Zero Carbon Step Code to November 1st, 2023, and advanced the Step Code 4 at that time for homes and low-rise multifamily residences.

Sufficient engagement with industry has already taken place, and builders want regional consistency.

And I've just added this little thing.

I got an article from what's happening in Nelson, and they're just stepping up their zero carbon step code.

And it says, um, I've been very pleasantly surprised with how much buy in we have from builders.

Most builders said they like being ahead of the curve.

Many builders articulated a personal desire to be ambitious, a sense that this level of ambition is closely associated with how Nelson sees itself as a community.

She said, most builders enjoy the fact that they are already in compliance and did not feel rushed into changes.

So, next slide for you.

Highlands, Esquimalt, and Callwood already brought in the step-up, step-down approach.

For example, setting the step code at step code five for homes built as net zero ready, but permitting a step down to a step code three build if a low-carbon energy system like a heat pump is used.

For a building to meet a zero carbon ready standard, most will use electricity for all building systems.

As the BC hydro grid does not yet provide 100% renewable energy, these buildings are thus deemed ready to be zero carbon upon the decarbonization of the grid, which is set for 2030.

Next slide, please.

So what is a low-carbon energy system?

We have bandied about some terminology, one of which is low-carbon energy systems.

Simplistically speaking, low carbon sorry, low-carbon electric technologies such as baseboard heaters are commonplace, but not the most efficient options available.

Heat pump technologies, however, are more than twice as efficient and cost less to operate.

Plus, they double as air conditioners for increasingly hotter summers and include air filtration, thus protecting people from wildfire smoke, pollen, and pollution, which makes our homes much healthier and safer.

Next slide, please.

In this chart, again taken from our CCAS, note the lavender swath, which is stepping up new buildings.

Our approved CCAS says, what is important is that we get started now implementing the big moves.

The zero carbon step code is a big move.

The province of BC has seen the necessity and urgency to allow municipalities to implement the zero carbon step code in addition to the energy step codes.

They have provided a best practices bulletin for local governments for improving energy efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from new buildings.

To reflect this urgency, note that planning started in 2022, was legislated as quickly as February 2023, and implementation is authorized to start this May 1st, 2023, less than two weeks from now.

So that's pretty exciting.

The province recognized the shortfall of the energy step codes alone.

I'm sure you can see this wonderful opportunity that has been gifted to us to enable us to greatly reduce our GHG emissions and meet our climate targets.

I hope we have impressed upon you the urgency to revise the necessary bylaws to include the benefits of the zero carbon step code.

Thank you so much for your kind information.

And the last slide is just the resources where we garnered all this information.

Any questions?

Thank you, Jane, for that well thought out and put together uh presentation.

Um I'll turn to my colleagues to see if there are questions.

Comments.

Um thanks, Jane.

Um I appreciate the information and what um you and the uh the coalition have been working on.

Uh thank you for bringing us the information with respect to the other municipalities and and uh that it's all very useful.

And um now I with that information I look forward to hearing what uh staff have to say and how we can indeed uh move this along.

So thanks again for the presentation and and thanks also from the the the uh the letter from the coalition.

Thank you so much.

Um does council want to consider a uh motion for staff to investigate a um zero carbon step code.

Coming up later.

Okay.

We'll go there.

Yeah, that's see if we staff.

Uh no, we'll hit it on the agenda.

Okay, thanks uh again, Jane.

And I think we move now to a public participation period, and I'll look to our audience members to see if anybody here would like to address counsel.

And I see no one here.

Carl, have you got anybody on the phone that would like to address counsel?

Mayor Tobias, we have no callers at this time.

Third period.

I told you, nobody's available.

Um and reports.

So I think we have a staff report already because they were reading my mind on a BC energy step code and zero carbon step code.

Thank you, Leon.

Thank you, Mayor Tobias, and good evening, members of council.

And I just want to start off by saying that thanks to Jane for making that presentation.

It's really great to see sort of the passion in terms of dealing with our climate crisis in the community.

So I just want to start off by saying that.

So I did prepare a report for this agenda just to share with council some information as we sort of embark on looking into the zero carbon step code.

And I I guess I just want to first off by saying that the town's community climate action strategy includes a low carbon vision, which states by 2030 no fossil fuels and wood are used for heating buildings in View Royal, and all buildings will be transitioned to zero emissions fuels.

As most of you know, the province's clean BC roadmap to 2030 includes foundation actions, and which one of them is new requirements for all new buildings to be zero carbon and new space and water heating equipment to be the highest efficiency by 2030.

The province has established a zero carbon step code, which will come into effect on May 1st.

And so that these requirements are embedded in the new in the BC Building Code.

The zero carbon step code is an optional step code for local governments right now to reduce reliance on fossil fuels in new buildings.

And while the zero carbon step code, which includes four emission levels, is optional today for local governments that would like to use it, the province has stated that it will introduce carbon pollution limits in the BC Building Code in 2024 and 2027.

However, the end goal is in 2030 that all new construction across the province will need to be zero operational carbon.

Some local governments, such as the District of Saanich in the city of Victoria, have started to develop implementation schedules of low carbon to zero carbon ahead of the provincial timeline.

If council wants to follow in this footsteps of the City of Victoria and the District of Saanich to reach a zero carbon performance, and staff have reached out to colleagues in the other municipalities and the CRD.

It would be prudent to allow staff to bring forward a comprehensive report to Committee of the Whole to inform Council on the zero carbon step code.

And once council has all the information and wishes to endorse an accelerated timeline to zero carbon to reach zero carbon ahead of 2030, then staff can prepare the necessary bylaws to make that happen, amendments to the building bylaw to make that happen so the recommendation this evening is to receive the staff report and um give give staff um a chance just to come forward with a report at committee of the whole just outline to to ensure council is fully informed and um and if if council wishes to to to have this accelerated timeline because we are in a climate crisis and it's um it is low hanging fruit so to speak then that is something that we may want to explore but uh I think it would be helpful if staff can just have a little bit more time chatting with the colleague my our colleagues in other municipalities and at the CRD to sort of help us help walk us through this to make sure we're if we're sort of in line.

Thank you, Councillor McKenzie I I don't have any questions, but I do have a comment um yes, I would I was prepared coming into uh the C things meeting to uh propose that we do accelerate um to step four at according to Victoria's timelines.

However, um I'm happy if if staff wants to do that little bit uh extra work.

Um I would actually I am a bit curious what what in the report um what will that explore that you're not too sure at this moment about is it is it with the developers or um so through through the mayor the through the CRD, the City of Victoria, District of Soundish, the Central Soundage did some comprehensive engagement on zero carbon step code last year um and within that it it provides sort of the pros and cons.

I think the development industry, from what I've heard, is the development industry is sort of on board with the original timeline that the City of Victoria and the District of Sanich came up with, which was uh the 2024 2025 timeline for part nine and part three buildings.

Um this new accelerated approach, you know, is my colleagues in the other municipalities are getting a lot of questions right now, like what does this mean?

Um and so what's gonna happen?

Obviously, um I we don't know sort of what the impacts are with the sort of BC hydro and transmission lines and all these sorts of things, right?

So just there's just a couple of I just want to just want to make sure at the staff level that we all understand we can answer answer council's questions um in a thoughtful and informed way.

And um, and uh and we're we'll we'll bring back something like relatively soon this is not gonna sort of sit um it will it will come back it's just so give an opportunity to kind of help sort of frame things and as you all know we are working our on our building bylaw right now that needs to come into effect at the beginning of September and so staff is just quite busy with that so um but this is equally important and um and um and and so we'll yeah we just need a bit more time yeah no thank you and I appreciate you guys are very busy so thank you.

Councillor Levin and then Councillor Rogers.

Good.

Thanks, Leanne.

Refresh me, please um we are you're working on the building bylaw and several months ago, uh the step code was discussed at council, perhaps it was the committee of the whole, in which we talked about okay, we would go to step three and step two if like Cullwood, if if um uh all electric was used for heating and so on.

Um do you recall that or were you here then?

Yeah, um so through the mayor, I I I don't recall that conversation.

However, um what I can tell you is that um we have um our building bylaw has been amended and um to we are now implementing the BC Energy Step Code.

So step code three for all um BC energy step code three for all uh part nine buildings so houses, townhouses, duplex, and then part two for um part part two step code two for part three buildings, um which are um buildings that are greater than six stories and um commercial buildings, and so that's already in place.

Okay, so elect so all electric doesn't feature.

That's something different, yeah.

Okay, okay.

That's part of the zero carbon right step code is becoming um sort of decarbonizing our space heating and um hot water heating.

All right, thank you.

And just one more question.

Have you been um has has staff been um speaking with the industry at all or is that to come?

Okay.

Not not yet.

And again, um in terms of there there has been as part of the um the engagement piece associated with um the CRD and and um the work that District of Saanich and City of Victoria and Central Saanich did um was with sort of the same players as um that would work in Fear Royal as well.

So I I I'm not sure if further engagement is will be necessary given this sort of new information that I've heard from my colleagues in other municipalities.

So I think it's um again, like this is a thing like I think it'll be really helpful and beneficial if staff can just bring forward a more fulsome report to committee of the whole for council to make a decision if they wish to um endorse an accelerated approach to the zero carbon step.

Definitely.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks.

Councilor Rogers.

Yes, thanks.

Uh you know, it's interesting with the um uh we were just looking at the step codes and then Cole Wood came around and and gave their innovative approach along with um the other municipalities, and that was just um you know, step code five or three with low admissions, and now suddenly we have zero carbon.

You know, it just came onto the doorstep.

Um and it it is interesting looking at the I think the regional um climate um GHC reductions were not doing too good.

I regionally, I think we have a problem.

So I understand um where um Jane and and the the committee is coming from and I really applaud um uh Victoria Squamous Sandra Santa's Coldwood and and uh Highlands you know all around us and I think that's what um developers are looking for is this that consistent approach so um and it it's um a regional wide approach I appreciate the um uh the need for a staff report I'm I there's some technical points that I'm still very confused on uh this is so new um you know I don't even understand what the four levels of of zero is is all about and how does that impact us?

But I oh I do understand that uh developers are not happy with the costs of step code five.

And if we can um achieve you know the ultimate goal of uh really reducing, getting zero carbon, uh then I think um uh it's probably something that the the developer community can can get behind um, but your points will take.

How are things with the infrastructure and the electrical grids and and so forth to be able to support the region in that regard?

So that is um what um I I look forward to.

So the question is if we have a target of January the 1st going zero carbon, much like um is it would that be possible?

Would we be able to get a staff report um so that we could make a decision and move forward for um some bylaw to go out January 1st.

Um through the mayor, just just a point of clarification, um, councilor Rogers, I are you are you saying um that uh uh establish like reach well I think there's a couple things there there's there's part nine buildings and part three buildings, right?

So and they actually have the city of Victoria and the District of Saint, they have different um they're reaching levels at different different stages, right?

Just because of it's easier to reach zero carbon for part nine for a house, for example, like installing a heat pump um than a larger six-story building.

Um so there it's it's it would be more challenging for those larger buildings.

And so that and that is why there's a there is a um a bit of a phased approach with respect to um implementing the zero carbon because it just will allow developers who are building larger buildings a bit more time to to get it um make sure they have their mechanical systems and it's just more complicated for part three buildings.

And so I think we just I think I think if you can just give um staff just a bit more time just to um because I mean this is all really good this is all good stuff.

This is all important.

It's just um it's just important that staff can come back and um provide you with the information you need.

And if I may you worship the um uh I guess the point is that yes obviously we need more time we need to have a a good evaluation of this and make sure we get it right but I really hope that we as a council can do something uh towards um uh and and make something out um put something out in January and then make it the best we could possibly do in that time so um we've have a few months move staff recommendation um I think uh thank you, Councilor Lemon.

And and we're we're absolutely we'll we'll go there.

I think you've probably heard that council's interested, maybe subtly, um, in accelerating the process as much as we can.

And and so we look forward to your staff report.

Councilman Lemon has moved uh receipt of the staff report.

Can I get a second or second?

Seconded by Councillor McKenzie.

Uh all in favor.

I oh sorry, I also have just the last question.

Okay.

Um something that occurred to me at the last, I think it was one of the last meetings, was those developments that get approved, but don't start building for a number of years.

And then uh perhaps uh do the are they do they have to comply with the new step?

So it's at the time of construction, not the time of the permit.

Um be at the time of the building permit.

At the building permit.

Okay, yeah.

All right, thank you.

Okay, speaking to the motion received um i don't mind moving receipt um or supporting the motion provided that you know um we don't lose this and um uh i don't i can't speak for the rest of council but i'm hoping that we would um and and council would support um something before us with a path of a amended improved better climate action bylaw in january first is that is that the intent um from members of of council uh thank you, Councillor Rogers.

I I think that would be a separate motion if we wanted to prioritize this for staff.

If that's uh the will of council, I'd be happy to see if we can package that to a motion to prioritize this work um uh to bring back.

Counselor Lennon.

Yeah, in making the motion, I'm I I what I heard from staff was that they need time and uh they're they're operating a bit in the dark now.

So I I'm trusting that you're prioritizing this and uh within the next you know before before the summer comes, we'll we'll hear from you and have something to to um to work from.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh all in favor of the receipt.

Uh any opposed.

None opposed.

I'm I'm taking your uh non-moving movement, or you could be frozen, Councilor Matson, as agreement.

Uh otherwise I'll rely on you to speak up.

Yes, sir.

No, I'm I'm fine with the motion.

We've been talking about this for a couple of years, looking at options of moving things forward.

And so uh staff certainly seems to have the uh thing things in hand and know what council expectations are.

So I have every confidence that's something will be coming up before too long.

So thank you, staff, for your work.

Thank you, Councilor Mattson.

And we've got, I think, next up an active transportation network plan follow-up.

Ivan.

Thank you, Mayor Tobias.

I've been the young director of engineering.

Um, first of all, Mayor Savaz, thank you for your comments at your mayor's report.

I'll pass it on to staff.

I'm sure they appreciate that.

Um, so the again, uh, welcome to our next chat about the active transportation network plan.

Um, really looking forward to speaking on this and providing any uh answers um that you may have, um, any questions that you have.

So uh the purpose of this uh meeting is to uh provide information to you on how uh the active transportation network plan um can be finalized and uh submitted to the the province, and also at the same time uh it's important for us to address uh the council comments uh as well as any other additional comments.

I really do appreciate the passion that you have for active transportation.

Um we do acknowledge that it does have impacts to all road users, so um looking forward to uh answering any questions.

But uh I at the end of this too, you'll notice on the screen I have uh FNXA follow-up.

So there's six items in the tracking sheet that uh I wouldn't mind um having council maybe uh uh provide answers for us so that we can uh certainly move forward with uh with our uh memo that we do intend on putting uh on top of the the ATMP.

Um but that said I just wanted to lay out here the fact that uh the plan doesn't not does not need to be adopted um it just needs to be finalized uh what's important to the province is that we have identified gaps uh it showed needs I also want to emphasize that uh council has the ability to uh inform on the design uh in the future as more uh details come to light and also at the same time that council has ability to reprioritize should they wish as part of budget deliberations.

But uh I'd like to pass the pass the mic to yourselves and uh again, I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you.

Uh Ivan, uh council rudding yeah.

Uh thank you for the report.

Um it it certainly was right at the last minute, so I'm I'm at a disadvantage in in uh being able to go through this um uh lengthy, detailed um uh feedback.

So it's um but I I guess um um we did get a summary of of the open house.

Um I I would certainly be interested in getting more details of what the the public um had to say.

Um I know there was a good many of attendees, so um that would be helpful to get that input.

Um I do want to thank um uh both the mayor and staff for allowing um uh this council the ability to uh to go through and and comment on such an important document.

Um a fine-tooth comb was uh indeed necessary to ensure that we uh um we would get what VWOL deserves the best.

Um so um making sure that it's it's fair, equitable, uh, and great value for our taxpayers will take time.

Um again, I'll reiterate the conditions report is amazing, uh, basis from which to work.

And I think um if um if we put a mind to it, we can also make sure that this is going to be a a uh a fabulous document, not for 10, but for 20 years.

So um I'm I'm happy just to move a receipt of the report at this time and um uh work with my colleagues and and staff to uh get down and get it done.

And yeah, I was very pleased, uh Ivan, to um to note that um the the province would receive it still eligible for the grant as long as council had uh had received it.

And I think there's some great core stuff in there.

And as you suggest that if council has concerns about a specific part or development, they're gonna have input on exactly what that looks like when it comes time to do that.

Um and uh and yeah, so I think uh that's good.

So can I get a motion to move receipt for the HPN uh moved by counselor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Lemon.

Uh Counselor Lemon, do you have a comment?

I I do, and and I you know i'm wholly in favor of receipt.

Uh but I I do want to say that i i don't agree with the motivator of of the motion entirely i i don't see it as our role to go through something with such a fine tooth comb um i think that kind of detailed isn't isn't our role it's not it's not the job of governance and i think staff has gone to an awful lot of work here to answer an awful lot of questions and um i thank you for your tolerance and your patience um and it it it was it it's a lot to ask and i i um i i i think we muddy the waters when governance gets so far in the weeds and and it confuses the public and and and i believe it confuses staff so that's all i have to say thank you counselor lemon counselor kettle uh yes i would also like to kind of echo what councillor lemon was saying i think at this point we are the bigger question is whether we're happy with the process that was followed to get to the the state that we're at um and if we are then we have to be happy with the results of that um that.

That said uh so overall, I am really happy with the process that I've seen for this.

The only place that I feel slightly uncomfortable with is the lack of engagement with the Songhese Nation up to this point.

I know going forward, we will engage them on each of the uh individual projects that we take on.

However, I did have the opportunity to speak to a counselor with the Songhese Nation for something else, but I did mention our active uh transportation network plan, and they are very interested to see it.

So I don't want to delay or um you know add any complication, but I think it would be uh the maybe courteous thing to do is to share it with them and invite them for a conversation about it, um, even at this stage uh mayor to bias if I can if I comment to that yeah greatly appreciated um engagement at the first station is always an ongoing thing um but and we do also understand the the need to engage them especially because Admirals Road I believe is number one on the priority list so that makes 100% sense.

One thing we do intend on doing is engaging them and also um providing the relevant and needed resources for them to engage uh meaningfully we do know that uh our neighbors receive a a lot of referrals, and we do understand that uh it takes a bit of time and it takes a bit of work on their end.

So uh what we may be presenting to council in the future are ideas on how to help our neighbors on that um a a lot of that would be to um provide resources for them to uh so that they can engage with us and we can engage with them.

Great, thank you.

Thank you, Councillor McKenzie, and and noting for I guess staff and council that um First Nations engagement and the effect of UNDRIP on local governments will change our cadence, right?

It will that engage process of engagement, it won't be as fast as we're used to, and it's going to take some time to get it right.

And when we come up with plans and and engagement is included in them, we have to factor that in that it's it's not going to be as quick as if we weren't engaging them.

So, and that's okay, right?

We've got to all realize that that that is the cost of changing it rather than just lip service, our governance model will have to be tolerant to um to more back and forth about uh what what right looks like.

And nobody's an expert yet, none of us are, and we'll learn from the process, but I thank you for that.

I will comment on the notion of council's role in review of documents, um, and that I will not debate for a second that counselor Rogers' comments were extensive.

Um, and all of us have different views on that, but I see council as a role of oversight and represented uh of the public.

So if council, a particular counselor wants to make no comments about it and receive it, then that is fine.

If somebody wants to be very detailed about it, that is okay too.

What Ivan has produced in front of us here is not only our own comments, but other comments that were involved in the engagement process, which I find is very valuable because the question I get on a daily basis in my day job is how was my data used to make a decision?

Was it factored in?

Otherwise, I'm just wasting my breath.

So engagement as a process without the public being able to see the input and change that that has made is a significant, again, a change in governance we should get used to if we want to embrace openness and transparency.

If somebody makes a comment on a policy or a proposed document, we really have an obligation to show them how we've considered it.

And if we've just chosen not to consider it, that should be, you know, apparently scalable as well, right?

And findable.

So whereas, you know, there's a degree there, but I think that openness and transparency and extent of review, that's what we're actually doing because it does have complications further down the road.

So again, Ivan, what you've done here really uh is able to summarize, you know, uh things.

And I will say that regardless of the extent of comments, all of those comments that I think you've made uh got from all of us that have commented uh were uh thoughtfully responded to and tracked and i know it didn't come easy but it's a worthwhile task like our other engagements we do with first nations so thank you for that um yes and so counselor maston will go uh to you first and then councilor rogers sure uh i i do apologize that i haven't been able to sort of provide uh comments uh the time to actually spend to to do comments given my location but i did want to point out that i've uh received a surprisingly number a surprising number of complaints from individuals uh uh about the putting sidewalks in areas where they've never been before and and the complaints are you know sort of twofold one of them that it came to them as a total surprise and again i i know we've did a lot to inform people but there are a number of people were surprised that there was this process and they didn't have an opportunity to comment and didn't have an opportunity to comment on on the documents um so again in and in terms of engagement I know staff have worked hard at uh getting the message out but we're we've we're still sort of lacking in that regard um and um again I I I too share the the same concerns that I'd heard about um you know the sidewalks because people as soon as they see them think that they're happening next week as opposed to something which you know may or may not ever happen so there needs to be sort of better information out there in terms of what this document does and how in terms of councils receiving it and uh what what it's really going to mean to the the community in the future.

Those are probably all the comments I have for now.

Thank you Councillor Matson appreciate uh council rogerson yes, thank you so uh if we're gonna open up the governance aspect um I think it's important um for this council to um give very detailed consideration for a document that has such profound implications, both in terms of the climate change and in terms of how we spend our taxpayers' money.

So, you know, when we have um visions on based on loose concepts with no pros and cons and no uh in-depth um uh analysis, we're behooving to our taxpayers to think about and weigh these these options and not just fluff it off and say, well, there we go, we got our report.

This was more than $50,000 from the province.

I I'm um again, I'll come back to the uh conditions report.

Brilliant.

It took a lot of really good introspection, and for that I think we've we uh we got our money's worth.

And um, but I think we as council probably failed in giving staff enough money to do a proper consultation beyond the cyclists.

We didn't consult the transit users, we didn't consult the pedestrians, and um and I I think you know when you look at the graph car, bus, pedestrians, cyclists, I mean I've I've been working on on the ENN trail for you know 20 years.

And you know that's really super important.

I agree.

But it's still um an inferior trail when it doesn't cause have separation for for pedestrians.

And thank God CRD is working on that with Lockside and and the Galloping Goose.

So um just because we've we've got a report doesn't mean we do ignore it, doesn't mean we don't make any constructive comments.

Uh it means that we really have a a uh an opportunity uh to consider our tax base.

And in in terms of the song he's yes, I really want to hear from the First Nations with respect to uh the plan that we have on Atkins, because I think it's a great worry for them.

They walk and they need assistance on in this plan.

So um when we go to consultation, I suspect that they won't be happy with um, you know, this unusual anomaly that is inconsistent with the Esquamo and Sandage.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Rogers, and um just a last comment on this before we go to vote, if uh and before I go to you, Councilor Brown, and that is we've got a number of changes that are gonna be likely imposed on us in the next little while.

Um, province wide uh mandate of suites, um, up to uh a row housing for uh this may alter what we prioritize as a plan because um there are unknowns there that we don't know exactly how that legislation is going to spill out.

So I think before we go to anything when it comes to decision making regarding active transportation, we maybe have a look on how that might affect us, and we'll know that early September, which staff will be busy um trying to interpret what that actually means for View Royal.

Uh, just ask that we consider the changes we know are coming uh and factor that into whatever it comes to our implementation of this thing.

Counselor Brown.

Just being uh being new to this first time around, it's good to know that it's not etched in stone.

And as projects come up, we can approve them or not approve them.

Uh, make additions, take things out, and same as when the OCP, the new OCP, it again will be a living document.

I'm just very happy.

And you said that very well, Mayor Tobias.

How about as things come up?

We discuss them and and go, yay or nay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Brown.

I think we're ready to vote on receiving this um active transportation because I think we got cut off before the vote in discussion.

All in favor of receiving the active transportation plan.

Any opposed?

And I see Councillor Mattson's hands up, so none opposed.

Good work, uh Ivan.

Thank you.

Yeah you're on our own.

I I'm not done yet.

So I I wouldn't mind getting some feedback from from yourselves on six items I wouldn't mind tidying up on the the tracker and then what we'll be doing with this tracker is uh uh putting this on top of the document to make sure it's not forgotten for future discussion.

So move forward with just six items here uh just outlined um here but we can just get to the speech trails and web page promotions.

Um actually, there's three items in this one item.

I apologize, but um we I try to keep the the the number of points short.

Um so uh we'd we wouldn't mind getting some feedback from from council regarding uh reducing the speeds from 50 kilometers an hour to 30 kilometers an hour.

Uh if council wishes to do this and reduce it, then our ATMP can revise to include a recommendation in support in being supportive of policies and programs.

Um just an as an anecdote, the District of Sanitare have uh undergone their speed reduction um strategy, which is based on NACDOS, a National Association of Transportation City officials, uh, which is different than what the town of Esquamba is doing, which is and the way they're doing it is kind of similar to how Victoria and Oak Bay are doing it.

So those are neighbors, and um I think what the town has uh as an advantage is to take a look at those two or three options.

And um if if we wish to support these policies, then I would suggest that maybe additional uh details be provided to council before um we formally adopt a certain policy.

But that said, uh we can certainly um entertain incorporating this into our ATMB.

Specifically on the speed limit or uh um reduction, I think we've discussed that uh somewhat.

Is there anybody opposed?

Anybody opposed to reducing from 50 to 30 on residential roads?

Council Brown.

Sorry.

Just making a comment.

Um obviously, the intent is to obviously reduce accidents because you're lowering speed.

You could lower it to 20 or 10 or just get rid of cars altogether, but I guess that's not feasible.

You already have the 30 kilometers in in parks and school zones.

I know myself, I'm sure most people are very conscious of that, and they maybe even go slower because they they're waiting for kids to jump in front or people working at the parks.

I know some other municipalities have gone down to 30.

Um personally, I find 30 is excruciatingly slow, except when I'm going through a park or through a school zone.

I'd be very happy to see 40, other than of course the island highway, the Trans Canada Highway, obviously, and maybe some other roads as well.

And being a police officer, I've seen a lot of accidents caused by road caused by road rage.

People, you know, again, typically everybody slows down for the parks and the school zones, but to slow down to 30 everywhere, to me, it's excruciatingly slow.

And talking to police officers, it's it's also very hard to enforce as well.

So that's just my personal opinion.

But if council's hole thinks 30 is the way to go, I would certainly uh support that.

But I would I would prefer 40, but then that's just me.

Thank you, Councillor Brown.

Counselor Lemon.

Just a question to that point.

Um Ivan, when we when we're talking um residential or neighborhood streets we're not including what kissway helmkin burnside um but also island highway island highway yeah all all the collector roads uh and abroad as you're speaking of so we're talking chilco that would be just yeah um mayor toias that is uh exactly it in spirit um council does have the ability to adjust the CD limits of our collector roads should they wish as well.

Um, I do know I believe the town of the Squamalt are are bringing some down to 40, I believe.

Um, but again, the beauty of um bringing this forward with details for council is that um that staff will provide the needed information for you to make a decision that's best for the community.

Counselor Brown.

Yeah, of course that would require a very specific naming the streets.

Uh like Atkins Road is is 30 now.

Even though there you go another sign for the school zone, but it's it's 30 all the way.

And it's uh anyway.

Um, so that would be one road that could be considered to be 40.

I don't know, just saying.

But that's a good point.

Yeah, some of the little side rows, yeah, 30 would make total sense.

Yeah, I agree.

So I I'm I'm fearing that we could get involved in a long discussion here, Ivan.

Um, so I'm not sure how best to handle that.

I would recommend maybe that we package these up for the council of the whole if that fits with your timeline, um, and go through them that way and allow um council to have a read of those and deliberate.

And I think that would be probably more productive uh because I probably couldn't see a way ahead without having that in front of them.

Just trying to save your time too, Ivan.

Uh that's fine.

Actually, this is the hardest one of the six.

So we can see if we can get through the other five.

We can table this one for later.

Uh the the purpose of this is so that um we can uh myself can provide direction to um our staff and our consultant as how to tidy up this report.

Um, and in the meantime, uh the committee of the whole is still before the uh the deadline May 31st.

So uh certainly there is the ability to.

Um but ultimately I'd I'd like to see it at least tidy up for um for May 2nd at least.

Uh but that said we can we can present this for sure.

Thank you.

Uh counselor Rogers and then Councillor Qualwick, please.

Yeah, uh this is obviously very consistent with um the um preax uh motion uh as well as the um uh if we will uh climate correlation.

So we're all on the same page, and and map nine uh is really clear.

We're talking the neighborhood streets.

So if you looked at if you've ever seen map nine, you know exactly what this is about.

It's not Watkins, it's not the island highway, it's not six mile.

So um, and I think we're only talking about uh 30k on those streets where it's hard to imagine anyone can drive more than 30 anyway.

So um thank you for getting right on this and and putting that in this part of the report.

And yes, when it all comes back, we take care of the other issues.

Yeah, and the other thing we can do too is uh this doesn't need to be set in stone.

Uh staff can certainly present um amenable language to to council saying that's we look into this into the future.

Um even even though it's uh going from 50 to 30 for residential streets, we can open it up in the ATMP that mentions that it's being looked at, and then that way that package can go to the province and we can deliberate this uh as a municipality so we can certainly do that to wrap it up perfect thank you uh counselor qualify please certainly uh thank you thank you and uh if we're wanting to get through these tonight ivan i would like to comment on the 50 to 30 kilometer uh bullet point um it's certainly an easy decision and i support moving down to 30 kilometers an hour for residential streets thank you counselor mccetting uh if if we are if we are discussing this um i think for me it would be really useful to see what the other municipalities are at, because i can only imagine it'd be really confusing to go from you know Esquimalt the View Royal and each of them be different rules without having, which would require signage.

Whereas if we are consistent, maybe we wouldn't need signage on all the roads.

Um I mean personally I 100% agree.

Um it would make sense for uh us to get into that details later to give council the ability to discuss what's important.

Um for the purpose of the ATMP, um I think we can just leave it saying that it will be looked at, and then that could spring up as another initiative.

Or we could just put it to vote.

Those in favor of going from 50 to 30 kilometers on residential streets.

We're not even talking about the connectors, just residential streets.

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Okay, so I think you've got some direction on on residential streets.

Talking with the mayor of Saanich, uh West Burnside is on their roadmap to crack down to 30.

It's not on their list right now, but their intent would be to make it common all the way to uh where we have our problems with right now on on the corner.

So to Council McKenzie, your point making those uh so both the Squimalt and Sanich, our two neighbors on that side are moving to 30.

It's not all done at once.

There's some studies going on.

Uh, not sure for Callwood for uh Old Ireland, but that's just about all of them.

So, what's the next item on the agenda?

Uh it's just been an easy one.

List safety improvements for regional trails to pass into the C or D.

So there was a few comments with respect to uh how to uh make the CRD uh conflicts a little safer.

And so this line item is just simply uh we can revise the the plan to include a high level direction just indicating support of uh programs um the town can be involved in to play to have a more of a supporting role, encouraging CRD to widen regional trails within the town boundary.

So again, I said it's it's literally just notifying that the the CRD of uh of support for these initiatives.

Uh any opposed.

Yeah, um I think the comment um the one that I like particularly is uh with Santa's where um they um uh specifically are asking that um you know the the regional trails be widened um for um for pedestrian safety.

I think that's where they're clear on.

Um and I don't think it's just the case where um the volumes are high because it could be up and down, up and down.

We want it to be able to consistent.

If you have it and then don't have it, have it, don't have it, uh, then we have a problem.

Certainly.

Um, but in the Hell's Gate portion, where the galloping goose and the in and come together and come apart in a um for the sick cost savings back in the 1990s, um, it it is that is particularly bad, probably the first scenario that we want to take care of.

But ultimately we want to um be like Sanach and have uh go beyond 1987 and get pedestrian safety on all the regional trails.

So any opposed to uh advocating uh working with CRD to um to support their initiatives for trail widening and I'm hearing, you know, having pedestrian separation, and that's already in their plan, but again, to emphasize to them our importance.

Anybody opposed to that?

Nobody opposed, okay.

Uh promote uh walk, roll, map, link, and town social media.

Um, anybody opposed to that?

See, no opposition.

Do you ever know what it is?

Uh yes, I do know what it is, and I'm looking forward to seeing its promotion.

Um, which brings us to finding better ways to improve our engagement, get the message out there, but that's nothing to do with this.

What's the next one, Ivan?

Uh so the next one is actually a brand new point.

So we're a third there.

Um we'd like direction to determine if a specific uh if we'd like to have a specific improvement map.

So uh right now we have short, mid, and long-term uh maps, each showing, you know, here's one for sh for priorities, here's one for mid, and here's one for long, and the long's incorporating the ultimate.

Um the request was to have it all on one map.

Uh if council wishes to have that, then we can certainly get while consulting to provide something for us.

Um I would probably put that as a as a um uh as appendix to the to the cover memo.

Um but if it's their wish, we can certainly provide that.

Thank you, Ivan.

I've I've got an ask.

I mean, I like that, but uh I I'm as well concerned about what are those areas identified specifically to do with safety.

You know, because I think that would help council prioritize some initiatives that like um I guess my concern is are we doing something that's aspirational and might make a difference to some, whereas it might be a safety consequences for others, uh a street crossing, those types of things.

Is it possible to incorporate that lens on it as well?

I don't know, could be different color.

Um but uh just my thought is that the there are projects in here of importance and short, medium, and long are great, but I really want to know because uh I think lots of uh our residents have identified challenges in crossing a road.

That's the reason why they don't use active transportation and are hopping into their cars rather than walking to Eagle Creek.

So if we know that, then um there's different uh old island highway crossing is another one that has been of concern.

So if we could have just another notation on there, not to complicate your already arduous task.

Um Council Rogers.

Yeah, unfortunately, um I, you know, we're now getting into the details.

We're not we all don't have maps seven, eight, and five before us.

So we're not, I don't think we know what we're talking about.

And um if we're um I know what I'm I'm thinking of.

I'm thinking of just the pedestrian uh ultimate plan and the pedestrian ultimate plan breeding broken down, but it has to be broken down in in objective um in evaluation criteria, not to say that we're gonna do this, this, and this, because we haven't evaluated whether it's gonna be Atkins or Watkiss or what, you know, in terms because we don't know the costs, we don't know the benefits and and so forth.

So if we don't have the maps and we don't understand what we're we're talking about, um I think this may be something we have to take to um um the uh committee as a whole Ma Mayor Tobias just a point of clarification it was not provided in that word document that was uh that um yourselves had the opportunity to review and the reason why is because the document would have been just excessively big however it was included in the draft acts of transportation that were planned that was provided on the previous council and as well as on the website but we can certainly uh point that out um and make sure you have the ability to take a look at that.

So your simple ask is we've got three maps now, right?

And what you're suggesting is we have one map with the three um locations put on that one map.

I don't think we need more information to make that decision to have one map to show three things rather than three maps to show one thing each.

Council Brown.

Yeah, certainly one map would be very useful.

And and same repeating what Mayor Tobias said too, the safety aspect is so important because so many of the uh some of the ones listed already have uh paved sidewalks, for example, or or wider boulevards where some streets have you know foot and a half foot wide boulevards.

So uh yeah, it'd be nice to see that and the priority list.

Mayor Tobias, that I think that was in response to um ST3, and uh staff can certainly bring that forward as a separate initiative for uh staff or for council commentary.

Thank you, Ivan.

I think we'd be happy with that.

Okay, so next one is um regional connections and working with the CRD.

So um I believe the the report uh had uh relatively loose um wording with respect to working the CRD, and this request was to um delete the where possible and then provide stronger verbiage uh regarding the promotion and support of widening CRD trails.

So it's very similar to um what we just chatted about.

Anybody opposed to that?

Yeah, I just want to explain that yeah, the the the dimensions provided are the CRD standard.

The um four-meter cycling two meter pedestrian that's CRD standard.

Yeah, based on the report, that is correct.

And I think the purpose of uh of this point is to um provide stronger wording saying that the town is in support of that.

Um ultimately is the CRD that administers it.

And I sit on the perks for CRD too, so I'll make sure to bring that up and amplify it.

Thank you.

Okay, we're halfway there.

Um ready set role program addition.

So this is to uh put in to the ATMP um support of school crossing guards or advocating for school crossing guards.

Uh staff can certainly put that in there.

Um, as a as a side note, uh the staff is currently working on the ready step rule program with uh Ecoville Eagle View Elementary, and there's probably going to be other uh important items to be uh that will arise out of that, and school crossing guards could as well.

So the question that we have for council is uh do we want to have specifically school crossing guards in this ATMP for advocation, or uh would you like to have that as part of a report once we have finished or not finished, but like our in our journey with Eagle View Elementary as a ready step rule, presenting our findings at that time.

I I think that would probably be acceptable or or more acceptable and to receive it all as part of that.

And again, for council, we're not saying who funds the crossing guards in this one.

We're all just agreeing that the crossing guards would be part of the plan.

Okay, next page.

Thank you, Mayor Tabas.

Um so this is with respect to project G, which is the Chancellor Road.

Um, I believe we've had uh we what's uh staff and report has shown is a a multi-use path going from uh Helmkin towards uh Chancellor Park.

And the request here is to have um basically uh protected bike lanes on both sides of the road road instead of a multi-use path.

Um, which have with walk consulting, they said that given the volumes of the road, that is certainly an amenable option.

So um we can certainly uh provide that as an option in the ATMP report, if that is what you wish to have in there.

I uh travel Chancellor just about every day, I guess.

And uh I it's rare that I see a car and a bike at the same time.

So I think we've got um we've got a bike lane there, and that is a residential road, right?

And that portion of chancellor that we're talking about.

I'm not so certain they need to be protected, and I'm all into safety, but that little stretch just for on Chancellor, not we're not talking about crossing Helmkin, we're not talking about walk because that little stretch there, I don't know if I would see a real requirement.

Those are pretty much living streets there now, Ivan, but that's my thought.

Councilor Roger.

I I yeah, I think one of the problems I'd had when I was reading this was just talking about um bi-directional bike lanes and it would be on one side and so forth.

Yes, in unilateral um bike lanes, I think are really uh important.

It just makes ICBC a little happier when uh cars don't collide with bikes uh as they're coming out their driveway.

And I think the the potential of that development, the the corner um and the density that was coming out of that would um would be something that we would probably want to leave um when that future development comes along.

And um yeah, so uh I would make it that it conditional.

Right.

So uh what staff would recommend then is that we add that um uh the option of just bike lanes and also for future discussion, and um that comments actually fairly timely given the development.

So we I thank you for that.

And last one is adding to project J, which is the um one of the sidewalk gaps.

But in this case, uh the wish is to install sidewalks on the underside of the road, um basically at the at the town border with Calwood to provide uh better access to the rec center.

Um most of that is within the city of Calwood.

So um staff recommendation would be that uh the ATMB can refer or work with Calwood on this particular item.

And you're talking about the the side of the road that uh the rec center is on or the opposite side?

It's the side that the rec center is on.

Uh currently the sidewalk that's on uh a town of Vero Royal, it basically ends, and then there's a small path that goes towards um the rec center.

That whole strip is a mess for sidewalks right now.

There it starts, stops, um, you know, is gravel.

So uh I think uh I I would advocate working with the town of Calwood as well.

If you could toss on there, Ivan, their bike lane plan as well, because I believe that they're just finishing up their active uh transportation master plan as well.

And I don't think we've probably talked about, but it'd be nice to be able to get on a bike and drive and the bike lane not end when we hit Calwood.

Then I think all it would take is a conversation.

And maybe the lines are the same color and something, same width.

We'll definitely work with uh with uh other towns on that.

That's the the the border designs are always the ones that take the most time.

So yeah, absolutely.

Thank you, Councilor.

Yes, uh thanks so much for for putting this in.

Um absolutely important.

Um we know that it's uh it's an accessibility issue for anybody that's on um um motorized um uh seniors on on scooters and so forth, they and and also a real hazard, I think, for because it hasn't following the septed rules of people, uh vulnerable people working in the forest walking in the forest in the dark.

Um and just a question to staff, the with the uh rapid transit plan, um is there any opportunity to working with transit as they're um uh developing their uh rapid bus lanes um that uh we could work in unition with callwood as in as an opportunity uh that is currently being done uh from a staff level uh bc transit is working with both the town and callwood with respect to uh the buses there um i think per last week's uh presentation from BC Transit.

The design uh in itself is pretty close to being done but uh uh at the end of the day we do have an open channel with BC Transit.

If there's anything that's um that's is that you wish to that council wishes to forward to us to to ask questions on, um that's certainly something the staff can do.

I I just think it might be an opportunity uh once all the road work is going on and and consulting with Callwood.

But thanks for putting it on.

Uh and um I'll just take this as a given Ivan but given that uh I've seen many projects started and then they rip the road out to do something else just looking to you to ensure us that if we paint pretty lines down a road or do something to it that we're not ripping it up for sewer main replacement that's scheduled the six months after.

Yeah, that's that's that's our that's my job.

So but uh it's it's always um it's always that one thing that's uh that's often overlooked.

So I appreciate that comment.

The good news about the town is that we're fairly lean, so we don't have those segregated multi-departments.

So um, but we'll certainly keep that in mind um with uh the underground and uh road projects that may come to light.

Perfect, thank you.

So uh the specific question is you wanted the inclusion of that for the sidewalk in the plan.

Um, that would be on the side of the wonderful figure.

Is anybody opposed to that?

And this is just the plan, this is not the the actual.

Okay, I think you've got your answers that you require, hopefully.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor Tobias and members of council.

We look forward to coming to you at the next council with the finalized ATMP.

I guess we move down now.

Thank you.

Thanks, Ivan.

Uh, if there are no objections to our resolutions that we came up with at the last committee of the whole, uh, and I realize that some counselors weren't here about it, but we made some decisions in your absence.

And uh uh now's the time to really bring them up uh fulsomely.

So uh we discussed the reading center, we had a presentation on it.

Uh the recommendation was that uh they had initially asked for more funds than than count than in in this uh uh recommendation.

Uh so that the committee recommend to council that a 2023 grant and aid of $30,000 be approved in accordance with the policy for the View Royal Reading Center.

There was active discussion around support for helping the reading center with other sources of funding, which I will uh reach out to the reading center to ensure that either council or staff that are willing to assist in them uh getting other grants and aid, not only to alleviate um the pressure on the town, but also provide them greater resources.

Um so uh can I get a motion that uh for that recommendation?

And uh councillor Lemon moved and councillor Brown seconded councillor Lemon would you like to motivate oh I um I think it was all said last week I'm just delighted that and they are delighted I got I got a letter shortly after um thanking us and and a big sigh of relief counselor Brown yeah and they had a bigger ask we cut it back from 38 to 30.

I think we made it pretty clear that it may or may not be the last time we give them a grant.

So I think, and that was good to say, you know, go back to the regional library and and work with other groups and get out their grants.

I think that was excellent.

And uh um yeah yeah yeah they went away happy and I think they got the message loud and clear.

I was very s um happy to see they brought metrics on how many people attended and really with and how many new members were signing on and uh all toll I think around a thousand people were signed up to actually use the reading center including uh youth that were um I was wasn't only gray hairs like me it was uh youth that were going there that were picking up books which is good.

Council Rogers yes I'll be voting against the uh the motion the um and and the points that uh was ready to the committee whole I I uh stand by.

Uh this is the duplication of service.

Um we have seen a forty uh thousand dollar increase in the Great of Victoria um library's budget, um, and that's not gonna go away um in the following years.

Um, I I hand it to the uh the reading center, and I do recall being having taken advantage of this back in the 60s.

However, uh we are now part of a a really efficient, really effective uh library system.

And um from the years that I've been on on the commission and the discussions that we've had about uh support um from them to the reading center, not gonna happen.

They're not going to um we have we're talking apples and oranges in terms of um volunteers and and paid union staff.

Um so I I think it's an and already we know that the G VPL is is uh really struggling uh with their budgets.

Uh and uh and goodness knows what kind of cuts they've made.

I have a question for staff.

Um how much is left in our grants and aid uh package if uh this motion is approved.

Through the chair, um mayor Tobias.

With the 30,000 uh uh that is involved with this um recommendation, we have just over ten thousand uh dollars left in the original budget uh for, and I believe we do have one outstanding request that has not been decided, and that is the view royal Community Association, which requested five thousand dollars.

Yeah, my understanding they'll be coming next next council meeting uh from Sarah.

Okay, so um at it at this point anyway I'm I'm opposed to the uh motion thank you counselor rogers anybody else counselor mattson reaching out to you no I'm in support okay counselor McKenzie uh I won't go I don't I won't reiterate what I said in committee of the whole but just to say I I will also be opposing the uh motion for similar reasons to counselor rogers thank you counselor McKenzie counselor crawl I've I've been on this for many years.

And um at the risk of repeating, Counselor rogers, this is a service that is already provided to view royal residents at a quite a great cost at the Greater Victoria Public Library.

We routinely speak about efficiencies and uh cutting costs and and being accountable to constituents.

We have a significant tax raise this year.

This is a prime example of something, unfortunately, uh that we need to make a hard decision on.

I am uh asking my colleagues to uh who are perhaps made their mind up already to strongly reconsider this and uh look at this in perpetuity.

I have sat here since 2017, and every year it's the same thing.

This is the last year, and it's nothing personal, it's not personal.

This is the last year.

This is a responsibility that we have to make, and these are the hard decisions, and that's why we're elected.

And unfortunately, I just cannot support um the reading center this year.

Thank you, Counselor Qualich.

Any other thoughts?

Okay, uh call the question.

Those in favor of the $30,000 for the uh View Royal Reading Center.

And it is for those opposed, please.

Councillor Qualit uh opposed was Councilor Rogers and Councillor McKenzie.

And noted everybody, and it was a difficult situation.

Motion passes.

And Councilor Qualitic, when we're here next year, please remind me of your comments this evening.

That moves us to spring and fall community building events, which didn't have a high price tag on from Councillor McKenzie, and that was that the committee uh recommended to the council that both a spring flower garden contest and a fall Halloween decorating contest be organized by council members.

This to be run very similarly to the Light Up View Royal event um with uh perhaps top three prizes details to come out.

So we've got now a winter occasion, a spring occasion, and a fall occasion.

But Councilor McKenzie was pressed to have a summer occasion, which I'm still looking forward to.

So all of those in favor or can get a motion first.

So moved.

So moved.

Uh Councillor Mattson, uh seconded by Councillor Lemon.

Uh Councilor Matzen, did you want to motivate I just want to call the question?

It's a no-brainer.

Councillor Lemon, do you want to motivate?

Just what he said.

Okay.

Uh those in favor.

Any opposed?

I see none opposed.

Motion passes.

Uh and the 2023-2027 uh financial plan approval.

Move recommendations.

Uh discussion.

Seeing none.

Uh all in favor.

Any opposed?

None opposed.

Motion carries.

Uh, and that the committee recommend council that the uh proposed 2023 be amended to uh by adding the provincial grant revenue from the community growing fund, and that's for four million six hundred and sixty-five thousand, and that these funds be transferred to the reserve being established to receive this grant.

So moved, moved by councillor McKenzie, seconded by Councillor Mattson.

Uh any questions?

Discussion?

Seeing none, those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

Um I'm not sure if we have uh Superintendent Preston said he may be here this evening to discuss this.

So a background on our next item was that at the committee of the whole, we had discussed um that uh there is a requirement for an administrative officer uh to support uh a municipal employee to that's an RCMP support for us.

We had discussed, I think, Councillor Brown, you had suggested a start of uh the first of January.

I think we settled on the first of April instead of uh mid-year 2024.

Uh, unfortunately, I don't think anybody's here to speak to it.

Um, but uh when I discussed it with Superintendent Preston, he said it would have a significant effect on personnel, and that um he's reaching the point where his personnel are also challenged with doing the administrative paperwork in order to support the frontline position, and it's increasing the stress because we haven't got it.

He would be happier if we would have considered a start for that position for the first of January vice the first of April because of the time lag required for security clearance.

Um I have a question of staff.

Um staff with the uh the the um the suggestion that this position start in April, not even you know, not not the january um what would that do to our tax rates would that take the residential tax rate over the 9.9 that we had agreed to in in uh committee as a whole through the chair the the difference has been included in the financial plan bylaw that is attached to this agenda i found when i looked into it that the original budget had the positions starting earlier than june 1st, so the difference was only a nine thousand dollar increase to the twenty twenty four taxation, so it has minimal uh increase to the twenty twenty four taxation line.

I'm sorry, so for 2023, we're holding our own there would be no impact to 2023 taxation.

Okay.

And that's for a 1st of April start by yeah, yeah, 2024.

That's what you meant to say.

Yeah, so so what we're talking about is I guess the requirement uh to consider uh as we uh reflect on this motion that instead of starting April 1st, um it would start potentially uh January 1st.

Can I ask uh Don, would you have a rough order of magnitude of how much that would be for January February or March April or I guess it'd be three months my estimate would be about eighteen thousand dollars which you know if if a one percent tax increase is a hundred thousand dollars then it's not terribly significant to the tax increase counselor Brown yeah I'll make a motion that we make it effective uh January 1st.

Uh that was the my original motion.

I know we went back and made it April 1st, but uh we already pushed it ahead over a year, and I and it's not only is it the municipal employees uh pressure, but it's also the the regular members uh which are having hard enough time filling those positions.

So the municipal staff provides a lot of service.

There's a and Damien can attest to it too.

The amount of paperwork that a uh uh particularly a police constable has to do is considerable.

And um yeah, they do need the support, and and the sooner the better.

So uh I would like to make that motion, like I made last meeting to make it January 1st.

I would second like I did the last meeting.

Now that it's on the table, um uh is there any discussion?

Council McKenzie.

I have more of a question.

Would uh agreeing or approving this tonight, would we be able to closer to the time depending on how our you know our funds are looking change our mind, or does that commit us if we decide tonight?

I don't know.

That's that's a good point.

And counselor or superintendent press and I talked about that.

So right now we're going with a funding formula.

And Kim, please correct me if I'm tracking off here.

Um, but that formula right now for View Royal is about 850.

For 850 persons, we require a a constable or an SCMP officer.

For so many officers, we require an administrative position.

We are somewhat bound by that formula.

And if we come up with a better formula, but keeping in mind our formula is also stretched or shared through various municipalities across the way, right?

So as we approve increased population, we can't say we don't want that extra constable necessarily on there.

It now affects our agreement with everywhere else.

Councilor Matson, I've seen you waving your hand.

Yes, no, I'm feeling a bit frustrated.

I don't think council ever agreed that there should be cart blanche increases uh with population increases.

That's certainly something the RCMP requested, but I don't think council's ever by policy said that we're just going to just give them whatever they want based on our population.

And I mean, I've certainly never been convinced that that that 850 to 1 is is is even reasonable.

And I think we uh the city of Calwood has agreed to it.

We're the only ones, View Royal, who has not agreed to it.

Um, and if we don't agree with it, then council has to acknowledge the fact that there may be uh some effect for service.

Uh right now it's it's it's an imperfect formula.

They're challenging us to come up with a better one, um, but that's what we're going with right now.

So that's the recommendation.

But I mean, if if we're prepared, if council is prepared to make a decision for 1st of April that may have our CMP constable coming to us through the media and say he's not supported enough when we're not living up to some obligations that we may have.

So council needs to be prepared for that.

Council Rogers.

Yes, thanks.

Um turn your light on.

It's not often I catch anybody.

So um just a point of clarification here.

We're not talking about an Australian T constable, we're talking about a municipal staff.

So um, yeah, we're not the the numbers where we will talk about the ratio is is with respect to constables.

This is a uh a municipal staff.

Agreed, and for so many what they're working on is with so many uh constables, they need a staff person to back them up, right?

So uh what I would ask maybe the Superintendent Preston to come back to us and ask staff to reach out to Callwood for their motion that they had for consideration for a forthcoming meeting that they actually uh had endorsed it for council to deliberate because even though we've got uh former members of council, we've also got new members of council who may not be aware of the ratios that are expected right now, and I think it would be good to bring everybody up to the same level.

Councillor Brown.

Yeah, the number, the ratio is it varies from municipality, municipality.

Langford's one to 750.

Victoria, I believe, is one to three fifty.

Obviously, they have two number patrols a lot of the time.

But uh, and even the superintendent says it's an imperfect formula.

But um and actually, in some ways, it would be nice to have a set number that you can anticipate year after year, but uh that's just my own opinion.

Yeah, and and this uh goes on with our growth as well.

So if we're approving developments, and by my last check, um, given the amount that has already improved and holes in the ground, uh, we're gonna see uh an increase of 2,000 people in the next couple of years when those things are built.

So implication is by this formula, uh two point some odd constables potentially coming on, potentially with administrative staff.

So that's the cost of servicing that goes along with growth.

And if we we can absolutely turn around and say no, and we want to do that, but having the knowledge that that will decrease our service level as it's shared across the board.

That's something that we'll have to consider when it comes up.

So right now we've got uh I guess the a motion on the floor.

Uh, we have our our motion that that was recommended from the council of the whole, and we've got a recommendation that it commence on the first of January 2024, vice um the first of April 2024.

Are there any other comments or questions?

We're voting on January 1st now?

Okay, thank you.

Those in favor of um the uh council or the or the start for the municipal employee in support of the RCMP for a first of January 2024 start.

Those in favor.

And I'm counting five.

Uh those opposed.

And opposed are councillors McKenzie and Councillor Mattson.

Am I sorry, am I able to call comment?

So I would be for the April, but just not the January.

It's clear.

So you're you're in favor of just a difference in start, not that you don't want one entirely.

Thank you.

Um 2023 tax rate options.

Uh so seeing how we pass that, Don, as we further on down the agenda, when it comes to approve those things, we will have to table those things for the next meeting to allow you to adjust the the bylaw that's presented, correct?

Yes, uh, we would bring back a revised bylaw at the next council meeting.

Thank you.

Would that affect our next one?

Our tax rate options.

Uh not at this stage uh because what we have before you is just a recommendation to prepare uh you know on which the future tax rate bylaw can be based you are correct the financial plan bylaw must be adopted prior to the tax rates bylaw since the one determines the other so we will make sure that that that is ordered that way correctly on the next agenda.

Thank you Don so uh the recommendation is that uh the committee recommend to council that the 2023 municipal tax ratios be set as scenario A unchanged from the 2022 ratios and that a bylaw be prepared to implement those tax rates?

Can I get a uh mover and a seconder, please?

Moved by councillor Brown.

Seconded, maybe Councilor McKenzie.

Um thoughts and discussion.

And those were just the tax rates, right, that we went through last time.

So I guess we'll call the question.

All those in favor?

Oh, you got a comment?

So I have a comment.

Um I will be opposed.

Um the I feel that we should be giving class six, uh, the uh businesses of our community, um, some uh assistance um while we we talk about inflation pressures that uh we all individually um uh must bear, they have a much greater burden.

Uh they have um uh the uh increased wages, the challenges of finding employers, uh the cost of um uh materials and so on, and businesses are are struggling.

We are at uh a 4.3, which is in the middle.

Um the I think um um it we had been at four, and I was hoping that we would get at least so some um support to businesses and reduce it from uh 4.3 to 4.2.

Um, but I failed in in that attempt to the the last to community the whole.

So unless there is any interest in giving businesses a a benefit this year, I will be voting against the uh the motion.

Thank you, Councillor Rogers counselor lemon yeah and and to counselor rogers' point if I could ask staff just for you know everyone's understanding what what would that look like on a on a tax bill uh what what kind of you know there have been stories in the paper lately uh about the you know um uh uh businesses and industry in Victoria facing 22 percent and 37 percent hikes um what would that look like on our tax bill when it hits the media?

Is it going to say bureau businesses are going to be paying 22 percent more?

It it is very difficult to give an average for businesses.

Because as described at the Committee of the Whole meeting, uh businesses do range in value quite vastly.

Uh so you know the material that was distributed at the last um at the Committee of the Whole meeting tried to describe that with the with the details provided.

And uh certainly uh accompanying the report when the bylaw comes back will be more details specifically on the scenario that was selected.

Um I can tell you, I'm just pulling up the information here, that uh you know we we did talk about businesses that you know there were a larger percentage of businesses are valued at a million dollars or less.

And if there was a I'm just looking at the sheet here, if there was a 2022, oh let me just look, um, uh you know, a property that had I'm looking at a property that realized a nine percent increase in assessed value, experienced a 7% increase in taxation.

So, of course, it's relative to the amount of uh assessed value increase from the prior year, which is going, you know, it's going to range.

You know, another example, there was a third a property with a 31% increase in assessed value, and they will experience uh just about a 29% increase in taxation.

So you know, on on the other hand, uh another property had a 0% increase in assessed value, and they will actually see a reduction of about 1%.

So I I hope that answers your question.

It does, and I'm sure you put you on this on the spot.

And and you know, I I was there and I recalled that, but you know, not not everyone in you know in TV land was.

So thank you.

And uh my own thoughts about this is it goes somewhere when we talk about the percentages, right?

If we give businesses a break, that percentage has to go, and unfortunately that goes to residences or or different class of business or whatever.

So um just conscious of that too.

We could uh tweak things, but something has a cost.

So um hard hard deliberations, and I think we we had um suggested that they remain consistent.

So this amendment, I think, is uh or this um is just to get the bylaw prepared to implement those tax rates, but we have to give solid direction uh in order to get the bylaw prepared, um, so that it would be unchanged from the 2022.

So further discussion on it.

I'll call the question, then we will basically the motion is the committee recommend or that the council adopt the tax ratios set out in scenario A, unchanged from the 2022 tax ratios, and that gives direction that a bylaw be uh prepared to implement the tax rates accordingly.

Those in favor.

And I see councillor Rogers opposed because he said he was going to oppose.

Um and so motion carries.

My comment, your worship, is that um you know when we go around asking businesses to volunteer uh give donations uh to our volunteers uh banquet, we'll think about those hardworking individuals.

They may be smaller donations this year.

Understood.

Uh amendment to CD1 zone comprehensive development.

Uh and this was um, I think we've discussed at the council of the whole.

Uh so moved.

Okay, so moved and uh seconded.

Uh any discussion?

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Done opposed, motion carries.

Other reports.

There are a number of them.

Um, and I think some are on the blue sheet.

Um, but that's motion to receive.

Does anybody want to single some of these out?

Yes.

Speaking to the first one, you worship.

Say that again.

Yeah, yeah.

Speaking to the first one, the uh VWO's response to zero carbon step code.

Um, so uh I agree with the staff's recommendation that we refer to.

We've heard from staff.

Um, we're going to be getting a report uh to assess um all the options and and um uh hopefully to move this along.

So uh based on on uh staff's good work, I think we can uh simply refer to staff and have it in a report.

So I'll follow my handy dandy sheet that the staff have re um done for me, and that does um uh recommendations here is that we refer that to uh staff for report.

So I don't think we need to, we can just do a motion to receive uh some of these.

Or refer.

Uh and we can do a motion to refer to some of them.

So my recommendation is for the um tree canopy protection.

So you wish you wonder if we could just um refer the first one to um refer to staff for report.

Yes.

Uh so moved.

So moved.

Uh can I get a seconder?

Uh all those in favor?

Any opposed?

None opposed.

Um and that items uh pre Act 0423 and 0523, tree canopy protection be referred to staff for the urban forest strategy.

Council Rogers.

Uh just for clarification, I I think um what staff may be suggesting is uh we simply refer to the urban um or are we is the staff suggesting that um uh we would be working to um improve the for uh urban forest strategy to um uh consider the comments from the advisory committee.

Uh Mayor Tobias, uh the urban forest strategy is a you should council approve the budget is scheduled for this year, and I do recall that as a condition of that project that staff is to bring forward in terms of reference to council and what that would do is to confirm with council the scope of the study and with respect to uh the reference to staff uh for this tree canopy protection it may be a good uh it may be good to incorporate that into the urban forest strategy because it would define that like the urban forest strategy the I won't get into too much detail but uh the idea is to is to get a better understanding of um again the gaps and what we can do to provide continuous uh forest throughout the town and as well as can inform on um the items that are in this um or at least from a high level uh provide information that council can can move on.

But I think it's important that we have a certain level of information before um we decide to do this.

Um that said, it's up to council if you want to do a separate initiative.

Yeah, I um it was my understanding that some of the recommendations, although could be in an urban forest strategy, may affect um uh our setbacks, for instance, uh on on on uh that we've currently got on the go.

Would that involve the urban forest strategy, or would that be part of uh looking at um, you know, what where our setbacks are and and uh where our tree protection bylaws currently are at?

Leanne, I think you're gonna speak to that.

Yeah, thank you, uh Mary Thayas.

Yeah, so um the second part of this motion would also refer to the urban forest strategy, but I just want to build on this a little bit because we as when we're looking at development permit applications and siting buildings, we are looking at the impacts on um tree roots already.

And so um working with um architects and the developers on um locating the foundation of parquets to make sure that there is adequate setback to allow for um soil volumes and for um and tree growth to make sure we're establishing a tree canopy.

So there are I think the urban forest strategy will help inform us that the best way of doing this.

Um the zoning bylaw may or may not be the best approach it might be a a better way to um a better approach would be through design guidelines um because all trees are different there's like columnar trees there's trees that are big and bushy they all have different root zones and so i'm not an expert i'm not an arborist but just through um um working on different projects you you you I learn these things um so I think it's best to um as as um my colleague Ivan has said just let's um work through this through the urban forest strategy, and hopefully, we'll be able to sort of get some direction and perhaps some opportunities to update our design guidelines.

But I think it's important to note that when we look at development applications, we are all that is on our radar.

We're already doing that through the tree protection bylaw as well.

Thank you.

And before I go to Councilor Rogers, I guess I got a question for staff.

We already have a tree protection by law as it stands.

I think what the concern is here, uh, I'd like it to relate to the urban forest strategy, but I think the immediate concern is here is the question of whether it's effective or not.

Um and and you know, could we could we also include maybe consideration for these things in the urban forest strategy?

But I think it's a quicker answer to that.

Like I think the concern here is is that we're losing more trees than we're replacing, and that even replacing those trees, we're not going to see a difference in my lifetime anyway.

So could could we uh instead of referring this one to the urban forest strategy, is it okay that we refer to the existing tree bylaw and see where the delta is between the concern and the bylaw that we have established?

Uh Mayor Tobias, uh that can certainly be something that is looked at, and as uh Director Taylor has has mentioned, it is uh something that is on the top of our minds as uh as developments come in.

And certainly if there is a concern that it is it it will be information that'll be presented to the council uh and the committee as part of the development application.

Um, but to in in short, it's certainly something that can be looked at to see if what what can be adjusted and that would it as it is a bylaw it is something that would need to um go to council.

Thank you staff so we can um so we're gonna refer to staff uh for for that bylaw then because I'm just looking for um uh aware to put this next and I'm just fearing that it's if it's referring to an urban strategy uh forest strategy that we could include in it anyway that it's not gonna give the kind of sense of urgency and and feedback we probably need then revisiting councilor Rogers.

Yes, and I I appreciate the uh advisory committee committee bringing this up.

And and indeed, if we can um make some improvements to the urban forest strategy, the uh the plans for this and the terms of reference, um uh uh what I'm hoping that we're gonna capture is what's happening in View Royal now, the obliteration of trees.

And um I know I understand what the um staff are saying about the large projects and and the work um and you know the protection zones and so forth, but we've got lots of examples on View Royal Avenue, one Stuart and and you know the uh where all the trees are gone.

They've wiped out every single tree on that lot and put in a big huge house because their setbacks allow them to do so.

Um there's no more room for roots or anything green.

So that's the part that that concerns me.

If we're if we are going to really work to uh improve the the and maintain the ambience, the treat ambience of a neighborhood like uh the harbor, um then great let's let's cons you know assess those setbacks in such a way that um there is going to be a um enough space for roots enough um uh space for foliage um you know it gives uh what worries me is the province is coming forward with the four units per large lot there goes the trees and here comes the sidewalks you know it's this is uh um a very interesting change that uh the province is going to be imposing upon uh this this community and um on we we need to anticipate and uh consider the um the impacts um of our community or of our ambience so um if we're again when we take it to the urban forest strategy and as if we can just keep remembering that we may also have to deal with setbacks if um if the um property developers or property owners who do or developers they gotta stop and think about where we're gonna put that tree and it's not gonna be a bonsai thank you councilor rogers and i think the motion that we're considering right now is be referred to staff both on oh four oh five all in favor of referring those two items from preact to staff to the urban forest to the urban forest um strategy uh it would be referred to staff because it might have some inclusion for pre-uh tree protection bylaw as well and I'll leave it to staff too okay um to to bring that back to us and do course uh traffic speeds i'd recommend we for 06 and 07 for traffic speeds and little road property we receive those two items uh we've discussed them a little bit more but i think the traffic speeds was of course 50 to 30 little road property was to not mow it in may uh i guess no mow may is a thing if you haven't heard of it it allows pollinators to go in.

It's kind of like Movember without a mustache, and allows pollinators to go in and get busy and get their first uh bit of nutrition before things dry up uh uh there.

So is there any problem of not mowing in May, Ivan?

Just a question.

Currently, as a stands, the uh the majority of the mowing is meant is for the um creating hay, which is taken off by a uh a volunteer basically.

He does it and we we give him the land for that.

And that actually takes place in July.

So that's after after May.

So that should solve that.

Um the mowing we that is done along the perimeter closer to the U Creek development.

That is done uh due to some concerns from residents about um fire protection.

So that uh safety is uh is an item that's important to us and and Chief Hearst here, and it's decided that uh when the weather gets dry, it gets done.

So it's hard to gauge when it is.

Um certainly try to balance and manage expectations.

Um but if it is a dry spell and if it becomes a concern, that it's something that we would do earlier.

So uh we're not gonna mow it until July.

Bees will be happy, everybody will be happy.

Thank you, Ivan.

Council Rod.

Yes.

Um I I can appreciate the uh the fire thing, and I appreciate um, you know, perhaps we need to think about having some signage um uh you know about not smoking in in that area because that's where they have to go or they feel they have to go because there's no one else to smoke or no place else in in that in that property.

So that's one of the problems.

However, you know, this is agricultural land, and and um um I need to get a better understanding why we have someone going in and mowing it um as a volunteer.

Why not just voluntarily leave it, you know, cut cut around the the perimeter as a as a fire guard and uh let nature take its course and and uh rejuvenate the the soils for um future agriculture.

Uh mayor Tobias, historically it was done by um basically we don't have it doesn't cost a town any money to have someone go in there and and take that out as hay.

Uh and that has been historically happening for many years now.

Um if the idea is to change that process, then uh staff can certainly use some guidance from council.

I would suggest we change the process.

I I'd be opposed to that.

I think it's agricultural land.

We've got enough parkland, and I'm happy if that hay is going to feed some livestock and creating some food security.

It could be horses.

So that's my position on it.

But uh happy to receive um two right now.

So um uh so motion to receive uh 06 and 07 so that traffic speeds and little road property.

Uh I think we've Council Mackenzie.

Sorry, I just wanted to comment on the traffic speeds.

Since I voted against it earlier, I just want to clarify that I'm not opposed to lowering the the speed limits.

I agree in principle with it.

I just would like to have more information about the neighboring municipalities.

Thank you.

Uh that that makes total sense.

So all we're gonna do is receive those two right now.

And I think we got a report coming back for uh kind of what those areas are that would be, and uh I think um I think we can probably get a better understanding about what our municipalities are doing within that time frame too and how that's working out.

So we I'm sorry, on on the road, have we got an understanding that we won't be mowing as a matter of principal pro policy uh for the pollinators?

It won't be mowed um before May.

It's typically done in July.

Thank you.

So motion to receive 06 and 07.

Got nods, uh Councillor Brown, Councillor McKenzie, all in favor?

Any opposed?

None opposed.

In person meetings.

I think we my recommendation is we receive this and we review it.

And the decision regarding the advisory communities, uh committee structure.

We also uh kind of include there.

Uh, personal thoughts are that um I know that that everybody's not been meeting in person, that there's been a hybrid uh opportunity.

I will never underestimate the power of meeting in person because I think it's important.

However, uh, I think Council McKenzie brought it up a while ago, that uh it may open up the doors to other committee members who might author or who might not be able to attend because of family care or other reasons.

Uh certainly we've got it in a in our case where we don't want to limit somebody's opportunity to travel or be sick or be there present for other people are sick.

So, what my recommendation is we move to receive and then we review it when we discuss the larger advisory committee structure forthcoming.

Councilor Rogers.

So why do we all stay home?

You know, we we're meeting here for a purpose.

It it's helpful.

It's the exception where, you know, like uh Mr.

Councilor Mattson, who's in some other place.

So that's there, they realize that there's greater power in being able to meet face to face and discuss the issues.

And if we feel it's worthwhile to do so, why not give that benefit to the advisory committees?

The pandemic at this point is over.

And so I fully support they're not changing suggesting we change the structure the committee structure.

They're just saying allow us to meet and engage like you do at council.

And I fully support that.

Thank you, Councillor Rogers, but if they meet um like we do at council, then we would not have the ability to be hybrid.

So right?

We we wouldn't have the ability to be hybrid and have Councillor Matson join us right now.

So if we're going to mirror council with the committees, um, my my thing is I don't think we should dictate to them how whether they should be meeting in person and then exclude those people that wish to uh participate uh in a hybrid way.

No, no, no.

I don't think we're restricting the uh the individuals.

I think um we may find that people are more interested in attending the meetings when it's not electronic.

So um just you know, I for the odd occasion that uh somebody made me sick or whatever out of town or some other reason, um, I don't think we should um you know uh you know yeah, you know, it I think uh if they've requested, they have requested an in-person meeting.

So they um I would respect the committee and allow them to do so thank you counselor rogers counselor um the committee is always used to meet in person and and uh I I guess it's it if my question would be um whether it's um we're challenging for staff um to to attend meetings um or it's is there is I guess my question is so is there a reason that to staff, is there a reason we wouldn't have in-person meetings?

We explored a report about this last year and we considered it.

And as part of that, and in looking at the size of the committees right now, if we did in person, we would only be able to do in person.

It couldn't be a split high hybrid given the technology.

And also lack of space.

So we wouldn't be able to meet on the same night in person as well.

So there are various issues that come up about that.

So the recommendation before you is based on not knowing council's conclusion of the eventual um advisory committee structure, which we hope will be discussed um at an upcoming strategic planning session then i'm move that uh we receive this and address as the mayor said at uh a future session when we discuss the advisory committees as a whole i'll second that all in favor any opposed got one one opposed councilor rogers um proposed advisory committee structure um and this was again another C Doc recommendation uh councillor Rogers move receipts.

Can I've got a seconder?

Councilor Brown uh all those in favor?

Any opposed?

Nunopposed?

We've got uh several letters too, and I think we've got uh a few here.

Uh pardon me.

Yes, minutes for uh West Shore Parks and Recreation Environment Advisory Committee.

I'll move receipt.

Second.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Uh just a question.

Did we remove receipt of the two advisory committee minutes?

Uh just to be on the safe start, I move receipt of uh Minutes Preak and CDAC.

Second.

All in favor?

None opposed.

Motion carries.

So just I did have a question, you worship, on um Westure Parks and Recreation.

If just let me get to it.

Um Counselor, the uh I noticed that the uh staff would be um uh there was some discussion and you had uh raised this uh early before um it's number D, the BC Growing Communities Fund, and um where staff would be um um providing their top pick given and to and then going to all five municipalities for a unified ask on uh the fund share.

Is that uh developing?

Um I can tell you that not all the municipalities have reported back with their top asks as of yet.