Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the committee of the whole. For Thursday, February 26,
26, 26, it is now 930 and I would like to call the meeting to order. I would like to acknowledge
that we work live in play on the territories of the C-Shelton and the Kalamish nations.
And we have an agenda in front of us and I'm looking for a motion to accept the agenda as it is.
I have a motion in the seconder, all in favor. Very good. All right, so we're off to the races.
We have no presentations or delegations. I would like a motion to accept all reports. There we go, and all in favor.
Very good. Thank you. So all the reports are now entered in.
Report number 4.1 is a cliff-gilker trail and radiation parks recovery bridges construction award.
And I am going to ask staff to come and introduce this for us. We have a manager of Park Services Jessica Huntington and our General Manager of Community Services.
Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead.
Thank you chair. I'm good morning. I'm pleased to present the staff report outlining the Sunshine Coast Community Force proposal for the replacement of the Upper Waterfall and Guards Bridges along with the Associated implications and options for board consideration.
As you prepare to advance the significant component of the cliff-gilker bridges and trail remediation project, I would like to acknowledge and thank the Sunshine Coast Community Force for their generosity.
In supporting the replacement of the bridges and staff are looking forward to working collaboratively to move this project forward. Thank you and I'm happy to answer your questions.
Very good. I looked at my directors to see if they have any questions for staff on this or would like to move the motions as the appear.
Director. Yes.
Thank you chair. This is this feels good. This is something I think we can be really proud of. This is what I think the board wants and I really want to thank staff for getting us there.
And thank you to the community forces as well.
I wish it could have happened a little sooner maybe a month sooner and I would be nice but hopefully that this project teaches us.
That that's an instinct that we should have like when we have issues like the one that happened at Cliff Gilker.
Turn to the community and see how because people want to help, especially with our parks.
So really happy to see this collaboration happening.
And also I want to say thanks to chair Toss who thanks to his pragmatism and his good relationship with the community force was able to to facilitate this.
It's a new way of doing things.
Well, not new new but for us and what a great asset to have community force in the community to help us with these kinds of things.
The question to staff is what would be the.
How would we go about if if the two bridges that we've asked to decommission because the the price tag was was too high.
Is there a way to in the future maybe keep some of the funds that we would be returning to.
The community works fine so in maybe to plan for two more bridges.
How would that work.
That's a good question and I'm going to ask which staff member would like to address that.
Go ahead.
Thank you chair.
I think the simplest solution is I don't want to have any delay in moving what we do know today forward.
So I think we need to do that and then if there is a desire by the board to change the scope of the program to.
Possibly bring back the consideration for the replacement of those other two bridges then we can begin conversations to see how to make that possible and come back to the board with.
The board with a related report and implications and that way we don't we don't delay what we've already put in motion thank you.
Thank you yeah and then the funds that are going to be returned to the community works funder will be available to us for.
Future projects like this.
Go ahead director.
And then direction.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Obviously this is we're all areas that are participating in this really important parks function.
This is good to see.
I hope that.
That the regional district continues to look to and a group with the expertise of the community for us to.
Look at bridges that we have we have lots of water courses on the Sunshine Coast they need bridges.
So we should be in future now looking to looking to groups with the expertise like community force to to build this.
I would ask through you to staff there the report was fairly explanatory the only piece that I would ask about.
And two two questions I'd I'd love to if safe to watch through through you through to staff through to Mr. Hanson to say I love to watch when they if they do if they're possible to see what they're doing that would be great.
This is a good community thing timeline.
It says by the end of the year I hope I'm hoping because that's a that's very broad I'm hoping that.
I'm not I'm not I'm not instructing.
I'm hoping that it would be done by the end of summer if possible because it is the end of February we want to get going.
I think they're fast I think they'll do it properly but fast and I just wanted to see if that was.
If and a non-stracting I'm I'm wondering if then in fact that would come before we we need those bridges back soon additionally I hope that once the decision is made today that we the regional district is quick to go on social media.
To talk about the solution and and enthusiastic timeline because we know what's been happening there in cliffgelker with the this point without the bridges and the attempt by community members to make use of one of the bridges.
And then it wasn't deemed safe so we had to shut that down as the director well knows because he probably felt that push back but I think that if we decide on this and it looks like you will that we talk about it some more.
Thanks yeah thank you absolutely I think it would be great to have some type of public record of the work that's performed because this is an absolutely good news story.
And if staff wants to input on that statement question go ahead.
Thank you chair so in the report I think what we're referring to is the entire project because there is more than just the bridges there's also the trails.
So we are focusing on the bridges that's been our focus in the beginning of January.
We have met with community forest group we walk through sort of all the steps there's I know that they're keen to get going on some of the pieces as well that we can do in absence of a few permits I emailing on site.
So we have been working concurrently at having our agreement ready so that we can launch and get moving.
So I would anticipate that the bridges will be done well before the end of the year but the trails and some of the signs and the rest of the project we'll take a bit of time as well because we're going to focus on the bridges first of all and then we'll keep going concurrently with everything else.
So I anticipate to see some work starting as soon as some other pieces are in place but not a big delay thank you.
Thanks for the answer I like that we are concentrating on the bridges because they were very integral part of this park.
Go ahead, Director McMahon was first.
Thank you.
I'm pleased and relieved to see that we have a really good solution to this bridge challenge and that we're going to get a little I think more nimble about figuring out how to
respond to these bridges we have a lot of aging bridges as somebody pointed out we have a lot of water courses and they they they come with bridges and the cost these days to do it through the.
Without community partnerships is pretty breathtaking so we and many of these bridges were originally community partnerships put them in place.
So we're we're just going to have to be flexible and creative in in our solutions and this is this is great I love reports that say you're spending less money.
We could use more of those thanks.
All right and I'll see a question for staff there, but I'm going to go to director Lee and then director wait.
Thank you chair.
Yes, I the original bridges were built largely by the community and largely on engineered.
But in this instance this is an engineered solution.
I have confidence it's going to be much longer than the 20 years.
Because there is there is ways of of helping to do that.
And I honestly I really like the idea of using wood when you're in the forest.
It's when you're wandering through the forest in a forest trail.
The wood bridges are actually a highlight you sit there watch the water run under so I wanted to commend staff on.
Pivoting and accepting this I think it's absolutely great.
And I'm hoping that we would do fine book and clientele in a very similar manner which would bring the cost down for all of us and.
And actually get it done sooner I hope so.
Thank you.
I commend the director for area A to try and bring his community into this loop.
Go ahead.
I want to do that too.
I mean it's I think there's a very broad.
I'm hoping I want to echo especially director remains comments about.
This this kind of coming up is a really.
Efficient and sensible solution to the challenges asset management challenges at local government's face and.
The regulatory challenges.
And but I do have a question about it too and and which is more broadly.
Is what we've learned from kind of setting up this arrangement with one community group.
And we've learned a lot of the effort and time.
And resources that have been put into that is is that now applicable to be able to perhaps.
Expand this project within Cliff Gilker.
Area A area E other other projects in in the parks department is a lot of the great work that's going into this now going to be able to help us.
And we have a lot of the efforts to to other asset.
Failure or replacements that that are needed.
Thanks for that question.
Can we use this as a template.
Thank you sir.
So we do have a lot of community partnerships that exist already so I think that this is another unique and great opportunity and we do appreciate the sunshine coast community force coming forward.
So this is a model that we will definitely look to.
We need to make sure that we stay with an our purchasing and procurement rules and trade access while so we'll keep that in mind but I think you know we've heard loud and clear that we need to be looking at these type of models and we will.
When possible and keep pursuing other community investments when when the opportunity arises we do know and have identified even for the trail piece of Cliff Gilker we've said from the very beginning.
But when we're ready we'll be looking for volunteers to help supplement and contribute to the project so that continues to be on our radar. Thank you.
Excellent thank you.
Remind the board that we do have a rather lengthy agenda in front of us.
As if everyone's had their pre motion comments I would like to move the recommendations as the appear on page three.
Is there any more discussion on the motion.
Yes it's part of service so it's world directors only.
So seeing none I will call the question all in favor.
Very good that's unanimous.
Thank you. I am going to add a couple of motions that I've put forward to our recording secretary.
And I'll be looking for seconders on the ease.
The motion that staff provide monthly updates to the electoral area services committee meetings.
Regarding the Cliff Gilker Bridge project including any permitting delays or issues that may arise.
As well as a motion that staff invite the Sunshine Coast community force to collaborate on the feasibility of replacing the zigzag bridge.
With a 2027 budget proposal to come forward for consideration.
If viable.
And I'm looking for a seconder for that.
I have a seconder.
Is there any discussion on this motion on these motions?
Hmm.
One at a time very good.
We'll do them one at a time.
So the first motion.
Project updates.
Very good. I have a seconder.
Discussions on the project updates motion.
Then I'll call the question.
All in favor.
Very good.
Okay. We'll move on to the feasibility of replacing the zigzag bridge.
I have a seconder.
Any discussion on that?
Very good.
All in favor.
Excellent. Okay. Those pass here. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Do you have a question on this?
I just wanted to point out that the same atmospheric river that did such damage to Cliff Gilgrey Park also took out the bridge at Chasterhouse.
And the community is eager to see what we can do to replace it because it has been a long time.
We're working on it, but I'm hoping we can come forward with a community partnership on this one as well. Thank you.
That's really good. Hopefully this is going to be the beginning of a beautiful relationship of bridge building. Everybody loves a bridge builder.
So, with that, taking care of, we're going to move on. Thank you very much, staff. This is a really good news story.
Certainly. And thank you to the members of the community forest for coming out today.
Yes. We look forward to working with you guys more.
Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello.
Go ahead. What's your question?
In the microphone.
Or just repeat the question.
So, I see what's happening.
So, how long before I get the green light, I can start doing this.
How long is it going to take for?
You have a nice weekend coming out. Right?
Right. And so, the community forest is chopping at the bit to get started on this.
And I look to staff to see how soon they, there wasn't mentioned that there are some, some parts of the job that can be done immediately.
And I was wondering if they can, they can force that.
Sorry, go ahead.
No.
Staff, can you answer the question that this gentleman is given us?
Thank you, Chair. We have been working with the Sunshine Community Forest on timelines.
We do need to get an agreement in place first from a liability perspective.
So, we have been working on that agreement.
We don't see that going to be, it's not going to take a long time, but we do need to get that agreement.
I believe that the Sunshine Coast Community Forest is aware of that.
So, so does they have that in a place?
There's the green light.
Thank you.
Excellent. Okay. How's that answers your question?
Go ahead.
Mr. McMahon.
Is there any benefit to moving this item to board today?
Oh, it's going to board our, never mind.
All right, good.
So that is a, this will appear, this will appear aboard this afternoon.
Excellent.
So, moving along here to 4.2.
Solid waste management plan, engagement strategy.
We have a manager, or sorry, strategic planning coordinator Rempel and manager Mark Sol.
Thank you, staff.
Go ahead and introduce this.
Thank you.
On February 12th, 2026, the board directed staff to engage on the draft solid waste management plan with the community.
Following provincial guidelines, staff are preparing to engage with the public on the draft plan between March 1st and April 10th of this year.
This report provides an outline of the plan methods of engagement during this engagement period and staff are here to answer any questions.
I think they're all in shock if that last item.
So, that things actually went through.
Go ahead, vice chair.
Thank you, chair.
I actually don't have any questions for staff.
I happen to see this moving forward.
Six weeks.
It feels like an aggressive timeline.
But I know that staff, when they want to get out and engage, they can do a really good job of doing that.
So, I'm happy to move the recommendations on page 9 as they are presented.
I see a second term.
Any discussion on this motion?
Go ahead, director.
Yeah.
No.
I'm happy.
This looks like a well thought out public engagement strategy.
And we have a rapidly filling landfill.
So, we need to move this forward as expeditiously as we can.
So, thank you very much for this.
We look forward to the engagement.
Okay.
Seeing no other questions on the motion on the floor.
I will call the question.
All in favor?
Very good that passes.
Thank you.
We are going to move on to item 4.4.
Wastewater.
Oh, sorry.
4.3.
Eastborne water system operations and maintenance contract term extension.
And we have General Manager Rosenbeut to introduce this.
Yes.
I was expecting one other managers to come in.
But I will take the one other for now.
The purpose of this report is to seek board approval for contract fixed ends for our operating and maintenance
contractor at the areas for our Eastborne water system.
Our Eastborne water system is an SOD system that is operated and maintained by a contractor for logistics purposes.
And it's going a very satisfactory and that's why we're proposing it into the extension to the contract.
Thank you.
All right.
Thanks for joining us.
Manager Gears.
Give us an.
And I'm going to look to Director McMahon.
You know, question about this.
Yes.
I just was trying to remember where we are at in the saga of the Eastborne water supply, which has been, you know, playing out for quite some time.
Now, so how does this to your contract extension fit into any other plans that we've got going.
Thank you for the question.
It's actually it's almost unrelated.
Because this is.
It will take up these two years for us as well for the new wells to be developed.
We've experienced some in other projects that we're planning.
We.
We confirmed that there was some archaeological artifacts are areas with high archaeological.
Potential that we need to do with in the project area.
So we're working to resolve those.
And but at the end time, we are preparing a.
Gospel proposals for a contractor to help us with the design and.
Of that of those new wells and associated infrastructure.
Go ahead.
Director Stanford, sorry.
I've got something in my throat.
Thank you chair.
It's really good to see this.
This is a local company that has a strong family presence on Keats.
They, they are well connected to the community and responsive to any issues.
So I would like to move the recommendations as presented on page 15 of the agenda package.
And we have a second here for that.
And I'm looking to see if anybody wants to.
Okay, go ahead.
Vice chair.
Thank you chair.
Just a comment that thank you.
Director Stanford for mentioning that it is like a local on island company and family.
Because a lot of the times when the regional district ends up responsible for the water systems.
We end up having.
Contractors or consultants that have to travel to get to the system and.
Thinking about you know water system operations and mountain water system.
You really do need eyes on it daily and emergency access all the time.
So I know this is a couple of other communities on the coast with.
Smaller or more isolated water systems and yeah, the more local knowledge that can be built up and an expertise that can be gained the better for everybody.
So thank you.
Very good.
Any other comments on the.
Motion.
There's a motion on the floor right.
Yeah.
Any more comments on that motion on the floor.
I don't see any so I'm going to call the question on favor.
Very good.
Thank you.
We're going to move on to item 4.4 the wastewater facilities.
Feasibility study results, which is a for information.
For the board and if anyone has any questions for staff.
We have assistant manager or rock as well as our GM Rosenbum here to answer any questions you may have.
Is there myself.
Oh, that's a good question. Thank you.
Vice chair.
Is there anything in this report that you would like to highlight for the board to illuminate us on this.
I'm not really presented. I drafted a little introduction speech here.
Go ahead.
Yeah.
The purpose of the report is to present results of the wastewater system.
Feasibility studies for the square bay collection system and the Jolly Roger secret code of wastewater treatment plants.
The studies identify high priority near term and long term actions for all tree systems.
No media action or community directions are required at this time.
However, we will look to implement operational process changes identified in the studies and will consider presenting budget proposals for implementation of high priority recommendations as part of the 2027 budget process.
We're happy to answer any questions you have.
I'm going to go.
I think the majority of these are in area area.
Oh, and there's some in area B as well.
I'll start with area A go ahead director Lee.
I just wanted to say I really like the thought that we're actually making a community type solution rather than standalone little ones.
It seems like an awful good way to go to me.
So what did the command you on the proposal or at least the thoughts it isn't a proposal yet.
Excellent. Okay.
Thank you chair and yeah, no decisions to be made today.
Thank you for to staff for giving us the heads up and I'll circulate that with my community for the people affected so that they know what's happening.
What's coming up.
I have a question about the Jolly Roger secret code one and how I know that GM Hall is not here, but if we're talking about building a new one or doing upgrades like how how could this.
Kind of dovetail with the OCP.
And I don't know if Jim Rosenbin can speak on this or I should wait for Jim ought to be back, but.
Good question for the GM go ahead.
Thank you.
This kind of information is shared internally with our plan and department so that in any assessments of feasibility of growth areas, this kind of information is included.
I think it speaks to a larger discussion within the OCP context of the OCP about sewer system and wastewater systems and service incapacity of co-thera.
So yeah, this is definitely information that is shared for them and that collaborative will we consider in any further steps with the OCP.
Thank you.
Very good.
I'm going to look to direct a McMahon for the next.
Yeah, I just wanted to see if you would expand a little on how this fits into our bigger asset management efforts with our wastewater systems because I remember about.
Four years ago we got a series of reports on each of the wastewater systems and then I assume that following on those reports, you know,
and we've been working on financial plans for each one of the financial approaches, but I assume that there is a there is a plan rolling out on how to deal with each of these.
Thank you.
Go ahead.
Oh, sorry.
She's assuming a general road.
This is a direct response to those plans to those plans to develop because in those plans these plans.
In those plans, these two facilities, Georgia, Georgia, Georgia, Georgia, Georgia.
She could go for it and fight as an end of life in 2020.
So this is directly response to those plans.
What I should notice in these case, these two projects were funded from province or grant funding.
And that grant funding is currently not no longer available and it's to be confirmed by the province if it will at some point.
We open or not that program, but.
Thank you.
Thank you for the answer.
This is for information only.
And it's there in the public record for anyone to have a look at.
So I'm going to move along.
If we have no other questions.
Oh, go ahead and direct my command.
You have something else.
Sorry.
And I may not have read it closely enough.
But is there a communications plan with the participants in these services?
Go ahead.
Thank you.
Thanks for the question.
Currently there's that has not been considered because we're reading early planning stage.
But I just heard the director say that she will initiate some conversation in the staff can support that.
We were more than happy to do so.
Okay.
That's efficient.
Good.
Thank you for your time.
We're going to move on now into our.
Sunshine Coast regional district extreme heat plan.
We have acting senior manager of emergency and protective services chief Michael.
As well as emergency manager coordinator.
Aaron Wilson to answer any questions.
This is for this is a request.
A request for decision.
For the recommendations that appear on page 23.
And I was wondering if there are any questions for the staff members, or an introduction, or an introduction from the staff members. Thank you chair. Keep me on the straight narrow.
Good morning chair.
Today we're presenting the heat emergency response plan, which is a foundational document that supports the SERD's emergency management program.
While it's been completed for some time, we're bringing it forward now to make sure the work is officially recognized.
And we can share it with our first nations and government partners to support our coordinated regional preparedness.
So, have you to answer any questions?
Thank you. I have one question. On page 30 of the agenda before us, there is an internal plan distribution.
That neglects to include my area, area D. And I was wondering why that is.
Probably just a typo.
But I would imagine that we will include area D in the distribution of this plan.
Very thorough. Thank you.
Yes, we will.
Okay, good. That's just a repair to the plan that I'm looking for.
Go ahead.
Director Lee.
Thank you chair.
I was noting on the extreme heat plan that it's got a date of February 2024.
Was that when the plan was made?
Because we're calling it the final plan.
What's the 2024 date?
It's wondering how come it took so long to get here?
Thank you, Director Lee. I believe that was the beginnings of this plan.
Go ahead, Chief Michael.
Yeah.
So we had recognized that these plans have been in development for quite some time and completed.
But not formally brought through to the board.
There was a presentation by the consultant, but the actual plan itself was never brought forward.
Kind of tying up some loose ends and tidying things up by bringing you to hear today.
Director Lee, sir, you go ahead.
You have a question.
Just through you to staff. I'm assuming when they say they're providing the report to other levels of government.
Great.
We're all in this together with climate change.
Can I just ask that they if it goes to our staff, it also goes to C-Shot Council as well.
If that's part of the plan.
The concerns with heat leading to forest fires and or heat generally is as a concern of everyone's.
And one of the things our council has been doing is outreach is our community on the forest fire issues.
So if we can get the heat information.
An interesting, just a little side note chair is that when the last time.
Because heat comes at different times.
I remember a few years ago and I think everyone remembers that there was around is that the heat was in June.
I think it was the heat.
And the actual, I was at a soccer tournament in Gibson's and there was hundreds of kids there.
But the sprinklers were able to be on.
Which was the right time of year. I guess we still had enough water.
So the kids all use the sprinkler system to keep.
We had to I had to break the game. I was one of the roughs.
And organized to break the games quite every 10 minutes so that the kids could all run under the sprinklers because there's hundreds of kids there.
So that was a great heat reaction from the planners of that event.
But the unfortunate part is heat may come in August where I'm not sure if we can use that same cooling system in our public parks.
But it really worked for hundreds of kids.
Maybe in brothers as a counselor why just saying but tell that's great.
But that was such a good system that we hadn't placed that day but it was in June.
Thanks.
Thank you.
I was going to go to director Stanford and then back to director McMahon.
Thank you.
I'd just like to commend you on this report.
It's very thorough and it isn't just the focus on the heat issues.
It's the detail in the stats behind it.
One of the questions I had it I think it's briefly mentioned in an ecological point of view but specifically one of the concerns I've had is it seems obvious that when there is extreme heat event people do tend to go to the ocean.
And it also seems to be the time when we see higher equal accounts around the beaches and it actually can become a health hazard.
So I'd like to see that expanded a bit more and how the coordination between Vancouver health or coastal health and getting the beaches tested at the same time.
So we know that one of the avenues for heat support is to is a safe alternative.
Go ahead.
I think the best answer I've got for that one is that Vancouver coastal health is part of our emergency planning committee and that is something that I think we can take forward and discuss with them to make sure that we're in alignment.
Director McMahon.
Yes, I was just trying to find somewhere in here.
I thought there was a list of cooling centers but as was pointed out in here, we don't have very many air conditioned public spaces on the coast.
So is there a contemplated strategy for.
For putting if you sponsor other cooling systems into more of our public buildings.
There is a chart on page 196 that talks about the cooling centers, but yeah, is there a strategy to include some of our centers.
I have a comment about that after chief Michael gives us a rundown on this.
I think the short answer would be not currently, but I think that we are trying to think about this when we are doing more of our buildings.
It's on the radar, but I don't know if a specific plan designated to have more heat pumps in our community buildings at this time.
Thank you, and I do want to point out it shows that there are no cooling centers within my area robbers Creek, but I believe that the community association has.
I have created the HVAC system at the Hall and it can act as an emergency cooling system.
So that I wonder if that should be included in this report.
I have a I had a hand up over here, don't go ahead.
The director from area F.
Thank you, she I think he's just getting at me.
Yeah, a lot of this particular plan is relying on neighbors connecting with neighbors because that seems to be the most vulnerable.
There's a lot of people live alone.
It's relying on that communication to the public.
So it's not just a plan.
There is there an active communication strategy to get the information out prior to the summer.
And remind people that this is more than some other emergency situations.
Neighborhoods checking on neighbors.
So that's communication strategies where I'm coming from.
Go ahead, Chief.
I know we have a we have an emergency communications app that not everybody's aware of.
And I end the name escapes me.
Thank you go ahead.
Board, we do have a communications plan that we work with our communications team with every year.
And this heat planning is a part of that that we have a plan for those months leading up to the summer months.
And then we also have communications that are generally sent out to our community partners as well for them to send out to their clients.
So that is definitely part of our communications plan.
The following.
Go ahead.
And just your reminder that the directors all have their own communications within their rural areas on their own on the ground strategies.
Please keep us in the loop as early as possible so we can get the messages out ourselves.
My pleasure, which is to have some input.
Yeah, I'm going to move the recommendations on page 23.
Very good.
I'm sorry.
Right.
So go ahead.
The director moves the.
Okay.
I'm looking for a second or you got a seconder.
Any other comments on the motion.
No, seeing none.
I'm going to call the question.
All in favor.
Very good.
Thank you for your time.
Let me get myself oriented again.
That was the extreme heat plan.
And we are now going to look at 4.6, which is hazard risk and vulnerability assessment final report.
This is for decision as well.
It begins on page 28 in our agenda.
And we have.
We have the same staff here to answer questions on this report, which is also a long time coming.
Can you tell me when the work was begun on this.
I think the work began three years ago.
We had a grant that helped us begin this project.
We had a lot of questions.
Excellent.
Thank you.
Looking to the board for any questions for staff.
I don't see any.
Go ahead.
Go ahead, director.
Make man.
You're making.
Some waves that you want to ask a question.
I'll give you some time.
Oh, sure.
Uh.
We didn't get the benefit of an introduction.
But it was interesting that probably due to the quality of data available.
The report focuses on the district of seashell in the town of Gibson's.
And Gambier Island.
Why is Gambier Island so special?
Why does it get its whole section in this report?
Well, I'm not sure if Chief Michael will answer that or a director.
Stanford.
But go ahead, Chief Michael.
I would certainly defer to the area director on that question.
I wasn't heavily involved in this myself.
But I would imagine that the directors are corrected.
It's where the data was available.
But I will take some takeaways and check in with our emergency management staff and see.
Maybe why there was such a focus.
My early thoughts would be perhaps that it is a bit more isolated and recognizing that it
have some unique hazards compared to the rest of the regional district.
Go ahead.
Director Stanford.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
I didn't really notice it was that much focused on the islands.
But you know, they do have a specific unique set of circumstances that make them more vulnerable.
On the other hand, they also tend to be more set up to handle emergencies just because they're of the awareness level.
So I think the previous hazard report was a little scant on any detail about the islands.
And that was commented on at the time the report.
So maybe this is just making up for loss detail, but it's well appreciated.
And I do plan to use this excellent detailed report to continue my advocacy for the critical infrastructure to support these
Finally communities so that they can be accessed in an emergency.
And yeah, thank you.
It's such an interesting perspective, even though it does feel like it's all bad news.
But I look forward to my communities seeing it and reminding them that they always have to be prepared.
No matter what the circumstance is.
Very good.
Thank you.
Thank you, director.
Thank you.
Good.
Sure.
It's always fascinating reading about, you know, potential disasters.
And and I see that all of the stone did feature when it came to flooding because we.
There's reasons for that.
So a whole thing about the earthquakes I found sort of interesting because the risk level is called low likelihood.
And I understand that it's low likelihood in a short span of time, like in the next year or two or three.
But in fact, it's pretty much a guarantee that we're going to have earthquakes sooner or later we will have earthquakes and some of them will be quite large.
So I would say that it's a very high likelihood, but not maybe an imminent while we hope not imminent because we have almost forgotten about earthquakes in our focus on all the other disasters that are being coming at us.
So yeah, I I just like to remind myself and perhaps other people too that we still have to think about earthquakes.
Any any thoughts.
Go ahead chief.
Yeah, I've got some perspective on this for sure.
And I think our last version, I think back in 2005, 2008.
It was really heavily focused on earthquakes, and this came about through the community consultation piece where there were different hazards identified as perhaps the more consequential, drought being one that I would highlight given the time that the engagement was happening.
So, although I agree, the consequence of an earthquake would be significant. The likelihood in the criteria, you know, a one in 50 year, perhaps or longer, would not have the likelihood rated so high.
So, I think this gives us a more general focus on all the other hazards and not specifically focused, which I believe to be a good thing.
But this is, this is the exercise, right, the hazard risk vulnerability assessment and demonstrating more local unique and alternate hazards that we might not be top of mind for us.
Thank you. Yeah. Director Stamford. And then I'll look to this side of the table if anyone has any questions.
Just an added special interest group that I always want to make sure is is brought forward is the sunshine coast is somewhat unique in the number of children's camps and that that always needs to be considered when developing response plans.
They have different requirements and at any time we need to coordinate with the camps.
I think it's a good thing to bring them into emergency planning. They are also probably better set up than many of the neighborhoods around them and they can be used as a resource as a different way of looking at them.
So, it's worth keeping that in mind.
Thank you. I'm looking over to Director Inkster. You have some questions? Yeah, thanks.
I'm glad that others have brought up the fact that we have a couple of events that were sadly due for.
And that's fire that I'd go on and on about.
And earthquakes, that's true. I mean, the earthquake that they're talking, I mean, this has been mentioned before, but I'm glad that emergency responses thinking about it.
Because when that happens, they say it's going to be a big one. I think we remember this board, what was it a year ago in that one hit.
That was really weird. I ran out to the middle of the street to see if something hit something.
I think some of us did that and then realized it was an earthquake when the neighbors all ran outside and said, you know, it's just an earthquake.
So that's going to be really freaking people out when that that finally comes.
So I'm glad that there's some thought to it, although it may never happen. It might even not even happen in my kids' lifetimes, but we need to be.
Because it's going to knock out bridges, electricity, water systems, if it's as big as other areas of hit.
The other thing I think about with this report chairs that the reports are helpful and we're being prepared because government has reacted to citizens needs to be prepared
and a calamity. But until something happens, we do not know how good we're going to be at this.
That's the interesting part about this. These are all helpful reports.
But until something happens even on a small scale would almost be helpful because we would tell the emergency people and all the fire chiefs, police chiefs, how prepared we are when they react to a small event.
I beg to differ with the director.
Because I first had an experience as to the training regime and that the our local fire departments go through is quite extensive and they do train for all types of incidents, including earthquakes and floods and wildfires.
And so it is one of the things I like about our fire professionals is that they are very good at thinking outside the box and coming up with solutions to the problems that are faced that they face.
But that's fair chair. I mean they, but we will we will see what happens when yeah because because when you're if you're emergency personnel and you have to and it happens it happens yeah and then you have to decide is my family safe.
And then I'm you know, because that's going on because this is just the and they're well trained we know they are.
And and we there's a training agency shelter and a lot of them come there and I've talked to the chief chief Michael about this and others about the training it's really good.
But when something happens and you you're about to go to an event and you have to decide where my kids.
Where's my family or they safe and then you got to go that way.
That's where the rubber hits the road.
Thanks.
Yeah.
I understand we're all humans.
Go ahead.
Yeah.
No, it has no.
I want to I want to point out mostly what I'm hearing right now is really strong support.
So for this meeting this.
This plan and we're hearing we hear from the community all the time like people people.
Desiring emergency plans.
So I strongly supported to and I want to move it.
I'm sorry I have a second or so that's the recommendations as the appear on page 228.
In our agenda.
Go ahead.
Director McMahon.
Two quick things.
I believe the hospital foundation is holding an event about emergencies coming up soon.
I complain sometimes about outside consultants coming in and dropping templates on us when they're writing reports for the regional district.
But I think this is an example of a place where a template really makes a lot of sense.
Because jurisdictions right across the province should be following a similar, you know,
organization set of steps template whatever.
Because it just makes sense.
So I'm really glad we've got this here and and you know it will be updated and improve it upon over coming years.
So thank you.
Yeah, this is a good bit of bedside reading for emergency response personnel as well.
As well as the general public.
So any other questions on the motion on the floor.
Seeing no, I'm going to call the question all in favor.
Very good.
Thank you for your time.
We shall move on to the 60 page that has to deal with the director's renumeration review.
There's a direct, yes, it would you would there are CAO or our corporate officer wish to introduce this for us.
Thank you chair.
So it is a requirement of the board's policy to do a undertaker director's remuneration review prior to the subsequent election.
And so we're just presenting some options here on some ways to proceed with that.
So these are not exhaustive. There could be other options.
But happy to have the discussion.
Thank you.
Okay.
Sorry.
Director McMahon, then Director White.
Thank you.
We had a very thorough remuneration review around about four years ago and that was the first one for many, many years.
I think, because the system that was in place before that showed every sign of having been cobbled together and sort of patched.
But, you know, I think that the review was a good review and that I haven't heard any complaints from any other directors about the remuneration.
I think it's a minor consideration.
But, so I'm going to say I would, I would be happy with option two or even option three, which is not to do remuneration review this term.
And I'm interested to hear from the other directors.
Thank you.
Director White, you were in it.
I'm having a deja vu here because I thought this already came to us this term, even.
And we, I said the very same thing and said let's do this internally.
But now we're getting, it's back and there's a recommendation to do it externally and I didn't, I looked, I poured through the staff report trying to find out where.
Any mention of was, of the last time this came to us and I couldn't find it so.
Sometimes in the last few months this came to us already and I thought we said let's do this internally.
Is the director having a deja vu or is this actually has happened.
So on page four of the staff report, I think it's page four twenty seven of the agenda.
The recommendations that staff have from that discussion.
Was that staff bring back a report on options regarding revisions of the terms of reference, including background information.
So I happy to take any clarification on that particular review.
I would also say that was also my recollection.
But we couldn't find the specifics to that so.
I think part of this particular report is to, I think solidify that close that loop and make sure we're all in the same page.
Director Aster, yeah, so that what we're talking about happens temporary teeth according to this record, but you go ahead director Aster.
Yeah, what we'll see I guess we just got to be if we do anything internally we just have to be transparent with terms of reference and decision making.
What goes into that as we do it because I think arguments can be made for going in particular directions.
A couple of things in terms of the information presented to us.
Director Bands as you hasn't heard many complaints.
I think just like director Bands with the bridges sometimes were a little quiet until certain point I've complained about the renumation.
Bylaw that was that came in last time to other directors.
There's certain things that I would like to discuss.
And and they've heard that so that can happen if we have that venue.
One of the things that I just would like to say philosophically though is based on the earlier recommendations of a few years ago is that I didn't understand why there was a difference in municipal versus regional.
I don't think there should be tears for directors.
I think that if anything the municipal moves up with the world directors because there was there was an argument made by some that they do a lot of work and they do a lot of consistency work.
Then you don't have tears you just go up with them and that's the change that I wouldn't have made so I would have recognized.
The fact that there has been a change in workload and that they have to do a lot of their own newsletters and work but then the municipal's don't stay they go with them.
So that's that's one of my one of my things that I wouldn't have done but it came from a recommendation the board accepted it but you don't always have to take their recommendations you can make your own decisions and changes.
So that's that's just my initial thought thanks.
Okay director wait.
Yes I was who put in.
Yeah I guess it's unclear about how we'll go forward I mean if we're going to make the decision here as a board and debate things here as a board but I mean I can.
I do I was I am familiar with the rationale that happened last time and it was partly to align with every other regional district in the province virtually.
Which does have a difference between a recognition that that a rural directors do have a lot more to do with with a lot more in in this context anyway because municipalities are doing their planning and everything else would be other tables so that's it was to align with other districts and it was it's thoroughly.
We had a conversation before but I have sorry I have to say it is thoroughly addressed in the report so.
It's something to that that can be read in the report that came out a few years ago but anyway that I feel like that's kind of a side track because I don't know that's a discussion to have.
an external committee or an internal committee or a no committee maybe that we know committee but that's probably where we should be focusing our.
Conversation right now to move things forward.
All right I've got a little speakers list I'm going to go directly to the top director.
Thank you chair.
It's an interesting point director man raised about you know option two option three I think it doesn't.
It's not an extensive cost and it's not a great amount of staff time my understanding to do an update.
Along the way so I'm not I'm not of all opposed to doing an independent review I think one of the very last things we should be doing as directors is.
You know deciding or reviewing our own compensation you know whether it's in a public meeting or not.
I actually I know that our policy for the remuneration review does speak to.
Implementation for the following term but if we go to move the recommendations on page four 24 I'm not there yet but if we go to move them.
I would hope that somebody would add to the end of recommendation three to be implemented after the twenty twenty six local election.
I know it's already in the policy but you know this is one of those issues were optics matter and I think building it right into the recommendation means that people can't.
You know make stuff up about us voting on our own pay raises and so those just mountain thoughts I am interested to hear whether.
People think we should be doing it internally or externally. I'm in favor of externally. Thank you. Thank you for that input. I was going to direct your, like, man.
I just thought to spark the conversation. We'll further that I would try moving option three, which is to not undertake a review of director room.
Reuneration this term. Oh.
Does anybody want a second?
All right. Director, Mr. and then Director wait.
So, chair.
Emotions on the floor. Do you want me to speak to that? Do you want to speak to the previous one?
Yep.
Yep. Okay.
Okay.
So, I do think that reneumeration should be reviewed regularly.
And one of the reasons I would suggest that whether whatever decision you make is that we are talking this board quite often about accessibility to whatever that means including elected office, but also housing issues on the Sunshine Coast.
And consequently, because of those, the costs associated with housing, et cetera, cost of living, we should be reviewing things more robustly now than we used to many years ago.
When I was first elected, we made $3,500 a year in council and sea shell.
Can you imagine?
Yeah. I think it no 38.
So, it might be how long I've served.
I'm taking a different tack than what Director wait just said into my ear, but it's how long I've served.
And so, but there's been a huge change. And that's in recognition of the fact that you're opening it up to more people.
You're potentially opening it up to people, families, younger people.
There's some examples of that at this table.
And you're also in reviews looking at the change in the sad change in the housing costs on the Sunshine Coast and in British Columbia.
So, that's in speaking to that motion, and I was going to say something about the other one, but it's not on the floor right now.
Thanks, Chair.
I said, there's housing costs and there's work load and area B lost a director because she couldn't find a house because she couldn't afford to find a house on the Sunshine Coast.
And so, she had to move. And so, that was that was a reality.
Director wait, go ahead.
On the motion, I'm kind of leaning towards supporting it because I'm not sure.
I'm not really convinced that doing another external reviews, a good idea.
It did take a lot of staff work.
I was there. I could confirm that.
There were two, and it's in the report, two.
There were two staff members included in the CIO, which is a big commitment of CIOs having a lot of other things to do.
I spent quite a bit of time on this when I was on the external committee when I was external.
So, yeah, I'm concerned about that thought.
And you also can't really, I mean, I'm on another one with director Rinkster right now at the School District.
You can't necessarily, if you do an external committee, you can't necessarily control how much staff time it's going to take because that external committee may come in and say,
like, we need a ton of information, which they tend to need.
They'll need staff to collect a lot of information from across BC and perhaps other information too.
I mean, I also say, my, the reason I was leaning towards internal and also supportive of director McMahon's earlier statements about this extensive report and work that was done last time is
I mean, I know there's a lot of stuff in there that that I don't know if it was explored by the board because I think it would hold winning camera.
So, talk about transparency, but I, there were, there were recommendations in there like there was a, there was a headline, but like the very first recommendation of that report from last time was,
and I know this is coming up in the School District discussion too is immediately the very first thing the external people say is, well, we need some kind of job description, we we need to know what, what, what your actual role is.
So that's what the external people said, especially not me because I was in a former director, but the other two HR professionals said, that's, that's the biggest thing we need and I'm not aware that that's been done yet.
Okay, so that there has been there was one okay, okay, so, but there are other recommendations in there that I think the board may want to transparently review.
Um, because I'm not sure that was done so that's that's something and that might be the first thing the an external committee says is like, well, what about all this, these recommendations for me last time.
So.
Thank you, I'm going to go directly.
We wasn't spoken on this yet.
And thank you, Chair, it was kind of deep lost in deep thought over here and I missed what was the motion that was made.
I would recommend that we hear that three, which was to that too.
Not do a review and.
That the review of the director's renewation would be referred to the next board term after the 2026 election.
Is that it? Yes.
So it's.
Go ahead, director, I want to hear what you have to say.
We did it in 2020, I believe, and it's now 2026.
That's the second board that's.
I've been in place.
I'm not sure that.
We're doing the next board of paper by saying, oh, we're leaving it to you because they really can't do a renumeration review of their own on themselves.
So I think we're really if we go with number three, we're saying that's not going to be a renumeration review until 2030.
A four more years after this one.
That's quite a while.
So that's something that we need to think about before we all get together and vote here.
Director, Director.
Yeah, I'm.
I'm going to be.
I'm going to be supporting a review.
I don't think that we shouldn't support it based on the choices we may in future make after this after this motion.
Whether it be external or external, I'm not going to make my decision based on that.
We can have that discussion at that point as director Lee has said it could be 10 11 12 years based on a review that takes a while.
The board then board won't decide necessarily that new board in 220 in 2030 right away to do that unless staff brings it to them, but unless they're reelected, they may not know to do that.
So that may take a couple of years for talking 12 years.
Potentially 11 to 12 years before a review is done when costs of living continue to rise.
So I'll be supporting as I do with always encouraging staff to bring forward.
Any other fees and charges reviews DCC reviews for us to make sure that were on top of our costs of doing government things.
Director McMahon you had some input.
Yes, I'm amazed at how the timeline keeps expanding here.
But talking of timelines is already February and this last remuneration review I don't know how long it took.
Remember right now, but it was a fairly lengthy process to try and cram a full scale remuneration review in before the end of this term, I think would be very difficult.
And as we all know, we have a lot on our plates for the work plan for staff for everybody else.
I think this should be booted to the next term, but with possibly with a recommendation that they start earlier than this right not like not start six months before the end of the term but two years before the end of the term to make sure that there's time to get it done properly.
Thank you.
I'm going to go to Dr. Gabias.
Yeah, thank you and understanding that we're the the review would not necessarily be for us.
It would be for the future board.
I'm more inclined to want to have a review.
But the last one that was done was really strong really through and I seem to remember that what we had agreed on is that we just want like a late just a little you know like.
So I don't think it would be as doesn't sound like it would be as lengthy as the last one.
So how do we like what kind of what resources are we willing to put towards that.
I think just a light you know upkeep of what we currently have would be enough.
I think it's the fair thing to do for the next board and not kick it down to you know in four years.
So I don't know how that would be phrased differently than what it is now, but yeah, I'm not in support of not having one.
Go ahead see you.
I believe we need to clearly understand what a light review would so scope of work.
So I think that would then dictate what the amount of effort would be needed for something like that to estimate it.
So would it be just comparing certain elements the report has several recommendations and we've also included background as to what was implemented.
So you know we'd have to understand what it was that this particular board would want us to review.
Is already built in that CPIs automatically included so that's applied so what elements would you want either an internal external whatever review to undertake.
In accordance to what the recommendations that were.
Implemented versus those that may have not been implemented or those that you might want to amend what's been implemented.
So there's a lot of flavors to it so I think it's difficult to estimate without a specific scope work.
There are a lot of flavors to it my my initial thoughts on this is that there was a review that had certain criteria that were gone through and that you were used to adjust the.
Renumeration has there been any changes within that criteria that would substantially affect the outcome of the of the renumeration so using the using the initial report and going over it and seeing if it all still applies or if there are some substantive changes to the criteria that would be I consider a light review.
And are there any other questions on this.
And then in the motion is to delay is to delay this and it's not do the review and to put it to the next council board.
I'll call the question all in favor one two three four four all as opposed.
To four.
Okay, so that's defeated in a tie.
Okay, so now we had never starting over again.
One and two is.
Is there any motions that anyone else would like to put forward.
Do I think man you have your hand go ahead.
Not necessarily motion it's just I kind of hear from the conversation that we may be leaning towards option two.
But if we do that as the CAO pointed out we need to set some parameters and I'm a little concerned about trying to wing it on the fly right now to come up with these parameters.
So if the board wants a light review we.
Perhaps we could kick it to a committee to come up with some parameters on what a light review would be.
And then come back with with some recommendations because otherwise I think we're going to spin our wheels here for quite some time.
I understand.
I'm not sure you're ready, but I'm going to go to director Stanford.
I'm concerned with that is committee sometimes is another month down the line and we're even tighter.
Someone if we can do something.
A little closer in so I'm just trying to think of how to speed this long.
Good question director wait.
I'm having deja vu again because I feel like this is kind of what we talked about last time.
Now we're like I don't know when we're in number of months since that time and haven't moved forward on it so.
I don't want to do the same thing and then we're just getting into next term so.
I mean I think we need to give staff some clear direction this time about.
I thought last time we talked about an internal board committee.
And look the board has to make the final vote at the end.
So whether it's from an external committee or a board.
It's not like the board has only the board can approve budget, and it's the same with any government in the world.
So, I think there's not a lot of getting away from the fact that the board needs to make the final decision.
And I thought we talked about an internal committee of the board before it doesn't need to be a committee of the whole, which we always do.
It can just be a few members to keep it nimble and with some, with some, some lot of staff report support.
And just get it done.
I mean, I think that's what the board's morning to do so.
That sounds like a recommendation, but I'm going to wait on that and go to Director Inster for his input.
Yeah, thanks. I was waiting for a recommendation for Director White, because he spoke into that a couple of times saying internally like that model.
If that gets seconded, then maybe we could talk about that and vote on it.
In order to move this forward, I'm okay with that.
But I think internal means the regional district board is making the decision, but that the meeting is public.
That's what I'm thinking, that the internal means.
That's that's when I'm hopeful that it is. I'm supportive of that.
And one question through you to to the CAO.
And I don't think CAO has this information, but she might and I don't remember from the budget documents.
Do we know what percentage of our spending at the regional district goes to the goes to board, renumeration and expenses?
It's very small.
Do we have that?
CAO, do you read the evidence?
Sure.
Sure, but I'm asking it now.
Yeah, they might not, but they might not.
And I can certainly find that.
It's not, it's not, it's not actually trivia.
It's really important to tell the public if we're going to go do these discussions that it's.
We need to let the public know that it's not going to have a huge effect on taxation for the board to talk about these things.
So it's not trivial to me, but anyway, if we're going to get the recommendation, if you want to push your recommendation direct to what you're interested, then I wait for that.
You pose a question to the CAO.
I'm going to ask the CAO has an answer. I guess it would be a section of their general government in the budget.
Quiet, please.
Sorry.
That's why.
That's why you couldn't hear me. Sorry for those online.
So it's not just general government.
It is included as well.
There's some top apps for the rural directors.
So we would have to do a review of what those are both for remuneration.
And it also includes travel expenses.
And so for 2026, we also did an increase for some of the various educational components.
So we'd have to look at what we are considering as far as what we consider total compensation for the board.
But I get, I get that, the ask and we can provide that to the committee if that's so passes.
As a percentage of our entire budget.
Okay.
Director Toth, go ahead.
Thank you.
I think what Director White is getting at is actually the recommendations that are suggested here.
Beneath option to near the bottom of page 428.
I missed him when I read the report the first time, because I just saw the recommendation and then moved on to option 3.
But there's actually a fairly lengthy option here that looks at a internal review.
Working group comprised of one to two directors plus a couple members of staff.
So moved.
Is that it now?
Yep.
Very good.
So.
Do I want to just read it out?
I can read it out.
The working group comprised of directors and staff be established to conduct an internal review of
the director's reneumeration allowances expense reimbursements and benefits.
And that the board appoint one to two directors to the working group.
And further that the chief administrative officer appoint one to two staff to the working group.
And further that the report be brought back before 2, 4, 20, 26 with recommendations for directors reneumeration allowances expense reimbursements and benefits.
Now q4 is that after the election.
So I would like to.
It says before q4.
Oh, it does say before q4 so that that's going to put it before the election.
Okay.
And we have a seconder.
Yeah.
I'm chair.
We've read that.
We know what we're supporting.
Just move it forward as I've said four times today.
I will support that even though I looked at another model.
I'll support that.
I'd like to see two at least of directors on that.
And I would like there to be some transparency as I've indicated.
Thanks.
So we're looking for.
Public reports.
Absolutely.
Director wait.
I'll go question on this with would this be something.
The is this under the undertaking of the chair.
When we say that the board appoint is that the chair will go and appoint these directors or is it something that.
Staff needs us to do as part of the motion.
We're going to board this after you know with this.
And I would know.
Not yet.
Either or.
The committee can elect right now.
You can do it at the board or you can do it as subsequent time.
Very good.
How would you guys like to proceed?
Okay.
We will wait to appoint people when we get to the board.
Which will be two weeks from today.
Yes.
Well, it can be moved can it be moved to this afternoon?
I'm adding that.
We can move it to this afternoon.
Very good.
Our corporate officers nodding in agreement.
So that's what's going to happen.
So we do have a motion on the floor.
Yeah.
That's a good referee move.
Okay.
Go ahead.
Your next board if it if you didn't pass it today wouldn't be until the 26th of March.
Whoa. Yes.
Okay. So now we're never okay.
Yeah.
We're going to refer this to board this afternoon.
And any other comments or questions on this.
Oh, director McMahon.
I would actually be fine with the chair pointing members to the committee.
But whatever.
Well, sorted out between now and this afternoon.
That's true.
Excellent.
Okay. Good.
I'm going to call the question.
All in favor.
There we go.
It's a unanimous.
Thank you very much.
Ladies and gentlemen.
Now we're going to move on to four point eight.
Let's see what we've got left.
I'm going to wait until we go into in camera before I call for brick.
So we're going to start 4.8, which is for information long term debt update.
And we have manager Taylor to give us an introduction into this.
Would you like to introduce this for us?
Sure.
Thank you.
So the report report before use is intended to provide an update on the SAD's current and future debt obligations.
At the conclusion around to total remaining SAD issued debt total 17.1 million.
Well, approved on issued debt total 45.4 million.
Not accounted for in these figures are future projects such as the vertical expansion project,
which is estimated for require an additional 32.3 million in long term borrowing,
following the review and approval of the solid waste management plan.
Summary of the SAD's current and proposed debt obligations can be found in attachment A and staff are available.
Should you have any questions?
Thank you for that introduction.
I am going to look to make Director McMahon.
All right.
Go ahead, Director McMahon.
Yes.
I really appreciate this report.
This is what has been worrying me for a long time is that we are debt that we are taking on for projects that are completely necessary.
It is going to be very, very considerable.
And I have two questions.
I'll start with the question of a policy.
We do not have a debt servicing ratio policy.
And it is now the time to look for one.
Our CAO has an answer to that question.
Go ahead.
The board does have a debt management policy.
In that particular policy, although the regional district or regional districts in generally,
do not have what's reflected with like member municipal debt servicing limits as a percentage of their revenue.
The regional districts don't have to do that, and that's partly because we are also the flow through for member municipal debt.
And so the policy, however, does state that the regional district will try to mirror that particular percentage.
And so when we take on additional debt and when we are presenting debt that the regional district is going to be taking on including what member municipal debt comes on.
We do provide that percentage as to where the regional district is in that particular percentage.
So I think that's something that this particular report can start to integrate a new section into the report is where we at cumulatively and make sure we have a good distinction between regional district debt.
I don't remember municipal debt because those would be very different amounts.
Go ahead, director.
Thanks chair.
I have a lot of always a lot of questions and comments on debt.
I'm glad to hear director Rick Mann asks that portionality question.
In this case, it's important to note C-shelts through the regional district.
Now, I can't guarantee to this board although it's not that board that will be paying it, but it will be the two members of this table from C-shelts that are amount may go up.
But it's very low right now and I'm very proud of that for C-shelts because we just had two debts come off.
But the CEO is alluded to our capacity.
And I always ask this question, what I would like to know is if in fact what it is going forward, we all know that the amount that people earn will go up, but not necessarily as quick as our debt to 2030 to be able to service that.
But what I would like to see if possible and make it and I know they can do it.
It's just it's just added work, maybe staff has a system of formula.
Is to find out what percentage going forward of our regional taxes collected will go to debt going forward.
Pardon?
Sure.
Both.
And that's what I want to see going forward percentage of our taxes going forward going towards debt.
And I would love to see, I would love to see, let's say a pie chart that shows going forward how much goes to debt and how much goes to the provision of existing services.
That's helpful information for me.
And the debt servicing amount that the CEO alluded to municipalities as has been indicated with my previous questions are governed differently.
But it would be good to know what the regional district would take off the 13 million that goes to the municipalities and look at the regional district and see what our service ceiling is.
Thanks.
Okay, our CFO is in the room.
I was wondering if you could answer that question.
Not specifically answering the questions.
I just want to.
Staff are making some notes so we can take a look at how we can integrate that into this reporting because I think we're changing how we report the debt as we take on some more debt in those financial considerations financial sustainability considerations.
So one of the things we will also have to review which is what's so different with the regional district is it's not the same as a municipal setting in the sense where the majority of the same folks are paying for the debt.
So even though we can present those particular financial indicators because those are traditional financial indicators in any type of financial analysis on your health of your organization.
We also want to factor in the health of the specific service and those specific rate pairs that are having to pay for it.
So regional water, for instance, town of Gibson's does not pay that.
So if we present something that assumes everybody paying into it, then that would be I think misleading because it would not be an accurate reflection so I think we just have to consider in trying to provide this information.
And when we try to do these things in comparison to our other regional districts to see the economic health of the regional district, it's just so different because of other considerations of how you're having to fund projects, timing of funding projects, magnitude of projects.
So there's just a lot to factor and it doesn't necessarily mean that you are in a financial dire straits, it just is a consideration of affordability.
So I think we'll take that back and see how we can articulate and report that back to the board and to the community.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Directorator, go ahead and go. Thanks to the CEO on that. I know that I probably give them extra work when I look for this information.
It just speaks to community affordability and how we can pay for our debt. If we look at that information.
The other thing that we do, because I've talked to finite staff, but it means value in the regional district is some of the debts that's all added.
But we need to consider, as we look forward to the future, because I'm not sure how the loans will be governed as money is really cheap right now.
And as any of us that had parents paying for mortgages in the 80s, it meant that the cost of borrowing doubled the loan at least or tripled the loan, but money was, but houses were cheaper than.
But anyway, the fact of the matter is money is really cheap right now, so if interest rates change, then the prediction of cost may change if they can't lock in a loan for a number of years at cheaper rates. Thanks, Chair.
I had to address McManus, or you can see your hands.
Yeah, I appreciate that it is very difficult to communicate the kind of impact because we have different scopes of service.
The landfill is an easy one because everybody is involved in the landfill.
So we actually have a really good estimate of what a $33 million loan is going to cost the average taxpayer, which is, yeah, a $13,66 per 100,000 assessment.
So that I took that out of the February 2nd report, but then regional water doesn't involve the town or people who aren't on the system.
And then, you know, fire departments are different again.
Half moon bay needs a new fire hall that's not included in this.
There's, there's a lot coming at us.
And I am concerned that we don't get ourselves into a crunch where we, like, yes, we can borrow almost infinitely, but we obviously don't want to.
So we're going to have to have the question, the discussion of how much debt is too much debt.
And that it's complicated because the, it affects different taxpayers and different services differently.
But some kind of a breakdown on where the debt is by service might be helpful.
I don't know if there's an easy way to, to do that in a graphical way, at least with the big services that we have like regional water.
Solid waste regional recreation things like that.
I think I've blithered sufficiently.
Thank you. And I do remind directors that we do all over approaching the end of the open agenda.
It is lengthy and we have, we still have an in-camera agenda director Tothko had.
Thank you just a quick comment chair and this is I apologize director McMahon because I saw your email and I meant to sort of head off this question in a bit of a way, because
Solid waste might be an easy one because everybody participates.
But the board hasn't made the decision on how to fund that debt yet.
If we fund it from 100% user fees, I eat tipping fees.
It's actually not taxation debt funding at all.
And so I think that's one of the things that we have to be careful about both when we talk about debt funding and also knowing that the newspaper listens to our meetings.
When they report out on debt funding is it's real, you know, it's a headline grab to say, you know, $35 million in new debt blah blah blah blah.
But it's so much more nuanced than that.
And it's frustrating because it's more nuanced than that.
And it's not easy for us to communicate that with people when the headlines drop.
So I think that's something that our staff and us have to stay on top of communications with our communities.
Thanks.
Directorator.
Go ahead.
Yeah, that's that's an important point.
Oh, sorry.
Oh, I didn't see.
I was sorry, director.
I did not see your hand.
I will go to director Lee.
Go ahead.
Now I forgot what I was going to say.
Not really.
I wanted to say a few things.
And that is I was looking at the future borrowing, which director Toth did talk about.
And it's nice information to have.
But there's grants that we're going to get.
There's other ways of funding it like user fees.
So it's it's good information and it's great to see.
But we got to be careful not to alarm people and tell it is time to be alarmed.
And the other I did have a question though.
And that was a different question.
I was looking at this and trying to find the initial amount that we borrowed and the length of time we borrowed it over.
So I could get some apples and apples things.
But I couldn't find it anywhere.
Is there is some way I could find that information when I was curious about it?
I believe that I was trying to explain to in one of my news releases.
Just exactly what it meant, you know.
So does this information exist in this report?
Better to jailer.
Right.
The timeline's exist in attachment A, maturity and the term length.
That would be page 537.
I'm actually looking at page 537.
And I can see the principle balance remaining.
I see the annual service cost.
I see the interest rate, but I don't see the amount we initially borrowed.
And how long we had borrowed that for.
Sorry, could I clarify which loan you're referring to?
Yeah, all of them.
So when the loan was taken out and what was the term.
I apologize because I originally thought you were talking about proposed that.
That is something that staff could consider adding in to future iterations of this report.
For sure.
Useful information.
Okay.
Thank you.
All right.
Directorator.
Can you keep your comments brief?
You know, I'll try.
Thank you.
Yeah.
That's kind of what I was asking for earlier was the makeup of our debt.
And it's a lot of staff work.
And what chair tooth is saying about public communications and what the public understands is really
needs to be clear decisions.
How we fees versus overall public taxation.
We need to make sure we're clear about that.
And we talk about that.
Just just ending really quickly.
A lot of the Republicans in the US still think that tariffs are paid for by other countries.
So that's an example of how we need to inform the public.
Thanks.
Yes.
There is misinformation and disinformation out there about the finances of the world.
And it serves some people and does a disservice to others.
I am looking around and I don't see any hands up at the moment.
I'm going to just move right along to our.
The minutes from our P tack meeting of Tuesday February 17th.
I see that director Lee and director man were at this meeting.
And I'm going to look to them to see if there's any comments that they wish to put to the board.
Otherwise.
These minutes are one of the reports that was adopted go ahead director Lee.
I did want to mention that there was a presentation made that was extremely interesting.
I don't know if if it's kept somewhere or not.
What was the nature of the presentation?
It talked about actual money to be borrowed and the impact long term.
It was quite a nice presentation made to the group.
The updates to the draft solid waste management.
Yes.
Is that something that we've already seen in it.
Or that is available online.
Go ahead director or sorry general manager Rosenbum.
Thank you for the question here.
That's the same information as was provided earlier to the board.
You know, report about funding strategies.
I've put a protocol that's mentioned in the sort of the budget management plan and the presentation.
I believe is available on the P tack side on our LDS city website on the P it's based.
Available and can you repeat that last part on the website on the SHD website on their P tack advisory committees.
Okay.
Yeah. On the front page advisory committee.
Thank you chair.
Yeah.
I had seen the information before.
But it was put in a different format.
Simplified format, which I really did like.
So I'm going to go pull it now.
Excellent.
Good.
With no other comments on this item, I'm going to move to 5.1, which is.
It is a correspondence.
From Joanne Malar communications coordinator regional district of Oconogans and El Camine.
About orphan dams.
Sorry, orphan dikes.
And although at first I thought that this might be something that should be dealt with at UBCM.
I realized that UBCM has put some restrictions on our resolutions in that they should be.
They should be.
They should fit into the entire province's.
Per view and not be to regional.
And so this is I believe there is.
A dikes that's owned and operated by the regional district, which we could fall into.
This category.
Go ahead, director.
I'm.
I'm a bit confused why this is on here because we we do get correspondence from other.
Well, governments all the time saying, hey, can you here's our motion? Can you support it?
So I've been kind of looking around seeing did any director ask for this to be on the agenda and I don't see it.
So.
I.
I feel like we should continue to follow a general protocol, like if a director asks for something to come to the board.
Let's let's do that, but I'm not seeing that and.
Given that I don't see anybody jumping a jumping in.
I just we've received this already let's move on to the next agenda item.
I don't think we need to get.
I don't think we need to.
I address every single request.
I just saw one from Cam loops that came in about indigenous relations last week and I don't see that on the agenda.
We're not putting it on the town agenda.
I was a bit too.
Because nobody's asked for it.
So.
I bet let's just move on.
It's my.
Yes, excuse me, we are being asked to sign their letter.
It is a specific action.
It's not to support their.
They're motion at UBCM.
We are being asked to to be added as a signatory on their letter.
Okay.
So do we need to.
We need a motion to sign this letter.
If that is the will of the committee.
Go ahead.
Yes.
Okay.
So, director Lee.
Thank you, chair.
I didn't really think it was our business because we don't have any dikes anywhere.
So we could become handling on something.
Do we have a dike somewhere that's we need to worry about.
I had to.
Thank you.
Thank you for the question.
Yes.
The idea is that I could the outside.
But it's registered in our name.
Our contacts are tax anywhere in the province where there is actually no owner for.
And hence it's a big risk to the community because there's nobody responsible for operating
a maintenance of those of those tax.
This is different.
So the motion is to put the board signature on this letter and return it to.
The request is, but I'm going to put it to the board is motion.
Are you making that motion?
I am.
Okay.
Do we.
Anybody second again?
Is anybody second in me?
No.
Then I'm going to abandon that motion and we're going to move on to the.
In camera portion of our agenda.
I move.
That the public be excluded from attendance at the meeting in accordance with sections nine one
one K and sorry ninety one K and ninety two be.
Three of the community charter.
So moved.
So second it all in favor.
Okay.
Thank you.
And we're going to adjourn the public portion of the meeting.
Sorry.
We're going to pause public portion.
And we're going to go to in camera.
We shall return here in five minutes time.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome back to the open portion of the Sunshine
because regional district committee of the whole meeting for Thursday, February 26th.
It is currently 12.29.
And I am going to inform the public that we shall change the time for our board meeting.
This afternoon, from 1 o'clock until 1.30, due to the length of our morning meeting.
So I'm looking for a motion to adjourn this morning's meeting.
I have a motion, I have a seconder, all in favor.
Very good.
Thank you.
We'll see you in an hour.
Are there-
Good afternoon everybody, everybody and welcome to the Sunshine Coast Regional District. Regular board
meeting for February 26th, 2026. It's 131. I would like to call the meeting to order and acknowledge
that the SDRD is located on the traditional territories of the Shishal Khan School Hall Machinations.
Directors, we do have a fairly lengthy agenda in front of us today. I've had a request to strike
Directors reports from the agenda today. We've got a notice of motion from Director Gabbius that we're
going to be adding as item 8.2, which is just for introduction. And I would like to move the motions
up to after item 3 on the agenda. Directors, are there any other changes to make
to amend this amended agenda? If not, I would look for motion to adopt.
The amended amended agenda, director Lee, director Gabbius, all those in favor. Thank you, that's carried. So first up, item 3.1, regular board meeting, minutes of February 12, 2026, before we adopt those directors, are there any errors or omissions?
If not, can I have a motion to adopt? Thank you, director McMahon, seconded. Thank you, all those in favor. Any opposed? That motion's carried. Okay, so now we're going to go to item 8.1, which is the notice of motion regarding Sunshine Coast Pickleball. Director Baxis is your motion. I'm going to turn it over to you.
Thank you. Before we begin, I would like to draw your attention to the last line after the motion, and I move to strike the last line. You haven't made any motion yet, so you can just not move that as part of your motion.
I move that, whereas the Sunshine Coast Pickleball Association, which is to enter into a land use agreement with the SCRD for the development of the recreation complex. On the parks designated property immediately west of 1309 Roberts Creek Road.
And I've got the folio number, etc. Therefore, be it resolved that the relevant staff meet with representatives of the SCPA to discuss the next steps in the process of entering into a land use agreement and return a report to the board.
Okay, full stop. Thank you, Director Bax. You did submit the motion in time for debate for our procedure by law, and the additional item item be technically was constituted as a late item, but the motion itself is in order. So I will look for a seconder.
Because this is park service, it's going to be park's function participants, so rural directors. Okay, thank you. Director, I assume that was going to be your question.
Yes. All right, thank you, Director Lee, your second day. Okay, so we have a motion currently on the floor. Directors discussion, Director Bax.
So the rationale behind this is simply an opportunity for us to officially sanction the staff entering into discussions with the pickable association. I see them here in the gallery.
In order to find out what it is that the pickable association needs to do in order to pursue the proposal that they have brought forward and how they're going to interact with the regional district.
I know that they're I've talked with some of the people within your executive and that director Bax to me. Sorry, I know that the executive of the pickable association is discuss with me and they have.
I have information about similar land use agreements that have been brought forward in other jurisdictions that I think would be very pertinent and time saving.
In this discussion and I'm looking forward to seeing if I can find support amongst my peers here to put this motion forward.
Okay, thank you, Director Bax. I mean, the motion's already been put forward. So you know, we're in debate now, Director McMahon.
Yes, I get it. The pickle ball is looking for a home. I am just concerned that there may be other options and to narrow it down to just this parcel, maybe premature.
I still have not heard back any clear reason why the pickle ball could not be place next to the seashell arena in seashell, which is already a recreational hub with parking and all the other amenities.
So we do not yet know what's involved there. So I hope it will continue to work with the district of seashell as well because it may prove to be an easier ask.
So knowing that that question was coming, I did ask staff the district of seashell about where things landed because the loop hadn't been closed with council yet.
And what I heard from corporate staff was that there was going to be a number of like lot consolidations that we're going to have to happen in order to create, you know, legal space in order to cite the facility.
Because I think the proposal that was brought to the district to seashell, and that we sort of talked about moving forward with staff would have cited the building right across a property line.
And they're both our properties, but there are set back like there are procedures and requirements for properties when it comes to parcel lines.
I haven't been able to touch base with the planning staff since you brought that question up. So I know from the corporate side that sort of where things stalled, if you will.
But I also would support continuing that that work in seashell to possible director angster.
Yeah.
I'd love to see more recreation that area. It's it's a big recreation area arena golf course soccer fields lit baseball.
I'd love to see it, but it seems complicated.
And I'm not sure exactly what piece you're referring to in terms of going across a lot line. I know I just don't know exactly. I know the lot the layout.
But also to this board should remember that if it if it takes into account the arena property, then that's regional district in a sense too, right?
Yeah.
So not necessarily the district of seashell because we've leased it to the regional district for the arena use.
So I'd love to see that pursued, but it seems so complicated sadly for a group of people who have been asking for a number of years.
Much like the lawn bowlers were for facility. Thanks.
I think my first meeting with the Sunshine Coast Pickable Association was back in 2019.
So yeah, definitely been been searching for a while on how to land this director backs.
Yeah. Thank you. And one of the things that I think makes this particularly attractive to the people of Robert's Creek as well as the Sunshine Coast and anybody who uses a community hall, which is a really popular venue.
But one of the drawbacks of the community hall is the lack of parking. And so when I was first approached by the Pickable Association, I asked them to include a parking lot that could be used for the by the community association for their events.
As well as I asked them to approach the Disc Golfers Association to incorporate Disc Golf course on this land and I think that the it could become a new recreation hub in Robert's Creek that's that would offer these type of amenities as well as bike lockups for people that take transit.
And if when you get at the chance to have a look at the plan, you'll see what kind of a boon it will be for my community as well as the Pickable ballers.
Thank you. Any other comments from directors director.
Thank you chair and happy to see so many people showing up in support.
I'm supportive of sharing of information between staff and the Pickable Ball Association because they're, you know, I think that's one option for them that's one land option.
There's the arena there's probably other ones as well. And so what would it entail for the association to go forward with this parcel. I'm I'm totally okay with that.
I don't know much about that parcel. I don't know what can happen there.
And I don't know what the, you know, the constraints of that site either. And I don't know if the association is knows about the, any constraints that could maybe get in the way.
But so all this to say like I'm supportive of the conversation between staff and the Pickable Ball Association and just so that they have more information to move forward with their plans.
With you know I'm assuming there'll be other, there might be other options being supported at the same time.
Thank you, director Gavis. Any other discussion from my directors rural or municipal.
If not, I will call the question, rural directors only all those in favor.
And that is carried unanimously. Great.
Thank you, director Bax and thank you to the Sunshine Coast Pickable Ball Association for bringing that forward.
And we don't normally, you know, we don't endorse that sort of, you know, clapping and shit livelyness.
But thank you for coming today, guys.
Thank you very much. Yep.
You
Okay. And note our entire gallery has left us so sad that they didn't want to stay for the financial plan by law.
But moving on to item 8.2, which is the notice of motion being read into the record.
We're doing motions now.
So director Gavis has a notice of motion to read into the record for next board meeting.
Thank you, Gerry. I have a notice of motion not to be debated today, but to look at future board the next board meeting.
So the motion is that the following be submitted to AVICC as a late resolution.
Here's the resolution establishing a provincial system of local watershed boards across British Columbia.
Okay, I'm going to read the whole thing.
It's right. Yes, for the public at home.
Whereas communities in British Columbia are experiencing increasing drought flooding, water impacts, and water supply and certainty that are contributing to infrastructure damage.
Rising emergency response costs and economic disruption.
And whereas local governments are responsible for protecting drinking water and supporting housing, economic development and climate preparedness.
But like the authority coordinated watershed governance structures and stable resources to manage growing water security risks.
Therefore, be it resolved that the Union of British Columbia municipalities call on the province of British Columbia to establish a provincial framework and provide stable long term funding for locally based watershed boards.
Go develop with first nations and local governments to support watershed scale planning source water protection and coordinated drought and flood preparedness across British Columbia.
Thank you, Gerry.
And that will be up on the next board meeting agenda.
Let's do that. You didn't make it longer though.
Just a little more reading time.
Okay, and so we're going to move on to item 4.1, which is business arising from those board meeting minutes that we adopted before the.
Pickable conversation.
So item 4.1 is an amendment to transit expansion funding resolution corporate officer.
Did you want to speak to that real quick.
Thank you chair.
So this is just to actually reflect the action that we have to take going forward due to the loss of transit expansion funding.
So staff are requesting the minutes be amended to reflect the absence of that funding.
Thank you and we've got a recommendation here on page 19.
And then that's been moved. That's been seconded any discussion.
All those in favor.
Any opposed. That motion's carried.
Okay. Thank you.
And so we're going to move on to item 6.1 because we have no delegations today.
Community the whole meeting recommendations. One to eight of February 12th, 2026.
Directors do wish to pull any of those for separate consideration.
Before we endorse the block.
If not, I will call the I will look for a motion to endorse please moved seconded any discussion.
All those in favor.
Thank you. That's carried.
Correct.
Yes. Thank you.
And just a question for staff.
If I may about the accessibility plan.
Tories with the next steps are now that we're endorsing the plan.
When are we going to see it next?
What's happening now?
Thank you.
Corporate officer.
Thank you chair.
So subject to board endorsement of the plan.
We have a let's talk page that's ready to launch as well as a news release.
The accessible B.C. Act says that once the plan has been put together.
We must put it out for public feedback.
So we will continue that process.
And you may recall that we've also recommended that the committee terms be extended for the next three years
to facilitate some continuity and ongoing conversation with that committee.
We committed to meeting at least once per year to update the committee on the progress.
That the local governments are making on the plan.
And just to provide updates on any public feedback that.
That we're receiving, also following endorsement, the plan will have to be circulated to staff, so that we can have a look at some of the things that may already be in progress, things that we may already be doing, and then to identify any new opportunities that the committee has identified for the local governments.
So the process will be ongoing and we'll be back likely to the board with updates as we go along.
Thank you. All right, and see no other hands. We'll move on to item 6.2, which is the electoral area services committee meeting recommendations 1 to 8 of February 19.
Directors, are there any of those that you want to pull for separate consideration?
If not, can I have a motion to endorse the block please moved and seconded any discussion on the block?
All those in favor. Any opposed? That motion is carried.
All right, next up is item 6.3, which is committee of the whole meeting recommendations 1, 4, 5 and 9 from this morning.
And directors, are you wanting to pull any of those for separate consideration?
This is if you're looking at the PDF of the amended agenda, it's page 32 and 33.
Director Bax?
We did discuss this morning about recommendation number 9 of the directors re-neumeration at which point should we should we pull this now and discuss the appointment of directors for this re-neumeration task group, whatever you want to call it?
For simplicity sake? Yes, because we're considering endorsement of the block.
Right, and so this is the time.
Okay, we'll pull recommendation number 9, please.
Okay, so 1, 4 and 5.
I don't see anybody else jumping at the bat, so I can have a motion to endorse those three, moved and seconded.
All those in favor.
Okay, that's carried. Thank you.
Now, recommendation 9, Director Bax, you asked to pull it because of the, I assume the appointment of one or two directors to this working group.
That's correct, and I'm looking to the other directors to see what kind of agreement we can come to as to who should be populating this group.
There was discussion earlier this earlier today that we should have a minimum of two of us on this group and a pair of staff members as well.
And so I'm, I'm going to, I'm going to recommend that Director Gabias be on this.
No.
So, I just want to clarify this.
Corporate officer.
Okay, because it's a working group.
I think as Board Chair, I can appoint people directly to it unless you guys otherwise direct.
Not to put you on the spot. Corporate officer.
So there's no formal guidelines around working group.
I believe it should be at the Board's discretion.
If the Board's comfortable with the Board Chair appointing individuals, I don't see an issue with that from a procedural perspective.
Okay, so I've seen head nods this far.
Director McMahon.
Yeah, I would be fine with the Board Chair appointing. He has, in all previous instances, you know, talked to us about whether we want to do this. He doesn't fall in told us.
So if we just change the wording to say, and that the Board Chair appoint one or two directors to the working group.
And so then the recommendation can stand and I will just suggest, although it may not, you know,
my suggestion is that it'd be one EA director and one municipal director.
Thanks.
But you're going to move the recommendation with.
I move recommendation number nine with the addition of the one chair.
Okay.
And I've got a seconder for that. Any other discussion?
Yeah, so this is on page 33 of the amendment agenda package, which is that a working group comprised of directors and staff be established.
To conduct an internal review of director's remuneration allows us as expense reimbursements and benefits.
And that the board chair appoint one to two directors to the working group.
And that the CAO appoint one or two staff to the working group and that a report be brought back before Q4 2026 with recommendations for directors remunerations allowances expense reimbursements and benefits.
And further that this recommendation be forwarded to the February 26 board meeting.
So yeah.
And I hear you guys loud and clear and you know, because we only talked about it this morning as this being the path.
Uh, we kind of short notice to try and pull together who wants to be on it. So we'll figure it out over the next couple days.
But I don't see any other hands up. So I'll call the question all those in favor.
Thank you. That's unanimous.
And so with that, I think we move on to item 6.4, which is contract award for RFP.
To 511702 mobile device services.
This is starting on page 34 of our amended agenda.
And, uh, manage your nails. Was there anything you wanted to introduce on this report?
Thank you chair.
Uh, yeah, this report request board direction and options to award a three year mobile device services contract.
Yes, sir, D has received two compliance.
From Rogers and tell us that met requirements in response to the RFP that was closed in December with tell us receiving the highest overall value score.
Thank you chair.
Great.
Thank you very much.
Directors any questions.
Discussion recommendations.
Director Bax.
This curiosity question. How many mobile devices are we talking about here?
Just just for curiosity sick.
I thought I had read it, but my apologies.
It's a little bit.
So manager Nelson.
Yes, thank you for the question.
We currently have 226 mobile devices.
But in conjunction with creating a mobile device allocations policy, we were able to identify 54 of those devices, which wouldn't meet the criteria.
If the new contract, so we'd be getting it down to about 172.
Thank you.
Um, yeah.
So directors any director.
I just want to move the recommendations on page 31.
Thank you.
And I've got a seconder for that.
So 34 of the amended agenda package.
Uh, that's okay.
I appreciate you have that copy open so that when somebody else has that copy open they know what page it's on.
I don't see any other hands up.
So I'll call the question.
All those in favor.
Thank you.
Anybody opposed.
Emotions carried.
Thank you.
Manager Nelson.
Next up.
We have item 6.5, which is the Pender Harbor Living Heritage Society.
Portable on Sarah Ray Hall Land.
Uh, this is starting on page 36 of the amended package.
And turn this over to staff to, uh, sorry.
I'm sorry, manager Huntington and I'm getting caught up myself.
Was there anything you wanted to speak to with this report?
Uh, thank you chair.
Uh, the purpose of the report for you is to provide update to the board regarding the Pender Harbor Living Heritage Society's request to place a portable building on the Sarah.
Sarah Ray Hall property.
Uh, staff have received correspondence from the society advising that they will not be proceeding with the relocation of the building.
Um, and given this change staff are recommending that the outstanding board directive be resented.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I'm going to like to the area director.
Go ahead.
Uh, thank you chair.
I'd like to make a motion that we accept the recommendations as stated on page 36.
Thank you.
We've got a second or four that any discussion.
All those in favor.
Thank you any opposed.
That motion's carried.
Thank you manager Huntington.
And next up we have item seven point one, which is a letter from Liz Kelly Eggmont Community Club.
Regarding a request for letter support for phase two project property revitalization.
Uh, director Lee will look to you because it's your area.
Uh, yes, thank you chair.
I'd like to make a motion that the SCRD board provide a letter and support with respect to the Eggmont Community Club's phase two waterfront park and play project.
Thank you.
I've got a second or four that.
Any discussion.
All those in favor.
Thank you.
That's carried.
All right.
We've already dealt with item eight.
So now we move on to bylaws.
Everybody's favorite.
And uh, first up is item nine point one.
SCRD municipal ticket information system amendment bylaw five five eight point fourteen twenty twenty six.
Starting on page forty six corporate officer.
Did you have anything you want to introduce.
Thank you chair.
I'll just point out that item nine point one and nine point two.
Are both ticketing bylaws coming forward in order to align our ticketing offenses and fines with.
The newly adopted building bylaw number seven seven nine and the water rates and regulations bylaw seven seven eight.
Thank you.
And I can do three readings at a time on this one right for second and third.
Correct.
Thank you.
If there's no opposition to doing first second and third readings at once.
Um, can I have a motion for first second and third reading of sunshine coast regional district municipal ticket information system amendment bylaw number five five eight point fourteen twenty twenty six.
So moved by director angster.
Seconded by director McMahon.
Is there any discussion or debate on this motion.
If not, I will call the question all those in favor.
Thank you.
That's carried.
Now can I have a motion.
I should say this is voting all directors one vote each.
Uh, now can I have a motion for sunshine coast regional district municipal ticket information system amendment bylaw number five five eight point fourteen twenty twenty six for adoption.
Moving seconded.
Any final comments or any comments at all.
I will call the question then all those in favor.
Thank you.
That is carried.
And so now we will move on to item nine point two which is sunshine coast regional district bylaw notice enforcement amendment bylaw number six three eight point fifteen twenty twenty twenty six.
Can I have a motion for first second and third reading director angster.
Seconded.
Thank you.
Is there any discussion on this particular motion.
If not, this is all directors one vote each.
All those in favor.
Thank you.
That is carried.
Now may I have a motion to adopt sunshine coast regional district bylaw notice enforcement amendment bylaw number six three eight point fifteen twenty twenty six.
Director Gabbius.
Director McMahon.
Thank you very much.
Any final comments.
Favorite.
Thank you anybody opposed that motion is carried.
All right.
Thank you very much.
And so moving on to item nine point three.
Which is the sunshine coast regional district twenty twenty twenty six to twenty thirty financial plan bylaw number seventy twenty twenty twenty six.
CAO.
Did you want to.
Speak to this or introduce in any way.
No then then here it is.
Okay.
Now directors again we can do three readings of this one at the same time as well.
Perfect.
Do I have any opposition to doing for second and third reading at one go.
No.
Can I have a motion to give first second and third reading to sunshine coast regional district twenty twenty six to twenty thirty financial plan bylaw number seventy twenty twenty twenty six.
Director.
I see your hand thank you.
Director Lee seconding.
Any discussion.
Director McMahon.
Yeah.
I am.
The our budget processes extremely.
Complicated and very challenging and.
When I saw the bottom line I wasn't altogether happy and I thought about voting against budget.
I'm very seriously.
I'm not going to do that because I don't think there's anything to be gained by doing so at this point but I am going to remind the board that.
We did a survey of the public in October and November last year about priorities financial priorities and the public came back with their five priorities.
We're drinking water fire protection solid waste emergency management and parks not completely in that order every time but that was it the five.
And when I look at where we're spending our money number one is drinking water yay.
Number two is recreation facilities which isn't even on the top five.
And.
And that that our top five and and I realize is very supporting to what services you're in blah blah blah.
But our top five really are drinking water recreation facilities transit solid waste and fire protection.
So.
I just I feel like sometimes are.
Our actual on the ground spending is not necessarily aligned with either our strategic priorities or.
The public priorities however that's that's a long term.
Challenge that we're going to have to deal with over the course of time.
Thank you director McMahon and and it's interesting because like transit.
I wonder if we're I create how much recreation even comes to people's mind until it's not there for some reason.
Close the pool for a couple days or you know don't run the bus for a day and suddenly it's everybody's number one priority even over you know water and solid waste.
So you know that's my own perspectives.
You know we did discuss this at my council we discussed this is part of the intergovernmental.
I've been hearing pretty loudly.
Social leaders are here earlier today. Recreations important to people. Could they go play fickleball in a parking lot? Sure. But that's, you know, another example of services where people are looking for more than just the bare minimum rate. Director Stanford, I saw your hand.
Why is words that's exactly what I was going to say? Thank you. Any other discussion on this? If not, I will call the question. This is all directors as a weighted vote. All those in favor. Any opposed? Director White opposed? That motion is carried. And can I have a motion to adopt sunshine coast regional district 2026 to 2030 financial plan by a lot number 721-2026?
Moved and seconded. Any final comments? Discussion? I will call the question then all those in favor. And those opposed? Director White opposed? That motion is carried. All right. Thank you. So we've struck directors reports. We have no new business. Any more new business. But we do have an in-camera section. So I look for a motion that the public be excluded from attendance at the meeting in accordance with section 90.
To be triple-eye of the community charter. Moved, seconded, all those in favor. Thank you. That's carried. Any questions from online?
Chair, I do see the coastal border online. Okay. Any questions, Connie? Otherwise, I know we're going to be talking later. Okay. Go ahead.
You should be able to unmute yourself. Thank you, Chair. And through you.
Hi, Connie. We can hear you. Thank you, Chair. And through you to Director White. Is there a reason for the vote against the budget?
I mean, speak on behalf of the border. Do you do those? Well, it was a question to you. A lot of lots of reasons have been over the budget process.
I don't need to repeat them all today. It would take too long, probably, but there were there were a number of votes that we had both me and our alternate director to against portions of the budget.
Those, I think, I think the reporter was probably present for those or see those. So those would be the reasons.
Thank you for that. Thank you, Connie. All right. So we're going to take a couple of minutes while we're going to go in camera and we're just going to take a couple minutes to reset the room.
Thank you.
You