Hello everybody. Um, we are now on to item
uh, four, uh, two. The actual, uh, youth council,
um, item will be deferred to a future, uh,
to future meeting. Uh, so we're going to move on to the
Squamish Community Forest Corporation. Um, and the, um,
this one is very, uh, is very, uh, simple in in in my mind. Uh, so I'll
try to explain it to, uh, Council. Be the judge of if it's as
simple as it, um, as it appears. So, uh, just to
briefly recap, Squamish Community Forest is is our first ever joint venture with
the Squamish Nation, uh, and is is governed, um, by a board of directors.
Um, the,
over time those, uh, appointments, um, uh,
have are made by the, um, the Squamish Nation as they, through their process
and as they see fit, have are made through this body. Uh, and currently
Councillor Greenlaw and I, uh, are the representatives to this
body. Um,
it's when I look at other,
um, other bodies that we
are responsible for appointing people to,
um, we solicit recommendations from that those bodies. Say, library board's a
great example. So, library board puts forward does the
looks at their their needs and uh, for board members solicits reviews
and puts forward recommendations to council
to to endorse. And, um, a couple things here. So, one, I would like
because this is a new, uh, entity, we haven't had that that
process. It has been exclusively council members.
The the
appointments from the nation side at this point are 100% not elected
officials. So, and I think that for we've
also for arms length purposes and so on, um,
we have three seats and it's my, uh, recommendation
that we, um, request,
uh, the community forest to, um, solicit, uh, applications for board
members that meet their needs and bring them forward as suggestions to as
recommendations to council when those appointments happen at the start of next
term, uh, leaving one seat for an elected official.
So, it's um, for me this is, uh, we're moving from a
sort of foundational time where those seats are exclusive have been
exclusively for, um, elected officials and getting the
foundational, um, systems up and running and, um,
and then it should really run with a maximum I
think of one elected official that is still appointed by
council. So, today I'd be looking for I'll turn into a motion, but just why
we're talking about this is that to do that
to be some policy development and then executing the recruitment and
consideration of what those recommendations would be to
bring forward to council for in time for swearing in, which is when
all the new appointments would would take place. So,
that's the the concept and
um there in the past have been big lag
times with new councils and appointments and
it really impacts the the operations. So, I want to make sure that we're sort
of setting this organization up as best we can to um
to move. So, that would be that's the essence recommendation. I'll I can turn
that into a motion, but I'd I'd um um
welcome any any questions on on this um
in advance of that. And there is a future touch point which we'll have in
September um that has some we've done a few
administrative things as this this body of like executing some legal documents
and and so on. There's uh an element of that
uh on the horizon as well, but I this one I wanted to make sure we had as much
room as possible if we were to give this direction to
uh that board. So, that's the CliffsNotes.
Um any
uh Can I answer any any any questions um on
this or yeah, Councillor Pennycook, we can get started.
» So, is this a request of the board or direction to our appointed members of
the board to bring forward something or or what is the specific
» So it would be um it would be I think it at this point it
would be that we write a It's a bit of an odd one as I'm the
chair of the board. So it's kind of six of one half dozen the other. The board
sees this as a way to um this could be a way to make sure that the we have the
appropriate skill sets around around the the table and that we get um
and is is one piece. I think that as a council uh the best the best practices
that is like a maximum of one and uh some would even argue that not have it
keeping elected officials away from these these things is the best is the
best course of action um as they are very community um based.
So I wanted to set um so it's it's it's either it's either or and um but I do
think that having um uh
getting down to that one elected official and having
two uh two others uh appointed to our that's
our three seats that we have on that uh is um
is appropriate. So that's what we're trying to get that's what I'm trying to
get at. >> Sorry for my lack of uh are we then
changing our District of Squamish appointment policy
or we asking or directing the Community Forest Board to do
something? >> We're asking the Community Forest Board
to to uh bring forward recommendations for council consideration. So our legal
the founding documents of all this say that the members are appointed by
council but doesn't speak to who those members are. So we in any of our other
groups where we have seats we don't recruit like the housing society for
instance. We appoint one member but the housing society does the rest. The the
the board similarly we appoint one member uh or we appoint one elected
official, but we actually appoint the board in that case. These things go
together in different in different ways. And I've never seen None of these do we
we as a council go to community and solicit applications for and so on.
That's usually done to the by the external and other They look
after the appointments. In this case, they'd be making a recommendation more
like the library board for council consideration. A council could take it
or leave it at that point. That's going to be a decision for the next council,
but Yeah, go ahead.
» Um
So, the board is made up of You said half Squamish Nation, half District of
Squamish. And now
you're proposing that the board put forward recommendations
for the District of Squamish component. So, the Squamish Nation
is also making recommendations on the District of Squamish
components of the board.
» Yes. Now,
the reason I thought I'd start with the uh the
short version of the answer. I'll go back a bit further.
Um I think that um because this is the first um
joint uh um
first partnership between the two organizations, uh the nation has um
their own uh
process for these for these appointments, and I see them
I see these two processes um uh
needing to sort of would benefit from alignment over time.
Um but right now we have we don't really have a process for the appointments,
particularly external appointments to people that aren't council members to to
this body. So, I think having the the body come up with a recruitment
policy and figure out their needs and and um put forward recommendations to to
council. The decision still lies with with council, but it's regardless of
who's appointed
then uh to the regardless of who the board is,
um it's it's the board has um some additional uh capacity and knows
their needs and uh and and so on. Um so, that's that's sort of the the
thought process there, but there is that piece where yes, folks um appointed by
the Squamish Nation can uh have input into the the
the future appoint- appointees.
Potentially. I don't know if that's a I think that's a neutral thing at this
point, but you can have a positive or negative to that.
» What's the fundamental purpose for having District of Squamish and Squamish
Nation have appointees? Like individual appointees on the
committee. So, I'm I I can imagine a
a balancing of perspectives. Um
and are we losing like the nation doesn't have a responsibility
to find people who will represent the District of Squamish and the District of
Squamish interests. So,
how do those interests get community like
» Yeah, I know. It's a it's an interesting um
it it's an interesting piece and I think
that as we go through um sort of an evolution of all of our
processes, there'll the lessons learned. I think that the safe when it comes
right down to it both partners have the ability to
appoint equal members, three and three.
Um who they are is up to the individ- individuals. We're just at the ask would
be that um they would put forward some some recommendations for council to to
take her or leave and that board does have
some capacity to do that work that I don't see council
doing in other cases and so it feels appropriate to me that they would do
that. Now, perhaps over time, like I said, their
their process can align these two processes can align, but right now they
have an internal process that they do. I don't know, I can't speak to that.
Um and then we don't really have a process
except for council appointments that happen
you know, annual- annually and it's time to have
members of the community contribute to that to that board and to have um
right now we're running with two appointments from the
from us as myself and counselor counselor Greenlaw and
um so one less elected official and two members from community
if is what I think would be would be best and I think the best
mechanism to do that is to ask the community forest board to bring forth
some recommendations. I understand the duplication sort of
piece with the nation appoint- uh appointees, but um
it's not a it's very much a
the board is rule- is um governed by um uh um consensus and it's been a very
collaborative consensus space. It's not a really a versus um
piece that way. So, but I That's why I I feel some comfort in in
that. >> Right. I and I'm not in any way implying
that it is a a conflict or I'm imagining a process
our policies and our processes should protect everybody in the event
that individuals do get into those positions who do want to take advantage.
And so, uh if that does occur, I want to make
like the the construction of
half nation and half Squamish that must have been intentional.
Um and so, I'm I'm concerned that
handing over recommendations to the board itself
unless that's done equally
with the nation and the district that we're creating an asymmetry where
an asymmetry doesn't need to exist. >> I think we're on the path to
alignment, but I'll recognize asymmetry um at the at this point. Um
so, I I tend to to
agree those seats are always the language is appointed by.
So, I could see a scenario where a qualified
candidate is a Squamish Nation member, but is also
votes in our local elections, a member of our community, may very well be the
best candidate for one of the seats appointed by the District of Squamish.
So, um I
I get that it's that it's uh unprecedented, but we're sort of
leading in this in this area, and I think we're going to find some spaces
that are just have a little bit of um uh take a bit of um
to wrap our mind our our collective minds around as we as we do that, but
the um ultimately the control there is that
council will have the makes the appointment. So, we're not
handing over any any control. We're asking really for anything for asking
for anything, it's a it's some capacity help to
to do recruitment that will meet the needs of the of the board and bring
forward some some recommendations um
to uh to council.
» Councilor Bingle. >> So, if I can summarize or maybe just
restate to make sure I understand, the proposal is that going forward,
if all this is supported, um
that Squamish Nation would retain three appointments, District of Squamish would
retain three appointments. The District of Squamish at this point
is asking the the uh Community Forest Board to provide
recommendations for our three appointments. We may or may not agree to
those and may appoint someone else or not, but we've just asked for that
assistance. The Squamish Nation may choose sooner or later to follow a
similar process. Um, so the only change here, the only new thing
is is um we are asking for the board to give council
some recommendations again, which we are not compelled to
follow through on. And then, I think part of what you said is our practice
has been to appoint two councilors sort of almost separate from this. We may
decide to not appoint two councilors, but again, our appointments that that's
at our discretion as a council. >> Yeah, I generally agree with that. I
think that um uh
Yeah, I I think that the how the board interacts with
the processes of both of its partners being the the district and the nation.
Um you know, will be a little bit different
to meet the requirements of each of each group. And if we take this step, um
perhaps there can be a more you know, that to me this is a the first
step into like that alignment. Maybe it's not the same process. Maybe for
very good reasons there's another process of like, "Hey,
identify your needs and we'll find you some folks." So, maybe that's the way
the board can interact with the nation process.
Um but um I think this is a is an important um
important step and also um uh
most most uh community forests have uh one or less elected officials and are
built under the same structure that we're on on the board.
So, that's that's um but that piece in and of
itself, I think is a is um that's a bigger a bigger
discussion if we want if I I'm not recommending that we step away from
having elected official on the board. That'll be a discussion for as this uh
entity has some more um uh
more more more time to to mature and uh and it and evolve.
But I think that um I know that we don't have the capa- I I
haven't seen the capacity nor do I expect the capacity to emerge between
here and uh the need to appoint some more board members
uh to recruit them um uh effectively to meet the the board's
the board's needs or the this entity's needs through the board.
I'm going to go to Councillor Greenlaw.
» Yeah, I just wanted to make a comment. Like my understanding of this is um
this is to bring the district more into alignment with what the Squamish Nation
is currently practicing, but also anybody who comes to the board has to be
approved by the board. So, it's not
» By council. By council.
» Anybody who comes to Yeah. Yeah.
» Yeah. So, my motion would be that the
that council authorize the mayor to write a letter to the community forest
inviting them to bring forward two recommendations for
board seats for appointment
in Q4.
Second by Council by Council French. Do you have Do you have a question?
» Well, possibly a friendly amendment would we say at least two or is it two?
» Two.
Two. So, I think I've spoken on this uh uh enough but I do think this is an
important step. Um um forward and with with good governance
uh of of the um of the community forest and working
in a good way with um with the Squamish Nation. I think this
is um a step towards having this entity really
stand on its own properly on its own on its own two feet and um I know we have a
lot of expertise in the community that we would benefit from uh harnessing uh
to ensure the success of this important endeavor with our friends at the
Squamish Nation. Um Council French.
» Sorry, I I I just want to make sure I really understand this two number. I
understand that we are thinking a point one elected going forward and
two as recommended, but we do not or we would not want to have a a sort of four
people recommended as all acceptable and we will pick only we will only pick two,
but like or do we say no, you shall not give us more than two recommendations
and we are going to pick only those two that you
» Um, in other cases, um
uh, you know, we've seen more than just the
rec- the two that are recommended. Um, and this is a new process, so we'll have
to we'll have to see, but I the number
available is the total number available is three seats and uh, I'd like to see
two recommendations and the other one stays open for
whoever the council of the day sees fit to to
to appoint as elected official. And I also want to recognize that
the next council might not accept these recommendations from the community
forest, in which case they can those are we're not
committing the council to any particular path, but I think they'd be ill-advised
to not, um consider these recommendations that
should come from this process.
Any other comments? Um seeing none, I'll call the question.
All in favor? Any opposed?
Was that a Was that a favor hand or a comment hand, Counselor Greenlaw?
» Favor hand. Favor hand. >> Nice. Well done. Um
motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Um, and just as a a foreshadow, there'll
be some um uh, in early September, there'll be um
uh, another item on the on the Genoa and
Folsom um, sort of update from the community forest on operations uh, so
far and um, hopefully strategic plan will be ready
to share at that point and and so on. Um, so work is underway.
That's Thank you for um, for this. Um Counselor Hamilton, can I
help you? >> Motion to terminate this meeting.
» I'm going to second that, and but we're all going to get two points because it's
been an epic. So, uh, all in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank Thank
much, everybody.
» It's a new record. 4 and 1/2 hours over.
» Don't tempt me. And if you think of it as a multiplier,
I hope that's the