Hello and welcome to the regular
business meeting for the District of
Squamish for Tuesday, March 17th.
Holland squalan Squamish. As always,
we're gathered to do our work today on
the traditional unseated territory of
the Squamish nation. Please be advised
this council meeting is being
livereamed, recorded, and will be
available to the public to view on the
District of Squamish website following
the meeting. If you have concerns,
please notify the corporate officer
present at the meeting. In this case,
that would be Miss Vlon Budau. Um, could
I have someone move adoption of the
agenda, please? Moved by councelor
French, second by councelor Stoner. All
in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries.
Thank you. So, our first order of
business uh is item 31. uh the BC
Epilepsy Society. Um
and I believe we have we'll be receiving
our presentation. Roly. Oh, there you
are. Hello. Thank you for joining us.
>> Hello.
» Hello.
Good evening, council. I am with the I'm
the administrative coordinator with the
BC Epilepsy Society. Unfortunately, our
executive director, Dietra, was unable
to speak today with illness. So, I'm
still grateful for the opportunity to be
here to rep represent our organization.
Um, and I just like to thank you guys
again for the opportunity to speak and
for the support of epilepsy awareness in
our community. We truly appreciate the
leadership and the com commitment to
help build a more informed and
supportive um community in Squamish.
Epilepsy is one of the most common
neurological conditions affecting
approximately one in a 100 people. This
means that here in Squamish, many
individuals and family are living with
epilepsy and contribute contributing to
the strength and diversity of this
community every day. with greater
awareness and understanding. Um we're
hoping we can create um an environment
where people living with epilepsy feel
supported and empowered and simple
actions like learning about epilepsy and
recognizing the uh epilepsy awareness
day on March 26th will help encourage
more open conversations making a
meaningful and lasting impact. Your
support helps us to build that community
where people feel confident and safe.
We're grateful for the partnership and
the role to help us bring awareness.
Thank you again for your time and
support. If anyone has any questions,
please let me know.
>> Thank you very much for the
» Thank you very much for the
presentation. Council, do we have any
questions for our guests? We also have
the proclamation request as it appears
in the agenda. Um, if we're ready for if
there's no questions, I'd entertain a
motion.
Are you moving uh the recommendation?
Councelor Pettingill. A second by
Councelor French. Would you like to
speak to it, Council Pettingill?
>> Um, just to say uh thank you for coming
» Um, just to say uh thank you for coming
and presenting uh and reminding us about
this. I think it's always good to keep
um these things top of mind and uh it's
a a simple and small gesture we can do
to help with that. Thank you.
Thank you. Any other comments on this?
Um, happy to support this um this uh
proclamation. I I do think it's as
councilor Pending said, it's really
important that we uh even through a
small gesture like this um uh
ensure that these these types of things
uh and particularly EP epilepsy here
receives the recognition um that it that
it deserves. there are people living in
our community and uh with that uh that
have epilepsy and we may not unless we
exp are nearby and we experience then
they experience an an episode it's it's
unlikely that we would necessarily be
aware of that. So this is an opportunity
for us to um uh to show our our support.
I'm happy to do so. So thank you very
much and with that I'll call the
question. All in favor? Motion carries
unanimously. Thank you so much. Enjoy
the rest of your evening.
>> Thank you for your time.
» Thank you for your time.
Thank you. So, next we have the uh
unscheduled public attendance. This is
if anyone has a matter they'd like to uh
have considered by council prior to our
next meeting. Uh this would be
opportunity to
put that forward.
No takers this evening. So, we'll move
on. Um we do not have any um public
hearings, so we're on to the consent
agenda. Would anyone like to pull
anything that is in the consent agenda
or move the consent agenda is the
alternative? Councelor Stoner,
>> I'm going to pull items D1 and two,
» I'm going to pull items D1 and two,
please.
>> Okay. Um, so we'll deal with those at
» Okay. Um, so we'll deal with those at
the appropriate time. Um, is there
anyone that would like to remove the
remainder of the consent agenda? There's
not much left for those that aren't
reading the moving council French second
by councelor Hamilton. All in favor?
Motion carries. And we'll deal with
those at the appropriate time later in
the uh in our agenda. Uh so now we have
uh consideration of first, second, and
third reading for the District of
Squamish in indemnification bylaw number
3224 2026. And we have our corporate
officer or director of corporate
administration uh to present to us.
Okay. Um, happy to take a quick timeout
if or a medium length time out if that's
what's needed. It's coming. Okay.
So just to buy some time without taking
a timeout, I'm going to propose we move
forward to we have a couple adoptions on
the on the agenda. Uh so that's 7B1 and
two. Um and as is our common practice,
we don't have presentation on these.
These are just these are ready to be
adopted. All the uh tees have been
crossed and eyes have been dotted. So um
could I So the first one is District of
Squamish zoning bylaw number 22 or 2200
2011 amendment bylaw and this is uh
regarding local and liquor primary
commercial. Moved by councelor French
second by councelor Hamilton. All in
favor? Motion carries. Thank you. And
the the next is District of Commerce
zoning bylaw number 2200 2011 amendment
bylaw regarding indoor recreation.
Moved by councelor Ster. Second by
councelor Hamilton. All in favor. Any
opposed? Motion carries.
I hope that we may have bought at least
some time. We'll come back to There we
go. Look at that.
The floor is yours when you're ready.
Uh good evening council. My name is
Melissa Bambbleo. I'm the director of
corporate administration. Uh today I am
presenting on District of Squamish
indemnification bylaw number 3224
2026.
Uh there were changes made to the bylaw
this morning, including the correction
of two typos, including a reference to
the a specific section in the local
government act and replacing guilty with
uh convicted in section 5.1G of the
bylaw to more to align more closely with
the local government act language. Uh
the bylaw has been replaced online and
is and the current copy is in blue in
front of council this evening.
Uh the bylaw in front of council this
evening uh if it is adopted at a future
meeting will repeal the current
indemnification bylaw which was adopted
in 1998
uh
and be replaced with the bylaw before
council right now. Uh the purpose of an
indemn in of an indemnification bylaw is
to establish parameters for when the
district will pay for and defend
municipal officials, which is defined in
the bylaw, from legal claims that may
arise out of the performance of their
duties or functions on behalf of the
district. This could include paying for
legal defense costs, settlements, or
judgments, or certain penalties related
to official duties. It does not allow
for the district to pay for a fine that
results from a conviction where the
official was it at fault or had intent
and examples of this may be fraud or
knowing knowingly violating legislation.
The bylaw will establish clear
expectations as to when the district
must be notified that a legal matter has
arisen which can be found in section 4.2
of the bylaw.
Uh the bylaw also sets limits on when
municipal officials will not be
indemnified under section five of the
bylaw which include if there is a
conviction where there is a finding of
negligence or willful misconduct.
Uh next section is legislative
alignment. The content of the bylaw has
been drafted to align with language in
the local government act, specifically
sections 738 and 740.
This includes the definition of
indemnity. The definition of municipal
official, limits on indemnification for
the following. When a finding has been
made related to dishonesty, gross
negligence, malicious or willful
misconduct has been made against a
municipal official. And this is section
5.1A.
Uh and and limits on on indemnification
when a municipal official has been
convicted of an offense that is not a
strict or absolute liability offense.
This is section 5.1G in the bylaw and in
the definition of indemnity.
There's also alignment with the
community charter including in the
limits of indemnification section
including breach of confidentiality
under section 117 and this is section
5.1E of the bylaw and disqualification
from holding office under section 111
section 1.5F of the bylaw.
And that includes my presentation this
evening. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much for the
» Thank you very much for the
presentation. Council questions
on this.
>> Go ahead, Councelor Penning.
» Go ahead, Councelor Penning.
>> So, how does this work with insurance
» So, how does this work with insurance
companies who would I believe typically
be the ultimate payers? Were there a a
judgment against someone who is
I I presume covered by this? uh like
does the fact that we have this bylaw
then obligate the insurance companies to
provide that to anyone in our an
organization they're insuring or is it
still ultimately up to an insurance
company
how things proceed or what happens or
can you speak to that a bit
>> uh through the mayor u the so the
» uh through the mayor u the so the
district's municipal insurance company
is the municipal insurance association
of BC and they handle very specific
claims for us. And when a claim is
passed to MIABC,
they handle every aspect of that claim.
So, prior to accepting a claim, they
make a determination whether it fits
within the scope of our municipal
coverage.
If a situation was to arise where there
may be a conflict with our bylaw, I'm
sure they would be flagging that in
advance of accepting the um accepting
the claim or uh representing the
district. Uh but I have not seen a
specific example like the one you've
referenced.
» Thank you. You have a followup. Yeah,
just sort of big picture wine because I
I had been I had the impression that as
elected officials we in particular had
very little protection against even our
own mistakes. Um uh this implies there's
something more. Uh, am I correct though
in thinking that um this doesn't really
I I guess maybe can you just speak a
little more to sort of where there is
some protection available if if some
like it's clear if you do something
willfully wrong you're not protected but
if you're sort of doing things with the
best intent best of intentions on what
are the still the limitations in this
» uh through the mayor, I actually brought
a couple of examples that I can speak to
and hopefully that will help frame it a
little bit because it to be honest, the
language in the legislation isn't always
clear and it is confusing and I had to
do a fair bit of research to wrap my
head around this. So, uh if you'll be
patient with me, I'll find a few
examples here and read them out.
Uh the first example is a municipal
official is convicted of knowingly
falsifying records. So in this situation
uh this is a is uh the municipality
cannot pay the fine. So if they were
convicted and there was a fine issued
the municipality could not pay the fine.
However,
it could the council does or council and
the district does have discretion to pay
some of the legal fees that may be
associated in the determination of
whether there was a conviction.
Does that makes some clarity? Okay, I'll
go into the next one. Uh, a counselor is
fined under an environmental statute for
an inadvertent regulatory breach despite
acting responsibly. So, there's another
fine issued in this case. Uh, there was
uh there wasn't intent, so the
municipality may pay the fine.
Does that provide some clarity? Is it
more confusing?
>> Like any good example, it may have
» Like any good example, it may have
triggered a few questions. So we'll I'll
go back to councelor Pettingill.
>> Yeah, that one is a little confusing in
» Yeah, that one is a little confusing in
that we have no individual ability to do
an environmental action or whatever
direct one. So the the word a counselor
like is implicit and this is actually
the council and their majority vote and
and it's the the group that's protected
or is there some case where an
individual is is somehow
which seems like an impossible
situation? You could replace counselor
with municipal official as defined by
the bylaw,
>> but you're right. No individual
» but you're right. No individual
counselor has a specific authority to
take an individual action. So that would
likely be the counselors in that would
likely be a multiple. I share your
assessment with that. Um
I was curious I thank you for the
examples. Those were help. Yeah. Well, I
know I know it's a it's it is a
challenging
topic. I think it's just got a lot of
new a lot of whatifs is to it. But I was
wondering you sorry in your presentation
it spoke to how it relates to community
charter and and legislation broadly. Um
how does where does the code of conduct
sit in this? Like I understand there's
these, you know, if there's a fine paid
or a guilty or someone, you know, in
other jurisdictions, but was there a
lens to do we rely on those
uh mechanisms for this or does the code
of conduct bump into it feels like we're
starting to that there's some overlap
potentially? How are we thinking about
that or or can you add some can you
orient me on that?
>> That's a good question. Um the
» That's a good question. Um the
indemnification bylaw is specifically if
there's a legal claim against the
district. So it's moved past the point
where
uh council in the district is dealing
with um a breach of
conduct in house and it's moved into the
legal fear sphere. So it there is a
fairly clear line between them I would
say.
>> Okay. Thank you. That's helpful.
» Okay. Thank you. That's helpful.
Um, councelor Hamilton. Yeah, go ahead.
>> Yeah, thanks very much. It's interesting
» Yeah, thanks very much. It's interesting
that the the this bylaw has an
interesting combination of council that
the municipal officer includes council
and employees of the municipality.
Um and in terms of municipal employees,
uh I can certainly I see the logic uh
for in part three
um
the determination of payment of the
indemnification amounts
um is determined by the chief
administrative officer, the CIO um and
the CIO being the head of the district.
That makes sense in terms of the
municipal officers. Does that make sense
as well in terms of council?
Does that is there um
are there other instances where the CAO
has determination
over council? When I think of the code
of conduct bylaw, for example, council
regulates, council's
um within that bylaw, council makes
decisions. So I guess the question is
within other indemnification
bylaws,
is it common practice to have the CEO uh
be a deciding uh uh determinated
determinating body on damages, awards,
fines, penalties, and what reasonable
costs will be paid um for council.
Many of the other bylaws that we looked
at when we were doing the research for
this left that more open-ended. It ended
at as uh out of pockets out of pocket
costs and uh
some included
the word reasonable. However, there we
didn't find any that specified a
specific individual that would determine
that. I will say though that we do have
in the code of conduct bylaw, the CEO is
the person that makes determinations
about um legal fees. If council needs to
uh seek legal advice, it needs to go
through the CEO. So, we do have a little
bit of a precedent there for that.
Okay.
So what role
um
what role does council play if any in
determining
whether council
pursues or
um determines the level of
indemnification
that another counselor will be
um awarded and awarded isn't the right
word here, but what determining that
reasonable level of cost because at some
point in time somebody might get into a
legal dispute and
more and more money might need to go
down that road.
Does council play any role in that or
does that sit purely with the CEO?
uh can if there is a legal claim that
fits the parameters of the bylaw if it
is adopted uh all the costs associated
with that in within reason would be
covered because of the indemnification
bylaw. So there isn't a
threshold for when a legal claim needs
to come to council for approval. I will
say that if a legal claim doesn't fit
the parameters of this bylaw,
council has the discretion through the
local government act to um direct direct
that the legal claim is indemnified
through council resolution.
» Okay. Thanks. I didn't realize that
overarching piece of the local
government act. That's good to know. And
yeah, the my my question my my point
here is that discussion of what's
reasonable and the determination of what
is reasonable when the C when a CEO and
this is not about our CEO. This is about
power dynamics that get set up within
councils and between the CEO because the
CEO can be um
either um they can be put in a position
where
they are undermined by their council and
a CIO can undermine their council. That
power dynamic can happen. Um, and I'm
reflecting here on whether this can
contribute to that power dynamic in a
potential sticky sticky situation. Um,
but I don't think I have a better
solution. Um, and with the coverage of
the local government act that the
council can step in and indemnify, I'm
comfortable with the CIO being in this
role here.
>> Would you like to comment on that, Miss
» Would you like to comment on that, Miss
Gundy or?
>> Sure. Yeah. And just before we do that,
» Sure. Yeah. And just before we do that,
we'll take a there's been a an ask for a
quick timeout. I just um in that section
where it does say reasonable. I I've
always ch I know the language is there
to provide some flexibility and I just
but for
all the for all the reasons I I just
wondered about the use of reasonable
because it doesn't imply that everyone
involved in it is is that. So, I'm just
curious on if that's the best the best
um language for that. Although, I
understand why you'd want to put some
reasonable limits on it. It's just hard
to see it framed that way. So, um I'll
wait for a reply till after after this,
but maybe I'll just flush council, see
if there's any other questions just to
make sure that we're um we don't require
another timeout on this matter. Go
ahead, councelor Penning. Yeah, just
sort of thinking of um I guess my
understanding of conflict of interest is
it's on us individually to decide and
declare if we have a conflict. If we're
unsure, it's on us to individually seek
and and pay for legal counsel to get
that advice if we feel we're we're
unsure. Um, and whether we do or not,
uh, if we proceed in good faith and
believing we're doing the right thing,
but then it turns out we were actually
offside. I had previously understood, we
would bear all the consequences
individually of that. When I see this,
this makes it seems like, you know, you
could sort of, well, I'm doing the best
I can. I don't have money to to have a
lawyer, and I'll be indemnified at the
end of the day if it doesn't work out. I
don't think that's what this is trying
to say, but that's what it seems to say.
I'm just I'm looking for a way to
understand why that case would be
excluded from indemnification if you
were acting in the best, you know, with
the best of intents, but it went south.
Why would this like I don't in the
exclusions, it's not clear or the limits
why that would not be covered.
Sorry, I I I'm not following the
question. Could you provide the specific
section or
>> Well, I guess sort of say, you know,
» Well, I guess sort of say, you know,
there's an issue comes up. I decided to
vote on it or do whatever. I I thought I
didn't have a conflict of interest, so I
was proceeding what I thought was
correctly. Turns out at the end of the
day, uh someone some court or whatever
body decides I was wrong. there's some
liability coming to me. I had thought I
was stuck with that liability before
today. Um reading hearing the discussion
like when I look at the the limits this
seems to say I would be covered. I would
be indemnified in that case but I don't
think that's what this is saying. So I'm
trying to understand why is that case
>> Could you point to the side of this
» Could you point to the side of this
>> sorry could you just point to the
» sorry could you just point to the
section that you've is that just sort of
a general takeaway or is there a
specific section
>> the limits on indemnification there's
» the limits on indemnification there's
nothing that says a counselor uh found
offside on conflict of interest is not
indemn or does not qualify for
indemnification there's nothing along
that sense so I'm trying to understand
um why again it's my understanding
this case would not be covered by this,
but I don't.
>> Okay. So, we have a question around
» Okay. So, we have a question around
conflict of interest. We can put this in
the after timeout. I don't know if that
or do you have a reply for the for how
that fits or would you like to group
that with the timeout matters?
>> Group that with the timeout matters and
» Group that with the timeout matters and
I'll have a crafted answer.
>> Okay. No, that's fine. And then I've got
» Okay. No, that's fine. And then I've got
Councelor Stoner and then I'd like then
we'll we'll go to the staff timeout.
We'll come back for another pass at
this. Councelor Stoner, go ahead. Yeah,
thanks to the chair. I think just I
wanted to add some reflections on the
word reasonable which I appreciate is
not defined um and is really difficult
to define especially in this context. I
think um from a process in a procedure
perspective I think reasonable is often
defined when you go out and seek
um like quotes for a legal cost for
example. And so I think adding some
discretion there by using the word
reasonable I think is fine. I think in
our procurement processes, we have ways
to guard rail against what is
reasonable. Um, and I just think it like
taking out that word makes this bylaw
really challenging to me and trying to
define it, I think, is near impossible.
So, I think there's other components of
our process in our system that help
guardrail the definition of reasonable.
>> Thank you for that. Um, and the last one
» Thank you for that. Um, and the last one
of the other pieces that I have is just
I I I do want to ask a question around
the uh in section 5.2F to F is it says
the provisions of this bylaw shall not
apply to a motion of center by the
district of Squamish Council. So I'm
just curious on how that interplays here
and to I was expecting that as part of
the answer from the code of conduct
piece maybe. So I you know because uh
censure is something that could flow
from the code of conduct. So that's sort
of where I was one of the things I was
trying to get at with that question but
I'll leave that till after the time the
timeout. Anything else before we go?
Councelor Hamilton, go ahead.
>> Maybe just confirming. So I read through
» Maybe just confirming. So I read through
the LGA and I think uh Miss Vonlutoo,
the section you were referring to was
section uh 742
A2,
the municipal officials ability. If you
could just confirm that on the timeout
and then we'll be on the same page.
>> That's 5.3 in the uh B.
We're going to grant the timeout and
then we will uh we'll address that
because there's an easy answer for that
one. So, um I feel like five minutes is
the minimum for for for this. Would you
like 10?
10. Let's take 10. We'll take a
10-minute break and we'll reconvene at
uh 6:42.
All right, welcome back. We're back from
a quick um timeout for staff. So, I will
go to to to CEO Glendy.
>> Thank you. through the mayor. Uh I will
» Thank you. through the mayor. Uh I will
answer the question about the CEO um
being
uh the determiner of the reasonable
costs in section 3. Uh it's a great
question. Um
the purpose of that is financial
control. And so the suggestion is to
prevent it being a one-on-one with CEO
and council is to include uh or amend
this bylaw first three readings of the
amendment to include with and CFO and
chief financial officer and then that
way there's the a financial control with
a second signature or the second person
vetting the costs that then get approved
by MIBC or not. So that is a solution
for that and that's the answer for that
one and I will do the chair pass it back
to Miss Vonto for the other answers.
>> Okay. So just um on that one does anyone
» Okay. So just um on that one does anyone
have questions about that response and
thank you for the for a suggestion that
addresses the concern. I'll just go to
councelor Hamilton. I think it was your
question that sort of took us down this
path.
>> Yeah thanks. Um
» Yeah thanks. Um
I think my concern was in in many ways
addressed by the
clearer understanding of section uh 5.3.
Uh but I do think that uh adding a
signature here or adding a a partner in
the determination uh I think makes the
whole bylaw stronger and makes our
policies and procedures stronger. Uh so
yeah, I would certainly u I'll make a
motion to add that if if needed.
>> Okay, we'll deal with that when we we
» Okay, we'll deal with that when we we
get there. Um thank you for that. Um
anyone else on this particular piece,
Councelor Penning? So does this imply
that as part of our budget uh that
somewhere there's a legal envelope there
going forward we might be a bit more
explicit of like this is the bucket we
have for the CFO and CIO to possibly
address these things for the coming year
and so council sort of uh approves an
envelope annually and and then sort of
within that envelope would apply this
bylaw
Oh yeah, whoever would like to speak to
uh I guess how we allocate legal into
our budgeting.
>> Uh
» Uh
corporate uh administration has a
general legal bucket that we uh set
aside annually to cover all legal costs
that are associated with the dis or most
of the legal claims that are associated
with the district. And at the moment
we've never had an issue with uh
overruns from that budget
» and any expenditure even under this
would need to be inside of the budgeted
amount just to state the
further that point. Um any other
questions on on this before we go back
for the answer on the second question
which I'm forgetting what it was at this
point. Oh go ahead councelor son. Uh,
can I just seek some clarity on the
proposed amendment and how that would
intersect with our general procurement
policies and so like there's a threshold
like I don't want to make this an overly
cumbersome process and we already
require multiple signatures on larger
expenses. So I'm just curious if this
just feels like a redundancy to an
existing parallel process that would be
highlighted or initiated anyways out of
this.
the current um I'm trying to think of
the bylaw is is it the delegation bylaw
that refers to spending authority
indicates that um all general managers
have a certain threshold which includes
the CFO after which the CEO has
discretion up to basically the budget.
Um, I think if we're talking about
like part of this is essentially what is
reasonable to be indemnified by MIAC or
indemnified by the district. Um, if
there's a concern about a power
discrepancy with the
one person agreeing to the amount, then
adding a second signature provides that
financial control and eliminates that
power discrepancy which with this
particular bylaw doesn't exist in a
process in our procurement policy.
>> Thank you for that context. Um I will go
» Thank you for that context. Um I will go
to staff now to answer on the second
question which I've forgotten what it
was but I'll go to you.
>> Uh the second question I believe was
» Uh the second question I believe was
around conflict of interest and if a
council member would be indemnified if
they inadvertently
have a legal claim arising from a
conflict of interest scenario. Is that
my understand? Is that correct? Uh, I
believe councelor Penning, does that
capture your your concern? You're asking
about the about this piece around
conflict.
>> Well, let's take the answer and we'll
» Well, let's take the answer and we'll
see if it addresses your concern. Does
that
» Okay.
>> Okay. Uh, the first thing I'd like to
» Okay. Uh, the first thing I'd like to
state is that the purpose of the
indemnification bylaw is to protect
officials,
you included, that who are acting in
good faith while doing their jobs.
uh it's to prevent and then some of the
restrictions in the bylaw are to prevent
the use of public money for shielding
personal misconduct. So it's I think the
key word around this is acting in good
faith.
Um and then in terms of the conflict of
interest component
the limits on indemnification.
So this is what uh the district will not
cover in terms of legal claims and
conflict of interest is not included in
here and it's important to note that
most of these elements except for a
couple are u directly from the
legislation. So council has the
discretion to be more restrictive and
limit more
limit the number of things that will be
covered through the indemnification
bylaw. So, right now, the way it's
written,
conflict of interest claims would likely
be covered. Unless there's a conviction
and there's a fine issued, then the
district couldn't pay the fine. Um,
council has the discretion though to
totally eliminate covering conflict of
interest claims that may arise by
including that in this section. Is that
clear?
>> I think so. So I think one of the risks
» I think so. So I think one of the risks
that happens in the in can one of the
risks that exists in these roles is
someone could bring at any point in time
a conflict of interest um matter forward
uh even if it was frivolous I would need
to go through a a legal process and I
think there's a difference between um h
being um having that happen and it
ultimately being not coming to uh being
dismissed or coming to some other
conclusion. usion versus oh yeah there
was a conflict here and there's a
penalty and if there's a penalty then
our indemnification wouldn't apply. Is
that correct?
>> That's my understanding. Yes. So that's
» That's my understanding. Yes. So that's
the sa the safety the safety net here
and I think it's
I think that's reasonable and I think
without that sitting in these seats
becomes even harder than it than it is
because we're open to um um to this to
this risk that could just
you know I don't know how else to it's
it's it's not appropriate I think to be
exposed to that to that risk unless you
did something that was ultimately found
guilty for and and there's a penalty and
I think that this addresses addresses
that. I'll go to you councelor Penning
then I've got councelor Stoner.
>> Yeah, maybe not a topic of discussion
» Yeah, maybe not a topic of discussion
for tonight but it seems to me it might
make more sense for us to set aside a
bit of a funds where if you are unsure
there's some support to get that uh as a
counselor a clear legal advice on
conflict. So you're, you know, you're
not sort of saying, "Oh, maybe I can
take a risk and try and do my best
without a lawyer, which seems to be sort
of where this is pushing us and
hopefully we'll catch it on the back end
as opposed to like actually have a very
high standard and maybe less
indemnification if you're offsite on
conflict because you would have had the
ability to check in with legal at the
start before doing anything wrong." But
I think um yeah, thank you for that. I I
have seen some uh renumeration bylaws
that that include the ability to to use
some discretionary funds for or some
funds for um uh a conflict conflict of
interest consult legal consult or
something like that up to a certain
amount. So I think that's where that I
like that suggestion but I think that is
um is is important but is outside of
this obviously it'll interact with this.
Do you have thoughts on this?
>> I do. So, I I don't have the language in
» I do. So, I I don't have the language in
front of me exactly, but the code of
conduct bylaw does allow for counselors
to seek approval from the CAO for a
legal opinion if it's related to
conflict of interest. So, that language
is written into the code of conduct by
law and the intention isn't to
have all matters, you know, if they're
if they're tangent tangential,
uh, go for a legal opinion. But if
someone is truly concerned, there is an
avenue through the code of conduct bylaw
to seek a legal opinion that is covered
by the district.
>> Okay. Um, councelor Stoner, I I think
» Okay. Um, councelor Stoner, I I think
you're next to my speaker's list.
>> Yeah. Just trying to consider this
» Yeah. Just trying to consider this
component around conflict of interest on
the limitations list 5.1b
specifically says willfully acted
contrary to the terms of their
employment. Um, and I had originally
flagged that because that's employment
is generally a difficult word for those
on this side of the table because we're
not technically employees.
Um, and so I wonder if it's worth adding
in a bullet around like willfully acted
contrary to the terms of their oath of
office or in contrary to the community
charter or the code of conduct to kind
of capture
that component. And I I don't know if
I'm ready to propose that today off the
fly because I haven't thought through
the potential negative implications
thereof.
Um but I wonder if there's if staff have
any thoughts around that like weighing
of contrary or like willfully acted
contrary to the terms of their
employment and how that can be reflected
or if it is already reflected in the
other language there for council members
who are not employees.
Uh the number was 5.1B.
» I don't know.
>> I mean I do think that 5.1A maybe just
» I mean I do think that 5.1A maybe just
does it like been guilty of dishonesty,
gross negligence, malicious or willful
misconduct is maybe sufficient.
Um,
but that's maybe more for my council
colleagues to consider if they feel like
that is sufficient and strong enough
given the other avenues that we have as
well with code of conduct.
>> Oh,
» Oh,
>> layered in here.
» layered in here.
>> Uh, yeah, when I was reading that that
» Uh, yeah, when I was reading that that
this document that piece felt like it
didn't apply to me. it applied to the
the employee piece, but there's also
nothing that really separates out those
categories in the document itself. So,
is that sort of the in the intent there?
It's not meant to cover
I know I agree with the spirit of it,
but just the letter of it really seems
to speak more towards employees than um
elected officials.
>> Through the mayor, I would agree that it
» Through the mayor, I would agree that it
speaks more towards employees than
elected officials and there is a
differentiation there.
Okay. And I don't think that this is a
these matters are large enough uh
or or that we need two separate like we
don't need two separate versions of this
to cover like to parse that out. I think
this makes good sense to me that some
pieces the wording is just not for us.
The wordings for staff. Um any other
questions
on this?
Um
I'm going to look to councelor Hamilton.
I think we might be ready for a motion
that may
>> amendment. So I will um move the staff
» amendment. So I will um move the staff
recommendation that the district of
Squamish identification bylaw be given
first,
second and third readings with the
addition of
uh
and CFO or and chief financial officer
after chief administrative officer in
section three.
Okay. Um, are you seconding that that
motion? And um I like to minute taker.
Does that was that clear? Okay. Uh, go
ahead, counselor.
>> Thanks very much. Um,
» Thanks very much. Um,
this the indemnification bylaw. Uh, I
think this is a really important piece
of our municipal framework. Uh, and like
so many things in my first term here on
council, um, you didn't really didn't
really reflect on how important these
things are until you read it in the
bylaw and think about all of the ways
that things can go, um, uh, sideways for
for all kinds of various reasons. And I
think it's important that we have um a
bylaw that helps us and supports
employees and counselors in the event
that there is some under the honest and
um in under the honest carrying out of
their duties uh happen to fall into uh
some kind of legal dispute. Um and then
if they are guilty of those uh offenses
that they are held uh to account. I
think it's important that we have that
and I absolutely recognize it's
difficult to define those things and
that's why we're here tonight and I
think this bylaw does a pretty good job
of defining them as best we can. Thanks.
>> Thank you. Other comment I'll go to the
» Thank you. Other comment I'll go to the
secondary and then I'll go around. Go
ahead.
Uh it's important that bylaws like this
get regular review and um I'm happy that
uh this one is in front of us getting
the modernization that um it's being
given and a little bit of um extra
spice. Thank you um councelor Hamilton
and and the rest of council for the
discussion to um to get us to the place
we're recognizing adding the CFO in
section 3 is um a prudent thing to do.
Um and um thank you staff for the good
work to get this in front of us.
>> Thank you councelor Steart.
» Thank you councelor Steart.
>> Yeah, thank you the chair. Happy to
» Yeah, thank you the chair. Happy to
support the motion on the floor uh and
the updated bylaw in front of us. I
think it's important to note that this
is not necessarily new identification
that we're providing to council and
staff. It's an update to a bylaw that is
was originally written in 1998 and
brings it, as councelor French said, up
to more modern standards and reflects
the current wording in the local
government act and the community
charter. Um, so I think this is just
good prudence on our part to make sure
that our bylaws are up to date and
reflective of current practices.
>> Thank you for that, Councelor Penning.
» Thank you for that, Councelor Penning.
Yeah, I think I'm going to support this.
I think I'm I'm a bit intrigued by my
colleagues comment, you know, whether or
not we would limit indemnification for
when there's a code of conduct or oath
of office violation, those two in
particular. Um, and I guess, you know,
part of me is like, yes, if you've
willfully violated those things, I don't
think we should be indemnifying you, but
I'm not sure there's a case where you
only violated those where you would need
indemnifica. like it may be a
non-existent use case. And so that's why
I'm not sure if that's one to push on,
but um I'll just sort of flag and maybe
if staff has a moment to sort of see is
this even a real thing because I I do
feel a bit uncomfortable with the idea
of I guess I'm looking for some
alignment like if you've acted contrary
to the terms of your employment or your
oath of office or your code of conduct
maybe makes a little more sense. Um, I
guess I'll leave it there for now, but
that's the one piece I'm struggling with
a little bit.
>> Thank you. Any other comments? Um, just
» Thank you. Any other comments? Um, just
in in reply, I think the um uh the
answers I I for for me personally, the
the answers that I received from staff
were this is really that external thing.
So, when it goes past a code of conduct
and I think if you violate your oath of
office, it's these other processes that
would do that would determine that. So,
um I'm I'm comfortable with where we
are. I do think that um as councelor
Stoner um stated uh this is a an update
to a very old uh bylaw and the um the
legislation that it relates to has has
changed in that time and this is a
modernization. I think it's important to
um for folks to to understand that this
isn't this isn't about creating a a
shield for elected officials that have
done something that is off that is
offside or in this case illegal. Uh by
um uh it's about ensuring that we uh
that these seats are and these roles are
reasonable things that people could be
expected to participate in. And I think
without the reasonable protections that
this provides, I would have a very hard
time um sitting in these in these seats
uh without these these protections. But
again, this does not provide uh
protections um uh where folks have
clearly gone into the uh um uh clearly
offside. Uh so happy to to support this
and um I do think that after uh if this
when this gets used I would expect to
I'm happy that it sat for so long in so
much as it doesn't feel like it's been
used very often. So, I'd imagine that
going forward if this does get used that
that um it continues to be to be refined
uh to ensure that it's not that it's
performing its duty and um and not more
than it's intended to, which is the
which I think is really important. With
that, I'll call the question. All in
favor?
Motion carries unanimously. Thank you.
So, our next order of business is
section uh 8A1
uh landback task force terms of
reference and appointments. So, staff
are just getting set up for the
presentation and we'll get underway when
they're ready to do so.
The floor is yours when you're ready.
>> Uh, thank you very much to the chair.
» Uh, thank you very much to the chair.
Good evening, council public who uh are
watching online and in the audience. My
name is Linda Glende. I'm the chief
administrative officer here at the
district. Uh I am joined by Ms. Asia
Peterson who will introduce herself in a
moment and we are presenting about the
landback task force which is a priority
activity in the memorandum of
understanding with Squamish Nation.
Hello um mayor and council. My name is
Asia Peterson and I'm the projects and
research coordinator. privileged to be
here tonight and honored to be working
on the traditional unseated territory of
the Squamish people.
Thank you. So, as Linda mentioned, we
are here tonight to present on the
proposed terms of reference and to seek
three appointments to the landback task
force. On March 4th, Squamish Netian
Council approved the terms of reference
that you'll see and appointed three of
their own council members to join the
task force as well. Next, Uh just a bit
of background on this report that I'll
highlight. In 2018, council formally
recognized the United N um nations
declaration on the rights of indigenous
people, otherwise known as UNRIP. And in
building on our own relationship with
Squamish Nation in 2023, council signed
the Wima Squomish Protocol Agreement,
which led to the development and signing
of the memorandum of understanding
between the two governments in 2025. So
this built on a long um history between
the partnership of the partnership with
Squamish Nation and was a significant
step forward in our rec reconciliation
journey. The establishment of a landback
task force was identified as a priority
activity in theou.
In both the protocol agreement and theou
principles are outlined to help guide
this work in an intentional way. So I
just wanted to highlight them here
before we begin. Listen and engage.
Follow the ways of the Skomish.
Genuinely care. Learn the advice of the
Skomeish. The people go through it
together.
And protect the rights and title of the
Skomeish.
So before we review the details of the
terms of reference, I wanted to take a
minute to highlight the concept of
landback. This is an intentional term
that we use. Landback is a
reconciliationdriven initiative that
acknowledges the impacts of colonization
on indigenous people. It aims to restore
governance, stewardship, and cultural
connections to land. So in this context,
landback is referenced in theou and it
means exploring possibilities for the
return or the co-management of public
lands in a way in a way that respects
Squamish nation rights and title.
Landback is not a threat to private
property. It's about reconciliation and
moving forward together. It's not about
exclusion.
Um, so in turning to the terms of
reference, as I mentioned earlier, the
task force will have three
representatives from each government.
Squamish Nation appointed all three of
the Squamish Valley counselors earlier
this month. Diana Lewis, Anthony Joseph,
and Johnny Williams. The terms of
reference outlines that this is a
timelmited task force. It will exist
until 2028 or until project deliverables
have been met and the task force will
meet on a quarterly basis.
So now I just wanted to highlight um the
structure of the task force. This um
graphic is an overview of what the
structure will look like. Staff from
both organizations will provide the
research, administrative and technical
support and will develop work plans for
task force approval. The task force will
inform, advise and engage the community
on this work and then all
recommendations will go to both
respective councils for final
independent deliberation and decision-m
I now wanted to highlight some of the
roles and responsibilities of the task
force. Really the function of the task
force is to serve as a coordinated
research and engagement mechanism
between the two governments. It's to
coordinate research efforts looking into
landback opportunities.
So once the task force is established,
they'll approve work plans and a
communications and engagement plan. The
task force will review and analyze the
research that staff produces. They'll
provide guidance on community engagement
and dialogue opportunities. And then
based on the on this research and
community engagement process, the task
force will make recommendations on a
framework. Those recommendations would
go up to each council independently for
consideration and decision-m. The task
force itself does not have
decision-making authority.
Next slide.
So in terms of the scope at this time,
the scope of the task force is limited
to exploring, researching and engaging
district residents and Squamish people
on the topic of landback. Some of the
areas areas that the task force could
explore include the nation's historic
continued connection to their to their
traditional territory, reestablishing
cultural and linguistic connections to
the land,
um ways to enable shared decision-m or
co-management of lands, potential policy
updates,
ways to support or advocate for Squamish
Nation as it relates to crown land, and
any other initiatives that might be
identified. One thing that we should
emphasize is that private property is
not involved with the scope of this task
force.
So, some of the examples that the task
force could consider making
recommendations related to are things
like co-management of parks and
protected areas, restoring original
place names, granting exclusive access
to cultural sites for Scoomish people,
facilitating access to traditional
harvesting sites,
um exploring opportunities to recommend
policy updates for district land
dispositions or leases. Again, these are
just some examples. There'll be other
opportunities that haven't been
identified yet.
So, finally, um, community learning and
dialogue opportunities are central to
this work. We know that these topics are
complex and nuanced. So, as a first
step, we're focused on providing
community learning opportunities. We'll
be providing a ton of resources on our
website and leveraging our library's
capacity to support residents in better
understanding these topics. A
comprehensive trauma-informed committee
engagement plan will also be shared and
approved by the task force.
So, in returning to the recommendations
for consideration, we'll leave it here.
Thank you for your time and we're happy
to answer any questions you have.
>> Thank you very much. Council, do you
» Thank you very much. Council, do you
have questions for our staff at this
time?
>> Councelor French.
U thanks Mayor Herford. Um think that
this is a a bit of a housekeeping
question. Um with the meetings that are
expected to be ahead of us um held in
spaces provided by each organization as
we see in the report, I'm I'm guessing
the district space will likely be this
chamber or within u municipal hall. And
I'm wondering has the Squamish Nation
indicated their space of choice? Is it
Totem Hall or another location? is is is
there um maybe an indication that the
Squamish Nation would like meetings to
be held in North Vancouver? Can you give
us any insight into that?
>> Oh, sorry. Thank you. Through the chair.
» Oh, sorry. Thank you. Through the chair.
Um I think since all of the um appointed
members from Squamish Nation are from
Squamish Valley, Totem Hall would likely
be the space to convene.
Thank you for that very practical
consideration. Uh councelor Stoner,
>> thank you chair uh and thanks to staff
» thank you chair uh and thanks to staff
for the very clear presentation and
report in our package this evening. Um
you mentioned that it's a time limited
task force to 2028 or until such time
that the task force has completed its
outcomes. Um I'm just wondering if you
can speak to why 2028 was selected as
kind of the end date.
>> Yeah, through the chair. Um the 2028
» Yeah, through the chair. Um the 2028
deadline was selected because that's
where we've identified priorities in
theou. It was from 25 2025 to 2028. So
we put that timeline on it to align with
theou.
» Thank you councelor Penning. Yeah, just
curious if you can remind us because
we've also committed to meet council to
council with Squamish Nation more
frequently if if we know um sort of how
that um intersects with this and would
this task force uh sort of report when
the broader council council meetings or
does it more come to our individual sort
of staff and councils and sort of
separate from the the more the broaderou
council council meetings.
Thank you for the question through the
chair. Um I would say it's it's both and
um that there will be times when staff
come to council and council needs to
make their own decision in district
chambers as an example and same with
Squamish Nation Council and the
opportunity for the Lambback task force
themselves to present to both councils
at the same time would likely prove
fruitful.
» Okay. Um any other questions for staff?
Councelor Stoner.
>> Yeah, thank you through the chair. Uh
» Yeah, thank you through the chair. Uh
also appreciate the clarity on the focus
here on public lands. Um I'm curious if
there's been any dialogue amongst staff
in the development of the terms of
reference of inviting other orders of
government in. Much of the public land
that exists within the boundaries of the
District of Squamish are crown lands. Um
and so how do we start to address this
conversation or is that a topic for the
task force to do um of what that looks
like?
>> Thank you. Through the chair, I would
» Thank you. Through the chair, I would
say it's the latter. So at this point,
staff are bringing terms of reference
for each council to approve. Following
that, the task force themselves would
would commence that work.
Um and just and
I think that point is is is very
important and in the in the terms of
reference and scope uh the second bullet
point from the bottom I guess is the way
to describe that it's not numbered
support or advocate for scholar nation
as it relates to crown land dispositions
that doesn't quite cover the the
totality of the interacting with the uh
crown more broadly but there's um
definitely sort of recognition of that
there but I do think much of the terms
of reference um uh I would expect the
group jointly to look at this together
and see if there's room to move at this
point. Any changes to the to the um to
the terms of reference uh would need to
be negotiated with the Squamish Nation.
I do think this the task force is the
best mechanism to sort recommend
whatever those changes would be back to
their joint to their their own um board
or governance structure.
Um,
I'm not seeing any further hands for
questions. So, I would like to I will
move uh that council approve the terms
of reference for the landback task force
and appoint three members of council to
serve on the landback task force as
follows. Mayor Hurford, councelor
Stoner, and councelor Anderson. And I'll
speak to it if it's seconded. Second by
councelor French. Thank you. I think um
this is incredibly um important work. Um
and I'm going to read directly from the
um from the terms of reference. The
Lambach task force exists to research,
learn, and engage both District of
Squamish residents and Squamish people
on the concept of landback. Its primary
goal is to develop a framework for land
back in the District of Squamish,
including policy considerations for
future public land dispositions by the
District of Squamish and joint use of
district lands. I think this is in um
incredibly important that we um
that we have this dialogue with uh the
Squam with the Squamish Nation directly
and with our community around what um
what this is and what it isn't. We've
heard a little bit in the presentation
around what this what this uh isn't in
it is not something that's um and we do
not have the juris the the entity itself
the task force does not have jur does
not have decision making uh um in power
in and of itself and neither does this
group have decision-making power around
uh private private land. This is not
what it's what it's about. But there are
some very um uh meaningful conversations
to be had and in a good way and those
need to be shared with the community and
that is a lot of uh of what this is in
in my mind and I've heard some fear in
the in the community um and around the
the province and country around around
this and I really uh my expectation is
this can be a vehicle to fill those um
uh to fill those gaps uh in
understanding that uh folks have uh
often filled themselves with with fear.
So, this is um a really important piece
uh of work and and I really think back
to the protocol agreement where we
committed to as a as a group in this
room and as a community to listen and
engage to follow the ways of the
Squamish, to genuinely care, to learn
the advice of the Squamish. And I love
this one, the people go through it
together. We are all going through this
together as a community. the residents
of Squamish and the and uh the Squamish
Okme. We're going through this together
and I think it's this is a together part
of that as well as protecting the rights
and title of the Squamish. So, I look
forward to um to um working uh with
Squamish Nation and my colleagues on
this and um thank you to everybody
involved to get us to this point. Um I
I um I do think that having a table to
sit at to discuss these matters with our
uh neighbors at this at the Squamish
Nation um is incredibly important and
likely at any point in time, but
particularly at this point in time. So
I'm thankful for the creation of this
initiative and look forward to doing the
work. I will other comments on this.
Councelor French.
>> Thanks, Mayor Herford. Um this is
» Thanks, Mayor Herford. Um this is
exciting tonight. Uh the task force has
an important historical mission ahead
and coming into this meeting tonight
I've had some mixed feedback on this
task force from many people and
surprisingly to me a little bit people
from all over the province. Um, many
eyes are on Squamish tonight with this
decision and uh and this recommendation
and this motion.
And what I've discovered over the last
couple of days in going through the
feedback that I've seen is uh those who
get what we're up to, they truly get it.
Those who don't, in my opinion, are
mainly driven by fear, feelings of
superiority, and a belief that there's
no historical wrongs to be reconciled. I
fully disagree with that. There are
wrongs to be corrected. And part of what
we're doing tonight is taking that on.
The path that we're continuing on with
the Squamish nation feels minimal. When
I think about my white European
ancestors who came here, claimed these
lands, and introduced the human
construct that we call private property.
And the newcomers to this place then
tried to assimilate the Skoish people
into European ways using what I think
are cruel tactics. And many people agree
with me on that. With no ability to undo
the historical hurt brought to the
people who lived here for thousands of
years before my ancestors arrived, I see
this task force as a small step along a
path that we're meant to be on until we
can all collectively agree that true
reconciliation has been achieved with
the Squamish people. Councelor Lewis
told me a few days ago that she's stoked
about the work of this task force and
she's keen to learn who's appointed to
the task force to represent the District
of Squamish. We've achieved that I I
think or we're about to confirm that
tonight. And I want to add that
transparency through this process is
important to me individually. And I've
heard from many in our community that
transparency with this process is vital
to them as well. I pledge to do all that
I can to promote public education
through this process and to keep the
work of the task force as transparent as
it possibly um can.
And when my time in this seat comes to
an end, I expect that I will point to
the work of this task force as a high
point in my political experience. I
support the recommended appointments and
um any one of the elected officials I
believe in this room tonight would
suitably represent the District of
Squamish on this task force. I'm happy
that we've selected the three that we
have. I support the motion in front of
us.
>> Thank you very much, Councelor French.
» Thank you very much, Councelor French.
Councelor Sto.
Yeah, thank you to the chair. Uh, happy
to support this motion this evening. Um,
and I think back to even when we just
signed theou in mid July, the context
was very different. Um, it was before
the Kawashan tribes decision court case
came forward. Um, and there was a real
pivot in the provincial, let alone the
national narrative around the path of
reconciliation.
Um, I think as I continue to reflect and
and hear the concerns uh that are
emerging and I think um some of them are
they're definitely they feel like valid
concerns for many folks because there's
a lot of uncertainty. I actually think
what this task force does and our
continued commitment to recon
reconciliation does is actually
open up the opportunity for dialogue,
for understanding, for education,
learning, and sharing. And that is what
our community does best across both
Squamish residents as well as the Scoish
people. Um, as Mayor Hurford reiterated,
I think one of the most appropriate
components of the principles of theou
that applies here is that the people go
through it together. We are all in this
together and we're trying to find our
way through it. I'd be lying if I said
we all knew the answers. But to
councelor French's point, I think our
council, our staff, our community, and
I've heard this from the Squamish
Nation, this task force is committed to
transparency, to engagement, to
research, and shared learning,
developing a framework that we can all
feel comfortable with to move us forward
on a stronger foundation. Um, because we
are all going to be here together no
matter what. we can either battle it out
in court or we can build strong working
relationships and move forward together,
show up represented to the province
together as opposed to apart. And I
think that's the piece that we're
looking for in this work. Um, and I'm
honored to take it on on behalf of
council of community and with community
and with council and our staff.
>> Thank you for that, Councelor S.
» Thank you for that, Councelor S.
Councelor Anderson.
>> Thank you, Mayor Herford. Uh it will be
» Thank you, Mayor Herford. Uh it will be
a great privilege and responsibility to
be serving on this task force. I am
looking forward to to fulfill the
principle that's outlined in the snap
presentation tonight. One of those
principles, listen and engage. And I'm
going to be learning how to pronounce
that in the Squamish language. But
that's one that leaps out for me. Uh we
need in response to community interest
as well. Of course, I see this I'm
looking forward to a process of
exploration as well as an educational
process. Um I councelor French has so
eloquently uh reminded us that or
pointed out that many eyes will be on
Squamish. So uh it will be important for
a learning process
important for other communities and
agencies well beyond Squamish. So this
is an added responsibility that uh I
look forward to facing. Thank you very
much.
>> Thank you, Councelor Penning.
» Thank you, Councelor Penning.
>> Yeah, thank you. Uh happy to support the
» Yeah, thank you. Uh happy to support the
motion. Um just reflecting on a few
things. I was never really a a huge fan
of the the Harper government, but in
2008 uh that government uh apologized
for the residential school system and
later a couple years later adopted uh
United Nation Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples with with a small
caveat. But then in 2016, the Liberal
government, I guess the other side of
the aisle, you might say, uh fully
endorsed it. Um and so you know
colonialism and our history and how we
move forward is something that Canada
has been grappling with for a long time.
Um our democratically elected national
governments from both sides of the aisle
seem to support when you sort of read um
the text of of what they were doing and
why they were doing it. It is, I think,
as my colleague pointed out,
understanding, there's a more
constructive way than battling things
out in court. When we try and understand
and see each other's each others as
human beings and trying to understand
what we all need and how we can best
move forward together, that's kind of
the path to success. And that's what I
really see is sort of the common element
between these different governments and
these different documents that we're all
trying to work towards. And I I think
that applies here, too. I'm really proud
of our community every day on the
National Day for Truth and
Reconciliation. I see all the the orange
shirts uh uh walking down the street
together. And I think this is just sort
of that next step. There is a whole lot
of fear I think born out of a whole lot
of information uh misinformation and
political opportunism uh which is really
quite frustrating. But I think this is a
fantastic opportunity to have some
really great conversation that I think
uh should make things better for for
everyone at the end of the day. I think
this is a path of and it is the
underlying goal of how do we make this a
better place for everybody and I think
that's really what this is all about.
Um, and so I know this is something that
our our whole council has felt
passionate about and it's pretty hard to
to I think we all sort of would would
have liked to be in the room, but even
if we're not in the room, um, we'll be
finding other ways to support these
absolutely critical efforts. Um, with
that out of the way, just one small
thing. I I do see that the budget for
this is part of our broader memorandum
of understanding uh, budget. I I do sort
of wonder and maybe the task force needs
to ask for this, but if if there's a bit
of a a clear number that this task force
sort of had to sort of scope like how
far they can go in terms of having these
community conversations and so on. Just
a small thought as I read through the
report, but otherwise um very happy to
support this and uh thank you to the
colleagues that will be leading this.
>> Thank you, Councelor Hamilton.
» Thank you, Councelor Hamilton.
>> Yeah, thanks very much. I'm very happy
» Yeah, thanks very much. I'm very happy
to be supporting this motion. This is
extraordinarily important work. Um, and
I am extraordinarily grateful to my
colleagues who are willing to take it on
as members of the task force. Um, and
I'm really grateful to staff for helping
get the councils uh to this point. I
think staff play a vital and pivotal
role um in having our councils be uh
able to have uh constructive, careful
conversations, delicate and challenging
conversations with each other. Um and so
I think this task force is really a
culmination of a lot of staff work um to
be able to have challenging and
difficult conversations uh with each
other in uh open and um receptive ways.
So, thank you to my colleagues for
taking this on. Um, and I certainly
would look forward to hearing uh as the
task force progresses.
>> Thank you very much. Um, and thank you
» Thank you very much. Um, and thank you
uh council for all the thoughtful
comments. I I would love to riff on each
of of the the themes that have emerged
here. Um, and I do think that uh really
highlights the uh importance of this uh
of this work. So um we will this this is
uh clearly not the but uh not the last
touch point for the for this. So we'll
save uh my comments for the next time
these matters are before us. I'll call
the question. All in favor?
Motion carries unanimously. Thank you
very much. Thank you for all your work.
Um, so next, uh, we don't have any late
agenda items or, uh, but or
correspondence action requested, but we
do have items referred from the consent
agenda. So, we're on to 11
uh C, I think, is what both of those
are. So, Councelor Stoner, um, you
pulled 6D1. So, this is the five-year
the STR review. And just to orient
everyone, I know council knows this. Uh
for the most part, we don't um with
these pieces where we have a a memo from
staff uh come through. We don't have the
staff uh available to answer answer
questions. So if we have questions that
are more uh involved, we could refer
these to a future meeting to dig into
them further. Um but uh just with that
caveat, I will I will turn over to you
to get us started, councelor Soner.
Yeah, thank you uh through the chair. I
was going to refer this to a future
committee the whole for future for
further discussion and if that's
seconded I'll speak to it.
>> I'll second it and do you want to go
» I'll second it and do you want to go
ahead?
>> Yeah. Uh and thanks for supporting
» Yeah. Uh and thanks for supporting
seconding it before I actually
articulated why I would like to discuss
it further. Um but there are some
components in the report uh that were
that flagged me that I think are just
worthy of some further council
deliberation. in particular, um it is
the suggestion that we continue to
encourage folks to reapply
for temporary use permits after their
six years. Um so under the legislation,
uh you technically can um reapply for a
TUP under a new application.
It's not generally our practice to do
so. Um and I it I think that that's
worthy of some council deliberation as
to whether that is that is practice that
we want to um address. And then we also
got some late correspondences today from
tourism Squamish uh that would also
amplify um I think a further dialogue
around our short-term rental regulation
policy.
>> Thank you. Um yeah, the thank you for
» Thank you. Um yeah, the thank you for
that. the the broader the TU issue here
is is broader I think than obviously
than just this use of t of t and I think
that with that in mind just whether this
is the um the preferred mechanism and I
get that that's likely a future action
thing that's not something that we have
in our work plans but I'd really like to
have a discussion around um around that
and I think this is such an impactful
piece for the community that it does
deserve more space than uh and I know
it's going to take more those sort of
future action items piece make make good
sense, but I do think we should spend a
little bit more um time with this and
address some of those or discuss some of
those issues. I'll go to you c did I see
a hand? No, you don't have to. You
can't. Councelor Penn is that your hand?
>> Yeah, I appreciate this coming back and
» Yeah, I appreciate this coming back and
just one thought maybe to uh for staff
to think about or for us to think about
when it comes back. I know there's been
some question or concern about uh has
this policy how many units has it
returned to the long-term rental market.
Um I think that is one aspect or in my
mind one aspect or one goal. The other
piece of it at least one other piece of
it for me was um you know if if a a home
can be a revenue generator um does that
then raise the price and sort of force
everyone to either do that or pay a very
high price for a home? And so it's it's
not just about returning uh units to the
long-term market, but what it does to
affordability. And we have many things
pushing affordability in different
directions. So not thinking that's, you
know, there's one magic solution here,
but um if there are any additional
thoughts or new information about uh the
push and pull there in terms of the
affordability of a home, um that may be
useful for our next discussion.
Thank you. Um just another piece of this
is the um the fees are meant uh I'm
curious to dig into the fees a little
bit. the um the fees revenue were uh
generally 156,800
and the annual um expenses to administer
the program were at 145,000 and it did
say that the third party monitoring
services dropped out of that and I just
I want to understand that better and if
inside of that cost recovery piece and
that's pretty close to the line with the
numbers that are there um just how we're
distributing those uh those uh fees
inside of that I I think are is worth
some. So, I'd like to dig into that
little piece a little bit as well, but
that is for a future meeting, which is
exactly what the resolution is. So, with
that, I'm going to call the question.
All in favor? Motion carries
unanimously. Thank you. And then back to
you, Councelor Stoner. Item 62.
>> Um, and I'm going to move receipt of
» Um, and I'm going to move receipt of
this memo uh because I just want to
speak to it and highlight it.
>> Is there a second for the motion?
» Is there a second for the motion?
Councelor French. Go ahead, Councelor S.
>> Uh, yeah. Thanks. I couldn't help myself
» Uh, yeah. Thanks. I couldn't help myself
but to pull this one because I think
that there's some really great numbers
in this memo which speaks to uh the uh
expansion of the evolve eBike share
program which we launched last summer.
So in just 166 days of its first year of
operation, there were across 54 bikes
were deployed from 18 locations that saw
1,318
unique riders for a total trip of total
number of trips of 3,96
over those 166 days. Um so BCAA who runs
the evolve program is looking to expand
uh to an additional basic almost
doubling their locations to 33 new
locations extending into Gabali
Highlands, Oceanfront, Brackendale and
Mammqu uh and providing a new
opportunity for folks not just ride on
ebikes but also on e- scooters. And I
think that this is a fantastic
opportunity for our community to have
different forms of transportation um and
micro transportation across our
very spread out community.
>> Other comments on this council penning?
» Other comments on this council penning?
>> Yeah, I was very happy to see this. I
» Yeah, I was very happy to see this. I
think it was in the first week or two
after launch uh which was not meant to
go past the mamquam. I saw uh folks at
the bag with a you know a pile of bikes
cuz they they'd ridden the bikes to the
bag and then they I guess rode them back
downtown or wherever. Uh so having this
uh available stops available in the
whole community I think is uh is a great
thing. Um uh sort of curious and ex
really curious to see how the the
scooters go. U I'm sort of wondering if
those stay more localized. That's just a
curiosity. Uh just a slight tangent. I I
saw I think an email that the um the on
demand transit service is starting to
and and so there's a lot of really uh
exciting things uh and I have people
asking for for more already for the on
demand. So it's great to see these
things uh moving forward.
>> Thank you. Any other comments on this?
» Thank you. Any other comments on this?
>> Um I'm going to say yes to those
» Um I'm going to say yes to those
comments that I've heard already around
the table. This really remarkable
success here. I think um Squamish um in
various initiatives hasn't quite been
the right size to support some other
initiatives around asomely like car
share as a you know we all know the the
challenges but to see something um
really be such a good fit for our
community is really is really great and
uh it shows when there is a there when
there is a fit that works for people
people will use it. those uh 1,318
unique riders uh is that's a lot of
people. That's impressive. And that is
with only uh 54 ebikes in 18 locations.
So, I'm really looking forward to uh
seeing and and feeling how the community
feels when there's um far more uh both
locations and and bikes available. And
one of the pieces that uh should jump
out to everyone that reads this report
uh not that there may be a line up for
people to read this report is under the
budget section. I'm going to read the
very first section. The partnership does
not cost the district money.
Remarkable. So happy to support. Of
course, we have uh folks uh do need to
uh on our team that do need to do some
what have been described as sort of
light touches around uh some some
planning uh for these, but essentially
the operations of these um do not cost
the district money and that's really
remarkable. Um,
oh, and a little side note that there
are uh the bikes and the scooters both
have uh GPS enabled and any that go
astray are found and returned to so uh
there has not been a a lost piece. Thank
you for that. Um I'll call the question.
All in favor? Motion carries. Thank you.
I think those were the two pieces
um left. So now uh we don't have any
business arising from the minutes. We
have no notice of motion. Open question
period. Clarification related to agenda
items. Is there anybody in the audience
this evening that has a question of
clarity for council? Um seeing none, uh
council or staff announcements. Go
ahead.
>> Uh thanks Mayor Herford. I wanted to
» Uh thanks Mayor Herford. I wanted to
share that on Wednesday, March 4th, I
attended a youth council event at House
Sound Secondary. Some of my colleagues
might want to pick up where I leave off
on this. Uh thank you to councelor
Stoner, Petting Gill, and Greenlaw for
uh the work that um you did to prepare
for the night and just generally your
work with youth youth council. Uh there
were uh no Squamish has some very bright
young people who are engaged and
actively working to make Squamish more
inclusive and uh offer a wider range of
things for all young people to do. I was
impressed. the future is definitely
bright.
>> Thank you for that. I would agree with
» Thank you for that. I would agree with
that assessment. Uh councelor Anderson,
>> thank you. Um the Railway Museum of BC
» thank you. Um the Railway Museum of BC
is hosting a seat to sky model train and
hobby show. It's an annual affair and
I've been to a few of them already.
It'll be taking place this weekend,
Saturday and Sunday, March 21st and
22nd. Fun for the whole family, says the
ad. And that is certainly true. uh model
train layouts of all scales, opportunity
to climb onto the Royal Hudson or engine
number two and other artifacts in the
railway park. People can ride the
museum's Bud Rail passenger car, be
going up and down the track. Railway is
topical these days and certainly in
Squamish. And railway modelers are not
only enthusiasts, rail fans, they are
experts with broad knowledge of the
history, technology and possibilities of
railway transportation. So anybody's
curiosity will be satisfied at this uh
train and hobby model train and hobby
show taking place this weekend. Thank
you.
>> Thank you for that. Um other go ahead
» Thank you for that. Um other go ahead
councelor Penniguel.
>> Yeah, two things. one uh just we have an
» Yeah, two things. one uh just we have an
endocrinologist now in town uh
regularly. So as a diabetic um I always
had to do my calls remotely or sometimes
they come to the drop-in center. I I
think I think I was the first patient on
their first day. So it is a
endocrinologist that uh is typically in
the city but they they have an office
here now. And so for anyone uh
struggling with diabetes and so on, um I
I think it's sort of I know there's a
lot of challenges that comes come with
growth uh but but seeing more services
like this I I think uh make the
community a lot better. So that was
great to see. Um and then I also just
wanted to had an opportunity with my
partner to go to the uh the fashion show
at House Sound. It was a fundraiser for
uh prom and uh a really great show. Um,
it it hurt a little bit to hear some of
the giggles and laughs at some of the
outfits that, you know, I think we wore
and we thought were cool, but it was uh
it was a really great event. So, thank
you to everyone who uh put that on.
» You have to submit some photos to
document this. Um, councelor Stoner.
>> Yeah, thanks to the chair. I'm going to
» Yeah, thanks to the chair. I'm going to
look forward a little bit uh later this
week. We will be welcoming welcoming a
delegation um of local government
officials from Zambia here in Squamish
as part of the partnership and municipal
innovation women in local leadership
program that we've been involved with
through the federation of Canadian
municies and global affairs Canada. I'm
actually not sure how many folks we'll
be welcoming from Zambia but there'll be
a group of folks uh who have traveled
this way. Um and the PMI will project is
really focused on achieving gender
parity in local councils and ensuring
inclusive approaches to service delivery
um uh in in all the work that we do. And
so we have been partnered with the local
government association of Zambia um and
we've had the opportunity for some
myself and some staff members to go down
um and work with the folks on the ground
in Zambia and this is a chance for them
to come here uh and share some of the
learnings in both directions. So, uh,
really excited to welcome them. Uh, and
then also another
component for youth council to flag and
mark on your calendars at the end of
April, Squamish Youth Council will be
putting on a one-day event called Rise,
uh, which the description says, "The
Rise Youth Summit is an Inerson event
where young people come together to
share ideas, learn new skills, and
ignite their passion for making a dis a
difference. expect awesome speakers,
interactive workshops, and tons of
opportunities to network with peers who
are just as driven as you are. And
there's currently a call out for
speakers, um either uh keynote speakers
or folks who might want to deliver some
workshops at this event. Um, and they
are looking for folks who have skills or
experiences to share that fit the areas
of health and wellness, real life skills
such as budgeting, cooking, mending,
navigating taxes, leases, and other
adultting basics as well as business and
career basics. So, if anybody has any
ideas on who would be a great speaker
for youth council uh in their youth
summit um who would like to share some
tips and tricks on how to be an
effective adult, I could sit in on a few
of those. Um but uh there's an
application form so um happy to share
that with council if you feel like you
would like to pass it on to someone.
Thanks.
>> Okay. Any other comments? Um
» Okay. Any other comments? Um
so um
also attended the uh the youth council
uh event uh and making the case for
local businesses to uh I would say cater
to uh youth and the benefits of doing
that including suggestions around hours
of operation and so on. It was great to
sort of see them really um uh um
articulating what they'd like to see and
not and and being brave to uh really ask
for it directly from the business
community. So, um it was great. Uh and
I'd like to thank both the the youth
council members for their continued work
and advocating for
um the things they'd like to see in the
community and to our business community
for responding. It was really
remarkable. We know that uh um just
running a business is
is very demanding and it's very
challenging times to be in business and
there was a big chunk of the business
community came out to um to be part of
the part of the event and um I think
that's a great response to the to the
youth in the community uh asking for
that. So, um, and we've already heard
some foreshadowing of what's coming
ahead, uh, with with youth council. So,
I look forward to, um, to seeing that.
Um, since we were last here, um, I, uh,
had opportunity to, um, we have a, I'm
going to use air quotes, a monthly
meeting with, uh, the mayors and chairs
in the Cedr
um, that seems to happen every couple
months with everyone's with everyone's
schedule. Um, so, uh, was this the week
week before last? Um
we got together in Whistler uh with um
we had um uh Mike Richmond, mayor of
Peton, Jack Crompson, Mayor Whistler,
myself, we had uh Patrick Wiler joined
us for the conversation and he brought
with him um uh Gregor Robertson uh who
is the um go through his portfolio here
is the Minister of Housing and
Infrastructure and Minister responsible
for Pacific Economic Development Canada.
So when I think about um the needs and
uh concerns of CD sky, he's a critical
uh player here and it was great to um
very thankful for um our MP Patrick
Wiler who does uh this is one of many
examples of him bringing folks together
and bringing the uh important um
ministers from his uh from his
government to community. And um and I
was I um
Mr. Robinson was very uh engaged and
very knowledgeable about the moving
pieces down to like a surprising level
of detail happening in the ca in the
ceda sky. So um many of the concerns
that we uh we have a lot of things that
are in our direct control uh in this
room but a lot of things the community
comes to us for require this um this
advocacy piece and um it's hard to sort
of highlight those places and times it's
happening outside of direct letters and
so on but uh this is a great opportunity
and um I think we uh also showed great
unity in the in the seed of sky around
what the concerns
uh are so um thankful for that for that
opportunity and um and for Minister
Robertson's time and um so of course the
the devil's in the detail. I didn't
leave there with a giant check or you
know all the any of those matters
resolved but um we are on the uh and
will continue to be on the uh federal
radar. Um I um last week I spent um a
few days with my elected official
colleagues at the at the local
government leadership academy uh which
is um an important initiative supported
by the province to really make us be
effective in these roles or uh aspires
to at any rate. And it was great to I
always enjoy spending time with my
colleagues from around the the province.
There was a lot of given where we are in
the term, there was a lot of reflection
and I I was really struck by how open
everyone was to share their uh you know
the strikes and gutters of this of this
work um and um and lessons learned and
um and uh and so on. So um excellent
opportunity and just um again I'd like
to really thank everyone that was
involved. There was also um I think a
highlight for us maybe locally would be
there was a presentation but from the
SLRD. Uh so Chair Ford was there uh RCAO
uh was there um uh and um and the there
was also um one of the staff members
working on the um the guide book to
reconciliation was uh was the the topic
and it was great to share that with
folks from around the the province. Um
and um yeah, it was it was quite surreal
to sort of be sitting in in the in the
audience as someone that sits at the
table that that um was there and just
listening to the discussion and the
context is just so varied for this work
around around the province. We've had
some discussion around on this topic
already in this in this room today and
it's it's different uh everywhere you
go. So I thought um yeah that was a
great a great session and um it was good
to see that work sort of highlighted in
that way. Um, I could go on, but I am
very excited about um uh the Zambia
delegation uh this week and um look
forward to spending some time uh some
time with them and uh I enjoy showing
off uh our community and the more I get
in the more time I spend in this role uh
I enjoy showing uh folks from around the
world in uh local government um not just
the beautiful bits that you show your
friend when you're when they come to
your community, you're like, "Oh, we
also have this and this." Like this is
the totality of it and also our where
our challenges are. So, look forward to
having those honest conversations um
going forward. Um and that's I see no
other hands for this piece. So, um we
don't have a motion to close. We don't
have any in camera announcements. I'll
be looking for Yes. Councelor Stoner,
can I help you?
>> I would move uh that the meeting be
» I would move uh that the meeting be
terminated. Uh, councelor French, I
believe you're seconding that. Uh, I
think I always feel funny calling the
question even on this one. I think we'd
all like to terminate the meeting. So,
all in favor, motion carries. Now,
council, if you were keeping score,
we're actually not done our work today.
We did not make it through the totality
of our closed meeting that we had uh
scheduled to conclude prior to this
meeting. So, we'll take a we'll
reconvene that meeting in um 15 minutes.
uh will reconvene our special close
meeting. So stretch your legs, but
you're not done yet.