Special Business Meeting - 26 Sep 2023


1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
2: ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3: DELEGATIONS/PETITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
3.i: Circular Economy Month Proclamation
4: STAFF REPORTS
4.i: Valleycliffe Childcare Project Partner Agreements
4.ii: 2024 Permissive Tax Exemptions
4.iii: 2024-2028 Financial Plan – General Fund Operating
5: BUSINESS
5.i: Shimizu Commemorative Ceremony November 3, 2023
6: TERMINATION
Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
0:04:36 (0:01:27)

The extract provided does not contain the presentation. Therefore, a summary cannot be generated.

Armand Hurford
0:04:36 (0:01:27)

hello and welcome to the special business meeting for the District of Squamish for Tuesday September 26 2023 and as always we're gathered to do our work today on the traditional and unseated territory of the Squamish Nation and I would like to thank my Council colleagues for all the touches of of orange and act and or moose side I see in the in the room as well and not on camera here are the staff members with various pieces of orange integrated into their into their attire today I think it's incredibly important that we take the time to reflect on the impacts of colonization well frankly always but particularly at this time of year and I'm looking forward to doing that with the community on Saturday so please be advised that this council meeting is being live streamed recorded and will be available to the public to view on the district Squamish website following the meeting if you have any concerns please notify the corporate officer present at the meeting could I have someone move adoption of the agenda please move by counselor Stoner second by counselor Hamilton all in favor motion carries thank you now we're on to item three one which is a request for Proclamation for

Circular Economy Month Proclamation
0:06:03 (0:07:58)

The council meeting featured a presentation by Laura Witten Zellner, the Outreach Sustainability Coordinator, and Shannon White, the Integrated Solid Waste Specialist. They discussed the District of Squamish's support for the federal annual waste reduction week, which has now been transformed into the circular economy month. This transformation was made to create more space and capacity for educational actions and initiatives around the circular economy and its principles. In 2022, the district officially proclaimed October as the circular economy month for the first time.

The circular economy goes beyond just reducing waste at the end of life stages of products. It focuses on optimizing design, consuming fewer materials, maximizing value, and improving products and services to maximize use and eliminate waste. The circular economy aims to keep products, goods, and services in use for as long as possible. During the 2023 circular economy month, which is October, the district will work with two community partners, the Squamish Climate Action Network and the Squamish Welcome Center, to execute several in-person events aligned with the principles of the circular economy.

These events will include a repair cafe, a clothing and book swap, and two upcycling workshops for residents. These events will not only be used to put circular economy principles into action like sharing, repairing, exchanging, and recycling goods and services, but they will also be used to provide education and raise awareness through in-person engagement and messaging on social media and in local print news. These events are also part of the district's work under the Community Climate Action Plan, the Zero Waste Action Plan, and the Circular Economy Roadmap. The council was asked to proclaim October 2023 as the circular economy month in the District of Squamish.

Armand Hurford
0:06:03 (0:00:04)

a circular economy month I'll pass it over to staff to introduce themselves on the topic

SPEAKER_14
0:06:07 (0:02:12)

thank you mayor and Council my name is Laura Witten Zellner I'm the Outreach sustainability coordinator on the sustainability team and I'm here with my colleague Shannon White she's the integrated Solid Waste specialist on our team the District of Squamish has supported the federal annual waste reduction week for many years in waste reduction has been and continues to be one of the core components of the work of our sustainability team the waste reduction week has recently been transformed into circular economy month to create more space and capacity for educational actions and initiatives around educating on the circle economy and its principles and in 2022 the district officially proclaimed October as the circular economy month for the first time the circular economy goes well beyond just reducing waste at the end of life stages of products and focuses on optimizing design consuming fewer materials maximizing value and improving products and services to maximize use and eliminate waste the circular economy aims to keep products goods and services and use for as long as possible during the 2023 circular economy month which is October the district will work with two Community Partners the Squamish climate Action Network and the Squamish Welcome Center to execute several in-person events aligned with the principles of the circular economy we're excited to have a repair Cafe a clothing and a book swap and two upcycling workshops for residents and these events will not only be used to put circular economy principles into action like sharing repairing exchanging and recycling goods and services but we will also use those opportunities to provide education and to raise awareness through in-person engagement and messaging on social media and in a local print news these events are also part of the district's work under the Community climate action plan the zero waste action plan and the circle economy roadmap So today we're hoping the council will Proclaim October 2023 as the circular economy month in the district of Squamish

Armand Hurford
0:08:20 (0:00:17)

thank you council do you have any questions for our guests and if not I'm going to entertain a motion moved by are you hearing moving that counselor moved by Council green last second by counselor Stoner would you like to speak to it

Lauren Greenlaw
0:08:37 (0:00:21)

sure I've expressed to several staff members that I am very enthusiastic about circular economics so I'm really happy to see this and endorse in the district I think it's an incredibly important ideology that basically everybody should be embracing so thank you for bringing it forward

Armand Hurford
0:08:59 (0:00:02)

thank you Council stoner

Jenna Stoner
0:09:02 (0:00:16)

yeah I think that this is an important proclamation to make and I appreciate all the work that staff have planned out for the month of October to try and Elevate this within our community once this motion is called on also bring forward a subsequent motion for my Council colleagues to consider thank you

Armand Hurford
0:09:18 (0:00:39)

that sounds rather ominous but okay any further comments on this before I Venture my own happy to support I think this these initiatives really are critical as in an earlier session today we've talked about our community climate action plan and circular economy I think can play a great role in achieving the goals laid out there so I'm happy to support and this initiative and yeah look forward to seeing participating in all the events going forward without a call to question all in favor motion carries unanimously he got counselor French is joining us online counselor stoner

Jenna Stoner
0:09:58 (0:00:41)

yeah thank you so some may remember when this was previously waste reduction week we used to have a council Challenge on who could produce the least amount of waste in the week and we'd measure out and weigh all of our waste and we'd come back with our tallies and see who the winner was as we move to Circular economy month that's a bit of a trickier challenge but I would like to move a council challenge for who can provide the most unique or Innovative item for repair reuse or rescue during the month of October and staff would be able to will be the judges of which item is the most unique

Armand Hurford
0:10:39 (0:00:00)

is

Lauren Greenlaw
0:10:40 (0:00:02)

that a is that a secondary oh yeah I'm accepting that challenge

Armand Hurford
0:10:43 (0:00:03)

oh wow okay would you like to speak to a counselor

Jenna Stoner
0:10:47 (0:00:06)

I think I already did but I will send the actual wording to our wonderful folks who are taking minutes

Armand Hurford
0:10:53 (0:00:06)

okay I feel like you might have a bit of a head start on us in this project but that's okay that's okay councilor panigale

Chris Pettingill
0:10:59 (0:00:10)

I'm intrigued I'm trying to think of something but just so I'm clear do we have to be able to fix it as well or just find something that's really unique for someone else to fix

Jenna Stoner
0:11:09 (0:00:14)

I believe I heard staff say that there were two repair cafes one repair Cafe scheduled in October and so I would say that you can find somebody else to repair it if that's what's necessary to keep it out of the landfill

Armand Hurford
0:11:23 (0:01:02)

okay any further comments on this or clarifications of the rules as it were they're gray a little that's okay seeing none I'll call the question all in favor motion carries I'm looking forward to reporting out on this particular motion come November I suppose okay thank you very much for joining us next moving on to item four one which is under staff reports is Valley Cliff Child Care partner agreements and we have our team joining us over to you feel free to take a second if you need to get signs up or whatever else you need to do thank you foreign

SPEAKER_15
0:12:26 (0:01:44)

we're just going to need one moment to upload the correct file apologies foreign

Valleycliffe Childcare Project Partner Agreements
0:14:01 (0:25:55)

The presentation was given by Sarah McJanet, a community planner, and Nav Triplett from real estate services. They were joined by their partners from Sea to Sky Community Services, Chelsea Brubacher and Cheryl Simpson. The focus of the presentation was the Valley Cliff Child Care Project, a priority project aimed at increasing the supply of child care spaces within Squamish. The purpose of the meeting was to seek council endorsement and authorization for three additional agreements for the project. These agreements include a partnership agreement with Sea to Sky Community Services, a sublease for the facility and its operation, and a landlord acknowledgment of sublease between the Board of Education School District 48 and Sea to Sky Community Services.

The Valley Cliff Child Care Project is a joint partnership agreement, with the presenters being the lead applicant to obtain the Child Care BC new spaces funding. They received initial funding in March 2022 of two million dollars and an additional half a million dollars in March 2023 through a cost escalation process. The project has experienced some delays due to an archaeological impact assessment in May, which found cultural materials on site. They anticipate receiving provincial and First Nations permits in October, which will allow the project to move forward.

The agreements required for the project were outlined by Nav Triplett. These include an interim agreement and head lease between the district and School District 48, a landlord acknowledgment of sublease signed by all three parties, and a sublease and partnership agreement between the district and Sea to Sky Community Services. The sublease covers a 2300 square meter area for a nominal lease of one dollar, with a 17-year term tied to the head lease. The district would be responsible for all structural components of the facility, while Community Services would complete routine maintenance. The partnership agreement secures the commitment for the long-term operation of the facility, with Sea to Sky Community Services agreeing to deliver the project and perform duties of the authorized and licensed operator for the term required by the funding agreement.

SPEAKER_15
0:14:11 (0:03:29)

foreign thank you so much Council apologies for that technical delay my name is Sarah mcjanet Community planner with me is nav Triplett with real estate services and I'd also just like to acknowledge and welcome our partners see the sky community services so we have Chelsea brubacher director of Service delivery as well as Cheryl Simpson manager of child care services so the valley Cliff Child Care Project is a priority project that is helping us Advance our ocp goals and objectives to increase the supply of child care spaces within Squamish as well as partnership building outlined in our child care action plan and as we know available accessible and affordable child care is a critical amenity and necessary social infrastructure to help provide quality Early Learning and enable local Workforce participation the purpose today is to seek counsel endorsement and authorization for three additional agreements for the valley Cliff Child Care partnership project today's agreements include the partnership agreement with Ceta Sky community services and a sublease for the facility and its operation as well as an um a landlord acknowledgment of sublease between the Board of Education School District 48 and see the sky community services so I'll pass it over to nav to walk through oh I'm sorry one more slide before summarizing the agreements and key terms as a recap this is a joint partnership agreement as you know and we have been the lead applicant to obtain the child care BC new spaces funding and with that successful award our role has been to administer the Grant and manage the project design and build out and subleasing the space to the operator we received initial funding in March of 2022 of two million dollars and we were successful in obtaining another half a million dollars in March 2023 through a cost escalation process and in terms of the ongoing operation of the child care facility under the funding agreement with the province there is a minimum 15-year operating period that is tied as a commitment with the funding in terms of our updated timeline that you can see on the bottom of this slide we are nearing the completion of the costing and final design stage we have experienced some delays in this project this spring summer we undertook an archaeological impact assessment in May and this required us to get another site alteration permit because there were positive results and some cultural materials found on site we anticipate receiving our provincial and First Nations permits in October which will enable us to move forward and so we are continuing this final detailed design and costing and Earnest we are bringing a capital project update as part of next week's budget review alongside Finance for some holistic review and find following our final cost planning we will be the next step will be preparing at building permit submittal and tender for a winter construction start so that's a bit of an update over on the overall timeline and I'll just pass it to nav for the agreements and key terms

SPEAKER_17
0:17:40 (0:01:44)

thank you Sarah so in order to facilitate this project various Agreements are required between the three parties already approved we had the interim agreement and head lease between the district and School District 48 and then we need a landlord acknowledgment of sublease that is signed by all three parties and then between the district and see the sky Community Services we have a sublease and partnership agreement so the three agreements in red are in front of council today and this is just a layout of the area just so you have an idea of the lease area and that's outlined inbred on both drawings and then the building is shown on the right side key terms of the sublease it's about 2300 square meters it's a nominal lease for one dollar we have a 17-year term which is tied to the Head lease one year notice by either partying or to terminate and for maintenance the district would be responsible for all the structural component components of the facility and then Community Services will complete routine maintenance in terms of equipment and Furnishings there is a schedule that outlines what the district will be providing for the landlord acknowledgment form that document is what sd48 consents to the sublease between the district and seaside community services and all three parties need to sign that one in terms of that agreement the other key terms are that the district would be responsible for everything still under the head lease and any other further subleasing would require permission from sd48 and I'll turn it back to Sarah to talk about the partnership agreement

SPEAKER_15
0:19:25 (0:02:48)

thank you nav so on the partnership agreement this is essentially where we secure the commitment for the long-term operation of the facility as required in the funding agreement with the province so subject to requirements in the community charger Charter we are providing assistance to the non-profit operator in the form of the subleased premises as well as these eligible Capital project costs and on Ceta Sky Community Services part there's a consent to deliver the project and perform duties of the authorized and licensed operator for the term required by the funding agreement which is 15 years to maintain the number of licensed Child Care spaces at the facility which is 36 within this Standalone child care and there's also after school care existing within the school itself as well that is operated by Ceta Sky Community Services and there are some other commitments around annual reporting licensing and insurance and the Child Care Program Administration and management itself so the agreement the partner agreement outlines the responsibilities for the District of Squamish and then also what city Sky Community Services is responsible for and this also includes as nav mentioned within the sublease routine maintenance repair and replacement of leasehold improvements while the district ends up being responsible for the base building itself so with the staff report there are four distinct resolutions for Council consideration today and I'll just read them out although they are extremely long um so apologies for that so firstly the resolution is that Council endorse the project partnership agreement and sublease agreement with Ceta Sky Community Services Society for the building and land located on a portion of 38430 Westway Avenue based substantively on the terms and conditions attached to the report secondly that Council endorsed the landlord acknowledgment of sublease with Sea to Sky community services and the Board of Education of school district 48 based substantively on the terms and conditions and attached to the report thirdly that Council authorized mayor and corporate officer to execute the project partnership and sublease agreement and landlord acknowledgment of sublease in a final form approved by the CAO and finally that the CAO be authorized to approve and execute any further documents related to the administrative matters covered under our delegation by law that concludes the presentation we welcome questions and comments thank you so much

Armand Hurford
0:22:13 (0:00:02)

thank you I have counselor Stoner to get us started

Jenna Stoner
0:22:16 (0:00:31)

thank you through the chair thanks for all us staffs in our partners work in trying to sort out the details here an important project for our community I do have a few questions around the partnership agreement and then also the timing here so the first one is around the partnership agreement I didn't see anything in there around the expectation of affordability of the cost of which child care would be provided to our community I'm just curious if that's something that's been discussed with the partners

SPEAKER_15
0:22:47 (0:00:43)

thank you for the question just around the cost of space to families for the project it's something that we will re-engage with see the sky around currently see the sky community services and I will ask our partners to please correct me if I get this wrong but they are part of the application and have been successful in the 10 a day sites for some of these some of their services within the community I don't know if this one would be eligible and has to would require another application but we can definitely report back to council around eligibility and whether what the project inclusion is around the 10 a day site

Jenna Stoner
0:23:31 (0:00:28)

okay thank you that would be helpful especially to inform our future conversation so your staff report does speak to an additional cost escalation that is anticipated and that would be the second for this project recognizing there are challenges on the site in the reality of construction that were in this day and age I am curious what the potential risks are by signing these agreements today and not having had that conversation to cover the Gap in funding that we're starting to see emerge

SPEAKER_15
0:24:00 (0:01:24)

thank you for the question through to Olive Council certainly this has been a long journey with the project and we've been at this for probably four years the agreements that have been drafted and underway we've been working on them for quite a while and this is happening in tandem with the detailed integrated design and costing that's happening as mentioned in the report we are we did receive a Class C estimate and that is showing continued escalations although it's a small consolation the escalations are not as great as we saw between the costing that we had upon application 2021 to 2022 they are softening a little bit but there is a shortfall the numbers are still in flux we are as mentioned we're bringing a more fulsome update to council as part of the capital discussion through the budget to talk about troubleshooting around the these escalations and what to do there we're not at this sort of that decision point today around that so we wanted to continue to bring these agreements forward knowing that there's you know flux around the pricing but we we'd be happy to get into more depth of discussion next week with Finance around that

Jenna Stoner
0:25:24 (0:00:12)

okay appreciate that response I just want to push on it a little bit so if we move to approve these agreements but next week we don't approve in addition to the capital budget to cover the cost difference than what happens

SPEAKER_15
0:25:37 (0:00:25)

that would be a decision of counsel and so these the endorsement today around in principle around the agreement if there's a decision later on not to move forward with the project for any reason then we would halt any progress around the agreement and these also will require the agreements to be in the final form and they're not there yet but they're almost there

Armand Hurford
0:26:03 (0:00:06)

thank you we're going to go to counselor French and then pettingo

John French
0:26:09 (0:00:39)

thanks mayor in schedule B equipment and Furnishings list the list includes major equipment and Furnishings to be included and provided there are five notes in the list and the final one is large play equipment within the outdoor play Space the schedule indicates that these items will be up to a value of x dollars and I'm wondering at this point in the process do we know what that x amount is so between the time when the report was written and today do we have that figure now and if we don't when might we know that figure

SPEAKER_15
0:26:49 (0:01:29)

thank you so much counselor French for that question um the equipment appendix schedule B the equipment and Furnishings list is an intention to be upfront about what is included within the base building in terms of fixtures and Cubbies and all those types of built-ins and what's provided and this is really helpful for the partner as they move forward with their own costing and equipment that they're bringing in the as part of our project under the new spaces fund all of the capital major pieces that are part of that Base building are included and eligible within the project including large play equipment so those are that's equipment that would be outside in the um in the outdoor play area and that's part of the licensing requirement to have all these fantastic play spaces and learning environments in the budget right now we have a hold a holding value of thirty thousand dollars for some of that play equipment as mentioned the class C estimate there's a lot in flux we're doing a lot of work right now in scrutinizing every single cost within the building and so our hope is to maintain good value around that outdoor play but until that costing is finalized um we don't have a value there but we will try and get as close to it as possible upon finalizing the agreement as long as we get there

John French
0:28:19 (0:00:41)

okay great and I have one more the commencement date is proposed to be the day immediately after ministerial consent is obtained and I see on page 10 of 35 in the least details document a note that the commencement of construction of the leasehold improvements will occur on or before and then there's a school district 48 note here that says parties to discuss appropriate outside date so I'm wondering what can staff tell us about the setting of this date has it been set since the agenda was created will are we looking like this week next month next year

SPEAKER_15
0:29:00 (0:00:14)

thank you for the question I just I'm hoping for some clarity counselor French is your question about the ministerial date with the Ministry of Education can you just repeat the reference that you're speaking

John French
0:29:15 (0:00:11)

to yeah I'm more concerned or interested in start of construction indeed

SPEAKER_15
0:29:26 (0:00:51)

that's a moving Target right now certainly as we look at the costing short or the costing the budget piece getting that authorization to kind of keep going from there we will um look back at the schedule and some of it is also tied into the construction start is tied into the site alteration permit piece with the province as well so we're um for sites that where archaeological materials have been found we are unable to do any ground disturbance until that permit is in place so there's a number of components that are in flux that we're getting confirmation around and the construction schedule and start date will fall out of the budget decision and the cite alteration permit

John French
0:30:18 (0:00:04)

okay great clearly many moving Parts here thanks chair

Armand Hurford
0:30:22 (0:00:01)

thank you counselor

Chris Pettingill
0:30:24 (0:00:34)

yeah thanks and thanks for the work on this it has been a long time running and I just want to make sure I'm sort of I'm setting my expectations appropriately so there was an initial escalation and there was a lot of lobbying with Pemberton and we got those escalations covered my recollection is we had indication from the province that you know they sort of understood the circumstance we might expect them to come along with us so am I correct in thinking we are optimistic that the province will take care of this most recent round of escalation and we're just waiting for confirmation from them is that correct

SPEAKER_15
0:30:58 (0:01:03)

to the escalation process that we went into the with the province in 20 the I guess it's the end of 2022 um that escalation process was involved and our indication from The Province at that time was that we were not going to go through the escalation process multiple times with the province in the funding agreement municipalities are like the grant or the grant recipient is responsible for cost overruns that is clear in the agreement something that we need to manage in terms of risk and so that will be the subject of more discussion next week as we look at the cost escalations in more detail the shortfall as well as opportunities to leverage any potential funding on our end but our understanding from The Province to date is that cost escalation we can't continue to go back around cost escalations

Chris Pettingill
0:32:01 (0:00:19)

okay so then what I'm hearing I think then is there's no point in planning another round of lobbying it's we need to think about scope and or funding it through taxes or different grants is sort of where we're at

SPEAKER_15
0:32:21 (0:00:25)

I would never say no to lobbying like I feel like this Council does that so well but at this point in time staff's understanding from discussion with provincial staff is that municipalities that have been receiving funding that we've gone through these escalations but it's not a continual kind of Open Door around multiple cost escalation requests

Chris Pettingill
0:32:46 (0:00:25)

okay thank you and then just Switching gears and I believe we did have some discussion about this previously but given our discussions this morning I just want to understand is the building being constructed so it can be moved at the end of the lease I'm less worried given the partners involved in this case but is that sort of the plan that we would move it as opposed to tear it down at the end of the lease if the school board said hey we need to expand our school we need the space back

SPEAKER_15
0:33:12 (0:00:43)

thank you for the question through to all of council the building is being designed and constructed as a permanent building on the site it's not a temporary or a portable building part of the decision around that was longevity and the ability to for good value and to build a resilient building that will last as opposed to putting up a port you know a portable that has a shorter lifespan in terms of deconstruction with this you know any building can be deconstructed and moved but this is a not easily deconstructed it's not a kind of like a modular mobile type building that can be lift it up and placed elsewhere

Chris Pettingill
0:33:56 (0:00:29)

so if I can follow up on that and you know that in general makes sense again I'm less concerned because of the partners involved but it does strike me a bit strange than the language of the contract is pretty explicit that at the end of the lease we're responsible for removing the structure and everything which kind of goes against that is there a reason why we went with that language given our sort of long-term intent with the building

SPEAKER_17
0:34:25 (0:00:32)

through the chair so that is standard language that we've worked through with them and we've kind of left it so that it's open to negotiation at the end too because we don't know where things will be at we have a 17-year term and then a six-year renewal and then we can open up discussions earlier than that and say hey do we foresee using this space continually does the school district want to take this on so that it's the language is still open to discussion at that point so we can have those conversations closer too

Armand Hurford
0:34:57 (0:00:22)

thank you Council I've enjoyed the discussion we're going to come back to some pieces of this shortly so for now I'd be looking for someone to move staff recommendations or something else if that's what they could desire removing the staff recommendations yeah if I can move all four of them at the same time I think we can do we can do all four of these together I'll second that would you speak to it

Andrew Hamilton
0:35:20 (0:00:22)

Earl I think this highlights the complexity of bringing together a project with many partners I think it's really important that we do this work and then we do it carefully and I thank you and your partners the partners for all the diligent work you're doing on this it's taking a long time and it'll continue to take a long time and effort but it's worth it so thank you

Armand Hurford
0:35:42 (0:00:01)

go ahead counselor stoner

Jenna Stoner
0:35:44 (0:01:03)

thank you through the chair I will be supporting the motion on the floor I do think that there's a lot of work that's gone into getting these agreements to where they are and in principle I think it's direction we need to be going there is still a big question for me on next week's discussion around the cost escalation and we're now looking at over 80 000 of space and Municipal tax dollars or amenity funds to cover that Gap and so for me coming back to that conversation next week it'll be important to understand what the affordability level is if these units or if these spaces can be rolled into the 10 day Child Care Program or if that's an additional round of advocacy that see the sky Community Services needs to do with the province just understanding that landscape for me is going to be really important for forthcoming conversations but I think having these places these pieces all in order depending on future or future decisions of Council on the funding piece I will help hopefully expedite that work and minimize any further delays so I will support the motion on the floor thank you

Armand Hurford
0:36:47 (0:02:32)

thank you I'm happy to see this piece of this complicated puzzle move forward and as we've talked about throughout this we have another touch Point coming up that will be that will be critical I I'll um reinforce the point around clearly understanding what the affordability like what is the product that we're delivering to the to the community particularly when we're being asked for you know to take some sort of some steps that we weren't considering or that we've done our best to avoid along this journey of child care um thus far so I understand that would be would be helpful for me as well seeing no other hands I'll call the question all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you very much and we'll see you back next week so Council we're slightly behind our projected our projected time but we're going to go to item four two which is the 2024 permissive tax exemption discussion with Miss Souza from our the director of financial operations foreign thank you hello before we proceed too far I want to highlight that councilor Anderson in the past has declared a conflict on one of the on one of the one of the properties in question so which is the Golf Course is that is that going to hold true at this point counselor Anderson

SPEAKER_19
0:39:20 (0:00:13)

yes mayor Hereford thank you for bringing this up and conveniently the item is located as the last one item e and I will be excusing myself from discussion of that item as I will explain as we come

Armand Hurford
0:39:33 (0:00:27)

to it yeah thank you I just want to highlight that for staff going in just if we could avoid discussion of the that particular property until we until we have to and which point to allow councilor Anderson to participate as fully as possible in the rest of the discussion room thank you but over to you

2024 Permissive Tax Exemptions
0:39:56 (1:12:47)

The Director of Financial Operations at the District, Rhian Sousa, presented on permissive tax exemptions (PTEs) at the council meeting. The two main goals of the presentation were to receive council endorsement of the amendments to the permissive tax exemption policy and to receive council direction on which permissive tax exemption applications to bring forward for bylaw first three readings at the October 3rd regular business meeting.

Sousa explained that a council may exempt land and/or improvements from property taxes, which are referred to as permissive tax exemptions. A PTE will exempt all property, municipal and other, and redistribute the taxes to other taxpayers. A PTE may be granted for up to a 10-year period and council must give public notice of the proposed PTE bylaws prior to adoption. A PTE differs from General statutory tax exemptions granted under Section 220 of the Community Charter in that the decision to grant a PTE is at council's discretion.

In 2022, the PTE policy was amended to include non-market and affordable housing criteria. Staff have reviewed the criteria and have further improvements to recommend. These include the removal of paragraph 1. 1 as it's a duplicate of the requirement that an application must meet criteria contained in sections 224 to 227 of the Community Charter, removal of the criteria that a non-market and/or affordable housing operator of a provincially owned building is not eligible for a PTE, addition of a criteria to clarify that if a non-market and/or affordable housing operator is eligible for property tax funding that it's not eligible for a PTE, and change of the application due date from the last Friday in August to the due date published in the application.

Eight applications were received this year and staff assessed the applications against both legislation and the district's PTE policy. A detailed summary of each organization can be found in the report to council. The total 2024 taxes redistributed to other taxpayers is estimated to be four thousand seven hundred and seventy six thousand dollars. The motions before Council are first the amendments to the district of Squamish permissive tax exemption policy as well as the eligible applicant permissive tax exemptions are brought forward for first three readings to the October 3rd regular council meeting.

SPEAKER_09
0:40:01 (0:06:50)

good afternoon mayor and Council my name is Rhian Sousa and I'm the director of financial operations at the district to assist with addressing me my pronouns are she and her I'm here today to present on permissive tax exemptions also known as ptes the two goals of the presentation today are to receive Council endorsement of the amendments to the permissive tax exemption policy and to receive Council Direction on which permissive tax exemption applications to bring forward for bylaw first three readings at the October 3rd regular business meeting for Council in the community's background I'll first review the legislation a council made by bylaw exempt land and our improvements from property taxes which are referred to as permissive tax exemptions a permissive tax exemption will exempt all property Municipal and other and redistribute the taxes to other taxpayers a permissive tax exemption may be granted for up to a 10-year period and Council must give public notice of the proposed permissive tax exemption bylaws prior to adoption a permissive tax exemption differs from General statutory tax exemptions granted under Section 220 of the Community Charter and that the decision to Grant a permissive tax exemption is at council's discretion continuing with background information in 2022 the permissive tax exemption policy was amended to include non-market and affordable housing criteria when staff presented the 2023 permissive tax exemption applications to council last year Council directed staff to continue to review the non-market and affordable housing criteria and bring it back to Council of further amendments are recommended as directed staff have reviewed the criteria which included discussions with non-market and affordable housing operators in Squamish and have further improvements to recommend the improvements are as follows first is the removal of paragraph 1.1 as it's a duplicate of the requirement that an application must meet criteria contained in sections 224 to 227 of the Community Charter the second is removal of the criteria that a non-market and or affordable housing operator of a provincially owned building is not eligible for a pte as the ownership of the building is not the driver as to whether the operator will receive property tax funding the third is to add a criteria to clarify that if a non-market and or affordable housing operator is eligible for property tax funding that it's not eligible for a pte to ensure other funding sources are exhausted before applying for a pte fourth is to change the application due date from the last Friday in August to the due date published in the application to allow appropriate time for staff to perform due diligence procedures the District of Squamish pte program has an annual intake this year eight applications were received staff assessed the applications against both legislation and the district's pte policy a detailed summary of each organization can be found in the report to council although the Squamish Valley Golf Club is on this side I will not speak to it while going through it I'll now move into permissive tax exemption applications that staff reviewed I'll speak to whether they meet eligibility criteria and the estimated pte value for 2024 the manquam river access society's application meets both the legislative and District policy criteria the estimated pte value for 2024 is 1 381 dollars Sea to Sky Community Services Center Point and riverstones applications meet the legislative criteria and the amended District policy criteria the estimated pte values for 2024 or 15 990 dollars and twenty three thousand seven hundred and three dollars respectively to note if Council does not approve the staff recommended amendments to the permissive tax exemption policy the seat of Sky Services applications will not be eligible the Sea to Sky Community Services Foundry and youth center application meets both the legislative and District policy criteria the estimated pte value for 2024 is 7 427 dollars the cetus guy Montessori Society application for the Montessori School meets both legislative and District policy criteria the estimated pte value for 2024 is 4 478 dollars the Squamish helping hand Society application for the overdose prevention site meets both legislative and District policy criteria the estimated pte value for 2024 is 18 904 dollars these Squamish helping hand Society application for Under One Roof meets both legislative and District policy criteria the estimated pte value for 2024 is 2232 dollars and at the request of the chair I will not speak to the Squamish Valley Golf Club until a conflict has been declared if counsel moves forward and grants ptes for each of the eligible applications for the time period recommended by staff the municipal and other taxes that will be redistributed are 105 000 in 2024 50 000 in 2025 52 000 in 2026 and 55 000 in 2027 when the 2024 applications are added to the ptes that have been granted in previous years for 2024 the total 2024 taxes redistributed to other taxpayers is estimated to be four thousand seven hundred and seventy six thousand dollars a summary of the Motions before Council are first the amendments to the district of Squamish permissive tax exemption policy as well as the eligible applicant permissive tax exemptions are brought forward for first three readings to the October 3rd regular council meeting I'll now turn it back over to the chair thank you

Armand Hurford
0:46:51 (0:00:13)

thank you very much so Council we'll do a session of questions on this and we'll steer clear of the golf course and then we'll handle those at the end but go ahead councilor Hamilton

Andrew Hamilton
0:47:05 (0:00:43)

thanks very much through the chair I've just got I've got two questions um that are probably more about feeling my feeling my understanding in the earlier in our summary and in your summary said the ownership is and doesn't isn't the driving Factor yeah but I'm confused by the then when we talk about the developer being the owner is the is the for-profit or not-for-profit characterization or status of the owner is that relevant

SPEAKER_09
0:47:48 (0:00:11)

yes it is under the Community Charter only our for-profit companies are automatically not eligible for a permissive tax exemption

Andrew Hamilton
0:48:00 (0:00:36)

okay thanks then my second question in the community chartered under the statutory tax exemptions 221 Point L talks about statutory tax exemptions for private schools do does the Montessori qualify I assume they would if I assume there's not some Grand mistake here but why doesn't the Montessori School satisfy the requirements for the statutory tax exemption

SPEAKER_09
0:48:36 (0:00:09)

I don't have the legislation right in front of me but I can confirm that they don't and can bring that back at a further time

Andrew Hamilton
0:48:46 (0:00:05)

thanks I'll hold my other question for later thank you counselor stoner

Jenna Stoner
0:48:52 (0:00:37)

thank you through the chair wanting to pick up on the piece around the ownership of provincially owned affordable and or non-market housing buildings we had a lot of discussion about this last year when we first brought this policy in and appreciate that staff have had a year to work with it still feels like a little bit of a download it's a provincially owned building and they're choosing not to pay Municipal property taxes so how does that differ from other provincially owned buildings in the municipality

SPEAKER_09
0:49:29 (0:00:20)

once provincially so to take a step back provincially owned buildings are generally statutorily exempt from taxation what does make them taxable is when they're vested so the fact that a non-profit is operating out of those buildings then makes it taxable

Jenna Stoner
0:49:50 (0:00:11)

and do we have a sense if there's other municipalities who have moved in this direction to support this level of permissive tax exemption for provincially owned non-profit housing

SPEAKER_09
0:50:01 (0:00:20)

last year when we were researching this other municipalities it was quite a range as to when they supported it and the level of support So in terms of this specific circumstances to whether a provincially owned building hasn't been a topic of discussion that we've moved

Jenna Stoner
0:50:21 (0:00:22)

into and from our non-profit housing providers do we know if they're advocating to BC housing to in like to extend their contracts to cover these sorts of costs or is this just something that they're expecting the municipality to do

SPEAKER_09
0:50:43 (0:00:23)

so through the chair sorry I've been missing that throughout the presentation through the chair the operating agreements were provided to staff for the purpose of reviewing a permissive tax exemption however the details are confidential they're not publicly known so I can't actually speak to that specific point

Jenna Stoner
0:51:06 (0:00:17)

okay and then finally the permissive tax exemption for Ceta Sky Montessori Society I feel like that one has come before us before we haven't supported it I'm just wondering if you can speak to the history or if they've previously received

SPEAKER_09
0:51:24 (0:00:45)

for the past two years is quite a new it's quite new that it's been operated out of the loggers Lane location it has been put forward by Squamish Montessori Society for a PTA application last year and the year before it was not granted and primarily due to the fact that there's two operations from that location one's a for-profit company and one's a not-for-profit company only the not-for-profit expenditures are eligible for pte so the delineation between the two becomes difficult in this case the owner operator has put forward that it's a 50 split so that's how we moved forward with the assessment

Armand Hurford
0:52:09 (0:00:11)

you're good for now okay I'm gonna go to counselor French and thank you for using the hand icon counselor French that's we need yeah but go ahead and then um counselor penangel to follow

John French
0:52:21 (0:00:26)

okay so with that wondering what is the advantage of taking out the specific reference to an identifiable date on the calendar for submitting applications so staff wanting to move to a date that's determined year by year by staff what's motivating that particular rewarding change

SPEAKER_09
0:52:47 (0:00:26)

through the chair the motivation is now that we have non-profit or sorry not non-profit non-market as well as affordable housing organizations applying the complexity of review has increased significantly and takes significantly more time so that's why we are proposing to move back the due date to make sure that we do have the appropriate amount of time to review those applications

John French
0:53:14 (0:00:23)

okay so then my next question was going to be will it still fall close to that traditional last Friday in August and I'm anticipating the answer to that is no because you need a bit more time so what kind of what length of more time are you anticipating might be needed

SPEAKER_09
0:53:38 (0:00:31)

through the chair we're still working through the details of the additional time that would be needed however when moving the due date back it would be um well shared with the public so that the public is very aware that of the date and in addition to that any ptes that are expiring we do notify The Operators so they're aware that they need to reapply as well as what the what the deadline for applications are

John French
0:54:09 (0:00:05)

great thank you for that additional info

Armand Hurford
0:54:15 (0:00:01)

thank you Council pentagon

Chris Pettingill
0:54:17 (0:00:11)

yeah a couple things and so as I recall religious organizations have a statutory exemption for the building is that correct

SPEAKER_09
0:54:28 (0:00:16)

yes under section 222 220 of the Community Charter religious building or organizations receive a permissive tax exemption for the building and basically the footprint so then the other area is taxable unless a permissive tax exemption is granted

Chris Pettingill
0:54:45 (0:00:32)

okay so we have a list of criteria about what things we sort of look for I guess in non-statutory pte applications but are we able to sort of as we do with Community enhancement grants or did in the past ask for a report even when organizations have a statutory exemption of you know roughly how many people they serve the demographics of who they're serving so even if we you know it's a statutory we still have an understanding of the benefit for that exemption

SPEAKER_09
0:55:17 (0:00:11)

through the chair as part of the application process the application does request that information so if that's something Council would find helpful to include in the pte presentations going forward that can be done

Chris Pettingill
0:55:29 (0:00:56)

yeah I personally I'll see what my colleagues think but I think that would be um useful for us and the public to sort of be aware of sort of you know cost benefit of these exemptions the other piece I just I note 2.1 in the existing policy Council may consider to not give a grant need for organizations receiving a permissive tax exemption but when I look at our existing Grant Aid policy I don't see the sort of companion to that and I don't believe unless I'm mistaken our partner organizations that are actually delegating those grants now are checking pte so is that sort of an obsolete piece or is that something that we need to beef up or are we sort of validating that and I guess the concern was that we're actually giving some organizations a greater piece and wanting to understand how much we're actually sharing

SPEAKER_09
0:56:25 (0:00:27)

through the chair although I wasn't here when the policy was first drafted certainly here when it's being amended it's a provision that gives Council the option it's not it doesn't mean that Council can't Grant to Grant denaid it could be removed because it the same outcome it's the same outcome whether it's in there or not if directed I can we can remove that

Chris Pettingill
0:56:53 (0:00:21)

yeah I just I don't have a I wonder if this is a council decision if we actually want to remove it or want to put a companion piece in the community enhancement Grant or just make that a criteria so there's an understanding of who overall is getting how much money just something that jumped out at me but I'll leave it there for now thank you

Armand Hurford
0:57:14 (0:00:51)

I'll ventric a question of my own foreign Port the some of the numbers of the estimated ptes I felt were a little they seemed odd they seemed odd to me and I and I wonder just to make sure that I'm gonna under understand this completely um when we look at we can use it let's use the overdose prevention facility and Under One Roof to me the numbers for Under One Roof the exemption would be for two thousand two hundred and thirty two dollars but for the other facility it's eighteen thousand and given the footprint of the ex the one of Under One Roof is substantially larger I just can you help me reconcile those and

SPEAKER_09
0:58:05 (0:00:11)

through the chair Under One Roof is 97 class three and that doesn't attract property taxes so only three percent of Under One Roof is attracting property taxes

Armand Hurford
0:58:17 (0:00:16)

okay thank you the something else is going on radar was going off and there it is okay so then the three seven eight seven zero Third Ave would be 100 of the of the taxation for that property is that correct

SPEAKER_09
0:58:33 (0:00:02)

through the chair yes that's correct

Armand Hurford
0:58:36 (0:00:18)

okay no thank you that fills that Gap and understanding for me Council other questions before we move on to a session that will focus on the golf any questions around the golf course go ahead counselor stoner

Jenna Stoner
0:58:54 (0:00:50)

yeah thank you can you just remind me which projects actually include non-market housing as opposed to affordable housing I think it's the Sea to Sky community services for Spirit Creek but do you know in granted this is a detailed question but I'm just curious like how as we look to potentially expand the pte list to more affordable housing operate operated business or non-profit businesses I'm curious about the breakdown between affordable versus non-market and also forecasting the reality that we have a lot of non-market units that are about to come onto the market that are will be developer owned but may be transferred to non-profit societies and the impact that could have on our taxation overall in the long term and so I'm just curious about breaking this out between affordable and non-market

SPEAKER_09
0:59:45 (0:00:15)

through the chair since both are eligible under the permissive tax exemption policy I didn't request that specific information from The Operators

Armand Hurford
1:00:01 (0:00:25)

okay Council seeing no further questions here is there anything else while we have the group together that you're looking for feedback on before we break out into the and I would like to discuss the golf course before we do before we come back we'll do individual votes just want to make sure that we have a chance to discuss the whole picture before we do that so I'm going to go to staff first I see your hand counselor Hamilton

SPEAKER_09
1:00:26 (0:00:03)

through the chair no further feedback is needed thank you for asking

Armand Hurford
1:00:29 (0:00:03)

thank you councilor Hamilton did you have a

Andrew Hamilton
1:00:32 (0:00:06)

I was wondering if we should sever the motion so that we discussed the first four conclude on those and then continue to the

Armand Hurford
1:00:38 (0:00:19)

fourth fifth my preference right now is if we can talk about the before we move anything if we could talk about the item on the list we haven't discussed yet so we can look at the entirety and then we'll absolutely sever so counselor yes over

SPEAKER_19
1:00:57 (0:00:16)

to you thank you mayor Hereford I wish to declare a conflict on the matter of the Squamish Valley Golf Club application as a member of the Affiliated house on Curling Club my annual fees could potentially be affected by the outcome of the golf club application

Armand Hurford
1:01:14 (0:00:57)

thank you counselor so we'll give councilor Anderson a minute or two to exit and then we'll take on that discussion and then we'll have him back and we'll go through the votes and then we'll sever off this piece again okay as counselor Anderson has left we can discuss topic using conflict actually before you have a question I just want to see if give staff a chance to speak to that item and then we'll then we'll open with questions but your top of the list Council Hamilton

SPEAKER_09
1:02:11 (0:00:14)

the Squamish Valley Golf Club application meets both the legislative and District policy criteria the estimated pte value for 2024 is 31 171 dollars

Armand Hurford
1:02:25 (0:00:02)

thank you counselor

Andrew Hamilton
1:02:28 (0:00:29)

Hamilton thanks very much and so that I understand the where the context of the Squamish Valley Golf Club what is the um my understanding is they don't the land is this is not what we're talking about here it's the upgrades the buildings is that the thing that they the pro that is attracting the property tax the building improvements

SPEAKER_09
1:02:57 (0:00:35)

the full lands are least and it is the full lands the way BC assessment works with property evaluations is once something is specific use it significantly reduces what the property taxes are in regards to the what's being put forward as a permissive tax exemption are the for-profit pieces of the golf course which is the Pro Shop and the restaurant or sorry the opposite everything but the pro shop and restaurant is being put forward for a permissive tax exemption

Andrew Hamilton
1:03:32 (0:00:10)

so the use of the golf course itself we would be awarding a permissive tax exemption effectively for playing a round of golf

SPEAKER_09
1:03:43 (0:00:05)

yes that is correct

Armand Hurford
1:03:48 (0:00:01)

cancer

Chris Pettingill
1:03:49 (0:00:33)

yeah just the phrase attracting property tax is just a funny phrase to me but my question or I just want to confirm and I think I stumbled over this every year the first few years on Council but we have a as I understand a long-term agreement with the golf course that effectively obligates us we still have to go through the process but there's an agreement in place that ensures they have a pte so it's effectively a non-discretionary permissive tax exemption for the golf course until the end of that agreement is that correct

SPEAKER_09
1:04:23 (0:00:31)

through the chair it is correct there's a long-term lease agreement in place and it's in place until 2029 and in the lease agreement it does say that the property taxes will be estimated to be approximately forty five thousand this is a summer not the exact wording but approximately forty five thousand and we'll bring it down through a pte it does say that is at council's discretion each year foreign

Armand Hurford
1:04:54 (0:00:01)

other questions here councilor

Andrew Hamilton
1:04:56 (0:00:35)

Hamilton in the description of the criteria for qualifying open mem like a member being all members of the community being able to access the facilities was a criteria in considering the Squamish Valley Golf Club is actually not open to membership they have on their website they say we're not open to membership because we're full and our wait list is full how does the Squamish Valley Golf Club meet that criteria

SPEAKER_09
1:05:32 (0:00:17)

through the chair although it's not open for membership it's my understanding that you can still pay green fees and golf at the golf course

Armand Hurford
1:05:50 (0:01:31)

so counsel any I'm not seeing any other questions on this piece and I would and as I think about sort of the mechanics of handling the conflict we have I think we should sever them but we can start with this one and then we can counselor Anderson back to participate in the rest of the discussion it'll just be a little bit cleaner that way so I need to go back to the so that would be that staff would be directed to bring forward Prince of tax exemption bylaw to the regular business meeting scheduled for October 3rd for the following and we'll just and I'll go ahead and move that up item e which is for Squash Valley Golf Club by itself second in um thank you I'll speak to speak to it briefly I think this is this particular piece is a piece of sort of regular business that happens at the municipality in his part and is essentially tied up in the in the lease of those lands I'm happy to support this and it does exclude the for-profit sections of the of the golf course being the pro shop and the and the restaurant facility so I think this is a appropriate course of action go ahead counselor Stoner and then Hamilton

Jenna Stoner
1:07:21 (0:00:38)

thank you through the chair I will support the motion on the floor similar to counselor petting Gill this is one that I scratch my head every year that it comes around there is an additional line that came out in the discussion today that it's at the discretionary Council on an annual basis in the lease terms but that being said there are still lease terms and I think there is a bit of a precedent or an expectation from the proponent here that there is a PT that is granted and so I think at this point it's wise to follow through with that but interesting to consider potentially for future years and definitely Once the lease expires thank you

Armand Hurford
1:07:59 (0:00:03)

councilor Hamilton

Andrew Hamilton
1:08:02 (0:01:26)

so I'm obviously in the first tier head scratching phase I'm struggling with this to see I understand how the golf course and the curling club are valuable assets to our community but when I look at the other things that we're considering for permissive tax exemptions this seems like in a different category I understand that the pro shop and the restaurant are separated from this but it's very difficult to run a pro shop without a golf course when we ask what we are subsidizing here what we are asking other taxpayers to fund the bill on it's somebody who can already pay 70 to 80 dollars for themselves to play a round of golf and while that might be I don't play golf so I don't know if that's a very affordable rate for a round of golf but that's still not within the affordability band of many of the people that we are seeking to help with these permissive tax exemptions so going through just exactly that explanation I am going to vote against this motion

Armand Hurford
1:09:29 (0:00:03)

thank you counselor penigill

Chris Pettingill
1:09:32 (0:01:14)

yeah I think it is actually news to me that this is at the discretion of council I was under the impression it was not and that's why I had sort of bite it being counter-intuitive had gone along with it I think I still have some questions I know there's a lot of use aside from golf that the community uses and so I have a number of questions I think before I want to revoke this p t e I feel some notices do and I still have some questions so I think my inclination is to support it this year and keep with the pattern but I'm not sure about next year and I have some questions I want to understand and so for me this is a discussion that we need to have and I'm not sort of presuming Which Way well I will go because again there are other things happening there besides Golf and I want to understand that well but for me this is one for a number of the reasons my colleague spoke about that it does deserve some consideration with in the light of all the other things that R and aren't taxed so support this time but I'm not sure about next year thank you

Armand Hurford
1:10:47 (0:00:05)

thank you councilor French

John French
1:10:52 (0:00:42)

thanks mayor I am going to support this year and I'm doing so because I don't wish for Squamish Valley Golf and contrary Club to be blindsided and I think that they would be if um we were not to support this year I clearly hear what my Council colleagues are saying and I'm supportive of this conversation going into next year with um the golf club being aware that we're having the conversation so that they could potentially be prepared for an outcome that will be more costly for them

Armand Hurford
1:11:34 (0:00:05)

thank you go ahead customer

Lauren Greenlaw
1:11:40 (0:00:18)

yeah I'm going to Echo the comments of my colleagues and say I'm supportive of it in the moment but because I don't want to Blindside a local business but I think we should have some conversations about this and in the upcoming year thanks

Armand Hurford
1:11:59 (0:01:18)

thank you so with that I'll call the question all in favor opposed if any counselor Hamilton opposes motion carries thank you Can so we'll get someone run and grab counselor Anderson from the okay thank you so we'll wait for Council Anderson to rejoin and we'll run through the rest welcome back councilor Anderson we've already dealt with the matter of the Squamish Valley Golf Course in its entirety so we're now to the staff recommendations we have before us the first being that Council approved the amendments permissive to tax exemption policy as presented and then the list of properties in section two so those are the two pieces of business left on this topic I will move that Council approved the amendments to the permissive tax exemption policy as presented at this meeting are you seconding

Andrew Hamilton
1:13:17 (0:00:05)

I would just request a severing of item of the Montessori School

Armand Hurford
1:13:23 (0:00:35)

yeah I was going to do this I moved just the just the first piece and then we can we can go through and stick handle our way through the next the next list so on the first piece you're seconding that thank you I'll speak to it briefly thank you for your work on refining this policy and helping both us I guess us the community and the applicants make it make sense and work for us all so I appreciate that and I think it's absolutely reasonable seeing another hands on this I'll call the oh sorry do you want to speak to this one go ahead counselor store

Jenna Stoner
1:13:58 (0:01:16)

yeah thank you I'm still struggling with this one a little bit because I don't think I fully understand the potential implications that this has on our future tax years and what other projects may be eligible over time and it still feels like in a bit of an additional download from The Province I'm having a hard time reconciling those two things I realize that this is an all hands on deck trying to address the issues of affordable housing and this is perhaps one way that the municipality can show up in a big way but it doesn't feel entirely fair or well thought out I will support it because I feel like we are iterative in this process and so we did one way last year and we're learning from it and I think there'll be another conversation next year and I think in the interim also having a conversation with our non-profit housing providers and BC housing around recognizing the impacts this is having on Municipal budget so I think this is an advocacy piece that is landing with us with BC housing in the province but I think it's what's necessary in the interim but I don't think it'll necessarily be forever so I want that message to be clear with our non-profit housing providers that they still need to show up and start advocating to BC housing in the province that this is not going to be the be-all solution thanks

Armand Hurford
1:15:15 (0:00:01)

thank you for that Council penngill

Chris Pettingill
1:15:17 (0:01:02)

yeah I'm in a similar boat and going to support it for similar reason that I think they're just this may be a need to be iterative ongoing and maybe for people to sort of I guess some of it tauren because we want people to be able to plan their financial investments especially when it's for housing and so on but wheel size Council I think want the flexibility to understand and react so I guess we'll just have to sort of work through that as a community and make sure we are speaking together the other piece that I would think you know when we come back and look at this piece again coming up on next year is to understand the alignment with the community Grant policy that piece I called out whether we remove the language in the terms of tax exemption or add some language in the community Grant policy I think there needs to be some alignment there and so maybe when we have this discussion about the housing we can talk about that piece too because I would appreciate hearing from my colleagues on that but I don't feel that's an urgent piece to address right at the moment so I will support this

Armand Hurford
1:16:19 (0:01:28)

I think I just want to speak to a couple points so we're raised here and I think it is really important to understand if we're extremely successful in our housing policies how impactful that can be to our taxation which is essentially what we're looking at what we're looking at here sadly we're a ways away from being extremely successful in our housing initiatives but it's something that um that does need to be I would expect to be considered in future modeling going forward and when we overlay our housing needs and assessment with future taxation models I think there's a lot of interesting pieces that'll be highlighted there and frankly using this process and leaving this piece of financial up to the Council of the such an important taxation piece up to the Council of the day to continue to support isn't sustainable funding for these for these operations and frankly it's far too volatile as we sit around here contemplating these and they deserve another solution but we have this tool before us now and I think it's appropriate that we that we use it but it's absolutely imperfect in those ways we highlight it and likely others and that's why we need to continue to refine going forward so I'll call the question all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you yeah go ahead Counselor Center

Jenna Stoner
1:17:47 (0:00:28)

yeah thank you through the chair I'm just wondering if I can ask a clarifying question to staff so the permissive attacks with inference for cedis guide Community Services have all been bundled but one of them is specifically for the provincially owned Center Point and Riverstone properties and I'm just wondering if you can identify which one that is with consideration of maybe only giving it a one year pte given the comments that we just heard

SPEAKER_09
1:18:15 (0:00:05)

through the chair you'd like in the motion for me to identify which are each

Jenna Stoner
1:18:21 (0:00:06)

yeah all right specifically which one is for the center point in Riverstone properties that are provincially

SPEAKER_09
1:18:27 (0:00:58)

owned the first set of rolled numbers so 500 the 500s 500 the last three numbers are zero point four to zero point zero one eight is Center Point the next ones for the 400s ending in .002 to 0.016 are river stones and then the last or sorry the next the next one is also River Stones so ending in .037 to .051 and then the single roll number ending in our starting M500 and the end point zero five is Spirit Creek the Buckley Avenue property

Armand Hurford
1:19:26 (0:00:02)

yep go ahead counselor Stoner and then I have you counselor

Jenna Stoner
1:19:29 (0:00:18)

yeah and then just one further clarification on The Foundry see the sky I would have assumed that would have fallen under the statutory PT as it's a provincial Health Care Facility but that doesn't seem to be the case I'm just wondering where that might where that Gap might be

SPEAKER_09
1:19:47 (0:00:09)

through the chair it's being operated by ceter Sky community services so it's not exempt

Armand Hurford
1:19:57 (0:00:06)

are you good counselor Cancer Center you're good yeah okay councilor pettingo

Chris Pettingill
1:20:03 (0:00:10)

yeah I apologize I just want to make sure with the Montessori am I correct that we did not Grant a pte at all last year

SPEAKER_09
1:20:13 (0:00:05)

through the Chariots that's correct

Andrew Hamilton
1:20:19 (0:00:04)

okay thank you

Armand Hurford
1:20:23 (0:00:39)

okay so these have we have the staff recommendation before us in where I believe we have the ability to move them all together I did hear some calls for severing different pieces and some investigating investigative pieces so this would be where we would do that before someone moves everything together and we have to try to amend and so on so if anyone likes something dealt with separately from the group this would be that maybe we'll treat it that way would anyone like to pull anything from the group and then we can try to move if there is a group left we'll try to move that group and then we'll deal with what's left go ahead counselor Hamilton I'd

Andrew Hamilton
1:21:02 (0:00:06)

like to pull item 2C CSI Montessori School

SPEAKER_18
1:21:08 (0:00:00)

okay

Jenna Stoner
1:21:09 (0:00:07)

and I'd like to pull 2B

Armand Hurford
1:21:16 (0:00:27)

Okay so what's left is that the snap recommendation would include item a h d and e or D A and D and then we have D and C to deal with separately is that correct did I get you correct counts for summer B you're pulling yep I haven't moved yep go ahead

Jenna Stoner
1:21:43 (0:00:20)

and just clarify with staff again the staff report says and this is again speaking to the center point and Riverstone properties that as per the motion would that be a four-year pte that we're proposing or is it still a one year PT

SPEAKER_09
1:22:04 (0:00:19)

the through the chair the recommendation was four years and the reason it was four years is we try to align all similar organizations with the same end date so that they all come to council at the same time for consideration so the ones that were adopted last year have four years left on them

Jenna Stoner
1:22:23 (0:00:04)

but those were slightly different because they weren't provincially owned buildings correct

SPEAKER_09
1:22:28 (0:00:02)

through the chair yeah you're correct

Armand Hurford
1:22:30 (0:00:03)

Pennsylvania

Chris Pettingill
1:22:34 (0:00:33)

yeah thanks I just want to sorry with the Montessori they are the beneficiary of a CAC agreement um for a finch Drive development like we have dedicated some space as part of a CAC and it's the I guess the not for profit side of that school that is the beneficiary of that is that accurate thank you

Armand Hurford
1:23:07 (0:00:04)

I see I see a few Mr velniscus

SPEAKER_05
1:23:12 (0:00:14)

through the chair the um the development on Finch that has included commitments for child care space isn't I don't believe it's related to the pde that's being considered

Armand Hurford
1:23:26 (0:06:10)

here just on that line of line of questioning so it triggered something for me but do you have an answer on this side you want to confer yep so Council staff's asking for a timeout so we'll take a 10 minute recess it'll give us five minutes five minutes five minute recess we'll be back at 2 55 thank you foreign welcome back to the special business meeting of District Squamish for Tuesday