qathet Regional District’s planning committee is recommending that a report on Texada Island’s official community plan (OCP) be received by the regional board, and that the board give third reading and final adoption at its August 26 meeting.
At the August 10 planning committee meeting, directors did not debate the recommendation that the board receive the report, but regarding the motion to give third reading and adoption, Electoral Area D director Sandy McCormick wanted to amend it. Originally, the motion read that the committee recommend the board consider third reading and adoption, but McCormick wanted to add the date of the August regional board meeting.
McCormick said this bylaw deserves to go forward. She said development of the OCP has been an inclusive process and with meaningful input throughout the community. She said items such as clean, safe drinking water and high-speed internet continue to be elusive for many people.
McCormick said she wanted to remind the committee that the regional board is not the final approving authority for the OCP. She said it goes to the provincial government for approval. She said compliance with ministry guidelines is important, otherwise the regional district will not receive approval of the Texada Island OCP.
She said with regard to bylaws and zoning, the vision statement on the front page of the OCP is that Texada Island’s vision is to sustain an independent rural lifestyle with minimal regulations. She added that the island economy is envisioned fostering a diverse and balanced mix of resource industries, tourism, small business enterprises, agriculture and services for seniors. The vision statement concluded by stating Texada Island will adapt to change carefully, while always preserving freedoms, stewarding the natural beauty of the island, the coast and the island lifestyle.
“This vision statement makes it very clear that there is no additional permitting, zoning, during the life of this OCP,” said McCormick.
She said the proposed bylaw is the result of 27 meetings in two and a half years. She said 51 public presentations were made and that input was provided at open houses. There were also community workshops.
There was a community survey with 206 respondents.
“That’s pretty large for Texada,” said McCormick.
There were also 43 submissions to a stakeholders survey.
“All of this was considered by the planning advisory committee in developing the draft bylaw,” said McCormick. “It was an inclusive process and meaningful input was received. It was also supported unanimously by the planning advisory committee. That is why I would ask for this committee to support to move it forward.”
Committee chair and Electoral Area C director Clay Brander said he appreciated the time and effort that went into the OCP and he applauds all of those who took part. He added that he appreciated the clear way the OCP was laid out. Concerns of the public were addressed and scrutinized, he added, and he did not see any obvious reasons for changes prior to adoption.
Gisborne expresses concerns
Electoral Area B director Mark Gisborne said he had some concerns, although he is not the director from Texada Island.
“That being said, I’d still like to express my concerns based on what I’ve heard from the islanders,” said Gisborne. “Something I heard during the public hearing was regarding the democratic process. I also saw it come up in discussions on Facebook that I didn’t participate in but just read.
“The democratic process does include a committee of islanders creating the draft OCP. It also includes the public hearing. However, our democratic process also requires that three non-islanders are going to be voting on policies contained in the official community plan. That means the Texada representative is only one out of four. The majority of the planning committee is not from Texada Island.”
Gisborne said what he heard at the public hearing was that the residents didn’t want any new regulations and they wanted their OCP to reflect that view. He said he was hearing that Texada Island representative [McCormick] also shares that view that Texada Island doesn’t want any additional regulations.
“While the OCP has a vision statement that Texada Island’s vision is to sustain an independent rural lifestyle with minimal regulations, to me, minimal regulations is context sensitive,” said Gisborne. “It is a relative term. What I consider to be minimal differs from what others at this table may consider to be minimal. After every election, what is considered minimal at this table could change drastically.
“The regional district is apparently looking at increasing the regulatory burden on property owners in the electoral areas in a phased approach. I am no lawyer, but in my mind, if the regional district chose to increase regulations on Texada Island, a non-specific vision statement most likely can’t stop it. The other three directors could outvote the director from Texada Island on the matter. The question that comes up is what protection does the OCP provide to the residents of Texada?”
Brander said Gisborne was off-topic. He said the committee had a motion to recommend third reading and final adoption to the board. He asked Gisborne to focus his discussion on the item in front of the committee.
Gisborne said if the OCP contained specific policies proposing new regulations, then section 478 of the Local Government Act could potentially provide Texada residents with the tools to legally challenge the regional district for implementing regulations that are not consistent with the OCP plan policy.
He concluded by saying that whatever direction the Texada director chooses to follow, he will support it out of respect.
The committee carried McCormick’s recommendation for requesting the regional board consider the OCP bylaw third reading and final adoption at the August 26 board meeting.
