COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE

as of November 14, 2014

CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED

1. Email from AVICC and letter from Islands Trust, dated November 7, regarding Public Consultation and Coastal Ferry Contract for Performance Term 4

November 7, 2014 Pages 1 - 3

2. Letter from the Corporation of the City of New Westminster, dated November 5, regarding Fraser Surrey docks and intervenor status for thermal coal transport

November 10, 2014 Pages 4 - 5

3. Email letter from Matt Thomson, dated November 10, with report to Local Governments on the Development of a Sunshine Coast Community Land Trust

November 10, 2014 Pages 6 - 13

4. Letter from Maya Treuheit, received November 10, regarding expression of appreciation for District of Sechelt Bursary

November 10, 2014 Page 14

5. Letter from Independent Contractors and Businesses Association of BC with copy of The BC Construction Monitor, dated October 30, regarding opportunities for responsible resource development

November 10, 2014 Pages 15 – 18

6. Email from Clayton Law, dated November 11, regarding Parking Bylaw enforcement on Cowrie Street

November 11, 2014 Page 19

7. Email from Doug Saunders of Custom Carpets, dated November 12, regarding Municipal Hall carpet replacement tender

November 12, 2014 Page 20 - 21

8. Email from Rotary Club of Sechelt, dated November 13, with What's on Your Plate Debriefing Letter and copy of Food Policy Council agenda

November 13, 2014 Pages 22 - 24

9. Copy of Letter from SCRD to Minister of Environment, dated November 3, regarding Woodfibre LNG Environmental Assessment

November 13, 2014 Pages 25 – 26

10. Email from Matt, dated November 14, regarding Sunshine Coast Childcare Needs Assessment Survey

November 14, 2014 Page 27

From: Iris Hesketh-Boles [mailto:iheskethboles@ubcm.ca] Sent: November-07-14 4:10 PM Subject: AVCC Member to Member: Islands Trust Letter - Coastal Ferry Contract for Performance Term 4 Please forward to Elected Officials and the CAO. Dear AVICC Members: Please find attached a letter from Sheila Malcolmson, Chair of the Islands Trust Council regarding Public Consultation re Coastal Ferry Contract for Performance Term 4. ----- Iris Hesketh-Boles Executive Coordinator Association of Vancouver Island & Coastal Communities (AVICC) 525 Government St, Victoria, BC V8V 0A8 Tel: 250-356-5122 Fax: 250-356-5119 EM: iheskethboles@ubcm.ca avicc.ca

1

Bowen Denman Hornby Gabriola Galiano Gambier Lasqueti Mayne North Pender Salt Spring Saturna South Pender Thetis

200-1627 Fort Street, Victoria BC V8R 1H8 Telephone (250) 405-5151 Fax (250) 405-5155

Toll Free via Enquiry BC in Vancouver 660-2421. Elsewhere in BC 1.800.663.7867

Email information@islandstrust.bc.ca

Web www.islandstrust.bc.ca

October 31, 2014 File No.: 0420-20

via e-mail: premier@gov.bc.ca; Minister.Transportation@gov.bc.ca; The Honourable Christy Clark Premier of British Columbia PO Box 9041 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9E1

The Honourable Todd Stone, MLA Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure PO Box 9850, Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9E2

Dear Premier Clark and Minister Stone:

Re: Public Consultation re Coastal Ferry Contract for Performance Term 4 (2016-2020)

Thank you both for meeting with the Regional District Chairs about coastal ferry service at the Union of BC Municipalities’ annual convention. I was glad that the Premier invited us to meet again in November. Over the next nine months, the Province will make funding decisions that will determine the future of BC Ferries and our coastal communities. By late June 2015, the Province will confirm how much funding it will provide to BC Ferries through the Coastal Ferry Services Contract in years 2016-2020. We hope you will engage British Columbians in this important decision. We appreciate that Minister Stone wants to hold BC Ferries fare increases close to the level of inflation starting in 2016, but are deeply concerned that this will be too little, too late. With ferry fares scheduled to increase by 3.9% on April 1, 2015, residents, businesses and tourists will be increasingly dissuaded from ferry travel. Many fares have already increased well in excess of 100% over the past ten years. The Province needs to increase funding to BC Ferries so fares can come down and ridership can begin to recover. We expect that there will be strong interest from our communities in engaging with the Province about the appropriate amount of Provincial capital funding for provincial infrastructure projects such as ferries and terminals that are integral to coastal ferry system, and the appropriate level of cost recovery from fares and ancillary services. On October 3, 2014, I wrote to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services on behalf of the Islands Trust Council to request that the Provincial government budget sufficient funding in 2015 and future years to:

• return BC Ferry fares to a level that would be in line with cost of living increases since enactment of the Coastal Ferries Act in 2003; and,

• fund BC Ferries costs, including capital costs, at a level that will keep future fare increases in line with, or lower than, the consumer price index while meeting essential transportation needs of ferry dependent communities.

By 2012-2013, BC Ferries’ passengers were already contributing 109% of operating costs. With ferry passengers already paying for operating costs, adequate Provincial funding is needed for BC Ferries to fund upgrades to ferries and terminals. To us this seems straightforward. Non-coastal communities are not having debates about the Ministry of Transportation’s responsibility to use taxpayer funds to pay for provincial capital projects that underpin BC’s economy. As the Union of BC Municipalities’ report A Socioeconomic Impact Analysis of BC Ferries revealed, investment in BC Ferries benefits the provincial economy. As we understand it, the steps in deciding future BC Ferries fares are:

1. Currently, the Ferry Commission is taking three months to consult the public about BC Ferries’ submission for the next performance term (2016-2020) as well as BC Ferries’ 10 Year Capital Plan, and BC Ferries’ Efficiency Plan for 2016-2020 and beyond.

2. By the end of March 2014, the BC Ferry Commissioner will make a determination regarding a preliminary price cap for fares for 2016-2020.

3. By the end of June 2015 the Province will decide how much funding to provide to BC Ferries through the Coastal Ferry Services Contract in years 2016-2020.

4. After June 2014, once the provincial contribution is known, the Ferry Commissioner will make a final decision about how much ferry fares will be increased or decreased 2016-2020.

2

Premier Clark and Minister Stone October 31, 2014 Page 2

The Provincial decision about how much to support coastal transportation 2016-2020 will determine the shape of our communities into the future. The BC Ferry Commission’s current consultation, while welcome, does not offer the public any idea of the scale of upcoming fare increases. Accordingly, we request that in early 2015, once more information about the preliminary fare caps is known, the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure take a substantive amount of time to undertake a meaningful, robust public consultation process regarding future ferry fares and Provincial investment in the BC ferry system until 2020 or beyond. Our communities have a great deal of wisdom and experience to offer when consulted in a meaningful manner.

Thank you for considering this request.

Sincerely,

Sheila Malcolmson Chair, Islands Trust Council smalcolmson@islandstrust.bc.ca

cc: Trust Area MLAs: Gary Holman, Saanich North and the Islands

Don McRae, Comox Valley Doug Routley, Nanaimo – North Cowichan Nicholas Simons, Powell River – Sunshine Coast Michelle Stilwell, Parksville – Qualicum Jordan Sturdy, West Vancouver – Sea to Sky, and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure for Transportation

The Honourable Shirley Bond, Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training Gord Macatee, BC Ferry Commissioner Mike Corrigan, President and CEO, BC Ferry Services Inc. Ferry Advisory Committee Chairs c/o Trustee Alison Morse and Brian Hollingshead Bowen Island Municipality Coastal Regional District Chairs c/o Powell River Regional District Chair Colin Palmer Association of Vancouver Island Coastal Communities members Union of BC Municipalities Select Committee on BC Ferries Islands Trust Council Islands Trust website

3

4

5

From: Matt Thomson [mailto:mthomson@gmail.com] Sent: November-10-14 1:26 PM To: Connie Jordison; Natalie Chell Subject: Report on CLTs Hi Connie and Natalie, I know this comes too late to include in this week's agenda, but I would appreciate if it could be circulated to Mayor and Council for their reference. It is a slightly more in-depth report on the presentation I will give this coming Wednesday. Best, Matt -- Matt Thomson, MA Planning 778-834-4377 mthomson@gmail.com

6

Report to Local Governments on the Development of Sunshine Coast Community Land Trust Background A 2009 study by CitySpaces Consulting assessed the feasibility of a Regional Housing Corporation for the Sunshine Coast. The report found that at that time a Housing Corporation was not a feasible model for providing affordable housing solutions and instead recommended the development of an Regional Housing Committee. The report outlined some possible responsibilities of the Committee, including:

• Provide leadership and coordination for the region in the area of affordable housing.

• Make recommendations to the SCRD and municipalities on housing matters. • Assist local governments, when requested, regarding decisions to be made on

affordable housing generated from affordable housing policies. • Secure agreement between local governments and non-profits to act in a

concerted way in obtaining funding from senior governments for affordable housing. The committee could advocate for funding for the community as a whole and support the efforts of individual societies.

• Provide a continued forum for the analysis of housing need and responses by government.

• Support the region’s non-profit sector through advocacy and information-sharing.

• Continue to monitor the need for a housing authority. The Sunshine Coast Housing Committee has conducted these and other tasks since its initiation in January, 2013. However, a Housing Corporation remains an unfeasible option for the Sunshine Coast for the same reasons outlined in the CitySpaces 2009 report. While a Housing Corporation remains an unfeasible model for the Sunshine Coast, the Housing Committee has identified the need for the presence of a housing organization that can actively develop affordable housing in partnership with these organizations, local governments and other community stakeholders. The We Envision sustainability plan also notes that a key action for housing is to “build strategic partnerships to leverage opportunities to fund and build affordable and supportive housing” on the Sunshine Coast. While many local organizations have expressed an interest in partnering (Community Services, Gibsons United Church, St. Hilda’s, SCACL, SD46, private land owners) to develop affordable housing, these organizations either have a particular mandate to serve their clients or do not have the capacity to take leadership on new housing developments.

7

A promising housing model that is gaining traction in British Columbia is the Community Land Trust (CLT), a charitable non-profit society whose model provides the flexibility of a housing authority, but has access to a broader array of capital and operational funding sources. During presentations to the 3 local government funding partners in November/December 2013, the Housing Committee identified CLTs as a promising model to be considered. Further research on this option was started in 2014. The committee learned that there are a number of key reasons why a CLT represents a more feasible option for the Sunshine Coast:

• As a charitable non-profit it has a governance structure that has been established to work in the area of social services (e.g. SCACL and SCCSS), with diverse skills and a board that is geographically representative of the Sunshine Coast;

• It would not require ongoing operational funds from local government, but instead local government participation would be determined on a project-to-project basis, and only a small proportion of Housing Committee budget would be utilized in its development (>$1,000 for registration and legal fees, and limited Coordinator time);

• Resource contributions (land and cash) are more burdensome for local governments under a Housing Corporation: as a local government entity, senior governments generally expect Housing Corporations to bring significant local resources to bear. With a CLT, local government contributions to housing projects would be determined on a project-by-project basis and would remain less onerous

• There are opportunities for local government to have ongoing input into the strategic directions of the CLT;

• As a charitable non-profit it would have access to charitable funding sources which would not be available to a corporation (e.g. Gaming Grants, BC Real Estate Foundation, Sunshine Coast Community Foundation, etc.), as well as being able to issue charitable tax receipts for monetary or land donations and conduct charitable fundraising; there are also opportunities for developing social enterprises through the CLT to support ongoing operations.

To this end, the Sunshine Coast Housing Committee is looking for the endorsement of local governments on moving forward with this project. What is a Community Land Trust in the Context of Housing?

The Canadian Centre for Community Renewal defines a Community Land Trust as “a nonprofit corporation which retains title to a collection of donated or acquired lands, while permitting people or organizations to purchase, maintain, improve, and sell the buildings on those lands. Selling is subject to a resale formula that keeps the buildings affordable to households within a specific income bracket. When a house sells, its price is primarily determined by the

8

condition of the house and by the Area Median Income, not by the market value of the land which the house occupies.”1

In addition to providing a shared equity model of home ownership, CLTs are able to manage affordable rental units for community residents. For over 30 years, CLTs in the United States have been used as a grassroots tool for developing affordable rental and home ownership. There are about 250 CLTs across the US with nearly 10,000 units of housing, providing affordable housing to low and moderate-income families. CLTs across the US share five basic characteristics:

• Dual ownership (or shared equity): Ownership of the land is separated from ownership of homes located on the land (in a shared equity situation). Homeowners (or a rental co-op) are responsible for maintenance of their homes, while the CLT holds ownership of the land. Land Trusts are also responsible for managing affordable rental units.

• Affordability: CLTs protect affordability for future residents and include provisions to ensure that homeowners receive a fair return on their unit while protecting the community’s investment in affordable housing

• Commitment to local control: CLTs provide local control of housing and land through a democratic governance structure.

• Flexibility: In addition to housing (rental and ownership), CLTs may provide a range of other local public land use amenities, community services, commercial space and agricultural protections

• Land acquisition and development: CLTs are committed to ongoing acquisition and development of land to meet changing community needs.2

The shared equity model used by CLTs has proven effective in providing housing for first-time buyers with incomes well below median income. One study of seven US shared equity programs shows that they serve families between 35 and 73 percent of the local metropolitan median income. This same study shows that even after resale homes in these programs (both ownership and co-op tenure) remain affordable for a second generation of purchasers. The study shows some variation in the equity appreciation for homeowners across the seven study sites; however, all homes did appreciate in value, representing an opportunity to build equity for homeowners. The study also showed that four of the sites had a lower mortgage delinquency rate than their surrounding metro area, while the other three had comparable rates. This indicates that the shared equity model is as risky or less risky for financing institutions than standard home mortgages. Overall, the shared equity model implemented by CLTs

1 From their website: http://communityrenewal.ca/affordability-locked-in 2 Information from National Community Land Trust Network. Available at: http://www.cltnetwork.org/About-CLTs/Frequently-Asked-Questions

9

represents an innovative, low-risk option that provides benefit to both the community and homeowners. In Canada, this model has not yet seen extensive use to develop non-profit housing. While both UBC and SFU have land trusts for their own property, these differ somewhat in purpose from CLTs in the United States. Toronto Islands Trust is a land trust currently serving a single neighbourhood (2 islands) with 262 homes near downtown Toronto.3 There are other small communities in BC that are working on implementing a CLT, but at this time it is too early to evaluate these for challenges and successes. The range of benefits offered by a housing model that can provide shared equity ownership and affordable rental under a community land trust model therefore indicate that it represents a promising opportunity for re-thinking affordable housing in BC and on the Sunshine Coast. In light of this, the following questions must be answered:

• Is the CLT model viable in a small community? • Does the CLT model meet the needs of the Sunshine Coast’s residents and the

mandate of the Sunshine Coast Housing Committee? • How does a CLT differ from a Housing Corporation, and what makes it more

feasible on Sunshine Coast? Is the CLT model viable in a small community? Yes. As noted above, there are about 250 housing land trusts in the United States, in communities ranging from small to large. The San Juan Islands in Washington state represent a useful parallel for determining whether a land trust fits small communities. The San Juan Island case studies clearly demonstrate that small communities are capable of developing and sustaining a Community Land Trust, over a long period of time, to provide housing options for their residents. The location, real estate history and geographical situation of the San Juans make for a useful comparison with the Sunshine Coast. San Juan County is the American counterpart of British Columbia’s Gulf Islands, situated in the Northwestern portion of Washington State. With more than 400 islands, the majority of the county’s population (15,824 people) live on one of four islands—Orcas, San Juan, Lopez and Shaw—all of which are served by ferries. The County’s seat is in Friday Harbor, on San Juan Island. There are 13,671 housing units and 8,051 households on the islands. The median value of owner-occupied units is $494,500, up approximately 170% from the 2000 median value of $291,800. The County has a home ownership rate of 69.2% and a median household income of $51,395. 11.1% of the

3 Jim and Kathryn Woodward. “A Preliminary Examination of Alternative Administrative/Governance Models for Re-Structuring the Arrangement between the False Creek South Leased Lands and the City of Vancouver.” Published June 14, 2013.

10

population is below the poverty level.4 The size, rural character of the community, reliance on ferries, and significant increase in housing prices in recent years make San Juan County a suitable community for comparison with the Sunshine Coast when considering affordable housing solutions. San Juan County currently has three active Community Land Trusts delivering affordable housing on three of its largest islands: Orcas, San Juan and Lopez. These CLTs collectively hold 143 single-family homes, 31 rental apartments and scattered commercial/office space, and are in the process of developing more housing. Does the CLT model meet the needs of the Sunshine Coast’s residents and the mandate of the Sunshine Coast Housing Committee? Yes. The focus on below-median income households in the US examples (80% and below on the San Juan Islands, and between 35 and 73% below median in the study of seven different equity-sharing models) fits with the current need to serve independent family, single and senior households. Furthermore, the model has a number of additional benefits:

• Homeowners have an opportunity to build equity • Equity-shared homes in a CLT have been shown to remain affordable to

subsequent generations of purchasers • The equity shared model poses no greater risk to lending institutions than

conventional home ownership (and in some examples equity shared home ownership has a lower default rate)

Comparing Models A CLT differs from a Housing Corporation in a number of ways, and offers a number of advantages to small communities.

• Governance: The governance structure of a CLT is generally a community-based volunteer Board of Directors comparable to other successful charitable non-profits (e.g. SCACL and SCCSS). In comparison, a Housing Authority would be operated by a Board of Directors comprised of both local government representatives and community Directors. Jurisdictional negotiations and funding agreements would be relatively complex and could take a significant length of time.

o Role of local government: In order to ensure ongoing participation of local governments, the CLT could take responsibility for the Sunshine Coast Housing Committee upon completion of the MOU (2015), with the Committee taking on a strategic advisory role in the organization, thereby ensuring local government would continue to have an active role in setting priorities and working in partnership with the CLT

4 All statistics provided are from the 2000 and 2010 US Census, available at http://www.census.gov/2010census/data/

11

• Funding: Municipal Housing Corporations are often reliant on local governments for their initial funding, while building capacity and developing projects. Additionally, local governments are expected to provide significant resources (land, cash, etc.) when requesting funds from senior government. In the community-based CLT model, cash from other granting agencies (e.g. Real Estate Foundation of BC, BC Gaming Grants, Sunshine Coast Community Foundation, Sunshine Coast Credit Union, VanCity, etc.) can be leveraged for both startup phases and for larger projects, rather than relying on local government resources.

o Role of local government: With a CLT local government contributions are determined on a project-to-project basis, rather than being a significant prerequisite for the development of affordable housing.

• Corporate vs. Charitable Operational Model: With a local government Housing Corporation, a greater burden is placed upon the resources of local government in any new housing project. Senior government funders typically expect significant local government contributions ‘brought to the table’ with each project, which is one reason it remains unfeasible in a smaller community. Conversely, a charitable, non-profit housing CLT would have greater flexibility in its fundraising sources (as noted above), but local governments could demonstrate project support in less burdensome ways (e.g. grants in aid, planning support for rezoning, density bonusing, etc.).

• Housing types: A CLT can provide both rental and shared-equity affordable ownership, as can a Housing Corporation. However, a CLT has an advantage over conventional non-profit housing societies in BC that generally only provide some form of rental.

A CLT represents a strong model for developing housing on the Sunshine Coast for a number of reasons:

• CLTs have demonstrated significant success in communities comparable to the Sunshine Coast (San Juan Islands in Washington state)

• Less complex negotiations between local governments in developing a region-wide entity, but a continued opportunity for local government to participate in housing initiatives

• Lower initial overhead costs than a formalized Housing Authority • Flexibility in accessing charitable funding sources not available to a Housing

Corporation, including community fundraising for projects • Flexibility in delivering different types of housing comparable to a Housing

Corporation • A CLT operates on an established governance model that existing Sunshine Coast

non-profits use (e.g. SCACL, SCCSS)

Moving Forward

12

• Local Government Endorsement and Resources: Endorsement and Acting as a Founding Partner

• First Projects: Application submitted to CMHC in partnership with Community Services may have an opportunity to include Community Land Trust

• Strategic Directions: Ongoing work with Sunshine Coast Housing Committee, local government and community stakeholders to set strategic directions for the Community Land Trust

• Accessing Startup and Capital Funding: Grant opportunities are available through Real Estate Foundation of BC, BC Gaming Grants, VanCity, BC Housing, CMHC, Community Futures

• • Operational Funding: Any initial housing project will necessarily provide an a

necessary revenue stream for core operations and administration The CLT model represents a community-based housing provider model that has a number of distinct advantages over both conventional non-profit housing and municipal housing authorities. Where conventional housing providers in BC have focused largely on low-income and supportive rental, CLTs can provide both rental and shared-equity ownership housing. Housing authorities/corporations can also provide these two forms of housing; however, they usually require a significant expenditure of local government resources in the startup phase, and are restricted from applying for grants intended for charitable organizations. A charitable CLT will have the advantage of having access to grants (e.g. BC Gaming Grants) for capacity-building and startup costs, as well as ongoing projects.

13

14

15

LII-Y FaIl 2014

CONSTRUCTION MONITOR

Resource development isone of Canadas time-testedcreators of employment andwealth. A modern, federallyregulated project such as the$5.4 billion Trans Mountain oilpipeline expansion is a goodexample of this.

While Canada is a worldleader in pipeline technology

were limited to selling nearly all our oil into aglutted midwest United States market. TransMountain wants to expand capacity of a pipelinethat has operated successfully between Edmontonand Burnaby for 60 years — and get Canadian oilto higher paying markets.

The project creates $ I 8.5 billion in economicbenefits improving Canada’s balance of trade, andsupporting health care and education. It provides

108,000 person-years of employment includingskilled and semi-skilled labor engineering, manufacturing, financial services, and transportation.During construction, workers in communitiesalong the project route will spend $560 millionon services including accommodation and food.

Burnaby, home to the western terminal forthe pipeline, can expect total municipal tax payments of at least $264 million over 20 years ofoperations. Trans Mountain is already Burnaby’sthird-largest taxpayer New revenue each yearcould pay for 132 extra firefighters, or the fullcost of garbage collection.

For contractors and workers, this project canbe one of the important segments of a long,well-paid career in the construction industryFor Canada, it’s a reminder that the resourceindustry creates opportunities that are essentialto the nation’s economic health.

We’re a world leader in buildingpipelines that bring lasting benefit

Philip Hochstein

The BC CONSTRUCTION

MONITOR is an ICBA

publication providing

ahead-of-the-curve

information and

statistics on the BC

construction industry

and issues relevant to it.

The Monitor draws on

analyses and outlooks

from various sources,

and provides current

and substantive insight.

This regular publication

is intended for industry

executives, government

decision makers, journalists

and other opinion leaders.

CONTENTS:

Pipeline to a stronger

economy... Inside

A key player in Canada’s

economy... Back page

You can receive the Monitor

in print or digital formats,

and let us know if you have

colleagues who would also

be interested in it.We also

welcome your feedback and

story suggestions. Please email

us at info@icba.ca.

A winning proposition for Canada: key facts

S ince 1953, the Trans Mountain Pipeline system has been safely and efficiently providing the onlyWest Coast pipeline access for Canadian oil products. The pipeline has been adapted over the

years to meet evolving needs, A proposed expansion will, if approved, create a twinned pipeline thatwould increase the capacity of the system from 300,000 barrels per day to 890,000.

Trans Mountain proposes to spend” , i i. ii— • • r i — manufactured from

I $5 ) 0—Il N L fl r I r , high-grade steel to

•. . . .

__________________________

1xpand its oil pipeline etweenj — .Edmonton and Burnaby A

Twin ning the 1,150 km pipeline creates

fl addrtlonal tax and royalty $ I 8.5 billionvenue to government. in benefits to Canada.

$2 million per day

$pedflcato1s.

/cba Independent Contractors and Businesses Association of British Columbia16

PIPELINE TO A STRONGER BC ECONOMY hicbawww.icba.ca

Key facts aboutpipelines094%Percentage of transportation demand in Canada supplied byrefined petroleum products

O More than halfThe homes in Canada are heated by natural gas

05.0 litresThe amount of liquid spilled per million litres transported bypipeline in Canada between 2002 and 2013

O More than two thirdsOf Canada’s energy demand is met by natural gas or productsmade from crude oil

0 $81.7 billionValue of Canadian crude oil and natural gas exports in 2013— most of which was transported by pipeline

097%The percentage of Canadian natural gas and crude oilproduction transported by transmission pipelines

02.5Number of times Canada’s natural gas and liquid transmissionpipelines would circle the earth if laid end-to-end

04,200It would take an additional 4,200 rail cars to transportthe 3 million barrels of crude oil moved each day by pipelinein Canada

O 0/ Amount of global. /0 greenhouse gas emissions

that come from Canadian oil sands development.China contributes 26. I 8%, the USA I 7. I 7%.

Who gets the benefits?This chart shows where the impact of theTMEPproject will be felt across Canada. BC is the biggestwinner in jobs and increased GDR Where Albertawill see its. benefits rise is in the fiscal impacts andnetbacks from oil extraction (i.e., royalties, cost toproduce and process oil). The rest of Canada alsosees benefits, though on a smaller scale.

Jobs(person-years)

GDP lift

Fiscal impact& netbacks

• BC • Alberta Rest of Canada

0% 0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

“We must continue to say yes to

80% 90% 00%

responsible resource development.Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountainpipeline expansion will help to provideour province with the unprecedentedeconomic growth.”

— Philip Hochstein, President of the IndependentContractors and Businesses Association of B.C.

Total BC municipal taxes

paid for the expandedpipeline will equal:

565seniorteacher

salaries every year

for 20 years.

be used to hire

132 EXTRAfirefighters

Every time a tankerdocks at WestridgeMarineTerminal inBurnaby, it brings

$310,000in value to the

:EJEvery year,the City of Burnabywill receive enough

municipal taxrevenue from the expandedpipeline to fund the city’s

public librarysystem with enough leftover to fund 29 additional

library staff positions.

local economy.

• • .• .• . •. •

TTTTTTT• • .• .• . •. •

TTTTTTT• • .• .• . •. •.•.Biggest impact throughout BC

Key sectors that would see supply-chain effect.(% share of supply-chain employment effects)

Source.The Conlerence Board of Canada

• Professional Services

Other

• Manufacturing

• Wholesale Trade

• Financial Services

In Burnaby, in one year

• Transportation

alone, tax revenues could

“Our project can createthousands ofjobs andbillions of dollars in newgovernment revenue,without compromising

— Ian Anderson, President of Kinder Morgan Canada

our commitment to

4r- 4r 4r

or more than cover the

annual garbage

social responsibility and

collections costs.

environmental protection.”

Source: wwenergyaIberta.caJOlSands/pdfs/AIbertasOil5andsFactsJan I 4.pdf

17

FaIl 2014

A key player in Canada’s economyCanada’s experience with pipelines dates back to 1853. The discovery of abundant oil and

natural gas in the I 950s triggered a boom in pipeline construction and energy production

in Western Canada. Today, oil and gas exports are a mainstay of the national economy, and

Canada is a world leader in pipeline technology.

Number of BritishColumbia supplierssupported bypipeline companies.

Independent Contractors andBusinesses Association of BC

211 —3823 Henning Drive,Burnaby, BC V5C 6P3

Phone: 604.298.7795ToIl-free: 1.800.663.2865Website: www.icba.caEmail: info@icba.ca

94%of the energy used fortransportation in Canadacomes from petroleumproducts.

4 N

Commitment to safety• Technical pipeline standards are part of

federal and provincial law, and arecontinually updated.

• Canada is a world leader in pipelinetechnology, developing the world’s firststandard for corrosion coatings in the I 980s.

• Pipeline inspection tools developed in Canadaare used worldwide to look for things such ascracks, or shifting ground.

• Kinder Morgan and other members ofthe Canadian Energy Pipeline Associationspent more than $1.4 billion last year onpipeline safety.

\

I ,024

Safeguarding pipelineoperationsThe Trans Mountain ExpansionProject crosses up to 500 rivers andother water bodies, eight provincialparks, up to 15 First Nations Reservesand numerous traditional aboriginalterritories, It’s fair to wonder whatsafety features are in place.

• Modern, high-toughness steels thatresist corrosion

• Heavier pipeline walls at keylocations

• Non-destructive testing of all welds

• Inspection and cleaning modulesthat travel through the inside ofthe pipeline

• High-performance coatings

• Alarms to alert control-centreoperators of an issue

Canada’s transmission pipeline network

is more than three times the length of

Canada’s national highway system.

7

\

/icba Member of

N1ErlT.,• OFFS!TTEfl

•

carbonneutral

18

From: Gloria [mailto:claw@dccnet.com] Sent: November-11-14 1:28 PM To: Council Subject: By Law Dear Mayor and Council: As a business on Cowrie Street, we sincerely apprecited the by law that has been placed in effect regarding parking. We have complained for years about the van that used to park in FRONT of our business during entire weekends. During the week he would park on the highway or further down Cowrie. He was trying to associate himself with our jewelry store to make himself legitimate. Customers often asked if we were associated with him, which we are not. Thank you again for enforcing the bylaw against this practice. Clayton Law Nitestar Jewelers 5677 Cowrie St

19

From: Doug Saunders | Custom Carpets & Interiors Ltd. [mailto:dsaunders@customcarpets.ca] Sent: November-12-14 6:48 PM To: john@johnhendersonformayor.ca; Mayor John Henderson Subject: Whats with this? Hey John. I was unpleasantly surprised by seeing this in the paper. It looks like some how someone has forgotten to put this out to tender to a large local flooring company(my store, Custom Carpet). We are a more than qualified store with certified commercial installers who pay taxes into the District of Sechelt. Our Sechelt location actually has 33 employees who pay into the District of Sechelt taxes. Why should we have to prove to the District our capabilities and experience as we have been doing flooring for the District for 20+ years? And this flooring store from Vancouver has probably never done a job on the Coast before let alone put a penny into this town before? Please let me know first of all how this even happens. And secondly that we will atleast be given the chance to give you a price. I will be emailing Linda Klassen tomorrow but I would really like you looking into this also as You and I both know this shouldnt be happening. Doug Saunders

20

21

From: normb56 [mailto:normb56@telus.net] Sent: November-13-14 3:32 PM To: Margi Nicholas Cc: info@secheltrotary.ca Subject: What's on your Plate Hi Margi; I have attached a letter of thanks from the Rotary Club of Sechelt on What's on your Plate event last month. The SC Food Policy Council is now preparing to ramp up its participation in community and will spend the next three months getting clarity of its place in community through the Agricultural Area Plan. Please visit www.secheltrotary.ca and follow the links on Food Matters. I have also included an agenda for the upcoming meeting to take place on November 15 of which you are invited to attend. If you can make it please complete the form at http://www.deeprooted.ca/fpc/foodmattersnov19.aspx

22

Rotary Club of Sechelt Email: info@secheltrotary.ca

Wor. John Henderson, Mayor District of Sechelt 2nd Floor Municipal Building Sechelt, BC, V0N 3A0 October 29, 2014 Re: What’s on Your Plate Debrief The Food Policy Council and the Rotary Club of Sechelt held a meeting to review the conversation of the ‘What’s on your Plate’ evening. The shared knowledge base of the community around agriculture that evening was informative for all who attended. You may read the minutes of the meeting by going to www.secheltrotary.ca and follow the links. It is the intention of the Rotary Club of Sechelt to be supportive of our local food security and sustainability in bringing forward ways to streamline the efforts of many. It was clear during the evening that there are many ways that we can further such a cause through a collaborative environment. With this in mind, below is an overview, in point form, of the next steps in preparing for a strong community engagement process in the New Year. § The FPC will formalize its position as an organization that will bring forward

strategies to engage community in forming our local Food Charter and policies around local food. Meetings to take place over the next three months.

§ That an AGM to be set to place the FPC as a formal body to have the ability to represent community before our local governments.

§ The Rotary Club of Sechelt will assist as it is able in the areas of communications, organizing and raising a broader level of awareness to the community on food matters on the Sunshine Coast.

§ That where possible, the Rotary Club of Sechelt will bring forward information on economic opportunities that will benefit our community both in increased food production as well as greater employment positions in our local food network.

The information presented by the speakers was very informative and reaffirmed the Sunshine Coast Ag Plan now in process. It is evident that there are synergies in our community that can be sown together for the benefit of everyone. We will keep you informed along the way and look forward to building a strong and lasting relationship with you.

Yours Truly,

Wayne McNaughton, President Rotary Club of Sechelt

23

AGENDA

SUNSHINE COAST FOOD POLICY COUNCIL (FPC)

November 19, 2014 Masonic Building

1319 Roberts Creek Road Purpose: To continue to bring stakeholders involve in the various aspects of local food natters to the table to generate Food Policy statements that are representative of the latest Agricultural Area Plan. Please visit www.secheltrotry.ca and follow the links to complete the online form for attending this meting so the necessary preparations can be put in place. § 5:45 pm Meet and Greet

§ 6:05 pm Confirm agenda Please send any additions so they may be included prior to the meeting.

§ 6:10 pm Brief from the Chair for the evening

§ 6:15 pm Sunshine Coast Ag Plan Update – Greg Gebka

§ 6:30 pm Break Out Groups Tables will be set for groups to discuss various aspects of the Ag Plan with respect to what is to be considered policy.

§ 7:00 pm Group Summary A person from each group should be prepared to provide a brief overview.

§ 7:30 pm Moving Forward

o Communications channel

o AGM

o Discussion on setting the next 2 meeting dates and agenda.

8:00 pm Adjourn

24

25

26

From: Monika Schittek Sent: November-14-14 12:04 PM To: ALLSTAFF; RCMP DOS Staff Subject: FW: Sunshine Coast Childcare Needs Assessment Hi Friends and Colleagues, I am currently working with Huckleberry Coast Childcare Society on distributing a child care survey for the Sunshine Coast. This work builds on existing research conducted by the Progress Plan, Child Care Action Team, Child Care Resource and Referral Centre and other community organizations. The goal of this is to develop a comprehensive understanding of child care needs across the Sunshine Coast. The final report will help Huckleberry on planning future locations, and also serve as a tool for a number of community groups in planning and advocating for child care. The survey launches today, and this email is a request for you to share this information as widely as possible amongst your networks, as you feel appropriate. The survey can be found at: http://fluidsurveys.com/s/SSCChildcare/ Additional information on privacy can be found at the Huckleberry website:http://www.huckleberrycoast.ca/ We will be distributing this information via social and print media, word of mouth and other opportune community gatherings in coming weeks, so apologies in advance if you see this information being cross posted. Thanks very much in advance for your support in this important and timely project. Please feel free to email myself or huckleberrycoast@gmail.com Best regards, Matt

27