AGENDA GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT (GVRD) REGULAR MEETING. Friday, July 30, :00 a.m. 2 nd Floor Boardroom 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC

Transcription

1 AGENDA GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT (GVRD) REGULAR MEETING Friday, July 30, :00 a.m. 2 nd Floor Boardroom 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC Board Members: Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta Vice Chair, Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Director Heather Anderson, Anmore Director Brent Asmundson, Coquitlam Director Kim Baird, Tsawwassen Director Brenda Broughton, Lions Bay Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director George Chow, Vancouver Director Derek Corrigan. Burnaby Director Ernie Daykin, Maple Ridge Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Director Ralph Drew, Belcarra Director Catherine Ferguson, White Rock Director Peter Frinton, Bowen Island Director Moe Gill, Abbotsford Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Director Rick Green, Langley Township Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Director Marvin Hunt, Surrey Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby Director Raymond Louie, Vancouver Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Gayle Martin, Langley City Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director George Peary, Abbotsford Director Andrea Reimer, Vancouver Director Gregor Robertson, Vancouver Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Judy Villeneuve, Surrey Director Dianne Watts, Surrey Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster Please advise Kelly Birks at (604) if you are unable to attend.

2 This page left blank intentionally.

3 Section A 1 NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT (GVRD) BOARD OF DIRECTORS 9:00 a.m. Friday, July 30, nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA A G E N D A 1. July 30, 2010 Regular Meeting Agenda Staff Recommendation: That the Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for July 30, 2010 as circulated. B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 1. July 16, 2010 Regular Meeting Minutes Staff Recommendation: That the Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held July 16, 2010 as circulated. C. DELEGATIONS No items presented. D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented. E. CONSENT AGENDA Note: Directors may adopt in one motion all recommendations appearing on the Consent Agenda or, prior to the vote, request an item be removed from the Consent Agenda for debate or discussion, voting in opposition to a recommendation, or declaring a conflict of interest with an item. 1. REGIONAL PLANNING REPORTS 1.1 Metro Vancouver Sponsorship of the Urban Development Institute 2010 Awards for Excellence in Urban Development Regional Planning Committee Recommendation: That the Board approve the expenditure of $5,000 to provide Silver Level sponsorship funding for the Urban Development Institute 2010 Awards for Excellence in Urban Development. July 22, 2010 RD-1

4 2. ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY REPORTS 2.1 Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision Environment and Energy Committee Recommendation: That the Board: a) receive for information the report dated June 29, 2010, titled Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision ; and b) direct staff to begin consulting with West Coast Reduction and other odour sources regarding an odour management regulation for the consideration of the Board. 3. FINANCE REPORTS 3.1 Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 Finance Committee Recommendation: That the Board endorse the five year financial framework for for budget and long range planning purposes as outlined in the report titled Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 dated June 29, Funding to External Organizations Mid Term Report Finance Committee Recommendation: That the Board receive the report titled 2010 Funding to External Organizations Mid Term Report, dated June 21, 2010 for information. 4. HOUSING REPORTS Note: The following item will be considered by the Housing Committee on July 23, Any resulting changes to the recommendation will be presented on table at the Board meeting. 4.1 Metro Vancouver s Opposition to the Elimination of the Mandatory Long Form from the 2011 Census Recommendation: That the Board: a) Request the Honourable Tony Clement, Ministry of Industry and Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. b) Request UBCM and FCM to write to Minister Clement and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada urging them to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. c) Request the Honourable Mary McNeil, BC Minister of Citizens Services, Multiculturalism and the Public Affairs Bureau and other relevant provincial Ministers write to Minister Clement and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada urging them to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. RD-2

5 5. OTHER REPORTS 5.1 Delegations Executive Summaries Presented at Committee July 2010 Staff Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated July 21, 2010, titled Delegations Executive Summaries Presented at Committee July F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA G. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA 1. Fall MFA Borrowing for City of New Westminster GVRD Security Issuing Bylaw 1131, 2010 Finance Committee Recommendations: a) That the GVRD Board, pursuant to Sections 182(1)(b) and 182(2)(a) of the Community Charter, give consent to the request for financing from the City of New Westminster in the amount of $8,300,000; b) That Greater Vancouver Regional District Security Issuing Bylaw No. 1131, 2010 being a bylaw to authorize the entering into of an Agreement respecting financing between the Greater Vancouver Regional District and the Municipal Finance Authority of British Columbia, be introduced and read a first, second and third time; c) That Greater Vancouver Regional District Security Issuing Bylaw No. 1131, 2010 be reconsidered, passed and finally adopted; d) That Greater Vancouver Regional District Security Issuing Bylaw No. 1131, 2010 be forwarded to the Inspector of Municipalities for Certificate of Approval. 2. Results of Alternative Approval Process for Greater Vancouver Regional District Road Dedication of Part of Tynehead Regional Park for the 96 th Avenue Widening Project Bylaw No. 1124, 2010, and Proposed Final Adoption of the Bylaw Staff Recommendation: That the Board reconsider, pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Regional District Road Dedication of Part of Tynehead Regional Park for the 96 th Avenue Widening Project Bylaw No. 1124, H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN No items presented. I. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Metro Vancouver Events Calendar August - September J. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING No items presented. K. ADJOURNMENT Staff Recommendation: That the Board conclude its regular meeting of July 30, RD-3

6 This page left blank intentionally. RD-4

7 RD-5 MINUTES

8 This page left blank intentionally. RD-6

9 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section B 1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held at 9:07 a.m. on Friday, July 16, 2010 in the 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Director Heather Anderson, Anmore Alternate Director Mary-Wade Anderson, White Rock for Catherine Ferguson Director Brent Asmundson, Coquitlam Director Kim Baird, Tsawwassen Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director Brenda Broughton, Lions Bay Director George Chow, Vancouver Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Ernie Daykin, Maple Ridge Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Director Ralph Drew, Belcarra Director Peter Frinton, Bowen Island Alternate Director Gary Gibson, Electoral Area A for Maria Harris Director Moe Gill, Abbotsford* Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Director Rick Green, Langley Township MEMBERS ABSENT: Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta STAFF PRESENT: Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Commissioner /Deputy Chief Administrative Officer, Chief Administrative Officer s Department Paulette Vetleson, Corporate Secretary, Corporate Secretary s Department Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Alternate Director Robin Hicks, North Vancouver District for Richard Walton Director Marvin Hunt, Surrey Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby Director Raymond Louie, Vancouver Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Gayle Martin, Langley City Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director George Peary, Abbotsford Director Andrea Reimer, Vancouver Alternate Director Barbara Steele, Surrey for Dianne Watts Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Judy Villeneuve, Surrey Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster Director Gregor Robertson, Vancouver Klara Kutakova, Assistant to Regional Committees, Corporate Secretary s Department Acting Chair It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board appoint Director Hunt to preside as Acting Chair at its July 16, 2010 regular and closed meeting in the absence of both the Chair and Vice Chair. CARRIED For Parks purposes. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held on Friday, July 16, 2010 Page 1 of 7 RD-7

10 A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1. July 16, 2010 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board: a) amend the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for July 16, 2010 by: i) withdrawing item E1.1 Aldergrove Lake Regional Park Swimming Lake Facility; ii) withdrawing item E1.2 Surrey Bend Regional Park Management Plan; iii) adding a cover report to item E /2011 Metro Vancouver International Engagement Program; iv) adding item E5.1 Outcome from Ottawa Meetings; v) adding under section J Resolution to Close Meeting, section 90(1)(c) of the Community Charter (labour relations or other employee relations); and b) adopt the agenda as amended. CARRIED B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 1. June 25, 2010 Regular Meeting Minutes C. DELEGATIONS No items presented. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held June 25, 2010 as circulated. CARRIED D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented. E. CONSENT AGENDA At the request of Directors, the following items were removed from the Consent Agenda for consideration under Section F Items Removed from Consent Agenda: /2011 Metro Vancouver International Engagement Program 2.1 Web-based Arts and Culture Regional Calendar 3.1 Update on the Rental Supply Stakeholder Meeting It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the recommendations contained in the following items presented in the July 16, 2010 GVRD Board Consent Agenda: 1.3 Experience the Fraser Memorandum of Understanding 1.4 Boundary Bay Regional Park Centennial Beach Concession Washroom Building Site Options Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held on Friday, July 16, 2010 Page 2 of 7 RD-8

11 4.1 3 rd United Cities and Local Government (UCLG) World Congress, November 16-20, Mexico City, Mexico and PLUS Network Biennial Conference, September 12-16, Ottawa, Ontario 5.1 Outcome from Ottawa Meetings CARRIED The items and recommendations referred to above are as follows: 1.1 Aldergrove Lake Regional Park Swimming Lake Facility Pursuant to item A1 Adoption of the Agenda, this item was withdrawn 1.2 Surrey Bend Regional Park Management Plan Pursuant to item A1 Adoption of the Agenda, this item was withdrawn. 1.3 Experience the Fraser Memorandum of Understanding Report dated July 5, 2010 from Wendy DaDalt, Parks East Area Division Manager, Regional Parks Department, seeking Board authorization for the Board Chair to sign the Experience the Fraser Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Province of British Columbia, Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley Regional District to facilitate the Experience the Fraser Project. Recommendation: That the Board authorize the signing of the Experience the Fraser Memorandum of Understanding between the Province of British Columbia, Greater Vancouver Regional District (Metro Vancouver) and Fraser Valley Regional District. Adopted on Consent 1.4 Boundary Bay Regional Park Centennial Beach Concession Washroom Building Site Options Report dated June 29, 2010 from Mitch Sokalski, Parks West Area Division Manager, Regional Parks Department, informing the Board about the early outcomes of consultation regarding the location of the new proposed Centennial Beach concession washroom building and seeking Board authorization to amend the existing Centennial Beach Lease to allow Metro Vancouver to construct the new building within leased lands. Recommendation: That the Board a) authorize Metro Vancouver staff to enter into negotiations with Corporation of Delta to amend the existing Centennial Beach Lease to permit the placement of the new concession washroom building on Leased land, and b) direct staff to ensure that the amended Terms and Conditions of the Lease meet Metro Vancouver tenure requirements for capital and operating expenditures, secure a capital cost depreciation repayment program, and ensure that Metro Vancouver retains the ability to build a destination restaurant at a future date. Adopted on Consent Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held on Friday, July 16, 2010 Page 3 of 7 RD-9

12 4.1 3 rd United Cities and Local Government (UCLG) World Congress, November 16-20, Mexico City, Mexico and PLUS Network Biennial Conference, September 12-16, Ottawa, Ontario Report dated June 28, 2010 from Heather Schoemaker, Manager, Corporate Relations Department, responding to Metro Vancouver s participation in UCLG and PLUS Network and proposing participation in the 3 rd UCLG World Congress, November 16-20, Mexico City, and PLUS Network Biennial Conference, September 12-16, Ottawa, Ontario. Recommendation: That the Board authorize the Chair to appoint Metro Vancouver Directors to participate in the following 2010 international events: 3 rd United Cities and Local Government (UCLG) World Congress November 16-20, Mexico City Estimated Travel Costs: $19,682 for two Directors PLUS Network Biennial Conference September 12-16, Ottawa, Ontario Estimated Travel Costs: $7,641 for one Director Adopted on Consent 5.1 Outcome from Ottawa Meetings Report dated July 9, 2010 from Simon Cumming, External and Intergovernmental Relations Division Manager, Corporate Relations Department, providing a presentation and update on recent meetings in Ottawa. Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated July 9, 2010, titled Outcome from Ottawa Meetings. Adopted on Consent F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA The items removed from the Consent Agenda were considered in numeric order. 2.1 Web-based Arts and Culture Regional Calendar Report dated July 6, 2010 from the Regional Culture Committee, together with report dated June 30, 2010, from Judy Robertson, Communications Specialist, Corporate Relations Department, responding to concerns raised at the regular meeting of the April 23, 2010 GVRD Board concerning a report from the Regional Culture Committee to develop and implement a Webbased Arts and Culture Regional Calendar. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board approve the development and implementation of a Web-based Arts and Culture Regional Calendar. CARRIED Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held on Friday, July 16, 2010 Page 4 of 7 RD-10

13 3.1 Update on the Rental Supply Stakeholder Meeting Report dated June 29, 2010 from the Housing Committee, together with report dated June 6, 2010 from Janet Kreda, Senior Housing Planner, Policy and Planning Department, providing an update on the feedback from stakeholders and on next steps to finalize the key messages and communicate these to the provincial and federal ministers. The Board requested that 2 rather than 3 Housing Committee members attend the meeting with the Provincial and Federal Minister(s). It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board: a) Endorse the key actions raised in the report Update on the Rental Supply Stakeholder Meeting as a policy platform for advocacy with the federal and provincial governments; b) Authorize two Housing Committee members, as designated by the Housing Committee Chair, to travel to Victoria to meet with the Provincial Minister and lead a delegation to Ottawa to meet with the Federal Minister(s); and c) Approve the cost of delegation travel estimated at $9,300. CARRIED /2011 Metro Vancouver International Engagement Program On-table report dated July 8, 2010 from the Intergovernmental Committee, together with report dated June 28, 2010 from Johnny Carline, Chief Administrative Officer/Commissioner, and Heather Schoemaker, Manager, Corporate Relations Department, responding to the Committee s request to prepare a policy for prioritizing international organizations in which Metro Vancouver should participate and an analysis around the concept of twinning. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board resolve that: 1. The goals for the 2010/2011 International Engagement Program shall be, in order of priority: a) the acquisition of knowledge and skills which directly benefit the Metro Vancouver organization and region; b) the influence on decisions elsewhere in cities or regions which have a direct or indirect benefit for Metro Vancouver, including those which are long run and global in scope; c) the provision of assistance to other cities or regions in the world, directly or through federal or other agencies, where such assistance is greatly needed and where Metro Vancouver has the capability to provide such assistance; d) the enhancement of Metro Vancouver s reputation in the international community. 2. The specific objectives of the 2010/2011 International Engagement Program shall be: a) the pursuit of innovation and best practices in the areas of: i) integrated resource recovery and utility management; Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held on Friday, July 16, 2010 Page 5 of 7 RD-11

14 ii) financial management techniques to support sustainable metropolitan areas; iii) tenant engagement and development practices in social housing; iv) ecological systems management; v) collaborative leadership (government, private sector, academia, etc.) in other metropolitan regions. b) Participation in UCLG and other international organizations and events as opportune to advance an agenda of collective local government action on: i) mitigating and responding to climate change; ii) an international approach to zero waste; iii) capacity building in local government. c) Participation in the PLUS Network with a view to reinforcing that mutually supportive set of relationships. 3. The 2011 budget for travel and expenses for elected officials participating in the International Engagement Program shall comprise individual budgets for each of the objectives set out in recommendation two. The administration of this budget, once approved by the board, shall be by the intergovernmental committee, comprising the chairs of all the standing committees. CARRIED G. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA 1. Colony Farm Regional Park - Results of Public Consultation on Port Mann Highway 1 Habitat Compensation Project Proposal Report dated June 1, 2010 from Frieda Schade, Central Area Parks Division Manager, Regional Parks Department, informing the Board about the outcome of public consultation regarding the Transportation Investment Corporation s fish habitat compensation proposal for the Wilson Farm area of Colony Farm Regional Park. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board receive for information the report dated June 1, 2010, titled Colony Farm Regional Park - Results of Public Consultation on Port Mann Highway 1 Habitat Compensation Project Proposal. CARRIED H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN No items presented. I. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Metro Vancouver Events July-August 2010 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held on Friday, July 16, 2010 Page 6 of 7 RD-12

15 J. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board close its regular meeting scheduled for July 16, 2010 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (c) as follows: 90 (1) A part of a board meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to one or more of the following: c) labour relations or other employee relations. CARRIED K. ADJOURNMENT It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board conclude its regular meeting of July 16, CARRIED (Time: 9:37 a.m.) CERTIFIED CORRECT Paulette A. Vetleson, Corporate Secretary Marvin Hunt, Acting Chair Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board of Directors held on Friday, July 16, 2010 Page 7 of 7 RD-13

16 This page left blank intentionally. RD-14

17 RD-15 CONSENT AGENDA

18 This page left blank intentionally. RD-16

19 Section E 1.1 Regional Planning Committee Meeting Date: July 9, 2010 To: From: Regional Planning Committee Eric Aderneck, Regional Planner, Policy and Planning Department Date: June 22, 2010 Subject: Metro Vancouver Sponsorship of the Urban Development Institute 2010 Awards for Excellence in Urban Development Recommendation: That the Board approve the expenditure of $5,000 to provide Silver Level sponsorship funding for the Urban Development Institute 2010 Awards for Excellence in Urban Development. 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to inform the Board of the Urban Development Institute 2010 Award for Excellence event, to be held on November 24, 2010, and to consider the expenditure of $5,000 in sponsorship funding. 2. CONTEXT UDI Awards for Excellence in Urban Development The Urban Development Institute is an organization representing land developers and residential builders in the region. The UDI Awards for Excellence recognize the contribution made by those in the development industry and celebrate their outstanding contributions. Since 1982, the UDI have hosted an Award for Excellence every two years, with the exception of 2009 due the state of the economy at that time. Metro Vancouver has participated and contributed funding for the awards in past years. Sponsorship Levels The current funding opportunity recommended is for a Silver Level sponsorship at a cost of $5,000. This level of sponsorship provides category sponsorship and the use of Metro Vancouver logo in advertising and conducting the event. Other sponsorship levels available range from $2,500 to $10,000. There are 18 different award categories. The category of Best Urban Infill is for the adaptive re-use or redevelopment of a previously developed property situated in a built urban context. Application to sponsor this category by Metro Vancouver would support innovative development options for infill redevelopment, which is a key strategy promoting regional urban containment and making best use of existing infrastructure and services. RD-17

20 Metro Vancouver Sponsorship of the Urban Development Institute 2010 Awards for Excellence in Urban Development Regional Planning Committee Meeting Date: July 9, 2010 Page 2 of 2 Award Jury Selection Process The award selection process will be by the appointed UDI Awards Committee which represents all facets of real estate development industry, including planning, finance, design and marketing. The jury will consider project category criteria, as well as other factors such as innovations in concept, sensitivity to the environment, transit-oriented development, community integration, construction quality and professionalism, and the marketing success of the project. Benefits to Metro Vancouver Sponsorship of a major developer / builder industry event by Metro Vancouver provides a number of benefits to Metro Vancouver, including increasing the profile of Metro Vancouver in the developer / builder community, building relationships with important industry contacts, and linking Metro Vancouver goals and policies with innovative forms of development. The UDI Awards for Excellence have a substantial profile, and receive coverage in the region s major daily newspapers. The Awards recognize development that advances the objectives of regional growth management and also demonstrate how Metro Vancouver objectives can be incorporated and reflected into actual projects on the ground. Funding / Costs The cost of sponsorship would be $5,000 and would be drawn from the Regional Development Division s budget. 3. ALTERNATIVES That the Board: a) Approve the expenditure of $5,000 to fund the UDI 2010 Awards for Excellence Silver Level Sponsorship; [Recommended] or b) Approve the expenditure for another amount to fund another level of UDI 2010 Awards for Excellence Sponsorship, or c) Decline sponsorship of the UDI 2010 Awards for Excellence. 4. CONCLUSION The UDI 2010 Awards for Excellence offers an opportunity for Metro Vancouver to promote itself to the developer / builder community and support innovative forms of development that support regional growth management goals RD-18

21 Section E 2.1 GVRD Board Meeting: July 30, 2010 To: From: Board of Directors Environment and Energy Committee Date: July 19, 2010 Subject: Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision Environment and Energy Committee Recommendation: That the Board: a) receive for information the report dated June 29, 2010, titled Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision ; and b) direct staff to begin consulting with West Coast Reduction and other odour sources regarding an odour management regulation for the consideration of the Board. At its July 13, 2010 meeting, the Environment and Energy Committee considered the attached report titled Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision, dated June 29, The Committee acknowledged the work of the District Director and expressed support for continuing the work being done on this issue, including imposing different requirements in the West Coast Reduction permit to replace the odour limits that were struck down by the Environmental Appeal Board. In addition to the District Director s work, the Committee recommended that staff be directed to begin consulting with West Coast Reduction and other sources of odorous emissions in the region regarding an alternative odour management regulation. This direction is reflected in part b) of the recommendation. Attachment: Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision, dated June 29, RD-19

22 This page left blank intentionally. RD-20

23 Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2010 To: From: Environment & Energy Committee Ray Robb, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Date: June 29, 2010 Subject: Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated June 29, 2010, titled Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision. 1. PURPOSE To advise the Board of staff plans to begin consultation on an odour management regulation for Board consideration. The proposed regulation is partially in response to a decision by the BC Environmental Appeal Board overturning permit requirements to reduce odorous emissions from a rendering plant in Vancouver. 2. CONTEXT Background West Coast Reduction Ltd. (WCR) operates the only rendering plant in BC. The facility has been located at the north end of Commercial Drive in Vancouver since WCR receives wastes from fish and meat processors and restaurants. The rendering process involves heating the raw materials to drive off water (as well as many malodorous substances) and separate the remaining fats and proteins. In accordance with its Metro Vancouver air emissions permit, WCR has reduced the amount of odorous emissions over the years through the addition of pollution control works. However despite improvements, complaints have increased dramatically over the past decade. The increase in complaints may be due to the changing socio-economic status and expectations of the surrounding residential neighbourhood, i.e., current residents may be less tolerant than prior residents in this East Hastings community. Based upon community complaints and staff observations, Metro Vancouver s Air Quality District Director determined that it was necessary to amend the permit in 2007 to require further emission reductions. The District Director chose to proceed through a series of amendments to achieve acceptable air quality in the community. A second amendment to further reduce emissions was issued in Both amendments were appealed by the company and the residents. The Environmental Appeal Board heard Appeals regarding both amendments in However it was not until March 2010 that the EAB issued its decisions on the appeals, ruling in favour of WCR. A third amendment was issued by the District Director in January 2010, following the appeal hearings but before the EAB decision. RD-21

24 Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision Environment & Energy Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2010 Page 2 of 4 Permit Amendments The 2007, 2008 and 2010 permit amendments were based upon the District Director s determination that air quality in the community was not acceptable. The permit amendments established performance requirements for the company to reduce the amount of odours emitted over several years. The quantity of odorous emissions was limited on the basis of the European Standard method for measuring odours. EAB Decisions The EAB determined that it was not necessary to amend the permit. In addition, they ruled that the amount of air contaminants released could not be limited in terms of the quantity of odour as determined by the European Standard method. Odour Measurement Rendering plants and other odorous sources emit hundreds of different chemical compounds that may exhibit offensive odours below laboratory equipment detection limits. As the human nose is the only means of detecting odour; measurement methods using human noses have been developed. The European Standard method of odour measurement was developed during a rigorous 20 year process involving international expert panels, inter-laboratory testing and critique by industrial and other stakeholders. Many modifications to the procedures were required before the method was deemed sufficiently precise, accurate and repeatable between laboratories to be adopted by the European Union as a Standard. The European Standard method of odour measurement has since been adopted throughout most of the developed and developing world as the method for measuring odours. Community Odour Impacts The diagram below shows the top four sources of complaints in Metro Vancouver over the last three years. West Coast Instant Lawns in Delta, EWOS in Surrey and A-1/HV Truong in Langley all had significant numbers of complaints, albeit far less than WCR. Each of the non-wcr sources responded to Metro Vancouver and other pressures to reduce their impact and the numbers of complaints dropped in 2009 for these sources. Conversely, complaints against WCR rose over the same period and were observed over a wider area and from a greater number of individuals (149 different WCR complainants in 2009). Complaints - Attributed to Sources by MV staff WCR WCIL EWOS A1/HV 07/08 average annual complaints 2009 annual complaints Source RD-22

25 Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision Environment & Energy Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2010 Page 3 of 4 District Director Actions While the EAB ruled that the 2007 and 2008 amendments were not necessary, the EAB did not give any guidance to the District Director to help him determine what circumstances would make it necessary to amend the permit. As the 2010 permit amendment is based upon stronger evidence collected in 2009 than the previous two permit amendments it cannot be directly concluded that the 2010 amendment was not necessary to do so would be prejudicial against residents interests. However, the performance requirements contained in the 2010 permit amendment, i.e. the limits of the amount of odours that may be released as measured in accordance with the European Standard for odour measurement, has been struck down by the EAB decisions on the 2007 and 2008 amendments. Consequently, the District Director is considering further amendments to the permit that would replace the performance requirements (odour limits) with other requirements such as specific limits on individual air contaminants that are known to be odorous, or technologybased requirements that may achieve similar results. Any permit amendment issued by the District Director may be appealed by WCR or any other person that is aggrieved by the amendment. If there is an appeal, it could be many years before the matter is resolved. The appeal of the 2007 amendment was not resolved by the EAB until The process could have been extended much longer if any party sought to review the EAB decision in the courts. The EAB decision also affects who pays for Metro Vancouver resources required to address WCR odours. A recent amendment to the GVRD air quality bylaw allowed fees to be collected for the quantity of odour authorized to be released by permit. The EAB ruling means that a permit may not authorize the quantity of odour released. Consequently, Metro Vancouver may not be able to collect fees to recover its costs of responding to WCR odorous emissions. If WCR does not pay for its odorous emissions then either other permitted companies or the general taxpayer will be required to fund Metro Vancouver s regulatory services. It is estimated that Metro Vancouver expends between $100,000 and $200,000 per year (mostly for complaint response) on addressing WCR emissions. Potential Board Actions Odour Management Regulation There is growing public concern regarding odours from various operations throughout Metro Vancouver. Further, odour issues are expected to increase as more organic solid waste is diverted from landfill and incineration. More semi-solid organic residuals are also anticipated from industrial pre-treatment of liquid organic wastes prior to sewer discharge in response to Metro Vancouver s liquid waste source control initiatives. The most effective means of assuring that acceptable levels of any air contaminant are achieved in communities is to set ambient objectives for the air contaminant and then establish air contaminant emission standards for sources that are necessary to ensure that the ambient objective is met. If Metro Vancouver is to achieve acceptable levels of odour in communities, it will be necessary to define an acceptable ambient odour objective and then impose odour emission limits on sources necessary to achieve the objective. The European Standard for measurement of odour is the gold standard for odour measurement. Unfortunately, as a result of the EAB ruling, the District Director is unable to set performance standards for the quantity of odour emitted through permits. While the Greater Vancouver Regional District Board cannot overrule the EAB, and must consider the same kind of information that the EAB considered if the Board contemplates a bylaw or regulation, the Board is not bound by the EAB decision. RD-23

26 Response to Environmental Appeal Board s West Coast Reduction Ltd. Decision Environment & Energy Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2010 Page 4 of 4 The Board may consider additional information and may come to a different conclusion regarding whether to require odour emission limits. A primary argument used by WCR during the EAB Appeal was that no elected body had sanctioned odour units in BC. The Board may remedy the situation by adopting a regulation, as has been done in other jurisdictions, to require facilities to meet emission limits such that ambient odour objectives are not exceeded. An odour management regulation could establish requirements for existing and new facilities. The regulation could also specify a schedule for existing facilities to reduce emissions. It is expected that the Regulation would be applicable to a few types of facilities at first and then gradually be expanded to cover more types over time. Early candidates for the regulation would include rendering plants, fish feed manufacturing, as well as composting and aerobic/anaerobic digestion of putrescible wastes. The regulation may also include fees for odorous emission sources to reflect polluter-pay and user-pay principles so that the general taxpayer is not subsidizing the regulation of malodorous industries. In summary, an odour management regulation is the most effective means of fairly and objectively protecting air quality in Metro Vancouver from offensive odours. Next Steps Staff intends to proceed with a two-pronged approach. The District Director is considering imposing different requirements in the WCR permit to replace the odour limits that were stricken by the EAB decision. In addition, staff plans to begin consulting with WCR and other odour sources regarding an odour management regulation for the consideration of the Board. 3. ALTERNATIVES None presented. 4. CONCLUSION Staff intends to respond to the recent Environmental Appeal Board West Coast Reduction Ltd. permit decisions by consulting with the company and others on additional permit requirements as well as an odour management regulation for the consideration of the Board RD-24

27 Section E 3.1 Finance Committee Meeting Date: July 15, 2010 To: From: Finance Committee Johnny Carline, Chief Administrative Officer Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Jim Rusnak, Chief Financial Officer Date: June 29, 2010 Subject: Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 Recommendation: That the Board endorse the five year financial framework for for budget and long range planning purposes as outlined in the report titled Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 dated June 29, PURPOSE To review and endorse financial projections as part of the 2011 Program Planning and Budget Process. 2. CONTEXT Program Planning and Budget Process A key part of the Program Planning and Budget process is the establishment of a framework of five year financial projections which are used to set the context for budget development purposes (see Schedule 1 attached for the timeline of our process). These financial projections reflect, at this point in time, the anticipated program budget changes based on Board supported initiatives as well as legislative and operational requirements. Some of the key corporate financial drivers impacting on operations are general inflation, inflation affecting labour costs, along with a need for increased maintenance on our water and liquid waste system infrastructure. The impact of these factors varies by legal entity and is addressed in the discussion that follows. This year the process of reaching the five-year projections included more consultation in advance of bringing forward the targets. The consultation included strategic discussions with the Finance Committee (June 10 th ) and with RAAC, REAC and RFAC at a joint meeting on June 23 rd. The consultation did not produce any recommended changes to the targets. One comment was made from RAAC expressing concern regarding the proposed increase in the Regional District requisition. The projections presented are consistent with previous messaging regarding Metro Vancouver budget impacts. RD-25

28 Finance Committee Meeting July 15, 2010 Page 2 Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 As in the past, these projections, subject to unpredictable new cost drivers and uncertainties, are reviewed and endorsed by the Board. Historical Budget Perspective The Finance Committee has been interested in understanding the historical progression of the Districts budgets. As in the prior years, Schedule 2 shows this information and includes annual budget changes along with explanations of any significant swings. Overview of 5 year Budget Framework Accurately forecasting five-year financial projections is difficult. Since the Board endorsed the five-year financial projections in 2008 many things have happened. These include the increased costs of the tunnel contract associated with the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project due to well known issues with the previous contractor. In addition, there has been the increased focus on asset management, and managing the risks associated with required maintenance of our water and liquid waste systems, the emerging feedback from the discussion and consultation on the new Liquid Waste and Solid Waste Management Plans. All of this takes place in the midst of a slow global economy. As discussed previously with the Board there are positive and negative impacts on Metro Vancouver as a result of the economic circumstances. On the one hand, it continues to be a very good time to continue with project work, with reduced input costs, a significant drop in Metro Vancouver job vacancies, more competitive tenders and RFPs as well as a relatively low cost of capital to Metro Vancouver. On the other hand we need to be aware of some prolonged consumer and taxpayer fatigue, unemployment and pressure on the municipal property tax base. There is a balance however, as to the level of cost deferral in the short term, particularly in the area of system maintenance, versus increased pressure on future years requirements. System maintenance was deferred in the 2010 utility budgets in light of the abovementioned sensitivities; however, the projections for 2011 propose a necessary recoup of some of these deferred costs. Each legal function is covered in detail below. Overall, the projections shown will increase the average household cost in 2011 for District services by approximately $57 of which $34 or 60 percent is for drinking water. An average household is approximately $600,000 in assessed value which is consistent with Regional District: Impact to Average Household July 2009 Projections 5.5% 5.5% 3.5% 3.5% Updated Projections 5.5% 5.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% Impact to Household $2.04 $2.15 $1.45 $1.50 $1.55 Total annual Household cost $39.15 $41.30 $42.75 $44.25 $45.80 Note: In this case we are assuming that growth in the region will be 1.5%. RD-26

29 Finance Committee Meeting July 15, 2010 Page 3 Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 In 2010, the budget was reduced by 1.5 percent in light of the situation with the economy. The main budget drivers in the Regional District continue to be primarily the impact of inflation and the implementation of the Parks Greenway Management Plan (PGMP) of approximately $15 million which is being phased in over 10 years. As discussed last year, it is proposed for 2011 to return to the original phased progression under the PGMP as approved by the Board several years ago. In addition, it should be noted that new Board initiatives may fall within the Regional District budget, as they have in the recent past (e.g. agriculture, culture, international engagement, pan municipal affairs). For 2011, the projected to increase in overall tax requisitions is $2.9 million or 7 percent of which 1.5 percent will be offset by growth in the region. This increase can be categorized as follows: $1.7 million for labour inflation, $900,000 for PGMP initiatives and $300,000 for initiatives and general inflation in other functions. This is a $2.04 increase to the average household. The Regional District projections for are consistent with those reported previously. A projection of 3.5% has been added for 2015 as well. Water District: Impact to Average Household Water Rate (m3) July 2009 Projections Updated Projections Impact to Household (rounded) Total annual Household cost $34 $21 $26 $17 $ % 9.7% 10.7% 6.5% 6.0% $220 $241 $267 $284 $301 The upward pressure on the wholesale water rate is due to the debt service and operating costs associated with the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant. In particular, increased tunnel contract costs, updated projections of declining water consumption and increases in system maintenance and costs associated with asset management planning have pushed the water rate projections upward. Results of the legal action being taken to recover the additional tunnel costs is not reflected in the above projections as resolution is expected several years in the future. For 2011, the combined water rate is projected to increase by $0.088 or 17.8 percent. This increase can be categorized as follows: Labour inflation $.003 ($1.2 million), Increase in debt charges for completion of Filtration Plant, tunnel work and other capital works $0.045 ($17 million), maintenance, Filtration Plant operations and other operating costs $0.025 ($10 million) and $0.015 due to the decline in expected consumption. The expectation for 2011 is an increase in total expenditures of approximately $28 million of which 60 percent is related to the projected increase in debt charges. This is a $34 increase to the average houlsehold. RD-27

30 Finance Committee Meeting July 15, 2010 Page 4 Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 The Water Rate projections for are consistent with those previously reported. A projected water rate of $ per cubic metre has been added for 2015 as well. Budget uncertainties not reflected in current projections: 1) Water Sales revenue variances: a wet summer can cause revenue variances of +/- 3 percent ($3 million). 2) Increased requirements regarding infrastructure maintenance. 3) The market indicators on long-term interest rates are indicating a possible increase in future borrowing costs. 4) Financial implications regarding the recovery of the increased tunneling costs of the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project. Sewerage and Drainage District: Liquid Waste: Impact to Average Household July 2009 Projections 6.0% 6.0% 5.5% 5.0% -- Updated Projections 6.0% 6.0% 5.5% 5.0% 5.0% Impact to Household (rounded) Total annual Household cost $10 $10 $10 $10 $10 $172 $182 $192 $202 $212 Note: We are assuming that population growth in the region will be 1.5 percent As noted above, liquid waste system maintenance was deferred in 2010 in light of the economic situation. The main budget drivers in Liquid Waste continue to be the impacts of contracted increases on labour rates, and the increased costs associated with the maintenance of our aging infrastructure. The Liquid Waste budget is particularly sensitive to the need for increased maintenance. It is proposed that for 2011 and beyond, some of these deferred maintenance costs be recouped. For 2011, the projected increase in overall GVS&DD levy is $11.8 million or 7.5 percent of which 1.5 percent will be offset by growth in the region. This increase can be categorized as follows: $1.8 million for labour inflation, $3.0 million increase in debt related expenditures for regular capital works and the commencement of preliminary design of the secondary plant upgrades, $2.6 million for maintenance, $1 million for enhanced disinfection regarding wastewater treatment and $3.4 million for general inflation and other initiatives. This is a $10 increase to the average household. The Liquid Waste projections for are consistent with those reported previously. A projection of 5 percent has been added for 2015 as well. RD-28

31 Finance Committee Meeting July 15, 2010 Page 5 Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 Budget uncertainties not reflected in current projections: 1) Possible costs associated with the Secondary Treatment Upgrade projects at the Lulu Island and Lions Gate Treatment Plants should these projects commence sooner than currently planned. 2) The market indicators on long-term interest rates are indicating a possible increase in future borrowing costs. Solid Waste: Impact to Average Household Tipping Fee ($82 per tonne) July 2009 Projections $87 $98 $113 $130 Updated Projections $96 $108 $121 $153 $182 Impact to Household (rounded) Total annual Household cost $11 $8 $9 $24 $20 $91 $99 $108 $132 $152 Historically, the impact of third party contract inflation and the rising cost of fuel have put upward pressure on the tipping fee. Until recently, this pressure has been offset by continuously increasing waste flows in the region and energy revenues through the sale of steam and electricity. This has not held true the past couple of years. In fact waste flows have decreased much more than anticipated. The 2009 deficit due to reduced waste flows was planned to be recovered over two years beginning in The partial recovery of that deficit in 2010, however, is projected to be eroded due to a further decline in waste flows leaving an even larger shortfall, projected at $11 million, to be recovered. The 2011 projection includes $7 and 2012, $8, on the tipping fee to recoup the projected shortfall. For 2011 the tipping fee is projected to increase by $15 to $97 per metric tonne. This increase can be categorized as follows: As noted above, $8 is for partial recovery of the accumulated 2010 revenue shortfall, $1 is the result of the impact that HST has on existing third party contracts and the remaining $6 is the net impact due to the loss of economies of scale as a result of the decline in system waste flows. It is expected that the real decline in waste flows, after taking into account regional growth of 1.5 percent, will be approximately 5 percent. RD-29

32 Finance Committee Meeting July 15, 2010 Page 6 Financial Projections for 2011 to 2015 The Solid Waste Tipping Fee projections for presented last year have been increased to reflect these changes. These increased tipping fee projections are driven by several factors: Projected 2010 deficit. Third party contract inflation. Declining waste flows. The financial impacts of the current draft of the Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP) which is currently in the consultation process. In particular, the projection reflects the debt service costs associated with the projected construction of new waste management facilities at a cost estimated, at this stage, to be likely close to $500 million. The SWMP provides for increasing waste diversion from the current 52 percent to 70 percent by This reduction in waste flows through the system would result in the loss of some economies of scale in the short term, therefore putting upward pressure on the tipping fee. In addition, with the Cache Creek Landfill closing in 2013, it is likely that a higher cost waste disposal alternative would be required to bridge the gap until the increased waste management capacity is available. While the projected tipping fees are reflective of the financial impacts discussed, many uncertainties and financial concerns remain to be resolved and quantified as the plan for regional waste management is finalized. Budget uncertainties / financial concerns: 1) In the near term, with the impending closure of the Cache Creek Landfill, uncertainties exist with regard to the waste disposal alternative to be employed until a long term waste management solution is finalized. 2) The resource requirement associated with increasing the rate of waste diversion in the system as called for under the Draft SWMP has not been quantified in a detailed manner. 3) The timing of adoption of a SWMP, and the capital spending that flows from it, will have significant impact on projections. MVHC - Regional Affordable Housing: The MVHC, the majority of which is governed by partnership operating agreements, is supported by revenue from property rentals which have exceeded expenditures in recent years. Over the past few years a number of operational improvements have been made leading to more efficient use of existing resources, and some properties were refinanced to improve the MVHC financial picture. Despite these improvements, a review in conjunction with our funding partners continues with the goal of a longer term management plan regarding two significant issues facing the MVHC: 1) the financing of the required water ingress repairs; and 2) ongoing maintenance and capital replacement of our now aging portfolio. We continue to move towards resolving some of these issues which should assist in meeting the financial pressures to maintain the existing portfolio in the near future. RD-30

33 Finance Committee Meeting July 15, 2010 Page 7 Financial Projections for 2011 to ALTERNATIVES 1) The Board can endorse the five-year financial framework as presented; 2) The Board can provide direction for amending the five-year financial framework as it considers appropriate. 4. CONCLUSION While some uncertainties remain, several things have happened since the financial projections were presented during the 2010 Program Planning and Budget process. As a result the projections for reflect the information known at this time. The projections are reflective of Metro Vancouver s requirements in order to deliver the established level of service to the region. PT/eb Attachments: Schedule Program Planning Schedule Schedule 2 - Greater Vancouver Districts Historical Budget Analysis Document # RD-31

34 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY. RD-32

35 Schedule Program Planning Schedule Date (2010) Action Internal Deadlines TBD CAO/Managers' meeting to discuss strategic priorities and key expenditure drivers for 2011 May PIP open to program owners June 11 Deadline for department dependency identification July 18 Deadline for program owners' completion of programs/budget and staffing July Finance department review with Division Managers July 30 Deadline for completion of Managers' program review Aug 2-20 Finance department review of programs Aug CAO administrative review Aug 30-Sep 10 Managers' appeal Sep 17 Final adjustments to Finance Five-Year Projections June 10 Five-year Projections to Finance Committee (informal discussion) June 24 Five-year Projections to RFAC June 23 Five-year Projections to RAAC July 2 Five-year Projections to REAC July 15 Finance Committee review and approve Five-year Projections/Targets July 30 Board review and approve Five-year Projections Committee Review Oct 6 Parks Committee review of programs Oct 7 Labour Relations Bureau review of programs Oct 7 Intergovernmental Committee review of programs Oct 8 Regional Planning Committee review of programs Oct 12 Environment & Energy Committee review of programs Oct 13 Water Committee review of programs Oct 13 Waste Management Committee review of programs Oct 14 Agriculture Committee review of programs Oct 14 Finance Committee review of programs Oct 14 Finance Committee review of Draft Budget TBD Electoral Area Committee review of programs TBD Housing Committee review of programs TBD Info Session for RAAC/REAC/RFAC Public Consultation TBD Public Consultation Session (BCIT) TBD Public Consultation Session (MV Head Office) Municipal Consultations TBD Municipal Consultation Session City of Vancouver City Hall Councillor Louie and City Staff Only TBD Municipal Consultation Session North Shore, District of North Vancouver TBD Municipal Consultation Session Vancouver City Hall Mayor & Council TBD Municipal Consultation Session Fraser South, Township of Langley TBD Municipal Consultation Session City of Richmond City Hall TBD Municipal Consultation Session Fraser North, New Westminster City Hall Board Review TBD MVHC Board - approval of programs & budget Oct 27 Board budget workshop Oct 29 RD, WD & SD Boards - approval of programs & budget RD-33

36 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY RD-34

37 Schedule 2 Greater Vancouver Districts Historical Budget Analysis REGIONAL DISTRICT: Tax Requisitions $ 35,141,405 $ 37,765,056 $ 38,792,473 $ 39,633,544 $ 41,755,456 % Change* 4.84% 7.47% 2.72% 2.17% 5.35% Cost Per Average Household $ 33 $ 35 $ 35 $ 35 $ 37 WATER DISTRICT With Regional Parks comprising about 60% of the Regional District their costs were kept relatively flat for several years and although this kept the requisitions down it also resulted in deterioration of basic Park's infrastructure. Increases in 2003, 2004 and 2005 begin to address the maintenance and upgrade of this infrastructure as well as the cost increases associated with an increase in the number of park visitors is up primarily due to increases in and 2008 up due to new initiatives in Strategic Planning (Agriculture and Environment) and implementation of PGMP. In 2009 there is the continuation of PGMP initiatives. In 2010 the were some additions to General Government and the continuation of the PGMP. Water Rate $ $ $ $ $ % Change 16.23% 19.67% 9.91% 15.82% 11.74% Cost Per Average Household $ 128 $ 151 $ 166 $ 169 $ 186 ** 2006 Increases due to the continuing construction of the new filtration plant Increases due to the continuing construction of the new filtration plant Increases due to the continuing construction of the new filtration plant Increases due to the completing construction of the new filtration plant Increases due to continuation of the Twin Tunnels, increases in maintenance and operating costs of the filtration plant * Impact per average household would be approximately 1.5% less. ** Drop in projected per household consumption from 382 cubic metres to 376. *** Drop in projected per household waste from 97% of a metric tonne to 81%. RD-35

38 Schedule 2 (continued) Greater Vancouver Districts Historical Budget Analysis (continued) LIQUID WASTE Sewer Levy $ 130,457,023 $ 136,333,761 $ 144,065,223 $ 151,431,254 $ 157,646,196 SOLID WASTE % Change* 3.84% 4.50% 5.67% 5.11% 4.10% Cost Per Average Household $ 143 $ 147 $ 153 $ 158 $ 162 Increases in the Liquid Waste budget over this period has been relatively consistent and has been the result of increased maintenance and upgrade requirements to an aging infrastructure( both operating and capital). Tipping Fee $ $ $ $ $ Cost Per Average Household $ 64 $ 64 $ 67 $ 69 $ 80 *** The Solid Waste Tipping Fee was changed to $65.00 per tonne in 1996 from $69.00 and had remained constant through This was made possible by increases in waste flows over the years as well as the addition of other sources of revenue such as the sale of steam generated at the waste to energy facility and the use of that steam to produce and sell electricity. In 2008 and 2009 there was a $3 increase in the Tipping Fee due to the Zero Waste Challenge and other planning initiatives moving forward resulted in another $11 increase to the Tipping Fee due primarily to a reduction in waste flows. * Impact per average household would be approximately 1.5% less. ** Drop in projected per household consumption from 382 cubic metres to 376. *** Drop in projected per household waste from 97% of a metric tonne to 81%. RD-36

39 Section E 3.2 Finance Committee Meeting Date: July 15, 2010 To: From: Finance Committee Jim Rusnak, Chief Financial Officer, Finance & Administration Department Date: June 21, 2010 Subject: 2010 Funding to External Organizations Mid Term Report Recommendation: That the Board receive the report titled 2010 Funding to External Organizations Mid Term Report, dated June 21, 2010 for information. 1. PURPOSE For the MV Board to receive for information a report which outlines the process being followed to award and administer funding to external organizations on an annual basis. 2. CONTEXT For the last several years Metro Vancouver has included as part of its GVRD budget, contributions to external organizations whose work provides a level of benefit to the community or to Metro Vancouver related responsibilities. At its meeting of October 30, 2009 the Board approved a report 2010 Funding to External Organizations, with a total budget of $1,286,375. A summary of the recipient organizations follows: Fraser Basin Council $ 310,000 BIEAP:FREMP ($25,625 each) 51,250 LMTAC 312,125 Seymour Salmonid Society 100,000 5 Search & Rescue Teams ($1,000 each) Coquitlam S&R 1,000 Lions Bay S&R 1,000 North Shore Rescue Team 1,000 Ridge Meadows S&R 1,000 Surrey S&R 1,000 Recycling Council of BC 60, , Network $4,500 SmartGrowth Conference 5,000 Agriculture Agencies 30,000 Parks Partnerships 38,500 Pacific Parklands Foundation 175,000 UBC-CALP 25,000 Catching the Spirit Youth Society 70,000 Cultural Grants 100, ,000 $1,286, RD-37

40 2010 Funding to External Organizations Mid Term Report Finance Committee Meeting Date: July 15, 2010 Page 2 of 4 Along with its approval, the Board asked staff to report back during the year on the administration of these contributions, and to provide an indication of what will be requested for the 2011 budget year. The intent of this direction was to ensure that this external funding was appropriate, necessary and consistent with Metro Vancouver s goals and objectives. There are several different ways in which these contribution programs are administered, and this report will summarize each of those: Cultural Grants The Board established an endowment fund under the Grants Reserve Fund Establishment Bylaw 698, in Each year annual grants are awarded from the earnings of this reserve, currently at a level of $100,000 per year. The 2010 recipients have not yet been awarded, as the selection process has just commenced. Each applicant goes through a fairly comprehensive application process to confirm their qualification for the grant, as well as their financial bona fides. Following the screening process, a report and recommendation will be taken to the Regional Culture Committee each fall, and from there a formal recommendation to the Metro Vancouver Board for approval. In 2009, sixteen different organizations received grants ranging from $2,000 to $14,500. Under the current process, successful applicants are not required to report back to the Board. This is not seen as a significant weakness, given the amount of diligence that goes in to the awarding process, but is an area that could be improved upon in the future. Agricultural Agencies Each year, the Agricultural Advisory Committee reviews proposals for funding to ensure that the applicants are in compliance with the evaluation criteria, and to ensure that the recipient will have a regional scope, is administered by a non-profit organization in good standing, and can demonstrate the availability of matching funds from another organization. There will be a report to the Board on June 25 th, 2010 recommending that $30,000 be awarded to six different organizations. While it is not a requirement that the organizations report back to Metro Vancouver, the AAC will regularly invite prior year recipients back to Committee to present the results of their awareness activities for which funding was provided. Parks Related Contributions Pacific Parklands Foundation ($175,000), Parks Partnerships ($38,500) and Catching the Spirit Youth Society ($70,000) are programs that have been on-going for a number of years and are administered directly through the Regional Parks Committee. Recipient organizations report on an annual basis to the Committee, indicating how the Metro Vancouver funds were put to use, and the progress made by their organization. The Parks Committee is very aware of the activities of each recipient. Further, Mel Kositsky, a Councillor from Langley Township and a member of the Regional Parks Committee sits on the Board of the Pacific Parklands Foundation and reports on their activities and financing to the Metro Vancouver Board on an annual basis RD-38

41 2010 Funding to External Organizations Mid Term Report Finance Committee Meeting Date: July 15, 2010 Page 3 of Network This $4,500 is more properly considered an annual membership fee as opposed to a grant, and will be moved out of External Contributions in the 2011 budget year. Smart Growth Conference This annual $5,000 payment is in support of their annual conference, which Metro Vancouver frequently participates in, along with representatives of many other municipalities. UBC CALP (Collaborative for Advanced Annual Landscape Planning) Climate Change Visualization The 2010 contribution is the third of a three-year program, so will not be renewed in Remainder of Recipient Organizations All of the other recipient organizations were asked to provide Metro Vancouver with a mid-term report, indicating the purpose for which the Metro Vancouver funding was used, and to indicate their request for future years. This included the following organizations: Fraser Basin Council ($300,000) BIEAP:FREMP ($25,625 each) LMTAC ($312,125) Seymour Salmonid Society ($100,000) BC Search and Rescue ($5,000) Recycling Council of BC ($60,000) With the exception of BC Search and Rescue, all of these organizations have provided very useful information substantiating the validity of the Metro Vancouver contribution, and expressing their desire that the contribution continue to be made in Summaries of their reports are provided in attachments to this report. 3. ALTERNATIVES Not Applicable. 4. CONCLUSION Under the Local Government Act section 176(1)(c) the Regional District can provide a grant to organizations who provide a benefit to the community as a whole. Metro Vancouver s external contributions program has evolved over the years to include a wide variety of organizations whose work contributes greatly to the quality of life throughout the Metro Vancouver region. There are prudent controls and processes in place to ensure the integrity of the program, and it is suggested that the program continue. It is expected that Metro Vancouver will receive requests for the 2011 budget year of roughly $1,256,375, based upon the 2010 level, minus UBC-CALP and BC Search and Rescue. This amount may be impacted by inflation in some instances, or by new requests which cannot be anticipated at this time RD-39

42 2010 Funding to External Organizations Mid Term Report Finance Committee Meeting Date: July 15, 2010 Page 4 of 4 Attachments: Attachment 1 - Attachment 2 - Attachment 3 - Attachment 4 - Attachment 5 - Fraser Basin Council BIEAP:FREMP LMTAC Seymour Salmonid Society Recycling Council of BC JR/eb RD-40

43 ATTACHMENT A GVRD Board Meeting Date: June 25, 2010 To: From: Board of Directors Richard Walton, Metro Vancouver Vice Chair, Mayor District North Vancouver Date: May 25, 2010 Subject: Report on Recent Activities of Fraser Basin Council Recommendation: That the Board receives for information the report dated May 25, 2010 titled Report on Recent Activities of the Fraser Basin Council. 1. PURPOSE As the representative appointed by Metro Vancouver to the Fraser Basin Council Board of Directors, this report serves as information regarding the activities of the Fraser Basin Council in late 2009/early The request for this first report was received from Deputy Corporate Secretary, Chris Plagnol. 2. CONTEXT The Fraser Basin Council (FBC) is an organization that is focused on advancing sustainability throughout the entire Fraser River Basin. The long-term vision of the FBC is to ensure that the Fraser Basin is a place where social well-being is supported by a vibrant economy and sustained by a healthy environment. Since it was established in 1997, the FBC has played a leadership role in helping to educate the public about sustainability, resolve conflicts and take advantage of opportunities to advance sustainability throughout the Fraser River Basin. This problem-solving role may be best exemplified locally in FBC s role in keeping the Fraser River Debris Trap operating for the last eleven years. An issue of great significance regionally, FBC s collaborative approach has ensured that the Province of BC and Port Metro Vancouver are now funding the Trap under a multi-year agreement with additional contributions from Transport Canada and Natural Resources Canada and no financial burden to Metro Vancouver. The FBC Board of Directors is a collaborative initiative of 36 representatives, from all orders of government Federal, Provincial, Local and First Nations, along with leaders from the private and civil sectors. Regional District representatives (from the eight regions within the watershed of the Fraser) play a pivotal role on the FBC Board and Committees to identify challenges that local governments face in planning for the social, economic and environmental well being of their communities. Financial support from local government through Metro Vancouver ($310,000 for 2010), calculated on an annual $0.15 per capita levy across the region, was leveraged with contributions from the Federal and Provincial governments, corporations, foundations and non-government organizations, to a total of over $5 million of programs services and grants in 2009/10. In the last year, through Federal and Provincially funded initiatives under FBC s RD-41

44 Climate Change, Flood and Fish & Fisheries Programs alone, over $1.9 million has been invested in projects and partnerships within Metro Vancouver. What follows is a sample of recent FBC initiatives, focusing on those within the region, which lend support to the Metro Vancouver Sustainability in Action Draft 2010 Workplan. Zero Net Carbon: - The FBC E3 Fleet Rating System (like a LEED standard for vehicles) involves working with public and private sector fleets, to reduce emissions from vehicles in a cost effective manner. The Township of Langley, Delta, Surrey and Vancouver have all had municipal fleets certified. - Under the Community Action on Energy Efficiency program, FBC is also providing resources to local governments and first nations including advice on innovative policies and approaches to encourage the construction of more efficient buildings, ways to carry out idling reduction campaigns, and through administering energy reduction grants (Gold funding to Surrey and Delta in 2009). - The FBC prepared a resource guide for local governments that provides an overview of policy tools and leading civic building operations that advance energy efficiency and released a Transportation Demand Management Guide for small and mid sized communities. - Since the fall of 2009, FBC administers the BC Climate Action Toolkit, an on-line resource offering specific solutions and practical resources, including funding, for local government to reduce carbon emissions. Clean Air For Life: - In October 2009 FBC hosted the Land Use, Transportation, Air Quality & Health Forum, in co-operation with BC Lung and Metro Vancouver staff, to spotlight on the latest research, several regional initiatives and international best practices, and projects underway to improve air quality. - The BC Clean Air Research (BC CLEAR) Fund, administered by FBC, funded transformative, ground breaking research of strategic importance for the management of air quality in British Columbia. $600,000 of this funding was directed within Metro Vancouver in FBC continues to play an ongoing role assisting TransLink in the development of their long-range plans and sustainability policies. - At the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) AGM in October, FBC staff highlighted several regional and provincial initiatives underway to assist local governments in reducing greenhouse gases, conserving energy and lowering emissions. Zero Waste: - At a Metro Sustainability Breakfast FBC s BuySmart program highlighted how local governments and businesses are using waste reduction as a key motivator for the creation of sustainability purchasing policies. BuySmart has held several learning events in Metro in 2009, on subjects including carbon in the supply chain, greening contracts and tenders, paper and printing, waste reduction and green fleet management. Feeding Ourselves & Others: - FBC assisted in the Simon Fraser University/ Ministry of Agriculture and Lands survey and analysis of Public Amenity Benefits and Ecological Services within Metro Vancouver, presented to Metro s Agriculture Committee in late RD-42

45 - FBC is working with several organizations, including Metro Vancouver as well as the Sto:lo Tribal Council, to connect the agricultural community and government and nongovernment organizations with those growing food in throughout the lower mainland. Healthy Parks Healthy People: - In co-operation with Metro Vancouver Parks Department, FBC has led a Youth Engagement, leadership and mentoring program to develop increased involvement of youth in local stewardship. - FBC s Ethnic Communities Education awareness-raising effort is fostering behavioral change in lower mainland Punjabi and Cantonese speaking communities in support of healthy watersheds. - The Fraser Salmon and Watershed program, administered jointly with the Pacific Salmon Foundation, invested in projects in Surrey, the Roberts & Sturgeon Banks, Musqueam, Delta, Langley and Coquitlam/Kwikwetlam in 2009/10. - FBC prepared a 10 year Heritage River Anniversary Monitoring Report to the Federal government on the Fraser River in Under the Regional Adaptation Collaborative (RAC), FBC is administering just over $6 million in applied research in 13 projects across BC in response to the effects of climate change, including the delivery of a Water Guide in 2011, a community case study in Delta and an agricultural Water Demand Model in Metro Vancouver. Collaborative Governance: - The FBC Board, which meets three times per year, is a collaborative space for complex inter-jurisdictional issues to be explored, with solutions sometimes being delivered through FBC (like the Fraser River Debris Trap administration, mitigating costs of over $9 million downstream annually) or if possible through cooperative responsibility sharing, as in the Britannia Mine clean up. - The FBC Smart Planning team is working in partnership with the Ministry of Community and Rural Development to plan and implement integrated community sustainability planning throughout BC. They worked locally with several First Nations and municipalities to encourage communities to take a fresh look at their futures and find ways to improve energy efficiency and foster more complete and compact communities. FBC undertook a sustainability review, Measuring and Reporting on Sustainability Progress for the City of North Vancouver to assess municipal policy, implementation and ground truth effects in part under this program. - Continued focus is on improving inter-jurisdictional collaboration through the FBC led Joint Program Committee for Integrated Flood Hazard Management and enhancing public awareness towards improved flooding readiness. Building upon feedback from local government following the delivery of floodplain mapping, FBC delivered a Best Practices Floodplain Management report for the lower Fraser, released in Sustainability Reporting: - In co-operation with the governments represented by the Lower Mainland Local Government Association and Environment Canada FBC s first Regional Sustainability Snapshot for the Fraser Valley Metro Vancouver Sea to Sky region was released in May Sustainability Snapshot 2010: Working Together in the Lower Mainland reports on several key measures of sustainability across the three regions to assist senior staff and politicians in understanding barriers, opportunities and advancing shared priorities for the area from Pemberton to Hope. FBC will be working with communities to advance cooperative action stemming from these findings. - FBC also supports other indicator and reporting initiatives, including that being undertaken by Metro Vancouver, the Vancouver Foundation and VANOC. A Transboundary Indicators Literature search for this area of the Georgia Basin was prepared by FBC for Environment Canada in 2009/10. RD-43

46 - In February 2009 at the State of the Fraser Basin Conference, the FBC released its Sustainability Snapshot 4 Indicators, reporting on the health of the Fraser River Basin, by region, through the sustainability lens and covering a broad range of economic, social and environmental topics. In conclusion, the Fraser Basin Council provides great value for Metro Vancouver and area local governments, in large part due to the alignment of FBC initiatives with the sustainability priorities of the region, developed as a result of a long-standing and effective partnership. 3. ALTERNATIVES None. This report provides the status of activities of the Fraser Basin Council. 4. CONCLUSION The Board receive this report for information. RD-44

47 Annual Report Highlights Bringing People Together. The Fraser Basin Council (FBC) is honoured to work in the Fraser River Basin and across BC to advance sustainability. Formed in 1997, FBC is a collaborative initiative of all orders of government federal, provincial, local and First Nations along with leaders from the private and civil sectors. FBC is devoted to helping people work together to tackle today s sustainability issues in particular those issues that span several regions, involve multiple jurisdictions and call for collaborative solutions. Our vision? A Fraser Basin where social well-being is supported by a vibrant economy and sustained by a healthy environment. Here is a snapshot of our work in The Fraser Basin Council focuses on projects that matter to present and future generations climate change and air quality, flood hazard management, healthy watersheds, sustainability planning, and education on diverse topics from sustainability purchasing to the latest green transportation options. We listen, facilitate discussions, and strive for practical, collaborative solutions. This is a story of shared success. The Fraser Basin Council has a presence in each of the five regions of the Basin and has forged strong provincial, federal, regional, non-profit and private sector partnerships. Our work is your work, and it is in service to communities that we find the greatest satisfaction. Our deep appreciation goes to all of you, and to our dedicated directors and staff, for your commitment to advancing sustainability throughout the year. Charles Jago Chair David Marshall Executive Director RD-45 FRASER BASIN COUNCIL 1

48 Trout Lake Buffalo Lake. er Hay R. The Fraser Basin is our foundation Bistcho Lake s ea Stretching D240,000 square kilometres across BC, from the headwaters of the Fraser River in the Rocky Mountains through the heartland of the Upper Fraser, Cariboo-Chilcotin and Thompson regjons to the most populated stretches of the Fraser Valley and Greater Vancouver, the Fraser Fort Nelson R. Basin is a place where many communities thrive. The Basin is home to over 2.7 million people of all cultures and languages and to an abundance of wildlife, fish and flora. It is also the region Fort Nelson that generates much of BC s gross domestic product. At the core of this common wealth is the Hay R. a chag Chin a hik Kec et Proph Fraser, one of the greatest salmon-producing river systems in the world. R. R. R. The long-term health and well-being of the Fraser Basin and its communities is the inspiration sc ba Wa for all the Fraser Basin Council does. Formed in 1997, the Council is a charitable, not-for-profit. ar body that works with all sectors to advance sustainability in the Basin and beyond. The Fraser Basin within BC The Council believes that sustainability is possible when people come together to make decisions in a collaborative, integrated fashion, working towards social well-being, a vibrant Uti ku ma R. economy and a healthy environment, now and for generations to come. Mus Williston Lake Alaska Chetwynd Babine R. Dawson Creek. Smoky R Lesser Slave Lake Takla Lake Mackenzie Babine Lake Stuart Lake Fort St James Stuart R iver Terrace ce Rupert Kitimat. ok Upper Fraser Franeois Lake yr Sm E Nechako R. Ootsa Lake ako R. Prince George (FBC Office) ch Ne Eutsuk Lake Tetachuck Lake Quesnel Valemount Quesnel Lake pson Cariboo-Chilcotin (FBC Office) Bella Bella Chil cotin R. Ho ma thk or. Thompson Shuswap Lake son Kamloops Lillooet Pemberton Port Alice GVSS Powell River Parksville RD-46 Vancouver Nanaimo Okanagan Lake Lytton Columbia Lake Vernon Lumby Kootenay Lake Kelowna Fraser Valley Peachland Summerland Hope Mission (FBC Office) Surrey (FBC Office) Similkameen 2 Shusw ap Thompson Port Hardy Upper Arrow Lake S. T ho mp (FBC Office) Campbell River Kinbasket Lake N. Thom Williams Lake Bella Coola Penticton Lower Arrow Lake Rossland Osoyoos Trail

49 Who We Are FBC Directors and staff, 2009 Formed in 1997 to advance sustainability in the Fraser River Basin, the Fraser Basin Council is a collaboration of the four orders of Canadian government, including First Nations, and representatives from the private sector and civil society. Directors make decisions by consensus, in accordance with principles set out in FBC s Charter for Sustainability. The Council is one of the first non-profits of its kind in Canada, and has shared its experience with others in this country and abroad who are interested in collaborative governance. The Council helps communities work on sustainability issues through staff in five regional offices. What We Do The Township of Langley captures BC s first green fleet rating under the innovative E3 Fleet Program Many of today s most pressing issues are, at their heart, sustainability issues. To find integrated solutions that last, it is often important to overcome jurisdictional hurdles and other challenges through collaboration across sectors. The Council serves as a catalyst and impartial facilitator, bringing people together to that end. The Council also raises awareness of sustainability and its importance; monitors progress towards sustainability by reporting on key indicators; and delivers a variety of partnership programs in BC. These range from initiatives that encourage a greener transportation sector, to those that support watershed and water-use planning and those that build economic resilience in rural communities. 10 Building Leaders for Sustainability Chair Charles Jago (centre right) and Executive Director David Marshall (centre left) accept an honour for FBC from the Fraser River Discovery Centre in October 2008 This past year the Fraser Basin Council marked 12 years of service to communities of the Basin. The Council s success is thanks to its many partners and supporters who have demonstrated a deep commitment to to sustainability and to collaboration as a way of finding lasting solutions RD-47 FRASER BASIN COUNCIL 3

50 ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND AIR QUALITY The Fraser Basin Council works with many communities to improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation strategies on climate change. Here s a look: Greening up Fleets Transportation accounts for almost 40% of GHG emissions in BC. Many public and private sector fleets are now shifting gears by adopting cleaner, more energy-efficient technologies and management practices. Over the past three years, FBC has encouraged this shift through Green Fleets BC, with provincial funding. Of note: 144 public and private sector fleets made commitments to reduce emissions through Green Fleets BC. This has led to reductions of 23,000 tonnes of GHG, 150 tonnes of NOx (nitrogen oxide) and three tonnes of fine particulate matter. Through Green Fleets BC funding incentives, several commercial fleets have introduced envirotrucks. These are newer trucks with cleaner-burning engines and aerodynamic features. Results are encouraging and now being shared across the sector: a 30% fuel savings, 20% drop in greenhouse gas emissions and 90% drop in smog-producing emissions. Another highlight is a pilot project to test medium-duty hybrid vehicles, such as urban delivery trucks, municipal bucket trucks and urban recycling vehicles. While there are yet only a few hybrids of this type in BC, they offer a 25-30% reduction in fuel consumption and emissions. Green Fleets BC incentives helped several fleets test medium-duty hybrids, beginning with Victoria-based R&B Trucking. The company purchased a new diesel-electric hybrid refrigerated delivery truck that is expected to save as much as 35% in fuel costs and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by more than 20 tonnes per year. Hybrid pilot projects were underway in 2009 at the Fraser Valley Regional District Library, Metro Vancouver, the City of Vancouver, BC Hydro and UBC. E3 Fleet Rating FBC created Canada s first fleet rating program E3 Fleet. The program offers in-depth fleet reviews of public and private sector fleets to identify opportunities for energy savings and emissions reductions. Over 80 communities have joined E3 Fleet so far, including 50 in BC. The Township of Langley earned an E3 Fleet Silver Rating in November 2008, becoming BC s first rated fleet. Idle-Free BC Small first steps do count! Turning off an engine to avoid unnecessary idling is a simple action every driver can take. Over 168 BC communities and organizations, including 14 school districts and 78 fleets, have committed to idling reduction programs. With funding from the Province of BC, FBC supports their efforts with training and tools through the Idle Free BC program. Transportation Alternatives for Communities When it comes to small and mid-sized communities, what practical alternatives exist to building more roads and accommodating more cars? FBC began developing Transportation Demand Management workshops to explore the question, thanks to Transport Canada funding. FBC also worked on a new resource guide for smaller communities, for publication in the Fall of The Hub for Action on School Transportation Emissions (HASTE) is a resource and networking centre. Students, teachers and schools learn how to reduce school-related transportation emissions, plan safe and active routes to school and access an online GHG emissions calculator. FBC is pleased to have facilitated this project. Clean Air Education In March 2009 FBC co-hosted the annual Clean Air Forum, The Council also helped with other initiatives such as promoting the Air Quality Health Index and the BC Clean Air Research Fund in support of innovative resesearch projects Community Action on Energy & Emissions The Fraser Basin Council partners on the Community Action on Energy & Emissions (CAEE) program, offering provincial incentives and research support to local government and First Nations to improve their energy efficiency and conservation and reduce carbon emissions. By the Spring of 2009, there were 54 BC local governments and First Nations participating in one of seven phases of the program. Over the past year, 25 communities completed projects and 14 communities began projects as diverse as GHG inventories, energy audits and community energy plans. In February, FBC released the 2009 edition of Energy Efficiency & Buildings: A Resource Guide for BC s Local Governments, featuring updated case studies and tools. As well, a new incentive program was in preparation to promote energy alternatives to diesel power generation in remote communities. RD Annual Highlights

51 FLOOD HAZARD MANAGEMENT In any given year, some BC communities will face the threat of flood. For the past 12 years, FBC has supported the development of flood hazard management information and strategies, in collaboration with federal, provincial and local authorities. The work included a 2006 flood study that resulted in a new flood profile for the lower Fraser region. Here are highlights for : FBC assisted BC Hydro, BC Ministry of Environment, Emergency Management BC, Fraser Valley Regional District, Chilliwack and Hope on topographical mapping for flood modelling in the Fraser Valley, as well as river sedimentation analysis and floodplain maps. The goal is to support land use planning, flood mitigation and emergency response. FBC conducted a survey of local and provincial representatives to ascertain their experience with land use planning in floodplain areas, a new responsibility of local government. Many of the survey respondents voiced support for updated technical studies, mapping and risk assessment of flood hazards, as well as greater coordination in the management of risks that impact more than one community. Flood infrastructure such as dikes, pumps and floodgates are necessary to protect communities along the Fraser, but they also create barriers to fish migration from the Fraser into smaller tributaries and they contribute to loss or degradation of habitat. Can the worlds of fish and flood be reconciled? FBC initiated a discussion of the issue and is documenting best management practices and success stories to assist local governments and diking authorities. SMART PLANNING FOR COMMUNITIES Smart Planning for Communities (SPC) is a BC-wide, collaborative initiative that provides resources and tools to local and First Nations governments for planning socially, culturally, economically and environmentally sustainable communities. There are five Sustainability Facilitators for the Northern Interior, Southern Interior, Kootenay and Vancouver Island, including a parttime energy planning specialist. On request, they assist local governments and First Nations that are intending to develop or implement a sustainability plan, as well as offer strategic support (such as how to access funding and expertise) and education (such as learning forums and resources). To date, the SPC team have connected with at least 50 municipalities and regional districts and nine First Nations through workshops, presentations, forums and one-on-one consultations. Smart Planning for Communities is administered by FBC on behalf of a funders group that includes BC Hydro, BC Ministry of Agriculture and Lands, BC Ministry of Community and Rural Development, BC Ministry of Environment, First Nations Mountain Pine Beetle Initiative, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and the Real Estate Foundation of BC. FBC has also partnered on a climate action toolkit for local government. Visit bc.ca. FRASER SALMON AND WATERSHEDS Pacific salmon. Funding is available for projects examples are the Water Wise program of the that focus on collaborative watershed planning Cariboo Chilcotin Conservation Society, the City and governance, habitat restoration and stewardship, of Surrey s salmon habitat restoration program, a sustainable fisheries management and joint watershed project of the City of Coquitlam education and engagement in the community. and Kwikwetlem First Nation and a foreshore The well-being of communities is tied to the health of land, air and water. The Fraser Salmon and Watersheds Program (FSWP), co-managed by the Fraser Basin Council and the Pacific Salmon Foundation (PSF), is investing in the health of the Fraser River watershed and encouraging the diversity and sustainability of wild FSWP receives federal and provincial funding, along with that of the Pacific Salmon Foundation Endowment Fund and other partners. FSWP funded $4 million in projects across the Fraser Basin in Many of these were led within the communities by nonprofit organizations and public bodies. Recent RD-49 mapping project of Columbia Shuswap Regional District on Shuswap Lake. See a full list of Fraser Salmon and Watershed projects at FRASER BASIN COUNCIL 5

52 PROJECTS IN THE REGIONS Debris trap. The Fraser River debris trap near Chilliwack River Watershed Strategy. Hope prevents large volumes of wood debris Like other watersheds, the Chilliwack River wa- from reaching the lower stretches of the Fraser tershed is under stress. FBC facilitated a team River during spring freshet, avoiding risk to lives effort among Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the and property. The Province of BC and Port Fraser Valley Regional District and the Fraser Metro Vancouver are now funding the trap un- Valley Regional Watersheds Coalition to identify der a multi-year agreement, with additional con- problems and possible solutions for such issues tributions from Transport Canada and Natural as illegal dumping, controversial sports fishing Invasive plants. When it comes to ecosystem Resources Canada. This was a welcome develop- behaviours and invasive species health, one of the thorny concerns is invasive ment for FBC, which serves as secretariat for plants. FBC began work on the issue in 2002 the trap operating committee and has worked with creation of a collaborative Invasive Plant hard to encourage funding stability. Interface fire. Fire hazards are top of mind for many BC residents who live on the urbanrural divide near grasslands and forest. FBC has worked with communities in the Cariboo by supporting interface fire planning and by overseeing a fuel reduction program. Strategy for British Columbia and launch of the Invasive Plant Council of BC, now an independent society. At a community level, FBC also now supports the Cariboo Chilcotin Coast Invasive Plant Committee on strategy, community educa- ner once again with BC Ministry of Agriculture and with local fish and wildlife clubs in expand- Survey on business sustainability ing the network of Farmwest climate stations practices. In partnership with VanCity Savings in the Thompson and Cariboo. These stations Credit Union, the Greater VancouverWhitehorse Sea to Sky measure soil and climate conditions, yielding Kakisa Lake Dezadeash Lake Tathlina Lake Kusawa Lake Tazin Lake Trout Lake region oversaw a survey in 2008 to find out the data to help agricultural producers better plan Buffalo Lake Tagish Lake Teslin Lake needs and priorities of small and medium-sized Atlin Lake tion and weed pulls. Climate Stations. FBC was pleased to part- irrigation and fertilization. ase De R. Athabasca Lake Hay R. Here are highlights of FBC s work in the regions: Bistcho Lake Lake Claire Fort Nelson R. business in the Lower Mainland, Fraser Valley and Taku R. asca Wab R. chasing, GHG and energy reductions and water to reduce its vulnerability to flood. conservation, as well as charitable contributions R. an important step for this community in planning haga et R. practices, including waste reduction, ethical pur- a R. Petersburg Utik um a R. Muskw Chetwynd Babine R. Smoky R. Dawson Creek Lesser Slave Lake Takla Lake Mackenzie Babine Lake Stuart Lake Fort St James Stuart Rive r Terrace Kitimat ako R. Prince Edmonton George (FBC Office) ch Ne Eutsuk Lake Tetachuck Lake (Mission), Thompson (Kamloops), Cariboo-Chilcotin (Williams Lake) and Upper Fraser (Prince Quesnel Valemount Quesnel Lake (FBC Office) Chilc otin Thompson hko Ho mat Shuswap Lake Kamloops om p Lillooet Pemberton Port Alice Powell River Vancouver Fraser Valley Summerland Hope Mission Surrey (FBC Office) Penticton Lower Arrow Lake Rossland Trail Osoyoos Idaho Washington Duncan Victoria Montana Everett Spokane 2009 Conference & Sustainability Snapshot How is the health of the Fraser Basin? The highs and lows are described in Sustainability Snapshot 4, FBC s 2009 indicators report. Released in Feburary, in conjunction with FBC s biennial State of the Fraser Basin Conference, this report canvasses sustainability data and trends, including regional breakdowns for all Fraser Basin communities and some BC-wide data, in 18 topic areas. These include te of the 2009 Sta SU STA INA BIL ITY SN AP SH The Ma OT 4 ity stainabil of Su ny Faces air and water quality, education, health, biodiversity, energy and waste management. Sustainability Snapshot 4 is available in both electronic and hard copy form. Visit Scheduled for release in 2010 is a new regional indicators report for the Fraser Valley Regional District, Metro Vancouver and the Sea to Sky corridor thanks to funding from Environment Canada and the Lower Mainland Local Government Association. The report will cover land use, transportation, air quality, health and other issues. An earlier regional report, focused on the Upper Fraser region, was released in the Fall of RD Annual Highlights. nr ma Old Kootenay Lake Kelowna (FBC Office) Nanaimo Vernon Lumby Peachland Similkameen Parksville Okanagan Lake Lytton GVSS Columbia Lake Shuswa Port Hardy Upper Arrow Lake S. Th Thompson For more on FBC programs and services, and to contact us, please visit Red Calgary (FBC Office) Campbell River. rr ee Kinbasket Lake R. R. local concerns. dd N. Thomps Williams Lake Bella Coola Bella Bella Re on Cariboo-Chilcotin n George). The work of regional committees and regional managers helps FBC stay atuned to. yr Nechako R. Ootsa Lake FBC has five regional offices: Greater Vancouver Sea to Sky (Vancouver), Fraser Valley ok Sm Upper Fraser Franeois Lake pso Prince Rupert ort Clea Williston Lake Alaska and employee volunteering. in Rep Fraser Bas er R. rwat Fort McMurray Sitka meetings on flood hazard management options, Chinc Proph showed a high level of interest in sustainability R. with the City of Prince George to facilitate public Hay R. ika Southern Vancouver Island. Survey respondents Kech Flood management in PG. FBC worked Fort Nelson Deer

53 Fraser Basin Council Directors as of March 31, 2009 Dr. Charles Jago Chair, Fraser Basin Council Past President, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George Deborah Abbott Executive Director, Nlaka pamux Nation Tribal Council, Nlaka pamux language group, Lytton David Barratt Harbour Master, Harbours & Ports, Mission Ervin Charleyboy Chief, Alexis Creek First Nation, Ts ilhqot in language group, Williams Lake Rose Charlie (De-lix-hwia) Grand Chief, OBC, LL.D. (Hon), Halq eméylem language group, Chehalis Michael Clague Past President, Canadian Council on Social Development Linda Coady Vice President, Sustainability, VANOC Olympic & Paralympic Winter Games, Vancouver Sheilagh Foster Artist, McBride Dan George President, Four Directions Management Services, Carrier language group, Prince George Leah George-Wilson Chief, Tsleil-Waututh Nation, Hun qumyi num language group, North Vancouver Duncan Jeffries Instructor, Computer Information Systems, University College of the Fraser Valley, Abbotsford Gary John Former Chief, Stl atl imx, S á imcets language group, Shalath Paul Kluckner Regional Director General, Environment Canada, Vancouver Doug Konkin Deputy Minister, BC Ministry of Environment, Victoria John Massier Director, Cariboo Regional District, Quesnel Ken Melamed Director, Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, Whistler Marie Mervyn Retired Rancher, Alkali Lake Debora Munoz Director, Regional District of Fraser-Fort George Michael O Brien Vice President, Vancouver International Airport Authority, Vancouver Alan Osborne Executive Director, Intergovernmental Relations and Planning Division, Ministry of Community and Rural Development Kristy Alphonse-Palmantier Natural Resources Director, Williams Lake Indian Band, Secwepemc language group, Williams Lake Bob Patterson Manager, Government & Environmental Affairs, Taseko Mines, 150 Mile House Bob Peart President, The Nexus Learning Group, Sidney Jerry Petersen Director, Regional District of Bulkley-Nechako, Vanderhoof Patricia Ross Chair, Fraser Valley Regional District, Abbotsford Doug Routledge Vice President, Council of Forest Industries, Prince George Gerry Salembier Assistant Deputy Minister, Western Economic Diversification Canada, Vancouver George Saddleman Representative, Okanagan Nation Alliance, Okanagan language group, Merritt Bob Smillie Retired Physician, Kamloops Paul Sprout Regional Director General, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Vancouver Rene Talbot Director, Columbia Shuswap Regional District, Falkland John Taylor Director, Thompson-Nicola Regional District, Kamloops Bev van Ruyven Executive Vice-President, Customer Care and Conservation, BC Hydro, Vancouver David Van Seters President, Small Potatoes Urban Delivery, Vancouver Richard Walton Vice Chair, Greater Vancouver Regional District (Metro Vancouver), North Vancouver Thanks to all Directors who completed service in : Duncan Barnett Director, Cariboo Regional District, Williams Lake Judy Guichon Rancher, Gerard Guichon Ranch Ltd., Quilchena Joan Hesketh Deputy Minister, BC Ministry of Environment, Victoria Colin Kinsley Director, Fraser-Fort George Regional Distict, Prince George Terry Raymond Vice-Chair, Fraser Valley Regional District, Boston Bar Perry Redan Chief, Sekw el as Band, Cayoose Creek, Stl atl imx, S á imcets language group Mike Retasket Chief, Bonaparte Indian Band Coro Strandberg Principal, Strandberg Consulting, Burnaby Tracy Summerville Assistant Professor, University of Northern BC, Prince George Laurie Vaughan Forestry Consultant, Anahim Lake RD-51 FRASER BASIN COUNCIL 7

54 Fraser Basin Council Offices FBC Basin-Wide Office and Greater Vancouver Sea to Sky (GVSS) Regional Office 1st Floor, 470 Granville Street Vancouver, BC V6C 1V5 T (604) F (604) info@fraserbasin.bc.ca GVSS Regional Office Regional Manager: Marion Town T: (604) mtown@fraserbasin.bc.ca Fraser Valley Regional Office PO Box 3006 Mission, BC V2V 4J3 Regional Manager: Marion Robinson T: (604) F (604) mrobinson@fraserbasin.bc.ca Thompson Regional Office # McGill Road Kamloops, BC V2C 6K7 Regional Manager: Mike Simpson T (250) F (250) msimpson@fraserbasin.bc.ca Cariboo-Chilcotin Regional Office Second Avenue North Williams Lake, BC V2G 1Z5 Regional Manager: Mike Simpson T (250) F (250) msimpson@fraserbasin.bc.ca Upper Fraser Regional Office George Street Prince George, BC V2L 1P8 Regional Manager: Terry Robert T (250) F (250) trobert@fraserbasin.bc.ca RD-52

55 RD-53

56 RD-54

57 RD-55

58 RD-56

59 RD-57

60 RD-58

61 RD-59

62 RD-60

63 GVRD Board Meeting: June 25, 2010 To: From: Board of Directors Director Ralph Drew Date: May 25, 2010 Subject: LMTAC Progress Report on Treaty Negotiations and Aboriginal Relations Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report, dated May 25, 2010, titled LMTAC Progress Report on Treaty Negotiations and Aboriginal Relations. 1. PURPOSE To provide an update on Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee (LMTAC) activities as they relate to treaty negotiations and aboriginal issues of interest to local government. 2. CONTEXT a) Recent LMTAC Activities Since the last report to the Board in October 2009, LMTAC (and or its staff) has, among other issues and initiatives, addressed or participated in the following activities: Held Inaugural Board and Elections on January 27 th, Election results include: Executive Committee: Chair Vice Chair Katzie Table Representative Musqueam Table Representative Squamish Table Representative Tsleil-Waututh Table Representative At-Large Members Regional District Representatives FVTAC Representative: Mayor Ralph Drew (Metro Vancouver) Councillor Corinne Lonsdale (Squamish) Councillor Mel Kositsky (Langley Township) Councillor Linda Barnes (Richmond) Councillor Corinne Lonsdale (Squamish) Councillor Alan Nixon (D. North Vancouver) Councillor Mary Wade Anderson (White Rock) Councillor Anne Peterson (Delta) Mayor Ralph Drew (Metro Vancouver) Mayor Jordon Sturdy (Squamish-Lillooet) Director Lee Turnbull (Sunshine Coast) Councillor Mel Kositsky (Langley Township) Continued participation in Agreement-in-Principle (AIP) negotiations at the Tsleil- Waututh and Katzie treaty tables. Coordinated special briefings to member Councils, including: the Sunshine Coast Regional District, Squamish-Lillooet Regional District and the Resort Municipality of Whistler. Distributed a memorandum to LMTAC member jurisdictions in November 2009, requesting that they consider adopting a policy statement regarding nonpayment of fees RD-61

64 LMTAC Progress Report on Treaty Negotiations and Aboriginal Relations Metro Vancouver Board June 25, 2010 Page 2 of 4 for consultation with First Nations as part of the process of obtaining provincial statutory approvals. Coordinated special Board delegation on January 27 th, 2010, with representatives from the provincial Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation (MARR) Fiscal Branch. Coordinated a special Board delegation on April 28 th, 2010, featuring a joint presentation by the Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation (MARR) and Integrated Land Management Bureau (ILMB) on the Coastal First Nations and Haida First Nation Reconciliation Protocols. In response to the Province not providing grant funding to TACs for the 20010/11 fiscal year, LMTAC submitted a second grant application to the Union of BC Municipalities enhanced Supporting Treaty Implementation Program (STIP) for operational funding. Participated in a Federal Round Table on Managing Aboriginal Title and Rights in BC on March 16 th, LMTAC distributed correspondence to member Councils and Boards to provide a briefing on the federal action plan and new mandates for treaty negotiations. Coordinated an LMTAC Executive Committee meeting with Minister Abbott on April 30 th, b) Status of Treaty Negotiations across the Province BC Treaty Commission: March 2010 Update Newsletter In March 2010, the BC Treaty Commission released its quarterly update on the status of treaty negotiations across the Province. Currently, there are: - 60 First Nations participating in the BC Treaty Process. - As some First Nations are negotiating together, there are 48 sets of negotiations, with: o 1 First Nations in Stage 6, o 7 First Nations in Stage 5, o 44 First Nations in Stage 4, o 2 First Nations in Stage 3, and o 6 First Nations in Stage 2. The Maa-nulth treaty received royal assent in June 2009; however an effective date has yet to be determined. The governments of Canada and BC extended the land offer originally made to the Lheidli T enneh First Nation in 2007 for another year to allow members to review and reconsider the treaty package. Yale First Nation initialed a Final Agreement with the governments of Canada and BC in February 2010, and In-SHUCK-ch Nation, Sliammon First Nation and Yekooche Nation are close to concluding Final Agreements. Nine First Nations are moving to conclude Agreements-in -Principle including: K omoks First Nation, Namgis Nation, Nazko First Nation, Northern Shuswap Treaty Society, Oweekeno Nation, Te Mexw First Nation, Tla-o-qui-aht First Nation, and two of the Tsimshian First Nations Kitselas and Kitsumkalum. RD-62

65 LMTAC Progress Report on Treaty Negotiations and Aboriginal Relations Metro Vancouver Board June 25, 2010 Page 3 of 4 c) Updates on Aboriginal Affairs-Related Events and Other Information The following are brief updates of key events, as well as other information related to First Nations issues. BC Treaty Commissioner Announcements In November 2009, Shana Manson was elected to represent the First Nations Summit (FNS) as a BC Treaty Commissioner. Ms. Manson was formerly a treaty negotiator for the Hul qumi num Treaty Group and is from the Lyackson First Nation of Vancouver Island. She is one of two FNS commissioners at the BC Treaty Commission (BCTC). In November 2009, it was also announced that Commissioners Jerry Lampert and Dave Haggard will serve on the Treaty Commission for another two-year term. Lampert was first appointed in December 2007 by the Government of Canada and Haggard was first appointed in February 2008 by the Government of BC. Treaty Completion Benefits Economy The BCTC recently released the PricewaterhouseCoopers study Financial and Economic Impacts of Treaty Settlements in British Columbia on the potential economic benefits of treaty settlements. Based on analysis of the Maan-Nulth, Tsawwassen, and Lheidli T enneh Final Agreements, the report estimates that if all sixty First Nations in the Treaty Process concluded Final Agreements in the next 15 years, the net economic benefit in the province could exceed $10 billion. The report is available at Yale Final Agreement Initialled The Yale Final Agreement was initialled on February 5 th, 2010, by Chief Negotiators from the Yale First Nation, Canada and British Columbia, making it the fourth Final Agreement to be initialled under the BC Treaty Process. Details of the Final Agreement include 1,966 hectares of Treaty Settlement Lands, a capital transfer of $10.7 million, and economic development funds of $2.2 million. The First Nation will become a member of the Fraser Valley Regional Hospital District on the Effective Date; however, Fraser Valley Regional District membership remains optional. Next steps include ratification of the Final Agreement by the Yale First Nation community, and by the Legislature of British Columbia and Parliament of Canada. The Yale First Nation has approximately 151 members and is located north of Hope. Say Nuth Khaw Yum / Indian Arm Park Plan On February 17 th, 2010, BC Parks, Port Metro Vancouver, and the Tsleil-Waututh Nation celebrated the collaboratively developed Say Nuth Khaw Yum / Indian Arm Provincial Park Management Plan. The plan provides land management direction for 6,826 hectares of parkland, and is the product of nearly twelve years of work between BC Parks and the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. Federal Throne Speech says First Nations crucial to economy The British Columbia Treaty Commission is encouraged that the March 2010 federal Throne Speech recognizes that The completion of treaties will unite First Nations as economic partners and strengthen the role that First Nations in BC play in the economic health of our province and the nation, said Chief Commissioner Sophie Pierre. We also note that the BC government s financial commitment to the treaty process and First Nation issues remains strong, said Pierre. The momentum we have gained in treaty negotiations over the past two years, and the good prospects for agreements, are reflected in the provincial budget. There will be no change to the Treaty Commission budget for the fiscal year beginning April RD-63

66 LMTAC Progress Report on Treaty Negotiations and Aboriginal Relations Metro Vancouver Board June 25, 2010 Page 4 of 4 1 st. The Treaty Commission expects both the provincial and the federal governments to give priority to First Nation issues and treaty negotiations in the coming year. Canada Takes Action to Support Progress in the BC Treaty Process On March 2 nd, 2010, the Federal Government released an action plan to facilitate progress in the BC Treaty Process and bring more flexibility to treaty negotiations. The new approaches were explained by Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl during a meeting chaired by the BC Treaty Commission in Victoria with Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation Minister George Abbott, First Nation Summit representatives Grand Chief Edward John, Grand Chief Doug Kelly and Dan Smith. Among the major announcements was the Government of Canada s establishment of the Cohen inquiry to investigate the decline in sockeye salmon stocks in the Fraser River. With the exception of the Yale, In-SHUCK-ch and Sliammon Final Agreement negotiations, Canada will defer discussions on fisheries at tables where the fisheries arrangements could involve salmon. The results of the Cohen Judicial Inquiry are expected in May 2011, with an interim report in August Nisga a Celebrate 10 th Treaty Anniversary May 11 th, 2010, marked the 10 th anniversary of the Nisga a Treaty, the first modern-day treaty in British Columbia. Celebrations brought together the Nisga a people, dignitaries, friends and supporters in New Aiyansh, the home of the Nisga a Lisims Government. City of Vancouver and Squamish Nation Sign Memorandum of Understanding On May 17 th, 2010, the City of Vancouver and Squamish Nation signed a Memorandum of Understanding and Protocol Agreement (MOU) to bring the communities closer together. In particular, the City and the Squamish Nation will form a steering committee to meet on a regular basis, and they intend to host a joint Council meeting at least once each year. The MOU also encourages collaboration in areas of mutual interest such as economic development, tourism, and environmental protection. Indian Band and Other First Nation Elections The Squamish Nation general election was held December 6, Sixteen band council positions were elected, with Chiefs Gibby Jacobs, Dick Williams, Bill Williams and Ian Campbell all returning to council. The Katzie First Nation general election was held on February 23 rd, 2010, and a new Chief, Jay Bailey, was elected. Three new councillors were also sworn in including Bailey's mother Leslie Bailey. The other two councillors are Leonard Pierre and Robin Green. 3. ALTERNATIVES No alternatives presented. 4. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the Board receive for information the report dated May 25, 2010, titled LMTAC Progress Report on Treaty Negotiations and Aboriginal Relations. Attachments: 1. Status of Lower Mainland Treaty Negotiation Tables RD-64

67 Status of Lower Mainland Treaty Negotiation Tables (Sources: BC Treaty Commission; INAC; MARR; LMTAC) The following table presents a brief summary of treaty negotiation tables within the Metro Vancouver region according to the BC Treaty Commission s (BCTC) six-stage treaty process. Negotiation Table Hwlitsum First Nation Katzie First Nation Musqueam Indian Band Squamish Nation Tsleil-Waututh Nation Stage (of 6) Federal Negotiator Provincial Negotiator First Nation Negotiator Stage 2 N/A N/A Chief Raymond Wilson Stage 4 Eric Roger Chief Bailey / Denhoff Graham Debbie Miller Stage 4 Bruce George Chief Campbell Milne McRae / Leona Sparrow Stage 3 Brian Roger Chief Stage 4 Smith Brian Smith Graham Bronwen Beedle Gibby Jacob Chief Justin George/ Leonard George / Leah George-Wilson BC Treaty Commission N/A Jerry Lampert Dave Haggard Robert Phillips Jerry Lampert A description of the current status of treaty negotiations for each of the six tables follows. Hwlitsum (Stage 2 of 6 Readiness to Negotiate) In May 2008, the BC Treaty Commission accepted the Statement of Intent submitted by Hwlitsum First Nation. Canada and BC have yet to commit to negotiate a treaty with Hwlitsum. The Hwlitsum First Nation has more than 300 members and its traditional territory encompasses a large portion of the Lower Mainland, the Gulf Islands and a portion of Vancouver Island. Katzie (Stage 4 of 6 Negotiation of an Agreement-in-Principle stage) Negotiations toward an Agreement-in-Principle (AIP) continue at a steady pace, with the goal of concluding an AIP by the end of Recent Main Table Working Group (MTWG) meetings discussed draft AIP chapters related to: Lands, Local Government Relations, General Provisions, Migratory Birds, Wildlife, Culture and Heritage and Eligibility and Enrolment. Katzie is also working to address shared territory issues, including meetings with the Tsawwassen First Nation and tabling a draft protocol and memorandum of understanding with Kwantlen First Nation on forestry resources. Katzie has approximately 495 members and traditionally used and occupied the land and water around Pitt Lake, Pitt River, Surrey, Langley, New Westminster, and Vancouver. Katzie has five Indian Reserves in four different local government jurisdictions, including two within Metro Vancouver s Electoral Area A (on Barnston Island and in the Pitt Lake area). Councillor Mel Kositsky (Township of Langley) is the LMTAC representative to the Katzie negotiations. RD-65

68 Musqueam (Stage 4 of 6 Negotiation of an Agreement-in-Principle stage) There have been no Agreement-in-Principle (AIP) negotiations at the Musqueam treaty table since January Musqueam continues to pursue other avenues outside the treaty process to protect its rights and interests, such as the Reconciliation, Settlement and Benefits Agreement with the Province in Musqueam also signed an Olympic Legacy Agreement with Canada on June 13, 2008, providing the First Nation with $17 million in legacy funds. Musqueam has approximately 1,220 members, with a traditional territory spanning the Metro Vancouver region. Councillor Linda Barnes (City of Richmond) is the LMTAC representative to the Musqueam negotiations. Squamish (Stage 3 of 6 Negotiation of a Framework Agreement stage) There have been no treaty negotiations for several years. Squamish continues to pursue opportunities outside the treaty process, including economic development, particularly related to the 2010 Olympics. Squamish Nation signed a Memorandum of Understanding and Protocol Agreement with the City of Vancouver on May 17, 2010, to encourage collaboration between the communities on issues of mutual interest. On May 18 th, 2010, Squamish announced plans to build a massive commercial and residential development on its ancestral lands located underneath the south end of the Burrard Bridge. Squamish Nation s traditional territory ranges from the Lower Mainland to Howe Sound and the Squamish valley watershed. The First Nation has approximately 3,620 members. Councillor Corinne Lonsdale (District of Squamish) is the LMTAC representative to the Squamish negotiations. Tsleil-Waututh (Burrard) (Stage 4 of 6 Negotiation of an Agreement-in-Principle stage) Negotiations toward an Agreement-in-Principle (AIP) continue, with Parties meeting monthly. A timeline for concluding the AIP has yet to be determined. Recent discussions have focused on chapters related to: Governance, Local Government Relations, Culture and Heritage, Environmental Assessment and Protection and Intergovernmental Processes (i.e. First Nation's role and rights outside of its treaty lands). Tsleil-Waututh is making progress on resolving overlapping /shared territory issues. A protocol was signed with Squamish Nation and another is being drafted with the Tsawwassen First Nation. Preliminary discussions are underway with Musqueam Nation and In-SHUCK-ch Nation. Tsleil-Waututh signed an Olympic Legacy Agreement with Canada on June 13, 2008, providing the First Nation with $17 million in legacy funds. Tsleil-Waututh Nation has approximately 445 members and with a traditional territory in and around North Vancouver and the Lower Mainland. Councillor Alan Nixon (District of North Vancouver) is the LMTAC representative to the Tsleil-Waututh negotiations. RD-66

69 RD-67

70 RD-68

71 RD-69

72 RD-70

73 Section E 4.1 Housing Committee Meeting Date: July 23, 2010 To: From: Housing Committee Janet Kreda, Senior Housing Planner, Policy and Planning Department Date: July 6, 2010 Subject: Metro Vancouver s Opposition to the Elimination of the Mandatory Long Form from the 2011 Census Recommendations: That the Board: a) Request the Honourable Tony Clement, Ministry of Industry and Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. b) Request UBCM and FCM to write to Minister Clement and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada urging them to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. c) Request the Honourable Mary McNeil, BC Minister of Citizens Services, Multiculturalism and the Public Affairs Bureau and other relevant provincial Ministers write to Minister Clement and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada urging them to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. 1. PURPOSE To inform the Housing Committee of the implications of the change from the mandatory long form to a voluntary National Household Survey to collect data for the 2011 Census and make recommendations for action. 2. CONTEXT It was announced on June 26, 2010 that Statistics Canada will replace the mandatory long form questionnaire filed by 20% of Canadian households with a new voluntary National Household Survey. The Census long form questionnaire is a unique tool that provides decision-makers with a rich set of facts about Canadians at the census tract, neighbourhood, municipal, regional, provincial and national level. Its richness stems from the huge sample size and the fact that response is mandatory. The long form provides all of the socioeconomic and demographic data for the population, and is the source of data on core housing need, poverty, household income, household type, and a whole range of information that the Metro Vancouver uses to assess labour markets, travel patterns, and the needs and well-being of the region s population. This information is not only invaluable for the region, but also for decision-makers at every level of governance. RD-71

74 Metro Vancouver s Opposition to the Elimination of the Mandatory Long Form from the 2011 Census Housing Committee Meeting Date: July 23, 2010 Page 2 of 3 Information historically provided by the long form is established in municipal and regional plans and is crucial to plan implementation and performance monitoring. For example, the Regional Growth Strategy, Regional Affordable Housing Strategy and the greenhouse gas targets mandated by the province rely on housing and income data, place of work, place of residence, and transportation mode and distance data collected in the long form. Another concern for municipalities is with respect to transfer payments. In some cases monies are awarded based, for example, on immigration data characteristics, and the change in survey methodology could have financial implications for cities. Minister Tony Clement has explained that the move to a voluntary survey was prompted by public concerns that the long form questions amounted to an invasion of privacy. Changing to a voluntary survey is likely to skew the number and demographic of respondents significantly. It is expected that lower income households and vulnerable populations will be less well represented in the data. This means that there will be a lack of continuity and comparability between data collected in previous Census and the one planned for 2011 making it difficult to assess socio-economic trends in the region and in Canada. A spokesperson at Statistics Canada acknowledged that they may not get the same level of detail as in the Census, and that the move could have a negative impact on provincial governments, community groups and other organizations that rely on the data for policy development. The Toronto Star, Globe & Mail, Montreal Gazette and Victoria Times-Colonist have published articles on this issue and the Centre for Policy Alternatives, Canadian Institute of Planners and Canadian Association of University Teachers have publicly expressed their opposition to the change in the Census. There is also an on-line petition and Facebook page that have been started. The Centre for Policy Alternatives published an open letter to the Minister responsible for Statistics Canada and the Chief Statistician asking for the long form to be reinstated (Information item 6.1). A report on this issue went to Toronto City Council on July 6, 2010 urging the federal government to immediately reverse its decision. Many municipal staff around the region have called Metro staff asking for the Board to take action. City of Vancouver staff is preparing a report on the issue. Metro Vancouver staff has also contacted provincial BC Stats and they are working with their Minister to convey concerns to the federal government. The Ontario Government has also expressed concern and will likely make a statement on the issue. 3. ALTERNATIVES 1) That the Board: a) Request the Honourable Tony Clement, Ministry of Industry and Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. b) Request UBCM and FCM to write to Minister Clement and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada urging them to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. RD-72

75 Metro Vancouver s Opposition to the Elimination of the Mandatory Long Form from the 2011 Census Housing Committee Meeting Date: July 23, 2010 Page 3 of 3 c) Request the Honourable Mary McNeil, BC Minister of Citizens Services, Multiculturalism and the Public Affairs Bureau and other relevant provincial Ministers write to Minister Clement and Munir Sheikh, Chief Statistician, Statistics Canada urging them to reverse the decision to eliminate the mandatory Census long form. This is the recommended option. 2) That the Housing Committee propose an alternative response. 4. CONCLUSION The change announced by Statistics Canada has profound implications for member municipalities and the region as well as decision-makers throughout the country. The data generated through the Census long form is established in regional and municipal plan policies and used for vital analysis of the demographic, socio-economic trends and travel patterns in every municipality in the region, province and country. Changing to a voluntary survey will change the quality and nature of the data collected and comparability of the data to previous Census years. In particular, vulnerable populations will likely be less well represented. The loss of the essential data provided by the mandatory long form presents a significant challenge for decision-makers and policy-makers RD-73

76 This page left blank intentionally. RD-74

77 Section E 5.1 GVRD Board Meeting Date: July 30, 2010 To: From: Board of Directors Kelly Birks, Office Manager, Corporate Secretary s Department Date: July 21, 2010 Subject: Delegations Executive Summaries Presented at Committee July 2010 Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated July 21, 2010, titled Delegations Executive Summaries Presented at Committee July Attachment: West Coast Reduction Ltd RD-75

78 This page left blank intentionally. RD-76

79 RD-77 ATTACHMENT