Island residents’ broad dissatisfaction with the Islands Trust was in sharp focus as results from a springtime survey came in last week — even as many support the organization’s mission, staff and individual trustees.
During May and June, the Islands Trust opened up a public survey as part of a new pre-budget consultation process, designed to get public feedback in time to meaningfully consider it during the run-up to the annual budget cycle. Through print ads, social media posts, the Trust’s newsletter and their website itself, word was spread and almost 350 responses were received — answering questions about funding levels for long-range and current land use planning services, bylaw enforcement, quarterly meetings and programs, as well as the Islands Trust Conservancy.
At the Trust’s Financial Planning Committee meeting Wednesday, Aug. 20, trustees heard that the Conservancy received the most broadly positive comments — despite what staff characterized as a “mix of support and skepticism” — with nearly 60 per cent of respondents saying the land conservation branch of the Islands Trust should receive the same or more funding in the future.
But current and future planning services were more roundly criticized, with roughly the same percentage of survey respondents (61 and 60 per cent, respectively) indicating they would prefer those services receive the same or fewer tax dollars in the future. The staff report summarized input offered in the comments sections, which “revealed concern about the Islands Trust’s effectiveness, efficiency and spending.”
“Some see planning processes as overly complex, duplicative of other regional services and disconnected from local community needs,” read the report. “Some respondents expressed frustration with constant revisions to community plans (OCPs) that often lack clear implementation or enforcement, while some question the Trust’s relevance altogether.”
Saturna Island trustee Mairead Boland noted the result was similar to the last survey they’d done, with most thinking funding should be the same or decrease.
“But we don’t actually achieve that each year, and we don’t focus on it,” said Boland. “People are not happy with the budget going up and up, or they’re not happy with the services provided for that money.”
Staff did note that respondents who wanted to see funding for long-term planning sustained or increased indicated they wanted to see a “clear focus on environmental protection and climate adaptation,” while others would prefer budget cuts, citing “poor results, staff bloat and overreach into areas outside the Trust’s core mandate.”
And despite significant trustee focus in recent months on improving bylaw enforcement, feedback there was divided, with respondents feeling largely that bylaws were “inconsistently or ineffectively enforced” and “overly bureaucratic,” according to staff, with concerns including “under-resourcing, long response times, unclear jurisdiction and lack of transparency.”
Respondents were even less supportive, at least in terms of spending, for Trust Area-wide programs like stewardship education and advocacy, with 67 per cent preferring the budget in that area stay the same or shrink.
Staff indicated it seemed respondents broadly felt the Islands Trust should return to its core mandate of land use planning and environmental protection — with less focus on advocacy, First Nations engagement, public education and external partnerships, which some saw as duplicating provincial or federal work already underway.
“However, others praise specific initiatives like ecosystem mapping and stewardship webinars,” according to the report, “advocating for their continued or increased funding.”
A question about Trust Council’s quarterly in-person meetings — which typically cost around $30,000 each, according to staff — found perhaps the strongest public preference for budget cutting, with just 18.5 per cent in favour of continuing to hold all four annual gatherings face-to-face. More than half preferred one or two in-person meetings with the rest held online, with just 11.5 per cent supporting holding all Trust Council meetings online. This Trust Council has twice voted against reducing the number of in-person meetings.
Respondents did give individual trustees and staff high marks for their “professionalism and helpfulness,” according to the report, with many valuing the Islands Trust’s “preserve and protect” mandate and crediting it with “preventing overdevelopment and maintaining the character of the islands.”
Staff pointed out the level of response, while nearly as high as past surveys, remained “not statistically significant,” although trustees noted such engagement at municipal levels rarely was.
Among the 343 responses, the largest number came from residents who said they felt “most connected” to the most populous island in the Trust Area, Salt Spring — roughly 20 per cent — closely followed by North Pender at 12.5 per cent and Gabriola with 12 per cent. The staff report noted 77 per cent of respondents said they were full-time residents, with over half of them reporting they had lived or owned property within the Trust Area for more than 20 years; almost 63 per cent indicated they were over the age of 65.
The committee forwarded the report to the Trust Council for consideration during its next quarterly meeting on Gabriola Island Sept. 16 to 18.