By Mairead Boland, Saturna Island Local Trustee,
Lee Middleton, Saturna Island Local Trustee,
Paul Brent, Southern Gulf Islands Electoral Area Director (CRD) and former Saturna Island Local Trustee
This is a response to MLA Rob Botterell’s April 2 column regarding the Islands Trust.
From the Islands Trust Act:
“The object of the trust is to preserve and protect the trust area and its unique amenities and environment for the benefit of the residents of the trust area.”
Botterell’s article suggests that trustees have chosen to re-interpret the mandate (this is correct), and that their interpretation doesn’t accord with his assessment of the law.
We are confident that the original mandate to preserve and protect the Trust is still functioning. Islands Trust staff or trustees would have been able to inform Botterell that more than five legal opinions sought by the Trust on this topic over the past decades disagree with his. Those legal opinions, repeatedly, and clearly, give trustees the responsibility of interpreting the wording of the mandate.
While the definition of “unique amenities” has been debated it has never been defined as “the environment.” Were it simply the environment that was the purpose of the mandate, the original crafters would have written it so. The Islands Trust Act explicitly refers to “unique amenities AND the environment.”
We can assure readers that unique amenities have always included many different characteristics of the Trust area including community centres, recycle depots, food banks, service clubs, community gardens, volunteer fire and ambulance services and, most importantly, a collective spirit of caring for one’s neighbours in any time of crisis.
As is proper in the context of reviewing the Trust Policy Statement, Trust Council (TC) once again reflected on the mandate and all of the legal opinions. The view of TC is once again that unique amenities are broad-ranging and may include aspects such as, but not limited to, housing, livelihoods, infrastructure and tourism.
A summary of the discussion and conclusions can be found in the Islands Trust Council Statement on the Scope and Meaning of Section 3 of the Islands Trust Act (Object Clause) posted on the islandstrust.bc.ca website on Jan. 18, 2024.
As to the inference that discussions about unique amenities in camera were somehow nefarious, it is simply the recognition that there were legal opinions that are privileged, and there to inform the trustees of the day, just as in previous terms.
MLA Botterell stated “Development and population growth in the Islands Trust area is not inevitable; it is a choice.” Indeed, and the communities of the islands made such informed choices when they agreed to the social contracts contained in each island’s official community plan and bylaws. For each island there is an implicit growth limit defined by the land use designation maps taken together with the subdivision and development regulations. This limit cannot change without full community consultation — and the processes that govern this consultation are clear. Extensive and transparent consultation occurs each and every time a bylaw amendment or subdivision is proposed.
Has there been election fraud? MLA Botterell suggests that trustees do not have an electoral mandate to review the Islands Trust Policy Statement. Several trustees in this term were elected in November 2022 as a direct, negative response to an initial draft of the Trust Policy Statement (July 2021) and to replace some of those trustees who were involved in its creation. Surely this is democracy at work?
Since that time, the amendments and engagement sessions with residents, First Nations and local governments have been extensive. To suggest that they’ve been inadequate demonstrates either lack of familiarity with the process or a disagreement with the content.
MLA Botterell notes that “last year Islands Trust Council asked the B.C. government to conduct an open-ended review of the Islands Trust Act.” Minister Nathan Cullen said at the time that a request for such a review would have to be made by TC, and TC obliged in that same term — as well as in this term, so twice now. The review was to address far more than the Islands Trust Act. Topics included the involvement of Indigenous peoples, funding for the Trust, and its structure and authority. (See Oct. 17, 2024 Islands Trust Requests Provincial Review of Islands Trust Act website post.)
Since two Trust Councils covering eight years have asked for a review by the province, one would think it is high time for some action, particularly in light of the external and highly critical report on the Islands Trust conducted by Great Northern consultants in February of 2022.
Instead, our MLA is publicly suggesting a delay of the review to yet another (third) term, noting in his opinion there are more pressing issues for the Premier and Cabinet to attend to. Clearly the Premier and Cabinet wouldn’t be doing the review, a contracted third party would be investigating the workings of the Trust, providing options for revisions to the act, different governance structures and even clarifying the mandate.
Having a look at options to improve the workings of the Trust was what the majority of two terms of trustees were lobbying hard to get, but it appears not what our newly minted MLA wants.
We appreciate differing opinions, but not from an elected representative who publicly advocates a position contrary to the democratically informed wishes of trustees elected in the same area he represents and who publicly questions the basis in law of their decisions without an examination of the particulars.
The writers have a collective 22 years of “trustee experience” spanning the last 13 years.