By JENNIFER MARGISON
for Friends of the Gulf Islands Society
The three Saturna trustees — two current, one former — who responded to MLA Rob Botterell in the April 16 Driftwood did not make a convincing case for reshaping the Islands Trust without broader public engagement. The changes proposed by Trust Council to the Trust’s mandate and Policy Statement are not merely “a review” but, as Mr. Botterell put it, “dramatic revisions” — and should be presented to islanders in an election.
The Islands Trust Act states that the Trust’s purpose is to “preserve and protect the trust area, its unique amenities, and its environment for the benefit of residents, the trust area, and British Columbians generally, in cooperation with First Nations and other levels of government.” Mr. Botterell, in his April 2 column, rightly emphasized that conservation remains paramount. He raised serious concerns about Trust Council’s reinterpretation of the mandate and whether council has the “electoral mandate” to pursue sweeping changes. Friends of the Gulf Islands Society strongly supports Mr. Botterell’s position, especially his reminder that “growth in the Islands Trust Area is not inevitable, it’s a choice.”
The Saturna trustees also failed to clarify the 2023 in-camera meeting that led to the “consensus” reinterpretation. Their claim that it was limited to legal advice is contradicted by Trust Council’s own “rise and report,” confirming major policy decisions were made behind closed doors.
The report reveals that “Trust Council’s view is that unique amenities are broad-ranging and may include issues such as housing, livelihoods, infrastructure, and tourism.” We disagree. These are services delivered by regional governments, not unique features to be preserved. The Islands Trust’s role is to protect the environment and the distinct character of the islands. The phrase “not limited to” dangerously opens the door to broad reinterpretation. If the environment becomes just another “element” to consider, the Trust risks losing its special role and becoming indistinguishable from other local governments.
Following the in-camera meeting, 34 former trustees issued an open letter expressing concern about the lack of transparency and the dilution of environmental priorities. Despite repeated requests, the public still lacks clarity on who attended, who voted, or whether a formal vote even occurred.
Trust Council also admitted it did not review a critical 1986 position paper endorsed by both the council and then Minister of Municipal Affairs. That paper defines “unique amenities” as natural and cultural features such as “heritage and archaeological” sites, “solitude, scenic beauty, a clean environment” and “tranquil rural areas.” While acknowledging a “range of lifestyles,” it firmly prioritizes conservation — not the provision of human services.
Meanwhile, Trust Council is moving ahead with revisions to the Trust Policy Statement, which guides local bylaws and community plans. We are concerned that the new interpretation will erode the Trust’s original conservation mandate.
At a time when environmental protection is increasingly sidelined, it is critical that the Islands Trust remain true to its founding principles. Only the provincial government can change the Trust Act, crafted to protect this provincial treasure. We need trustees who understand this. We urge residents to call on their local trustees to put this reinterpretation on hold and delay major changes to the Policy Statement until after the 2026 election.
You can add your voice by signing our petition at friendsofthegulfislands.ca.