Mavor and Council External Correspondence Summary H 02 (August 16, 2010) •

FROM TOPIC DEPT. A.T. #

Regina vs. Carol Berner! Message to the J. Cessford, Chief 303 Police Officers, Civilian Staff and Volunteers POLICE 106125 Constable, Delta Police of the Delta Police Department

National Post Story: Edmonton Bylaw Aims POLICE 304 T. Armstrong 106147 to Reduce Motorcycle Noise CC: Bylaws

D. Welch, Local FIRE: Farmed Animal Mass Carcass Disposal 305 Government Program Emergency 106148 Emergency Planning Services, UBCM Planning Mayor R. Drew, Chair, 306 Lower Mainland Treaty Federal Additions to Reserve (ATR) Policy HR&CP 106037 Advisorv Committee

L.E. Jackson, Chair, Burns Bog Ecological Conservation Area - 307 Metro Vancouver Board Delta Council May 17, 2010 HR&CP 106071 Recommendations

308 J. Cummins, MP Enabling Accessibility Fund HR&CP 106144

309 M. Dunnaway Aircraft Noise in North Delta HR&CP 106150

310 GJ Kurucz Delta Nature Reserve PR&C 105988

311 J. Wightman Tsawwassen Sun Fest & Recycling PR&C 106153 .

FINANCE 312 K. Furneaux, CGA Implications of Legalized Secondary Suites 106146 CC:CP&D < E. Olson, President, Minutes of March 15, 2010 Meeting: Section 313 Burns Bog Conservation CA&ENV 106016 Societv 14, Species at Risk

314 A. Acheson Composting Smell CA&ENV 106036

B. Hinson, GO GREEN 315 Delta Sustainability Issues CA&ENV 106075 Delta

. CA&ENV 316 A. den Dikken Burns Bog Proposed Annual Meetings 106149 CC: LS T. Cooper, Executive Sewage Connection Fee and Plumbing 317 Director, Delta Hospital CP&D Permit for Forest for Our Future Project 106030 Foundation

318 C. Bayne Southlands CP&D 106072 .

F:\COUNCIL\Correspondence and Correspondence Lists\Corresp Usts\201 O\August 16, 2010.doc Mavor and Council External CorresDondence Summarv (Auaust 16 2010) ,

FROM TOPIC DEPT. A.T. #

319 M. Fisher Tsawwassen Golf Course Redevelopment CP&D 106073

320 P. Horan Tsawwassen Area Plan Review CP&D 106093

321 E. Ries Tsawwassen Area Plan Review CP&D 106130

322 J. M. Horsfall Tsawwassen OCP - Infill Rezoning CP&D 106122

Alternative for Propane Cannons for 323 D. Sukkau CP&D 106126 Blueberry Farms

324 S. Wright Propane Cannons Noise CP&D 106151

325 D. Hildebrand Service to the Public CP&D 106131

326 J. Ronback Street Lights Around My Home Bother Me ENG 106092

C. Lee, Corporate 2011 Base Plan and Outlook -"Funding 327 ENG 106087 Secretary, TransLink Stabilization Update" L. E. Jackson, Chair, Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource 328 ENG 106121 Metro Vancouver Management Plan

329 P. Schaad Tree Removal from Corporation Property ENG 106104

ENG 330 N. Nutbrown Trucks on 72 nd Ave 106154 CC: POLICE

F:\COUNCIL\Correspondence and Correspondence Lists\Corresp Lists\201 O\August 16, 2010.doc ~M!!!iC~h!!:e!!:le~H:!:a~rr~is:..... ______A:..:.=~~=~=~=~=()=1 O:7:0:--3_<:;'-..""i"\ PE; ~oiJ~ Jrt;iZNCA 303 r(Qvtct8 - From: Jim Cessford [jcessford@de[tapo[ice.ca] DEPT: ...:-===---- Sent: Tuesday, Ju[y 27,20106:12 PM A'Y' # 1f"V("",,- To: Mayor & Council; Dennis Des Lauriers ; David Cc c~~~ent;:nQ( W , 'chandnee[[email protected]'; 'Gerry Ki[cup' ; i' I, !/II ...I.,WY Cc: Diane Steinberger; Me[issa Granum; George Hal I'iUtt 110 !2tq UII-'tV IVItL(l, n Subject: FW: R. v. Carol Berner (171252) 1 Convicted on all counts 1 Great Job by DPD & Experts Attachments: 20100727102025.pdf; R. v. Carol Berner RFJ Corrigendum Fi[ed.doc.pdf

Importance: High

This case was concluded today in court. The investigation and trial have been very taxing on everyone involved. The . findings, reasons and my comments to our staff are included here for you information.

Jim Cessford

----.------~----.----.-.-- From: Jim Cessford Sent: Tuesday, Ju[y 27, 2010 6:00 PM To: Everyone Subject: FW: R. v. Carol Berner (171252) / Convicted on all counts / Great Job by DPD & Experts Importance: High

A MESSAGE TO THE POLICE OFFICERS, CIVILIAN STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS OF THE DELTA POLICE DEPARTMENT.

The decision and the reasons regarding the Regina vs. Berner case are attached. Ms. Berner was convicted on a[[ counts and she wil[ be sentenced on November 8,2010.

The circumstances surrounding the death of A[exa Midde[aer and serious injury to her aunt are very tragic and clearly the judgment will not soften the pain and the hurt the family has gone through and wil[ carry with them their entire lifetime.

This afternoon [ spoke with Regiona[ Crown Me[issa Gillespie, John Labossiere, Winston Sayson and Kim Wendel and I thanked them for the outstanding work they did in preparing and presenting the case to the court. The Crown spent countless hours working through a[[ the information to ensure that they were prepared to present the best evidence. The results speak for themselves. I advised each of these Crowns that I am very proud of the professional manner in which they conducted themselves during this high profile and emotionally charged trial. .

The harsh reality is that a beautiful 4 1/2 year old girl is dead. Her family is grieving. However, if there is any consolation. we did go above and beyond to make a difference in the lives of several people who were affected by this terrible tragedy. We did whatever we could to offer the best possible support for the family.

I am so very proud of the members of the Delta Police Department who were involved in this case and who dealt with the carnage, the stress and pressure of this investigation. The thorough investigation, the planning, innovation and creativity that were used to present the best possible case to the Crown for prosecution was absolutely outstanding.

Our members were challenged in the courtroom by the defense. In some cases they had to withstand personal attacks. We stood our ground, did not waiver and we presented the facts in a fair and objective manner.

[t should be known that Victim Sef\!ices staff and volunteers have been working with the Midde[aer family since the day of the accident, May 17'h, 2008? These staff and volunteers were with the family during the month long trial as well.

I have received many very positive comments from the Middelaer family, the public and from the media in relation to the professional investigation our members conducted into this fatal motor vehicle collision. The Middelaers in speaking with the media today referenced the Delta Police Department has raised the bar for impaired driving investigations right across this country. Mr. Winston Sayson one of the Crown Prosecutors for this case spoke about the excellent job the Delta police officers did in investigating this case and that Delta Police has set the standard for these types of serious investigations. 1 There have been very significant outcomes as a result of this incident. Some of those outcomes will be evident when the new Provincial amendments relative to driving while under the influence of alcohol will become law later this Fall. I also believe that other changes will be forthcoming. The Middelaer family has worked very hard to do whatever they can to prevent this type of tragedy from ever occurring again. They are lobbying to get the police the tools they need to prevent, detect and ultimately prosecute impaired drivers. They are doing this in memory of their daughter 4 Y, year old Alexa Middelaer.

The outcome of this investigation is not a matter of victory or defeat, sol am not going to offer my congratulations. However, I believe it is important to acknowledge and validate the outstanding efforts and hard work of everyone involved.

Thank you.

Jim Cessford Chief Constable

2 Citation: ¢- Date: ¢- File No: 171252-1 Registry: Surrey

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

FILED REGINA JUL 21~ro

v.

CAROL ANN BERNER

There has been an order made pursuant to S. 486.5(1) of the Criminal Code that no person shall publish in any document, or broadcast or transmit in any way any Information disclosed in or in relation to this trial, that could identify the undercover operators in the investigation of the Accused, including any I pseudonyms used by the undercover operators. I

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OFTHE HONOURABLE JUDGE P.O. GULBRANSEN [

Counsel for the Crown: W. Sayson, K. Wendel Counsel for the Defendant: D. Tarnow. J. Tarnow Place of Hearing: Surrey, B.C. Dates of Hearing: May 31, June 1. 2, 3. 7, g, 14. 15,16, 17,21,22,23,24,2010 Date of Judgment: July 27,2010 R. v. Berner Page 1

Introduction

[1] On May 17, 2008, Carol Berner lost control of her car as she drove northbound

on 64th Street in Delta. Her vehicle left the roadway, colliding with a car parked on the

east shoulder, then striking four-year old Alexa Mlddelaer and her aunt Daphne, who

were standing at a nearby fence. Alexa was killed; her aunt was severely injured. Ms.

Berner has been charged with causing death and bodily harm by dangerous operation

of a motor vehicle and by operation of the vehicle while her ability to drive was impaired

by alcohol.

[2] The Crown submits that these charges are supported by evidence that the

accused drove at an excessive speed, ignoring the presence of two speed bumps; that

she failed to confine her vehicle to the roadway; and that she had a blood/alcohollevel

between 63 and 100 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood (mgs %) when the

accident occurred.

[3] rhe accused replies that the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt

that she was responsible for the accident. She points out that her car had been the

subject of three recall notices regarding the braking and steering systems. That is, she

submits, there was a real possibility that there was a sudden mechanical failure which

caused her car to go out of control.

[4] As well, the defence suggests that the reconstruction of the accident and the speed calculations done by the Crown expert are potentially flawed. The officer who took the measurements at the scene made at least one fundamental error in taking the measurements eventually used by the Crown expert who reconstructed the accident.

.,

f R. v. Berner Page 2

[5J Ms. Berner also asserts that there is virtually no evidence that her ability to drive

was impaired by alcohol. She points out that none of the witnesses who dealt with her

on that day, including peace officers and ambulance attendants, noticed anything in her

appearance, behaviour or physical movements which suggested that she was under the

influence of alcohol. She also emphasizes that because her blood/alcohollevel could

have been as low as 63 mgs %, there is no definitive scientific proof that her ability to

drive was impaired by alcohol.

[6J My decision in this trial must focus mainly on the weight or Significance that I

should attach to the evidence given by three Crown experts concerning:

• the speed at which the accused drove the car at the time of the accident and the manner in which the accused lost control of it;

• the mechanical condition of the accused's car;

• the effect on her ability to drive that would result from the presence of the volume of alcohol found to be in her body at the time.

[7J The accused was also subject to an undercover police operation where she

discussed the accident in detail on several occasions with a woman who had befriended

her and who unknown to the accused was a police officer. Ms. Berner did not confess to

committing any crimes, but did provide a fairly detailed version of her memory of the

incident. I will also have to assess this evidence and determine what weight If any, that I should give to it.

I ·1

I R. v. Berner Page 3

Relevant Legal. Principles

[8] The fundamental premises of Canadian Criminal law are that a person accused

of a crime is presumed to be innocent; that the burden of proving the guilt of the

accused is always on the Crown and never shifts to the accused; that a court can only convict if the court is satisfied that the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.

[9J A reasonable doubt is a doubt based on reason and common sense. It cannot be an imaginary or frivolous doubt. It cannot be based on conjecture or on sympathy for the accused.

[10] Proof beyond a reasonable doubt requires much more than proof that the accused is probably guilty. The Crown is not, however, required to prove its case to an absolute certainty. In cases involving circumstantial evidence, an alternative way of stating the same standard is that the guilt of the accused must be the only rational conclusion which can be drawn from the evidence. R. v. Ufchus, [1997]3 S.C.R. 320

Dangerous Driving

[11] S. 253 (1) of the Criminal Code states that a person commits an offence who:

"... operates a motor vehicle on a street, road, highway or other public place in a manner that Is dangerous to the public having regard to all the circumstances, including the nature, condition and use of such place and t.he amount of traffic that at the time is or might reasonably be expected to be in such place." R. v. Berner Page 4

[12] The offence of "Dangerous Driving" is concerned with pronounced or markedly

negligent driving conduct. All persons who drive a motor vehicle must conform to a

basic standard of reasonable conduct. Failure to comply with that standard constitutes

negligence, "Negligent driving can be thought of as a continuum that progresses, or

regresses from momentary lack of attention giving rise to civil responsibility through

careless driving under a provincial Highway Traffic Act to dangerous driving under the

Criminal Code." R. v. Hundal, [1993]1 S.C.R. 867 (S.C.C.)

[13] Thus the offence of dangerous driving involves conduct that is more than momentary inattention or simple negligence. The Crown must prove that the conduct of the accused "".amounted to a marked departure from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the accused's situation." (emphasis added)

Hundal, supra.

[14J The court must also consider any evidence about the actual state of mind of the accused,( if there is any evidence), to determine "whether it raises a reasonable doubt whether a reasonable person in the accused's position would have been aware of the risk created by this conduct" R. v. Beatty 2008 S.C.C. 5 paragraph [49]. This inquiry concerns circumstances where there is evidence of some intervening event which rnay raise a reasonable doubt that the accused had any control over his driving conduct. This would occur when, for example, an accused suffered a sudden unexpected heart attack or epileptiC fit. It could also encompass a situation where the car driven by an accused suffered a sudden, unexpected mechanical breakdown.

) ,. I R. v. Berner Page 5

Impaired Driving

(15) Driving while impaired is not synonymous with driving while drunk or driving while

intoxicated. It is an offence for a person to operate a motor vehicle while the person's

ability to operate the motor vehicle is impaired by alcohol or a drug. The verb "impair" is

defined in Webster's New World Dictionary as: "make worse, less, weaker, etc." It can

also mean "damage" or "reduce." Driving a motor vehicle is a complex task, requiring a

driver to have the physical ability to properly control the speed and direction of the

vehicle; to have the mental ability to perceive and react to such things as road and

traffic conditions, traffic lights, road signs or pedestrians. A driver must have the ability

to constantly absorb and react to such information while at the same time being able to

safely conduct the vehicle down the road.

[16) The ability to perform this complex task can be made worse or reduced by subtle

effects of the consumption of alcohol. A slight reduction in the ability to react and apply

the brakes or a reduction in the ability to steer properly or in the ability to notice and

react to traffic signs may impair a person's ability to drive. The problem is, however, that

it may be quite difficult for the Crown to provide evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a "slight" impairment of the ability to drive. The Crown does not have to prove that the consumption of alcohol has had a marked effect on a person's ability to drive. R. v. Stellato, [1994)2 S.C.R. 478n

[17) Most often the Crown must depend upon observations made by witnesses about the accused's appearance and behaviour to prove its case. This typically includes evidence of such phenomena as: erratic driving; bloodshot, watery eyes; flushed face; R. v, Berner Page 6 odour of liquor; poor balance; difficulty in walking or turning; problems with fine motor coordination; difficulty following instructions; emotional volatility or slurred speech. Aside from erratic driving, these other symptoms do not directly relate to a skill or task involved in driving. Rather, these symptoms tend to prove that the accused was intoxicated, from which the court may infer that the ability of the person to drive must have been impaired by alcohol.

[18] The Crown is not required to prove that the accused displayed any particular symptoms of intoxication or impairment by alcohol or that the observed effects of alcohol were severe or pronounced. However, a court cannot convict an accused on weak or slight evidence. There must be cogent evidence which satisfies the court that the accused's guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

[19] The principles which govern the court's assessment of the evidence are:

• A trial judge must consider the evidence as a whole, not the individual pieces of evidence. The judge cannot ignore reliable evidence which is inconsistent with impairment by alcohol and only rely on evidence which supports the Crown's case.

• Without the assistance of expert testimony, a trial judge can draw no inferences about the effects of alcohol on the accused's ability to drive based solely on thE! results of the analysis of breath or blood samples.

• The results of the analysis of a breath sample provided by the accused into an Approved Screening Device and any evidence given by the demanding officer about what the result may mean, are only admissible to establish that the officer had a proper basis to read the demand for a breath sample. This evidence is not admissible for any other purpose. R. v. Orban ski; R. v. Elias, [2005]2 S.C.R. 3

[20J Proof of causation for the offence of "impaired operation" of a motor vehicle I causing death or bodily harm must focus on the evidence which establishes a I I I R. v. Berner Page 7

connection between the impaired condition of the accused and the conduct which

caused death or bodily harm. The test was set out by the B.C. Court of Appeal in R. v.

Andrew 1994 Canlii 3288. The court indicated that the Crown must establish that the

accused's" ... impaired driving ability as evidenced by driving conduct, a failure to react

or make a certain judgment, comprises a contributing cause, outside the de minimis

range, to the victim's death or bodily harm."

The Victims

[21J In the late afternoon of May 17, 2008, Daphne Middelaer (now Johansson) drove

her niece Alexa and her parents, John and Yvette Middelaer, to a farm on 64th Street.

Alexa wanted to show her grandparents a horse that she had befriended there. They

had stopped en route to purchase some treats that Alexa could feed the horse.

[22J Daphne parked her Honda Civic on the east side of the street partly of,1 the gravel shoulder and partly on a grassy area that bordered the shoulder. The car was well off the road. Daphne and Alexa went to a fence which bordered the grassy area. The horse soon came over to where they were standing. Daphne and Alexa began feeding it.

Daphne recalled hearing a "horrible, terrible noise." Looking to her right, she saw a car coming sideways down the road. Dirt was flying. She can recall nothing after that about the accident.

[23] John Middelaer recalled that he was sitting in the rear passenger seat of the

Honda. His wife was in the front passenger seat. He heard a "frightening noise" of screeching tires and a "high rewing" engine. Something struck the Honda very hard from behind, knocking it quite a distance forward. He was shaken up but suffered no R. v. Berner Page 8 I major injury; neither did Mrs. Middelaer. When he got out of the car, he could see his I I daughter and granddaughter lying motionless on the ground near the fence. He thought that they had both been killed. !

[24] Alexa did not survive her injuries. Daphne survived, but had numerous serious injuries, including a closed head injury; fractured shoulder and upper arm; broken clavicle ribs and pelvis; compound fracture of her lower left leg. She had to undergo 13 hours of surgery to initially repair the damage to her body.

The Scene

[25] 64th Street is a paved two-lane road. It is straight and fiat extending northward from a point a few blocks south of 28th Avenue, near Boundary Bay. This is a rural area, containing farms on relatively large lots, the road made narrower by ditches on either side. The nature of the neighbourhood changes a few kilometres to the north near the intersection 'with Ladner Trunk Road, where there is a subdivision which extends north of 43A Avenue and mainly west of 64th Street. At this point the east side of the road is still agricultural land. The next intersecting streets to the north are Sunrise Lane and

Dawn Drive. The accident occurred about midway between those two streets.

[26] North of Sunrise Lane the road is much wider; the ditches have been filled in.

The east side of the road contains a gravel shoulder about 4 feet wide as well as a grassy area about the same width east of the shoulder. The grassy area is bordered by a fence. There is sufficient room in that area to park motor vehicles, something that visitors to the nearby homes commonly do. This part of 64th is a quiet suburban road,' I but it is certainly not deserted or isolated. The speed limit on this part of 64th is 50 kmh. I

I I R. v. Berner Page 9 I Route Driven by the Accused

[27] On May 17,2008, Ms. Berner resided at 6900 36th Avenue in Delta,

approximately 2.6 kilometres from the accident scene. Shortly before 5:00 p.m. she

drove her red 2000 Oldsmobile Intrigue west on 36th for one kilometre, turning north on

64th. The speed limit on 64th at this 'T' intersection is 60 kilometres per hour. About 1

kilometre to the north the speed limit changes to 50 kmh. First there is a sign warning of

the change and then about 200 meters further north a sign which declares that the

speed limit is 50 kilometres per hour.

[28] About 30 meters north of that sign, there is another sign which indicates that

there are speed bumps ahead. A further 60 meters ahead there are two speed bumps

covering the whole road, governing both north and south bound traffic. They are

approximately 2 meters wide and about 1Y:i car lengths apart. The bumps are marked

by two large white triangles. It is about 300 meters from the speed bumps to the

collision scene.

What Happened?

[29] It was a clear sunny May afternoon. Traffic was light. The only other vehicle on the road was a motor scooter driven by David Hargreaves who was driving south on

64th. He was about 600 or 700 metres away when he saw the Oldsmobile "fishtailing" on

64th going northbound. He saw it travelling sideways taking up much of the road. He looked away briefly, and when he looked again it was still moving northward but it appeared that the opposite side of the car was facing him. Then he heard (but did not see) the collision. There were no other witnesses who saw the movements of Ms. I I

I R. v. Berner Page 10

Berner's car although many of them heard the loud crash when the Oldsmobile struck

the Honda.

[30] Etta Stevens, who resides at 4343 641hStreet, heard the approach of the

accused's vehicle before the crash. Her house is on the west side of the street

bordering the north comer of 43A Avenue. She was reading in her front yard when she

heard a car approaching from the south. She did not see the car because her view was

blocked by a fence. By the sound of the engine, she thought that the vehicle was

travelling at a speed that was higher than normal for that road. She waited for the

vehicle to slow down but it did not. She heard it go over the speed bumps at a fast pace.

That is, there was a very short interval between the car hitting the first speed bump and

the second bump. A few seconds afterwards she heard a loud crash. Ms. Stevens was

familiar with the sound of various vehicles going over the speed bumps because she

has lived in that house for 23 years.

[31] At the sound of the crash many of the occupants of nearby houses rushed to the

scene to offer assistance. An ambulance arrived within minutes. Daphne and her niece

were eventually taken to hospital by helicopter. Ms. Berner was still in her car when the

. first witnesses arrived. One of them helped her get out of her car, eventually getting her

to sit down on a sidewalk on the west side of the street. It did not appear to them that

she had suffered any significant injuries. Several witnesses noticed that she appeared

to be sunburned.

[32] Constable Swallow of the Delta Police was the first police officer to arrive at the

scene; she took responsibility for dealing with Ms. Berner. Eventually the officer made a R. v. Berner Page .11 demand that the accused provide a breath sample into an approved screening device.

The result was a "fail," after which Constable Swallow made a demand for breath samples pursuantto s. 254(3) of the Criminal Code. After first taking the accused to the hospital to see a doctor,ConstableSwaJlow then took Ms. Berner to the Delta Police station where she provided two breath samples at 7:59 and 8:20 p.m. The results of the analyses of the samples were 60 and 40 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilltres of blood respectively.

[33] None of the witnesses who dealt with Ms. Berner, including two police officers and two ambulance attendants, noticed that she displayed any symptoms of being affected by alcohol. She seemed to walk without difficulty, spoke clearly, understood what others said to her, had no signs of poor balance and had no smell of liquor on her breath. (The grounds for the officer making the ASD demand were the circumstances of the accident and an admission by the accused that she had consumed 2 glasses of wine before the accident.)

[34] When questioned by Constable Swallow at the police detachment, the accused said that she had been on the way to a friend's place for dinner. She said that she had consumed 2 glasses of wine before she left her house. She also was not aware of any mechanical problems with her car. She said that she had recently had the brakes done.

[35] Ms. Berner said that she did not know why she lost control of the car. She told

Constable Swallow that, "It was speeding up and it wouldn't, it wouldn't slow down." (Interview transcript line 68.) She said everything had happened quickly, describing the I R. v. Berner Page 12 car's movements as follows: "It couldn't just go straight. It jus ... it was forcing me to go right and was forcing me to go left." (Interview transcript line 38.)

[36] Ms. Bemer was released from police custody on May 17. Charges were not sworn until 6 months later at the conclusion of a police undercover operation which targeted Ms. Berner. The object of the investigation was to try to obtain evidence of Ms.

Berner's culpability in the collision. Two police officers pretending to be a couple interested in moving to Ladner struck up an acquaintance with Ms. Berner and the friend in whose house she \Vas living. The relationship between the accused and the female officer soon blossomed into friendship.

[37] They met in late October 2008 and thereafter in16 scenarios orchestrated by the police. They sometimes went out shopping, other times for dinner and drinks. They even went to a Madonna concert. Eventually, Ms. Berner confided to the undercover officer that she had been involved in a bad accident in which a child had been killed.

Thereafter, the officer would try to have Ms. Berner discuss the details of the accident - including her drinking pattern on that day. The operation culminated in a meeting between them in a hotel room which had been set up to record this last conversation.

What Berner thought was a conversation between friends was actually a very skilful interrogation conducted by the undercover officer.

[38] Ms. Berner was fairly consistent in her account of what she remembered about the accident. She said that she may have been speeding, but not excessively when she hit the speed bump. All of a sudden she said, the car was going side to side, she could R. v. Berner Page 13

not slow it down. She believed that she may have mistakenly put her foot on the gas

pedal instead of the brake pedal. She attributed this mistake to having a "panic attack."

[39] She told the undercover officer that she drank three glasses of wine before driving her car, not two as she had earlier told her. Ms. Berner said she had lied because she was embarrassed and did not want her friend to think less of her. Berner said that she felt fine before she drove. She said she had taken a shower; "it wakes you up," she said. She also said that she felt fine to drive. She indicated as well that it was a half hour to an hour after her last drink before she drove.

[40) Ms. Bemer also told the officer that she usually slowed down almost to a stop when she drove over the speed bumps. In the course of the undercover operation the officer picked Bemer up and dropped her off at her home on 36 th Avenue. The route to and from the accused's residence usually involved driving on 64th Street past the scene of the accident. Ms. Berner had Jived there since May 2007 and therefore must have driven on 64th Street many times before May 17, 2008.

[41) Several times during the undercover operation the officer and Berner would have / drinks together. On several of those occasions Berner had at least three glasses of wine, sometimes more. The officer never observed any significant change in Berner's appearance, behaviour or physical capacity resulting from the consumption of those drinks. R. v, Berner Page 14

Expert Evidence

Mechanic

[42] Donald Kirkpatrick, a mechanic employed by the Corporation of Delta examined

Ms, Berner's car on May 21,2008, He performed a thorough and methodical

examination of the vehicle, He noted the severe damage that had resulted from the

collision, namely: extensive damage to the right rear and passenger side; the rear

window was "blown out"; the front windshield shattered; damage to the front bumper

and grille, Mr. .Kirkpatrick found that the brakes were in good condition, All four tires

were the same size and make, The tread depth and pressure were adequate. He found

no defect in or damage to the steering system,

[43] In cross-examination he agreed that he was not aware of recall notices that had

been issued for the 2000 Intrigue regarding steering knuckle,s and the weld connecting the inner tube to the outer tube of the steering shaft. The recall notice indicated that if the knuckle broke there would be a loss of steering control and a possible crash. He said however, that he did not notice any sign that these parts of the steering mechanism had broken or failed.

Alcohol Expert

[44] Brian Image, a civilian member of the RCMP and a forensic alcohol specialist testified that at 5:00 p.m. on May 17, Ms. Berner's blood alcohol level would have been between 63 and 117 milligrams of alcohol per 100 mil/ilitres of blood. He could not R. v. Berner Page 15

provide an exact figure because people eliminate alcohol at different rates, most

between 10 and 20 milligrams of alcohol per hour.

[45J Mr. Image said that every person's ability to drive is impaired at a blood/alcohol

level of 100 mgs % or higher. He said that alcohol is a drug which affects the functioning

of the brain and the central nervous system. It has a cumUlative effect. That is, the more

alcohol that a person consumes, the more serious are its effects. He categorized

blood/alcohol levels into three zones. The Zone of Impairment; the Zone of Intoxication

and the Zone of Death.

[46J The Zone of Impairment describes those persons whose blood/alcohol level is between 30 and 100 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. The closer a person's blood alcohol level is to 100 mgs %, the more probable it is that the person's ability to drive is impaired. Of course not everyone in this category is impaired. At this blood/alcohol level Mr. Image said that persons display few if any outward signs of being under the influence of alcohol. Alcohol can have "inward" effects on a person's ability to drive. In particular, he stressed that it could adversely affect the driver's comprehension, attention and judgment.

[47J The absence of symptoms of intoxication in persons within this category makes it difficult to determine whether their ability to drive is impaired. Mr. Image said that the issue could be determined by challenging the persons with scientific tests, for comprehension, or reaction time. This could be done, for eXample, by using a driving simulator. R. v. Berner Page 16

[48] The Zone of Intoxication includes those persons whose blood/alcohol level is

between 100 and 300 rngs %. These persons will usually display the typical outward

symptoms of intoxication such as slurred speech, staggering, and problems with fine or

gross motor coordination. At higher levels in this "zone" persons may become

comatose.

[49] The Zone of Death includes persons whose blood/alcohol level is above 300 mgs

%. At this level or higher, the effect of alcohol is to shut down the central nervous

system. The respiratory function may shut down, death ensues.

Engineer

[50] Steve Macinnis is a Professional Engineer who for the last 18 years has specialized in the investigation and reconstruction of motor vehicle accidents. Among .his areas of expertise are: mechanical and .vehicle engineering; accident and collision analysis and reconstruction; vehicle speed and impact speed analysis.

[51] He described the course of the accident as follows. Ms. Berner lost control of her vehicle while travelling north on 64th. The vehicle travelled leftward across the centre line. The driver steered the vehicle aggressively rightward. The vehicle travelled back into the northbound lane but then the driver steered it leftward. This caused the car to rotate counter clockwise. The vehicle left the road still rotating but essentially travelling sideways across the gravel and grass. The right front corner of the Oldsmobile struck the right rear of the Honda, knocking it ahead about 30 metres. The Oldsmobile continued to rotate counter clockwise for a short distance until its right front door hit a power pole. The right rear of the car hit a guide wire that supported the pole. It came to R. v. Berner Page 17

rest close to the pole and the wire. The car struck the two victims sometime after it hit

the Honda and before it hit the power pole.

[52J Mr. Macinnis conceded that the Delta officer who had surveyed the scene and

made measurements in preparation for the analysis of the accident, had made an error.

It appeared to Mr. Maclnnisthat the officer had used 2 different "0" or base pOints when

he made his measurements. After rechecking the data, Mr. Macinnis concluded that the

road measurements made by the officer were all correct. The scene measurements,

such as the location ofyaw marks, were wrong. Mr. Macinnis found that by rotating the

scene measurements by 6.4" clockwise, everything was basically resolved.

[53] To determine the speed at which the accused was driving her vehicle Mr.

Macinnis used three different approaches· crush analysis; accessing data from the

Sensing Diagnostic Module removed from the Oldsmobile; calculation based on yaw marks. These different methods all came up with similar conclusions. That is, that Ms.

Berner was likely travelling between 83 and 86 kilometres per hour at the point on the road when the first tire or "yaw' marks appear. Five seconds before the accident the vehicle was travelling at 91 kilometres per hour.

[54J Mr. Macinnis used crush energy analysis to estimate the speed by working backwards from where the Oldsmobile came to rest to the point that tire yaw marks appear on the road. He estimated that the Oldsmobile struck the Honda at a speed between 48 to 67 kilometres per hour. The vehicle began decelerating once Ms. Berner steered the vehicle aggressively to the left. The total deceleration over the 53.5 metre distance that the vehicle travelled from the first yaw marks was added to the estimated R. v. Berner Page 18

collision speed with the Honda. The resulting estimate of the Oldsmobile's speed at the

time it made the first tire marks was an average speed of 86 kmh.

[55] The Sensing Diagnostic Module (SDM) is a device contained in some vehicles which records and captures certain data 5 seconds before the air bags are deployed -

namely vehicle speed, engine speed and percent throttle. The police rerY)oved the device from the Oldsmobile a few days after the accident and eventually provided it to

Mr. Macinnes. He accessed and printed out the data in the SDM.

[56) The data showed that Ms. Berner's vehicle was travelling at 91 kilometres per hour 5 seconds before the collision, and at 83.2 kilometres per hour at 2.6 seconds before. This is the point at which the yaw marks begin and thus is consistent with the speed estimate obtained by the crush analysis method. The SDM data also reveal that

5 seconds before collision the throttle was at 0, but in the last 2 seconds was at 100%, meaning the gas pedal was "floored." The brake switch circuit status was recorded as being off until one second before collision.

[57] Mr. Macinnis examined the measurements of the yaw marks as made by Ms.

Berner's vehicle during the first 17 meters of the marks. He calculated that the speed of the accused's vehicle at the start of the yaw marks was an average of 83 kmh.

[58) The distance from the end of the speed bumps to the start of the yaw marks was approximately 225 meters. If the -lehicle was travelling at 90 kmh, it would have t(jken 9 seconds to travel this distance. It would have taken 2.6 seconds for the vehicle to travel from the start of the yaw marks to the point where. it came to rest against the pole. R. v. Berner Page 19

[59J In cross-examination he agreed that it is always a good practice for him to

, I. examine a vehicle which is the subject of an accident investigation. (The accused's

vehicle had been sold for scrap by the time that he was retained by the Crown.) He said

that he was unaware of the recall. notices for the Intrigue. He indicated however, that In

his opinion the steering system was in working order because the vehicle actually made

the yaw marks. These are marks made by aggressive steering. He agreed that it could

not be determined by the marks alone whether the power steering had failed. He said

that any issue with the recall notice concerning the braking system was not relevant to

the case at bar because any potential problem would only arise with heavy braking.

There was no heavy braking in this case. He agreed that the Delta officer who did the

initial scene measurements had made a fundamental error, but believed that he was

able to identify it and to correct it. He noted that his calculation of speed using the yaw

mark measurements was very close to the speed determined using crush analysis and by the speed recorded in the Sensing Diagnostic Module.

[60] Ms. Berner elected not to call evidence.

Analysis

[61] This whole tragic event occurred within twelve seconds. However, the duration was brief because !he accused's car was going so fast. The Crown's evidence in that regard is overwhelming. At 5 seconds before the collision, Berner's vehicle was travelling at 91 kilometres an hour. It is highly probable that it was travelling at that speed or slightly higher when it hit !he speed bumps. When she los! control, the vehicle's speed was between 83 and 86 kmh. I am satisfied that any error made by the R. v. Berner Page 20

Delta officer in making scene measurements was of no consequence. Mr. Macinnis was able to correct the error. In any event, two other reliable methods arrived at essentially the same speed determination as was achieved by calculations using the yaw mark measurements. I I Dangerous Operation of Motor Vehicle I

[62] As Ms. Berner drove north on 64th Street, she ignored or did not notice the sign I ! that indicated that the speed limit was 50 kmh. She must have been aware of the speed limit because she had travelled that route many times. A speed of 91 kilometres an hour

. exceeds the speed limit by 80%. This is not a circumstance where a driver was a little absent minded and because the road was straight and clear of other traffic started to exceed the speed limit by 5 or 10 kmh. That is, travelling at this speed was not a minor lapse in attention.

[63] Next, Ms. Berner ignored or did not notice the sign that warned that speed bumps were ahead. She knew that the speed bumps were there. She told the undercover officer that she usually slowed almost to stop when she drove over them.

Instead of slowing down, she maintained a speed of about 90 kmh. There is no doubt that hitting the bumps at that speed would be a particularly jarring experience for the driver. It seems most likely that Ms. Berner was not paying attention to her vehicle's speed or to the likely consequence of hitting the bumps at that speed. It is unlikely that she would do this deliberately.

[64J Despite the undoubtedly jarring experience of crossing the speed bumps, Ms.

Berner did not react in the way one would expect. She did not slow down. She did not R. v. Berner Page 21

apply the brakes. About 9 seconds later her vehicle crossed the centre line. This was

probably an effect of hitting the speed bumps at high speed. She then steered aggressively to the right and then aggressively back to the left, all in a vain attempt to keep the car from going off the road. When the car started spinning out of control, she likely intended to apply the brakes, but mistakenly floored the gas pedal instead. This had no effect on the car's speed, but it certainly did not serve to slow it down.

[65] Considering this driving conduct as a whole, I find that the manner in which the accused drove her vehicle constituted a marked departure from the standard of care to . be expected of a driver in the accused's situation. She drove far in excess of the speed limit, failing to adjust her car's speed to safely cross the upcoming speed bumps. She then failed to do what the speed bumps were intended to force drivers to do - slow down. Continuing at this high speed, she failed to keep her vehicle in her lane and

.when she tried to get it back into the lane, she steered aggressively such that it went into yaw and spun out or control. When she finally attempted to apply the brakes, she hit the gas pedal instead.

[66] There is no evidence of the accused's state of mind which would raise a reasonable doubt that a reasonable person in her position would not be aware of the risk created by her driving conduct. Although there were safety recalls concerning the

Intrigue, to suggest that there may have been a sudden mechanical breakdown in this case is pure conjecture. There was a competent and thorough mechanical examination which found none of the problems that the recalls referred to. Mr. Macinnis's evidence also effectively rebutted any suggestion of a sudden unexpected mechanical breakdown. R. v, Berner Page 22

[67J ,I have reached this conclusion on the issue of dangerous operation without considering the question of whether the accused's ability to drive was impaired by alcohol.

Impaired Operation of Motor Vehicle

[68] The focus of the "impaired operation" charge Is on the accused's physical and mental state whereas the focusef the "dangerous operation" charge is almost exclusively on her actual driving conduct. Evidence of driving conduct may, however, in I conjunction with other evidence, be used by a court to infer that a driver's ability to drive I was impaired by alcohol.

[69] I n the case at bar the relevant evidence conceming impairment consists of the analyses of the breath tests, Mr. Image's evidence, the observations of Ms. Berner made by the witnesses who had contact with her, and the driving conduct.

[70J None of the witnesses observed Ms. Berner to have any symptoms consistent with her being under the influence of alcohol. Mr. Image indicated that a person whose blood alcohol level was less than 100 mgs % and more than 30 mgs % could be impaired but also might not be. Such a person would probably not display any obvious symptoms of intoxication. Ms. Berner'sblood/alcohollevel could have been as low as

63mgs %.

[71J The manner in which the accused drove her car on May 17 resulted from defective judgment, attention and reaction. It was poor judgment on her part to drive at a speed that she should have known was excessive, knowing that there was a R. v. Berner Page 23

significant obstacle on the road ahead - the speed bumps. She further exercised poor

judgment in failing to do anything to slow the car down after it hit the speed bumps.

[72J Ms. Berner did not pay any attention to the signs that declared that the speed

limit was 50 kmh and that warned that speed bumps were ahead. She. failed to pay

attention to the speed bumps themselves, which were clearly visible and clearly marked

with large white triangles. Instead she drove over them as if they were not there. She

paid no attention to how fast she was driving.

[73] Despite hitting the speed bumps at high speed and no doubt feeling the sudden

impact, the accused did not react. She travelled ahead for about 9 seconds without

dOing anything to slow down. When she finally did react by at least trying to hit the

brakes, it was too late and she mistakenly put her foot on the gas pedal.

[74J The accused's perception and therefore memory of the event were also defective. This could be an effect of the consumption of alcohol. In her discussions with the undercover officer, where she seemed to be sincerely trying to give a full account of what happened, she had no idea of how fast she had driven her car. She merely said that she may have been speeding. She consistently said that the car would not slow down, indicating that she had not even perceived a need to do something herself to slow it down until well after she had hit and crossed over the speed bumps at high speed.

[75] What can explain this conduct? The accused is not required to explain anything.

Rather, the burden is on the Crown to prove that the only rational conclusion to be drawn from this evidence is that the accused's ability to drive was impaired by alcohol. R. v. Berner Page 24

[76] The accused had driven the same route many times. She knew the speed limit and knew that there were speed bumps, to which she usually reacted by slowing down.

Thus, her driving on the date of the incident was significantly different from her usual conduct. There is no evidence that she was distracted from concentrating on her driving by stress or worry or by an urgent need to get to a particular location. She told

Constable Swallow and the undercover officer that she was going to a friend's place for dinner.

[77] The vehicle was in good mechanical condition. I have already found that there was no basis in the evidence to conclude that there was any sudden mechanical failure.

The road was in good condition. It was paved and straight, with no potholes or other obstructions except for the speed bumps. There was no other traffic on the road which could have affected the course of the Oldsmobile.

[78] While Ms. Berner did not display any outward symptoms of intoxication, I find that by her manner of driving she displayed, in Mr. Image's description, "inward" symptoms that her ability to drive was impaired by alcohol. That evidence, which I have described above, in conjunction with the evidence that the accused had at least 63 miliigrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of her blood and in conjunction with the expert's evidence that a person at this blood/alcohol level could be impaired, proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Berner's ability to drive was impaired by alcohol. There is no other rational conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence.

[79] There is no doubt that the accused's dangerous operation of her vehicle and operation while her ability to drive was impaired by alcohol were contributing causes R. v. Berner Page 25 beyond the "de minimis' range to the death of Alexa Middelaer and the bodily harm of I

Daphne Middelaer.

[80] I find Ms. Berner guilty on aJl four counts on the Information.

/~

The Hdour~ble Judge p.o. Gulbransen Provincial Court of British Columbia

I

i I Citation: Date: <:t File No: 171252·1 Registry: Surrey

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA CORRIGENDUM

REGINA JUL 2 7 2010

PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA v. SURREY -----'

CAROL ANN BERNER

There has been an order made pursuant to S. 486.5{1}ofthe Criminal Code that no person shall publish in any document, or broadcast or transmit in any way any information disclosed in or in relation to this trial, that could identify the undercover operators in the investigation of the Accused, including any pseudonyms used by the undercover operators.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OFTHE HONOURABLE JUDGE P.O. GULBRANSEN

Counsel for the Crown: W. Sayson, K. Wendel Counsel for the Defendant: O. Tarnow, J. Tarnow Place of Hearing: Surrey, B.C. Dates of Hearing: May 31, June 1, 2, 3,7, g, 14,15,16,17,21,22,23,24,2010 Date of Judgment: July 27, 2010 R. v. Berner Page 1

CORRIGENDUM - Released July 27, 2010

[1] This corrigendum to my Reasons for Judgment issued July 27, 2010, is to clarify and correct paragraphs [11] and [52] of those reasons. As released on July 27,2010, the section quoted in paragraph [11] is erroneous, and the scene measurements in paragraph [52] should be in degrees not inches. Paragraphs [11] and [52] should correctly read as below:

[11] S. 249(1)(a) of the Criminal Code states that a person commits an offence who:

..... operates a motor vehicle on a street, road, highway or other public place in a manner that is dangerous to the public having regard to all the circumstances, including the nature, condition and use of such place and the amount of traffic that at the time is or might reasonably be expected to be in such place."

[52] Mr. Maclhnis conced~d that the Delta officer who had surveyed the scene and made measurements in preparation for"the analysis of the accident, had made an error.

It appeared to Mr. Macinnis that the officer had used 2 different "0" or base points when he made his measurements. After rechecking the data, Mr. Macinnis concluded that the road measurements made by the officer were all correct. The scene measurements, . such as the location of yaw marks, were wrong. Mr. Macinnis found that by rotating the scene measurements by 6.4' clockwise, everything was basically resolved.

/

From: Lois Jackson Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 9:45 AM To: Mayor & Council . Subject: FW: National Post Story: Edmonton bylaw aims to reduce motorcycle noise

;--:-.:

"'-;

From: Tim Armstrong [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:34 PM '~. , To: Lois Jackson; Heather King; 'Kevin Jones' Cc: 'Huntington.MLA, Vicki' Subject: National Post Story: Edmonton bylaw aims to reduce motorcycle noise

I sure hope Delta is watching what is going on here ... I do agree with the one councilor who stated that it is discriminatory to just make a bylaw regarding 'noisy' bikes. I think it should read any motorized vehicle over the 92 decibel in noise. Drop by over a summer weekend and listen to the 'excessive rumble.'

Regards, Tim Armstrong The Chief Constable has assigned this to the 5946 48a Ave. pertinent section of the Police Department for· Delta, BC 6049468910 follow up.

Edmonton bylaw aims to reduce motorcycle noise

MarY Vallis, National Post

Wednesday, June 9,2010

An Edmonton bylaw has captured the interest of municipalities and people across the country who loathe the persistent rumbles and

~hunderclap starts of motorcycles on their roads

You received this emailllecause your friend Tim Armstrong thought you would be interested in the article llnked above.

© 2010 The National Post Company. All rights reserved. Unauthorized distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited .

._._--._-_._-- .... _-

This message is provided in confidence and should not be forwarded to any external third party without authorization. If

1 Muffling the vroom

MaryVallis, National Post, with files from Terrine Friday· Friday, Jun. 11, 2010

An Edmonton bylaw has captured the interest of municipalities and people across the country who loathe the persistent rumbles and thunderclap starts of motorcycles on their roads.

Edmonton's city council is believed to be the first in North America to pass a bylaw requiring the muffling of motorcycle noise. Riders will be fined $250 if their motorcycles exceed 92 decibels while idling or 96 decibels while engaged. One hundred decibels is roughly equivalent to the sound made by a snowmobile or chainsaw.

"I've been fighting for this for a while," said city councillor Ben Henderson. "[Downtown Edmonton] has a number of places that are very attractive to late-night drag racing. It can be really disruptive to have someone tearing up and down the avenue at two or three in the morning, and it's a very severe problem for people who choose to live in an urban environment."

Winnipeg and Regina are among the cities across Canada investigating whether to enact similar measures, as are municipalities from British Columbia to the Maritimes, said Jo-Anne Farquhar, a spokeswoman for Canada's Motorcycle and Moped Industry Council (MMIC).

"We believe this is something, as an industry, that is important to us as well," Ms. Farquhar said yesterday. "We don't want to learn that people are purchasing after-market products that allow the decibel level of their bikes to be a severe annoyance to others. We don't agree with that any more than somebody wants to see their neighbour making noises that are unbearable to them."

The MMIC wants to help municipalities put new rules in place and has drafted a model law for excessive motorcycle exhaust noise. Police in Edmonton will use new sound level meters to check the noise output of individual motorcycles.

Edmonton's bylaw passed by a vote of 11 to 1 on Wednesday night and has prompted !I heated public debate. Those in favour of the bylaw attribute the distracting rumble of motorcycles to a culture of testosterone and bravado, while some motorcyclists argue noisy bikes help keep them safe by making their presence known.

"It's pretty biased. I'm pretty choked about it," said Rob Harvey, owner of Edmonton's Extreme Choppers. "Do police really have that much time for somebody that's out making noise on the road when there are other people getting stabbed to death?" Dave Thiele, the only city councillor to vote against the noise bylaw, argued the measure is "illogical and discriminatory." He pointed out Edmonton has approximately 13,000 registered motorcycles, while hundreds of thousands of cars are on the road.

"Nobody should be modifying their pipes to make them louder, whether it's a car or a pickup truck," Mr. Thiele said in an interview.

"It's just discriminatory, period. That's it."

Police in Winnipeg now plan to pursue measures, although not quite as stringent as Edmonton's bylaw. Sound-level testing conducted by the MMIC found Winnipeg likely has the most motorcycles­ - and some of the loudest--in Canada.

"It's hard to deal with complaints, because they're coming in at two o'clock in the morning ... and by the time the cruiser car gets there, the motorcycle is gone," said Patrol Sergeant Rick Zurba of Winnipeg's traffic unit.

Officers there want to target hotshot drivers, not every pleasure motorcyclist on a Sunday morning cruise.

"We're not mainly focusing on the equipment of the motorcycle, but the style of riding," Sgt. Zurba said.

"If you're going to accelerate at a really high rate of speed away from a stopsign, then we're going to start focusing on that, versus just the equipment part of the motorcycle."

Regina is also sussing out a noise law that would apply to all vehicles, not just motorcycles.

The fight in Edmonton is not yet over. Liane Langlois, who works for a small IT company and rides a Triumph Speedmaster, is organizing a petition. She will have to sign up 10%· of Edmonton's population in order for it to be legally binding -- roughly 79,000 people.

"I'm supposed to trust these people to make the best decisions when they're clearly advocating for police to discriminate and harass against motorcycle riders?" she said. ''I'm looking to get the bylaw repealed. For me, [the bylaw] has got to be all-encompassing or nothing." [email protected] 305 Local Government Program Services ... programs to address provincial-local government shared priorities

genda ;'-. FILE # 04CXD-'d..O A ,-,." TYPE: K6) cd!..w ±eYre!.", ; DEPT: P1fr:: (e:~&nc'1 . " ~,~ A.T.#: \0614=<:6 f'la"",..,s) ,.: MUNICIPALfl1ES July 26, 2010 Comments: A~:~o ~y '"::

Mayor Jackson and Council District of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Administration provided by UBCM Delta, BC, V4K 3E2

Funding provided by Province of B.C. RE: Farmed Animal Mass Carcass Disposal Emergency Planning

Dear Mayor and Council,

Thank you for submitting the final report and financial summary for the District of Delta's Farmed Animal Mass Carcass Disposal Plan. BRITISH COLUMBIA The final report notes a total expenditure of $15,717.00. Based on this, a The Best Place on Earth cheque in the amount of $2,412.75 will follow shortly under separate cover. This cheque represents final payment of the grant and is based on 75% of the totaleligible expenditures minus the initial payment of For program $9,375.00 madein December 2009. information, visit the FUl}ding Programs . section at: Thank you for your participation in this program.

www.ubcm.ca Sincerely,

, LGPS Secretariat -

Local Government House Danyta Welch 525 Government Street Policy & Program Officer Victoria, BC, V8V GA8

E-mail: [email protected] cc: Michel Latendresse, Acting Emergency Program Coordinator, District of Phone: (250) 356-5134 Delta Fax: (250) 356-5119

The Delta Fire Department can confirm that the grant money has been received and that Corporation of Delta Emergency Program personnel will continue to work with other agencies to implement the Farmed Animal Mass Carcass Disposal Emergency Plan .

. U: ". L\..:.' 306

genda , A FILE #b\\. L\.Cl~C;P~U~ July 16, 2010

Mayor Jackson and Council Corporation of Delta TYPE: +2t:hLU.fl\G--. ~~tft 4500 Clarence Taylor Cres DEPT: Delta, BC V4K 3E2 ¥SeA-COP A. T. #: r Q Coo ;2""1: Dear Mayor Jackson and Council: Commenls:AUGU'\)T)\o;dOIO ,,- ~"'>LLt.ftIl-""'E't3'ilji.;...., Re: Federal Additions to Reserve (ATR) Policy

On behalf of the Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee (LMT AC) Executive, it's my pleasure to provide you with a copy of LMT AC correspondence to the Honourable Chuck Strahl, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Metis and Non-Status Indians, including a copy of LMTAC's most recent draft discussion paper Local Government Issues and Interests on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve Process (enclosed), for your consideration.

In June 2010, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) conducted an evaluation of the federal A TR policy and LMTAC was invited to provide a local government perspective on current policies and practices. This discussion paper elaborates upon the summary comments submitted by LMTAC.

Dialogue is timely due to the increased involvement of Lower Mainland local governments in federal A TR applications, and the emergence of federal legislation intended to encourage on-reserve development, such as the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act and First Nations Certainty ofLand Title Act, which may lead to increased ATR applications.

INAC is scheduled to present on the federal ATR policy at the next LMTAC Board meeting on Wednesday, September 22, 2010, at which time the Board will also consider the draft paper. It is important that LMT AC member jurisdictions become aware of the potential implications of the federal Additions-to-Reserve (A TR) policy for local governments. Due to the time sensitive nature of this subject, I respectfully request your Council' or Board to review the draft paper and forward comments to LMT AC by September 22. 20 I O. I 'also encourage you to communicate your views directly to Minister StrahL I

Thank you for your on-going support to LMT AC and its activities. If you have any questions, please contact me via Regan Schlecker, Managing Director, at (604) 451-6198.

Sincerely, 5lJ?-J~- This correspondence is provided for Council'S information. Mayor Ralph Drew Chair, Lower Mainland Trellty Advisory Committee

Enclosure cc: LMT AQIM=1!mmKingsway, Burnaby. B.C" Canada V5H 4G8 ]el (604) 451-6179 Fax (604) 436-6860 July IS, 2010

HlJnourable Chu~k Struhl Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor f,lr Metis and Non-Status Indians House of Commons Ottawa, ON, K I A OH4

Dear M ihister Strahl,

Re: Federal Additions to Reserve (ATR) Policy

On behalf of the Lower Mainland Trea~v Advisory Committee (LMTAC) Executive, it's my pleasure to provide you with a preliminary copy of LMTAC's most recent discussion paper Local Government Issues and Interests on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve Process (enclosed) for your consideration.

This discussion paper is further to the evaluation, conducted by lNAC in June 2010 on the federal ATR policy, and invite for LMTAC to pt;ovide a local government perspective on current policies and practices. LMTAC appreciated the opportunity to participate in that evaluation survey, and prepared this discussion paper as a means of elaborating upon the summary comments that were submitted. ~

A dialogue on tlie federal ATR policy is timely due to the increased involvement of Lower Mainland local governments in federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) applications, and the emergence of federal legislation intended to encourage on-reserve development, such as the Pirst Natiolls Commercial (lnd Industrial /)evelopment ..tct and First Nations Ccrtainiv of' Land Title .. Ier. both of which may lead to increased A TR applications.

We trust the identification of local government iI1terests and concerns, and our recommendations to improve the cffectiveness of the federal A TR policy will be of assistance. We rcspectfully rcquest that your Ministry scriously consider the content of our paper in its rcview. LMTAC looks t'>rll'urd to your response and the tindings of your evaluation, when available.

:' Minister Strahl July 15,2010 Page 2

I f you have any questions, please wntuct me via the LMTAC Office at (604) 451 c6198.

Sincerely, )7i)N----- Mayor Ralph Drew, Chair Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee ec Anita Boscariol, Director General, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Negotiations West,INAC Linda Kerr, Senior Lands and Leasing Onicer, Lands and Trust Services, INAC Hon. George Abbott, Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation Hon. Ben Stewart, Minister of Community and Rural Development Director Hans Cunningham, President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities Councillor Ben Henderson, Chair, Standing Committee on Social-Economic Development, Federation of Canadian Municipalities Councillor Murry Krause, Chair, First Nations Relations Committee, Union of BC Municipalities LMT AC Members

Enclosure Draft 2(c) July 2010

LOW E R Lower Mainland TAe MAINLAND Telephone (604) 451-6179 4th Floor, 4330 Kingsway Fax (604) 436-6860 , Burnaby, B, C TREATY E-mail: Imtac.lmtac@metrovancouver,org V5H4G8 ADVISORY Website: www.lmtac.bc.ca COMMITTEE

LMTAC Discussion Paper: Local Government Issues and Interests on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve Process

Introduction

The Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) process of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), and the implications for local governments, has gained increased profile among member jurisdictions of the Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee (LMTAC), Reasons include: • LMTAC participation in a June 2010 INAC evaluation of the ATR process; • recent experiences of LMTAC member jurisdictions in A TR applications; and • the emergence oflegislation (e,g. the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act and the First Nations Certainty a/Land Title Act) intended to facilitate and attract on-reserve development, and the potential that such legislation may lead to increased A TR applications.

This paper summarizes the role oflocal government in the current ATR process, identifies potential issues for local governments, and presents local government interests and recommendations to be considered and promoted within INAC's ATR policy.

Additions, to Reserve Process

An Indian Reserve can be described as the area of land that is held in trust by the Federal Crown for the use and benefit of an Indian Band (First Nation). As Federal land held under section 91 (24) of the Constitution Act, 1867, local government bylaws and Provincial land use legislation are of no effect on Indian Reserves.

First Nation communities, like many other communities in Canada, may from time to time encounter the need or opportunity to expand their land base. Under INAC's ATR policy of2001, lands can be considered for addition to existing Indian Reserves if the application falls within the following three policy categories 1: .

I Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), Land Management Pr~ject Toolkit, Book 3, Additions to Reserve Policy (2007). " Draft 2(c) July 2010 I. Legal Obligations, including; o Specific Claim; o Court Order; or o Legal Reversion. 2. Community Additions, including; o Community growth (member housing, community centres, schools, churches, and other community uses); o Geographic enhancements (accretions, rights-of-way); or o Return of Unsold Surrendered Land. 3. New Reserves, with possible reasons including; o Social or commercial needs. The ATR policy requires a First Nation to demonstrate that the benefits of the proposal cannot be achieved' through other forms ofland tenure; o Provincial Land Offerings or Unsold Surrendered Land. The benefits of the proposal are weighed against the federal cost implications and other site-specific criteria; or o Landless First Nations.

ATR applications are addressed through a step-by-step process and are dealt with on a' case-by-case basis. INAC and the applicant First Nation must consider local government interests, including the following: • land use planning / by-law harmonization; • tax considerations; • service provision; and • dispute resolution.

While First Nations and local governments are expected to negotiate and communicate on ATR applications on a "good faith" basis, local governments do not have a general or unilateral veto over the granting of Indian Reserve status.2

INAC does not have statutory authority to approve an ATR application. 3 All successful . ATR applications must receive approval through the Governor General i.n Council. While INAC regional staff can make recommendations to the Minister respecting the strength and/or weakness of an A TR application, the ultimate decision to approve the ATR rests with Federal Cabinet.

Identification of Local Government Issues

Based on a review of the INAC ATR policy, and feedback received from several LMTAC member jurisdictions that have recent and ongoing experience with A TR applications, the following issues of concern for local government have been identified:

.2 !NAC, Additions to ReserveslNew Reserves Policy: Directive 10-1, 6.8 (October 2003) 3 INAC Presentation, Expanding the Reserve Land Base (December 2007)

2 Draft 2(c) July 2010

Communication • Improved communication between local government and the applicant First Nation is imperative. In a recent A TR application considered by two LMTAC member jurisdictions, INAC was responsible for communicating with local government; however, in another A TR application, it was the applicant First Nation that managed communications. Direct communication with the First Nation, even iffacilitated by !NAC, increases the ability oflocal government to understand and communicate with the First Nation any issues that may arise with respect to the application.

Process • !NAC regional staff make recommendations to the Minister respecting the strength and/or weakness of an A TR application. However, as the ultimate decision to approve the ATR rests with Federal Cabinet, politicians may support certain objectives and outcomes respecting the A TR application without the same understanding of potential implications for local government as !NAC regional staff.

• Municipal and provincial government agencies are provided with 90 days to respond to a First Nation's ATR proppsal.4 Once comments have been submitted, there appears to be no reciprocal obligation for INAC or the First Nation to respond to any issues or concerns raised by local government. Also, the 90 day response period may not be sufficient time for local governments to properly analyse an application that could significantly alter the regional landscape.

Local Government Engagement and Transparency • In British Columbia, local government is recognized as an order of government and not simply a 'third party' interest; following, local government should be meaningfully consulted on A TR applications early in the process by the First Nation and, if necessary, !NAC.

• Local governments must represent the interests of the community, and adhere to principles of transparency and accountability to the electorate. It is unclear if the A TR process is public or in-camera, which may place local government in the conflicting position of having private knowledge of proposals that are not in the community interest. The !NAC ATR process needs to adhere to principles of transparency and accountability to the electorate affected by the ATR proposal.

Intergovernmental Coordination • While municipalities are provided a role in the !NAC ATR process, there is no mention of the other order of local government in British Columbia - regional districts. Long-term regional district planning, service delivery, and capital infrastructure plans can be impacted by A TR applications and the potential change of land jurisdiction to Indian Reserve. The impression is that any regional

4 FCM Toolkit (2007).

3 Draft 2(c) July 2010 district involvement in the A TR process is a reflection of the goodwill of INAC staff, and nota matter of policy.

• Municipalities, regional districts, provincial agencies and other authorities may have interests in A TR applications. The experience of LMTAC local governments to:date reveals that there is insufficient intergovernmental coordination between agencies in the ATR process. Potentif!l issues and conflicts are compounded by the uncertainty caused by the lack of stakeholder coordination. Early, meaningful and coordinated. consultation canresult in challenges being identified and resolved prior to becoming obstacles to the application.

Servicing and Land Use • The obligation, if any, of local government to service ATR lands requires clarification; particularly ifland use and servicing needs are unclear or inconsistent with long-term municipal and regional plans at the time of application.

• LMT AC member jurisdictions are concerned that A TR applications could result in a patchwork of jurisdictions across the region, particularly if the applicant First Nation proposes land use for the ATR lands that is incompatible with neighbouring municipal land use planning.

Financial Impacts • First Nations and INAC must support the authority oflocal governments to determine the nature of the servicing agreements entered into for the A TR lands, before any endorsement is considereq. For example, certain local governments prefer unique agreements for each se1Yice provided, while others prefer the 'global services' approach. LMTAC encourages its members to pursue global service arrangements that include both. 'soft' and 'hard' services.

• Local governments rely on industrial and commercial taxation to contribute to a range of municipal and regional services. LMTAC is concerned that First Nations may use A TR to place local government tax rates at a competitive disadvantage, with no guarantee of the First Nation contributing to the full range of 'soft' and 'hard' municipal or regional services. Accordingly, ATR applications for market development should not be approved if alternative land tenure is available; for example, fee-simple ownership subject to municipal jurisdiction.

Local Government Interests and Recommendations

LMTAC First Principle #12 - Post Treaty Additions to Treaty Settlement Lands states:

Lands to be added aller the treaty is signed must remain subject to local government jurisdiction and taxation unless othervvise agreed to by local governments through a community consultation process. :1 r

4 Draft 2(c) July 2010

Although the above First Principle was created to address scenarios in the BC Treaty Process, the same underlying interest applies in the A TR context; local governments demand that no transfer of jurisdiction occur for lands located within municipal boundaries unless agreed to by the affected local government.

LMT AC recommends that local government issues and concerns outlined above be addressed in the A TR process through consideration of the following interests:

Communication • First Nation applicants and/or INAC must be obligated to confirm receipt oflocal government comments, and to address each of the local government concerns identified. In the event local government concerns cannot be accommodated, written reasons must be provided. LMT AC requests that ATR communication protocols be clearly delineated to the 'First Nation, INAC and local government.

Process • Local government needs assurance that criteria and processes described in the INAC A TR policy will not be overridden by the Governor General in Council. In circumstances where a Federal Cabinet decision differs from the recommendation of INAC regional staff, a process is needed for Federal politicians to communicate directly with affected local governments so that the potential implications for local communities are fully understood by the decision makers.

Local Government Engagement and Transparency • For ATR applications where there are no legal obligations for INAC, municipal consent must be required for ATR within municipal boundaries.

• . LMT AC recommends that the process must become transparent to the public. The community must clearly understand ATR land use plans through open houses, workshops or public hearings.

Intergovernmental Coordination .\ • The status of regional district consultl;ltion within the ATR process remains uncertain. INAC ATR policy must reflect the importance of meaningful consultation with all forms of local government.

• Proposed ATR land use must be consistent with Official Community Plans and Regional Growth Strategies, as well as gerterallocal government zoning and bylaws.

• LMTAC requests clarification on whether the ATR process and its potential implications for local government is considered in bilateral agreements between the Canada and First Nations outside of the treaty process.

5 Draft 2(c) July 201 0 Servicing and Land Use I • Service agreements should be in place simultaneously with the approval of any A TR. Service agreements are encouraged to be comprehensive and include both 'hard' and 'soft' services. Local government must agree with the terms of the service provision. The ATR process must not result in any obligation for local government to service new Indian Reserve lands ..

• To encourage First Nation land use that is consistent with that of the neighbouring local government, LMTAC supports lNAC policy to not approve ATR applications for market development if alternative land tenure is available; for example, fee-simple ownership subject to municipal jurisdiction.

Financial Impacts • Local governments must not be financially impacted by ATR. ATR proposals must address the harmonization of property taxes, including remittance of school and hospital district taxes, to the Province and regional district. In the Metro Vancouver region, the remittance of transit taxes for TransLink must be included.

• ATR applications must not be approved until the First Nation and the affected local government have agreed upon a:harmonized property tax structure.

The Need for Local Government Consultation

This paper is intended to identify the general issues and interests of Lower Mainland local governments with respect to the ATR process. Individual local governments will have additional issues and interests that reflect the uniqu~ nature, needs, perspectives, and circumstances of their communities in relation to the specifics of an ATR application.

A survey of LMTAC member jurisdictions reveals a range of experiences and potential impacts when faced with ATR applications. As the effects of ATR applications may vary considerably for any particular municipality and/or regional district, it is essential that the INAC ATR policy reflect that consultation with local government be public and transparent, meaningfully undertaken early in the process, and with coordinated, consistent and continuing means for communication throughout the process.

Next Steps

LMT AC respectfully submits the discussion papet Local Government Issues and Interests on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve Process to the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada for consideration, and requests the opportunity to discuss these issues with an lNAC representative at a future meeting of the LMTAC Board. Further to the ATR process evalualion conducted byINAC in June 2010, in which LMTAC was an invited participant, LMT AC requests a briefing on the findings and next steps contemplated by the federal government.

6 307 ~-4 .. metro vancouver Greater Vancouver Regional District· Greater Vancouver Water District Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District· Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation: 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5H 4G8 604-432-6200 www.metrovancouver.org

JUL 2 1 2010 ganda, ~ .-' % BD Office of the Chair A FILE #_Q\?~/s1\;;?TAI 604432-6215 Fax 604 451-6614 File: PA-03-01-BBG-03-02 Mayor Lois E. Jackson and Council , The Corporation of Delta -~-, 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent , TYPE: Reb~W ~ Delta, BC V4K 3E2 DEPT: . tte{CP . A.T.#: L17loo':tl Dear Mayor Jackson and Council: Comments· M 1/; U fil.l (), I . I\\.utl '5 I? I{) l"-(elll tV I\MthV\K Re: Burns Bog Ecological Conservation Area - Delta Council May 17,2010 Recommendatiorls 0

Thank you for your June 9, 2010 letter, regarding Delta's recommendations for the Burns Bog Ecological Conservation Area. Metro Vancouver staff has undertaken several steps, as outlined below, with regards to the topiCS identified in Council's recommendations

Geo-Reference Database: Metro Vancouver (MV) staff has held discussions with the Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) and Delta staff regarding the need for a Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area (BBECA) geo­ referenced database. MV staff understands the need to capture past, current and future data into a secured database that can be accessed by the purchasing agencies and to others through controlled access. In addition, MV recognizes the urgency of collecting the South Fraser Perimeter Road project data, some of which has already been received. Developing and maintaining a geo­ referenced .database is a significant project; discussions are underway with Metro's IT department to meet this need. MV staff will continue to keep Delta and SAP involved as this project moves forward.

Vancouver Landfill Monitoring Data: Delta and MV staff has held two meetings with City of Vancouver (CoV) landfill staff. At the May 27,2010 meeting, CoY staff outlined a number of landfill activities including the overall Closure Plan. SAP was present at this meeting and gave immediate feedback to CoY staff primarily related to water drainage management. A written response is being formulated and will be reviewed by SAP and Delta; Delta will receive a copy of the letter once complete. In addition, MV staff will request that SAP review Landfill data and provide advice to Delta with respect to further studies or actions required to assess and mitigate the present and future impact of Vancouver Landfill on Burns Bog.

Circulation of Delta Council's Report: As requested, MV will circulate Delta's May 17, 2010 Council report to SAP with a request to provide any further advice or recommendations back to Delta with respect to priority actions relating to Burns Bog restoration within Delta's purview. Once the priority actions are assembled, MV will forward them to Delta. Burns Bog Ecological Conservation Area - Delta Council May 17, 2010 Recommendations Corporation of Delta Page 2 of 2

Asthe lead management agency for BBECA, Metro Vancouver respectfully requests that MV staff be included in future SAP workshops with Delta Council. Absence from these types of workshops or other similar working sessions places Metro Vancouver at a disadvantage in integrating all management activities, including water management, into a comprehensive management program that gives MV the ability to respond and provide timely input to overall management of BBECA to meet the needs of BBECA, Delta, the Provincial and Federal Governments. Your consideration of this request is appreciated.

Respectfully, I remain,

ois E. Jackson Chair, Metro Vancouver Board

LEJ/EA/ms cc: Johnny Carlilne, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer, Metro Vancouver George V. Harvie, Chief Administrative Officer, Corporation of Delta Mike Brotherston, Manager of Climate Action and Environment, Corporation of Delta

.

Staff will be reporting baclcto Council once the feedback requested iSTeceived'fr'~~ ;~e .... " "'... Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP). Due to the lack of availability of the SAP members over the summer it is anticipated that the next SAP meeting will not be until September. Staff will continue to update Council on the subjects addressed in this letter..

4233485 Page 2 of 2 308 Michele Harris

From: John Cummins MP [[email protected] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 2:00 PM To: [email protected]; Mayor & Council Cc: CAO's Office; [email protected] ·Subject: Enabling Accessibility Fund

LAUNCH OF THE 2010 CALL FOR PROPOSALS ENABLING ACCESSIBILITY FUND

ISSUE

Enabling Accessibility Fund (EAF) Call for Proposals (CFP) for Small Projects. The CFP will be open from July 28 to September 10, 2010.

The EAF program supports community-based projects across Canada. It provides funding for projects that improve accessibility and enable Canadians, regardless of physical ability, to participate in and contribute to their communities and the economy.

The Fund was designed to improve physical accessibility, enhance existing transportation by modifying an existing vehicle to improve physical accessibility, and modify or enhance media or hardware to increase accessibility to information and communications.

BACKGROUND

In Budget 2007, the Govemment of Canada committed $45 million over three years under the EAF to help Canadians, regardless of physical ability, to participate fully in their communities. This program has supported over 330 community projects across Canada.

Budget 2010 builds on the success of the program by extending the Fund and provides an additional $45 million over the next three years.

The Budget expands eligibility for the program to include mid-sized projects, allowing for communities to undertake larger retrofit projects, or foster partnerships. for new facilities.

CURRENT STATUS

This is the third EAF CFP for Small Projects and the first under the renewed Fund.

The EAF program will provide grants of up to $75,000 for projects to renovate buildings, modify vehicles, and/or make information and communications more accessible.

Information on the Call can be found at www.hrsdc.gc.ca/disability or by calling 1-866-268-2502.

"Staff have reviewed the grant terms and conditions in relation to the new Delta Gymnastics building -this project is likely ineligible since construction has alr~a~y started .. Staff is ~aiting for' confirmation from provincial staff on this. Another option being explored IS upgrading the Ladner Community Centre washrooms to make them more accessible. PR&C staff are following-up on this." Enabling Accessibility Fund - Qs and As

Q1. What is the Enabling Accessibility Fund (EAF)?

AI. The Enabling Accessibility Fund (EAF) was originally announced in Budget 2007 as a three-year, $45 million program to support community-based projects across Canada.

Canada's Jobs and Growth Budget builds on the success of this program by providing an additional $45 million over the next three years to remove barriers for Canadians with disabilities.

The objective of the EAF is to support community-based projects across Canada that improve accessibility and enable Canadians, regardless of physical ability, to participate in and contribute to their communities and the economy.

For more information on the terms and conditions of the program, please visit the EAF webpage at www.hrsdc.gc.ca/disability or contact 1 800 O-Canada (1-800-622-6232). If you use a teletypewriter device (TTY), call 1-800-926-9105.

Q2. What is being announced today?

A2. Today we are proud to launch the 2010 Enabling Accessibility Fund's call for proposals for small projects. The Government of Canada will contribute grants of up to $75,000 for organizations to improve accessibility to facilities, activities and services.

Q3. Who can apply for funding?

AS. The following types of organizations can apply:

• not-for-profit organizations; • small municipalities (with a population under 250 000 as per census data); • . small private-sector organizations (fewer than 50 employees and under $5 million in gross revenue per year); • colleges and universities; • territorial governments; and • Aboriginal governments.

Please note that community support must be demonstrated in the application.

Q4. What types of activities are eligible for funding?

A4. Small Projects Enabling Accessibility

2 Eligible activities include renovating, constructing and retrofitting buildings within Canada to improve physical accessibility; modifying vehicles for community use to improve physical accessibility; and making enhancements that improve the accessibility of information and communication technologies. All projects must be accessible to the public.

Eligible activities include, but are not limited to:

• constructing an interior or exterior ramp; • installing wider doors or installing automated door openers; • raising or lowering sinks or counters; .• improving lighting and increasing colour contrast; • building an accessible washroom; • installing accessible door handles and light switches; • installing an elevator or lift; • providing computer enhancements such as voice interactive capability; • installing a wheelchair lift in a community-based vehicle; and • carrying out other activities that contribute to creating or enhancing accessibility for people with disabilities and are deemed acceptable by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada.

Please visit the webpage for details.

Q5. How do organizations get EAF funding?

A5. A call for proposals was launched on July 28, 2010 and will run until September 10, 2010. Applicants will find all information about the application process on the EAF webpage at www.hrsdc.gc.ca/disability.

Q6. How much funding can an organization receive?

A6. Organizations may apply for a maximum of $75,000 to renovate, construct or retrofit buildings; to modify or retrofit vehicles; or to make information and communication technologies more accessible.

Q7. The last call for proposals for small projects had a funding ceiling of $50,000. Why do small projects now have a ceiling of $75,000?

3 A7. The maximum allowable funding during the EAF call for proposals in 2008 and 2009 was $50,000 for small projects. It was found through data collected in previous Call for Proposals processes that many common improvements in accessibility can run over $50,000. As a result, the Government of Canada increased the maximum allowable funding to $75,000 for this call in order to permit greater flexibility to the accessibility improvement projects that could be funded.

Q8. Is consideration given to the distribution of projects?

AS. People with disabilities who live in rural and remote areas of Canada encounter -­ unique barriers to social and economic inclusion. The eligibility criteria will continue to support smaller communities, which include remote and rural locations. There is no provincial or regional allocation for projects. In 2009, 41 percent of all approved small projects were located in rural and remote communities.

QS. When will applicants find out if their application is approved?

AS. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada will make every effort to process applications in a timely manner. The amount of time it takes to process applications will be determined by the volume of applications received. Applicants will be advised of the Department's decision by letter.

Q10. How will applicants receive payment for approved applications?

A10. Once an approved organization confirms a start date for its project with Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, a grant payment will be sent to them with the letter of official approval. Organizations must confirm a start date before grant payments will be sent to them. Organizations must not start their projects until they receive the official approval letter from program officials.

Q11. If an application is declined, is there anything the applicant can do?

A 11. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada will make the final decision on projects recommended for funding. Applicants will be advised of the Department's decision by letter. If an application is not approved, there is no formal appeal process. However, the decision letters will provide contact information should applicants have further questions. Applicants will be advised to apply to future EAF calls for proposals.

Q12. Will there be an upcoming call for proposals for major projects?

A12. Major project funding is not available under this call or under the renewed EAF. Through funding announced in Budget 2010, however, EAF will support a number of mid-sized projects, allowing communities to undertake larger retrofit projects or foster

4 partnerships for new facilities. Details on a call for proposals for mid-sized projects will be available in the coming months.

Q13. How can my organization be advised of upcoming calls for proposals?

A 13. The information will be posted on Human Resources and Skills Development Canada's website at www.hrsdc.gc.ca/disability. Alternatively, you can send an email to [email protected] to request to be added to the email notification list.

Due to the large distribution list, some email systems send these notifications to junk mail; therefore, you may wish to configure your system to ensure that EAF's email is not marked as junk mail.

Q14. What is the Government of Canada doing for people with disabilities?

A14. The Government invests annually to help address the needs of people with disabilities through such programs as the Registered Disability Savings Plan, the Disability component of the Social Development Partnerships Program, Canada Pension Plan Disability, the Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities, labour market agreements for persons with disabilities, and post-secondary education assistance measures for students with disabilities.

For example, the Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP) helps families and . individuals save for the long-term financial security of a loved one with a disability. To learn more about the RDSP, visit www.disabilitysavings.gc.ca.

The Government of Canada also supports the income security of people with disa

Canada's Economic Action Plan and other recent federal initiatives are also addressing the needs of people with disabilities and their families through a series of important measures, including:

• $1 billion for renovations and energy retrofits of social housing, including renovations that support people with disabilities; • $75 million over two years for the construction of new social housing units for people with disabilities; • $20 million for each of two years to improve the accessibility of federally owned buildings;

5 • effective doubling of the tax relief provided by the Working Income Tax Benefit, which includes a supplement for people with disabilities; • extension of the increase in the Home Buyers' Plan limit and the First-Time Home Buyers' Tax Credit to people with disabilities who are not first-time home buyers but are buying a more accessible or functional home; and • $20 million towards the operating costs of the 2010 Paralympic Winter Games.

Q15. What does Budget 201 0 offer for people with disabilities?

A15. Budget 2010 proposes a number of actions to help people with disabilities and their families participate fully in Canada's social and economic life:

• In recognition of the fact that the families of children with disabilities may not be able to contribute regularly to their Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP), Budget 2010 announced a 1O-year carry-forward of Canada Disability Savings Grant and Canada Disability Savings Bond entitlements.

• To provide parents with more flexibility in ensuring that their savings may be used to support a child with disabilities when they are no longer able to support the child, Budget 2010 announced that the proceeds ofa deceased individual's Registered Retirement Savings Plan or Registered Retirement Income Fund may be transferred, tax-free, to the RDSP of a financially dependent child or grandchild with disabilities.

To enhance accessibility for people with disabilities, Budget 2010 extends the Enabling Accessibility Fund and provides $45 million over the next three years. The Fund will continue to support small projects that focus on removing barriers and enhancing accessibility. It will also support a number of mid-sized projects, allowing communities to undertake larger retrofit projects or foster partnerships for new facilities.

• Budget 2010 provides $5 million per year for five years to the Canadian Paralympic Committee to build on the successes of our Paralympians and continue to encourage people with disabilities to participate actively in sport.

6 309 Michele Harris

From: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2010 3:57 PM To: Mayor & Council Subject: Delta Website - Comments, Compliments & Inquiries

******Feedback Form Completed****'*

Directed To: . Mayor Council

Comments: Is there some reason why we apparently have to have flocks of 747s landing on Scott Road? Have we become the airport? Why are we being persecuted by this racket? By my count, they are flying over my house about every 5 minutes. I am also being woken up in the middle of the night, well after midnight. What gives?

Completed by : Marnie Dunnaway

Address: 11975 Staples Crescent, N.Delta

Phone Number: 604596-3054

Email: [email protected]

r'-<~ _... _ .... _ ... __ ..... __ .------~'-- ! Correspondence 106150:

Saff has responded to the resident's inquiry noting that there isa general.increaseIn aircraft traffic during the summer espeaally when the GRlZZ SfAR is in use. The resident was also prOVided information about the recently Installed temporary air~aft noise monitor in 8J~shine Hills. __ . _____. _ \

1 genda A FILE#

Mayor Lois E. Jackson

4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Ci, Delta, BC V4K 3E2

10 July 2010 __ .l

As a resident of North Delta I have occasion to use the Delta Nature Reserve often along with hundreds of other people. The Nature Reserve is like Delta's Stanley Park with its trails and walkways. I am somewhat taken back by the lack of basic maintenance on some of the pathways leading to the park. #1. There is a pathway that leads from the upper trail above the railway tracks immediately to the west of the Nordel Overpass onto the lower path in the Nature Reserve. Just prior to the tracks this path is nothing more than a dangerous washed out crevice especially when it is wet out. This portion of the path could stand some gravel to fill it in and make it s~fe. See picture" . #2. There is also a path at the end of Bates road on the east side that people use to cross the tracks to get to the lower road on the Nature Reserve. A large tree fell not long ago blocking the path. A new path was created by the public to the west of where the tree fell. The path goes through the ditch and when it rains the path gets very muddy. Some gravel in this area to build up the path would be a good thing.

A few years ago several loads of gravel were dumped just off the lower road along 72' just where the old peat moss property starts in an area where nobody walks or d rives. ....???

Another thing Bates road is blocked off at both end leading from 72's and Barrymore. People using the Nature Reserve park in the turnaround at the end of Bates road. There is almost one block length of paved roadway that is blocked off at both ends. Why don't you move the gate at the east end of that blocked off section to the center of the blocked off part and remove the barricade on the west end and make angle parking out of this stretch of unused roadway. People could park there from both sides. This would make a better parking area then the turnaround. Large trucks often come into the turnaround and have difficulty maneuvering due to the cars parked there. It would also create less noise and disruption for the people who live near the end of the road there. I look forward to some action being taken regarding these areas.

Yours truly

~GJ Kurucz

7858 Garfield Drive

Delta, BC V4C 7J4

The two trails the writer refers to lead people to an unsafe Railway crossing. The trails have been developed by users shortcutting to the adjacent housing. With respect to opening Bates Road for parking, it is staffs's understanding that the roadway was closed at the request of the neighbourhood due to undesirable activity.

The writer will be advised of these concerns.

gends A FILE # QSSW)-dJI 311 Michele Harris

From: Jean Wightman [email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 03,20108:28 AM To: Mayor & Council TYPE:~f"tLv- fhrr",t->0 Cc: Clerks DEPT: j'?t eeL. EA.") Subject: re Tsawwassen Sun Fest and recycling, etc. A.T. #: ,ObiS;? "' Your Worship and council members: Comments: ~ '1/(0 iltj

For next year's event, may I suggest that a group be given opportunity to collect refundable products at South Delta Recreation Centre as well? At the fireworks event on Sunday night, we noticed a large waste bin containing everything (no sorting). With the popular skateboard competition taking place at this venue, recycling .needs to be organized in order to reduce needless waste going to the landfill. I suggest that in addition to blue bins collection of recyclable paper (I.e. McDonalds paper bags) be implemented? A long term goal would be to place public outdoor water fountains in Tsawwassen. Then, with a bit of education, we could reduce the amount of plastic water bottles being used in the first place, especially since we have high quality water in the region.

The Sun Fest parade is a long time tradition of Tsawwassen and noticeably absent from this year's parade was a member of Delta Council (or the Mayor)!

Jean Wightman

Saff will work with the Tsawwassen am Festival organizers to place more recyding containers at the 8<.atepark.

1 312 Michele Harris

From: Kim Fumeaux [[email protected] Sent: Thursday, July 29,201012:01 PM To: Mayor & Council Subject: Implications of legalized secondary suites in home ...

As an accountant and a home owner in North Delta, I want to know what, if any, impact this situation would have on a home owner's principal residence exemption on sale of their property.

Thank you for considering my question. genda A FILE # ~;m sa -a...o

Cheers

Kim L. Furneaux, C.G.A. Furneaux Schindler Certified General Accountants Suite 211 - 8556 - 120th Street Surrey, B.C. V3W 3N5 Office: 604.501.2000 Cell: 778.895.7002 Facsimile: 604.599-5876

NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY This communication including any information transmitted with it is intended only for the use of the addressees and is confidential. If you are not an intended recipient or responsible for delivering the message to an intended recipient, any review, disclosure, conversion to hard copy, dissemination, reproduction or other use of any part of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you receive this communication in error or without authorization please notify us immediately by return e-mail or otherwise and perrnanently delete the entire coml}1unication from any computer, disk drive, or other storage medium .

.

'",' The Income Tax Act provides the legislation regarding capital gain or loss when property, such as real estate, is disposed of. Currently, the Act allows for a principal residence exemption, for income tax purposes, which can eliminate or reduce a capital gain on the disposition of a taxpayer's residence. Staff will reply to the writer and refer the writer to the Canada Revenue Agency website which provides information on principal residence and discusses various topics regarding the exemption including a situation when there is a complete or partial change in use of a prop.erty from principal residence to income producing.

1 4-7953 120th Street 313 Delta, BC V4C 6P6 Agenda Tel: 604.572.0373 July 12, 201a1"'l !.F!.:IL:EE~#~~~~.:u<.--""1 Fax: 604.572.0374 Toll Free: 1.888.850.6264 ," i Corporation of Delta Email: [email protected] 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent web1Nzw:~og.org Delta, B.C. V4K 3E2 TYPE: eer11&U:;: ~ . DEPT: eN fN\I

AT.#: lOlDDLl.o 1 . ./ ••• Dear Mayor and Council, c~mments: A\Jb 11011'0 12f0h~1( ~& • The Burns Bog Conservation Society appreciates the meeting you facilitated between Delta staff and members of our Society on March 15, 2010 to discuss impacts of the South Fraser Perimeter Road on Burns Bog. On June 8th our Society received a copy of Delta's minutes of the meeting.

We wish to draw attention to the discussion under Section 14, Species at Risk. One member raised a question about Delta's recent industrial designation of portions of public ally-owned properties that include B.C.'s highest-rating habitat for the Southern Red-backed Vole. The Burns Bog Conservation Society has consistently raised concerns that the South Fraser Perimeter Road is planned through, and adjacent to, this vital habitat.

On pages 6 & 7, Mr. Brotherston explained that the Southern Red-backed Vole has only been found in pine-salal vegetation found south of the animal shelter on the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area. He explained it was found during the ecosystem review. He explained that this vegetation type is not found on the properties north of the SFPR.

For clarification, the Burns Bog Conservation Society would like to draw Delta Council's attention to information that shows critical habitat for the Southern Red-backed Vole in the areas that Delta Council has agreed to designate industrial for construction of the South Fraser Perimeter Road.

Enclosed is a copy of Figure 4.25 from the Burns Bog Ecosystem Review, Synthesis Report, 2000, which shows how scarce the high-rating habitat is for the Southern Red-backed Vole. It should be noted that many of the areas of the identified habitat are outside the protected area of Burns Bog. One of these is the habitat identified at 80th Street in the area ofthe animal shelter and north of the shelter. In addition, Figure 6.10 (enclosed) of the same report also identifies this same area as Zone 1 in the Summary Map of Ecological Viability in Burns Bog. Zone 1 is:

"Areas within the water mound with attributes required to preserve the viability of Burns Bog"

Appendix I of the Synthesis Report (enclosed) addresses Municipally Owned Lands Adjacent to Burns Bog. The three properties of Bylaws 6827 and 6828 are identified as required or supporting the ecosystem viability of Burns Bog. Property 5, (80th Street east) has a "high rating for small mammals". Property 4 has "lagg transition" and "possibly Southern Red-backed Vole". Property 6 has "potential connection to the Fraser River" and "high wildlife diversity values." Fragmenting these properties with the South Fraser Perimeter Road will degrade these ecological values of Burns Bog.

Enclosed are copies from the Vegetation and Wildlife ImpactAssessment, Technical Volume 12 of the Environmental Assessment Application for the South Fraser Perimeter Road. The copies are from Figure 3, Appendix 2. The picture depicts small mammal habitat right on the route of the South Fraser Perimeter Road at 80th Street. The Figure shows the road planned through red listed polygons which show habitat for red-listed species. Honourary Chair: David Bellamy, O.B.E., B.5c., Ph.D., D.Univ., DSc.Hon., Charitable No: 12916 6682 RR0001 F,L.S., F.I.Bio., F.I.Env.Sci., F.R,G.S., F.Z.S., Botanist, Saving peatlands through education. Ecologist, Author, Broadcaster This information is confirmed on pages 30, 85 and 93 ofthe same Study.

Page 30: "Although the forest patch near 80th Street and the SPCA shelter (site SFPR 36) was rated as High, it was not sampled, as it was within 500 m of the trapline where Fraker et al. (1999) captured southern red-backed voles in 1999 ... "

Page 85: "Southern Red-backed Vole Priorto this project, there were only three known occurrences of this coastal race of the southern red-backed vole in British Columbia. Two (Stanley Park 1910, UBC Endowment Lands 1946) are from historical museum specimens. Although it was thought to be extirpated in the Lower Mainland, a population was discovered in lodgepole pine woodland habitat in Burns Bog in 1999 (Fraker et al. 1999), within 500 m of the SFPR study area."

Page 93: "5.5.2.6 Southern Red-backed Vole (occidentalis subspecies) Deciduous forest and wetland habitats were ranked as unsuitable (Nil) for this rodent. Only 2 sites were ranked as High (Table 5-14), and the key characteristics were a dense salal shrub layer with an open canopy of shore pine and jor birch. One site was the pine-salal forest west of 80th Street (SFPR 36 in Segment 222). This forest patch is less than 500 m from the trapline location where Fraker et al. (1999) trapped 7 southern red-backed voles in September 1999 and is classified in the same ecosystem (Pine-Sphagnum-Woodland forest)(Hebda et al. 2000)."

Note: - the reference above is (SFPR 36 in Segment 222) - This is not correct as Segment 222 is in SFPR 46, not 36)

Both the Burns Bog Ecosystem Review, Synthesis Report 2000 and the Vegetation and Wildlife Impact Assessment, Technical Volume 12, identified the 80th Street area near the animal shelter as rare high habitat for the Southern Red-backed Vole and an area required to preserve the viability of Burns Bog.

Delta Council should note that the information from the Burns Bog Ecosystem Review, Synthesis Report 2000, is taken from Chapter 4. The Burns Bog Covenant includes Chapters 4 and 7 and refers to these two chapters as the "Report". Section 3.1 of the Covenant states:

"The parties acknowledge that the Report establishes a baseline from which any change in the physical character of the Bog, and the performance of any covenant in this Agreement in relation to the Bog, may be measured."

Delta's Bylaw 6827 changes the designation ofa portion of the property east of 80th Street from Environmentally Sensitive to Industrial. It is the portion identified in Figure 4.25 of Chapter 4 as the highest habitat rating in the province for the very rare Southern Red-backed Vole. Bylaw 6828 rezones this portion to Heavy Industrial use.

As the maps and figures show, the B.C. Government is about to construct the South Fraser Perimeter Road through the habitat where the rare Southern Red-backed vole was found in 1999 for the first time in 50 years. This type of habitat is scarce and fragmented and a glance at the enclosed maps reveals that construction of the South Fraser Perimeter Road will cause irreparable damage. The uniqueness of the transitional bog habitats was expressed by the B.C. Ministry of Environment in a submission to the Environmental Assessment of the South Fraser Perimeter Road, August 21, 2007:

2 Page two West-side of Burns Bog The biophysical conditions associated with the western edge of Burns Bog represent a distinct culmination of ecological values including: the last remaining natural bog forest edge (transition area to a swamp forestland), productive habitat for a unique aggregation of wildlife, involving several threatened or endangered species and an endangered plant community. While anyone of these features considered in isolation has distinctive value, the combination of these attributes is unique to the region and province ...

The Burns Bog Conservation Society acknowledges the role of Delta Council in creating the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area in 2004 and the intent to add the two properties as outlined the Burns Bog Management Plan of 2007. However, government scientists have warned that the South Fraser Perimeter will cause irreparable damage to Burns Bog:

" ... will significantly compromise the ecological processes that are fundamental to the long term viability and integrity of Burns Bog ... " (Environment Canada, Technical Appendix, Nov. 19,2007, p.31)

"The proposed corridor directly intersects habitat identified as highly suitable for red-listed species. The removal of forests, wetland areas, field habitats and other ecosystem components will render areas within the footprint of the corridor unusable for the myriad of wildlife species described ... " (B.e Ministry ofEnvironmen~ August 21,2007, page 5)

"Environment Canada concludes that the management objectives for restoration of Burns Bog, to which the Province of BC, GVRD and Corporation of Delta committed to Canada in the Conservation Covenant, and further articulated in the Burns Bog Management Plan, will not be attainable should the Project proceed as proposed." (Environment Canada, Technical Appendix, Nov. 19, 2007, p. 33)

The Burns Bog Conservation Society remains concerned that the warnings are being ignored. The Burns Bog Conservation Society respectfully requests a response from Delta Council regarding these issues raised in this letter. This is important as the Society concurs with the Mayor (March 15) that it is very important that accurate information be disseminated by all.

Yours sincerely, ~~j)~ Eliza Olson President

Cc: Delta Council Members Guy Gentner, MLA, Delta North Vicki Huntington, MLA, Delta South John Cummins, MP, Delta South Richmond Sukh Dhaliwal, MP, Newton North Delta Et al

3 Staff are responding to Ms. Olson and providing further information regarding the habitat suitability for Southern Red-backed vole on Delta's properties north of SFPR. The pine-salal forest that was identified as high suitability for southern red-backed vole habitat does not extend onto these properties. It is located on Delta's properties south of SFPR which are to be added to the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area. Issues raised directly relating to the SFPR have been forwarded to the Executive Director of the Gateway Program for a direct response. ------~- --~ -~ .-':, Ii. r ~ __ I - ' .... -0- --- ~--- -',...<''::~1' ',~,,, I j -::..J Burns Bog f 1-//-----/ 1>;\1e ./:--" r' Ecosystem Review £,.... 1",- , ./ I" __ ",' "., ,1LT._~-;1....J '-~ \ ,_ -"%.- .1., r:TTI~I~------/:0-~, 1::-__ - ':;l ,----'--kLeJ1-- r=='-n-~-=~~l - \t::=":~ '-'~\ --- \'~))I'_"_~'!ii;;J Glu ,I 1\.", -<-;'1' k>~--~·< -~~ -'/ 'j1- -- '~ I III IJ\_-"I~~(~I'\li 'T--->; ~.Q.~-~- r - /'/ 00 ,.r:> , .-- _ r ~'_ t +, ' ::- --""c ;111 ~ __ /:::~____ , % ,'..1 ,...... ~ J_ I ~ I i - -c"r- \\f~ :---. '"--- ,I j ",__ I r '--'-{ ,-I..I I -n, "0' "D ,- 'I' (--,-._ -d, , Ll £7., ;;, .. r: "-:C-'-.1), " I ~1r" '-, r j." '::--' ' " - , /,..--1 W- II 'r- ~ __ -':.< ',' - _ ,I ___ l-1 S,// ~/~--Il('::-::'I' '" r- t-- ~I 1\ ,,~-.-.,~ -.., ~t\\ \, ~, ".-I~_~? \ ,\ v"""~~ -- -r ~ ~.--- \ ~--' J ,r ~'I " I I LII~ --I ,-I \ - \ o Mod_¥.tJel)' lugh ruil'oibll 5:11irahllit)' I,: --'0 , ~" I. <··ii' ,-;> -I' );'{, -~',1 1 " " ,1_ I "l-·.r-t-' ;;-J,~'-'~ '[ 1&, {5tl-95% ofbeSi in pl'ovim:e) --- \- \ ..-r -'~ l \_--I....,:~, ~ --; ,\ I'~ I ,l I ~/ .::., 11',~ , ., ,r" ! I ,l I ,I- , L I- -, 'I '\ " , .1 c:::J M~e"lla.bi'a1 ~itabilit}' (iHO'.~~

o ]..(11..... h3bilat -suitability (.~%) 'I , =,./'~~('>" -L;-1~c:df"f~)1 PI ~ ~J I I il'l I li,I---'~' '-'," II ,,i .J,!c::jLr j o Vel}' 10\\'10 Iii( habitat sultablJity I /' (/;: r I' :4-t-1 , (%%) ~L 11 Ir;-~.1, ' I I' __ ...j I, ,JI "

I '--, " 'rrd l I' <' ' , liU 1, I.'-',.....~~~lJ;_~_. I' '?'t.t;;"~ J'r:,'-\ II '\ - ,-pll _"" I_l ~--{~Ic:.----"'-llr/I- u r 11 1 J ) f\ ~,- l~~ ,?~....,\" (1 \ "';.J I ~- 11,---5 :,J S' \'~--1~ '~/ -'(,fl:. '7? -\I~\11 J\i:', 17:: .?.::'-.! \ r'i 1;1 ~ r";' " l~V; \ • I., '~. "\( (11\ l~ 1.1,1,1_''-'' I, L,lJ I-.JL_~ _J ;:/,· ___L-...Ji,<~\""_L __ r- I ~=4 I rt, j....--' 11\<-"-;'1: --..' ~-,-,-.....- -" I.:;'=.;T ~ "' ( hJ ~ '-- \~ =-:t_ l -~"'-... -""~-' -~ '\~l ' ~:=l '1}') '~_I? I' I~I "fP4 6 L '('\) / [:c- 'l (r 2 1 (- n--~ J--,-"",j:'-='~;"\': (~J ~---~ ) I -.( -,~"\J --..1 --..,\__ ..-~.. .ft..,-"?_'_i_,_~>E ~}:~.9.l .r'-- /\--)d=:._~t:;('(U"v ':--- ,_,_J r~t\-c~-.-----~~-i] I~\ l'l~~[~_d-':Q~~-'-~~~2. ~~----"Y'..J "':-.;. ""-...., J j""")I \. I lJ~ ,,J~) ! .... -.1-;\ ,\ '"""\ I ("-~~_\(( I -----.:.,-~ ~ III~I ~-_:r«.-'-} ~J~- "-.. r----- 11n1~ I \ ,,'\ ','I \ 'J,c"';\, c", ",,', ,(v'fi,\ '-"Iii ,J ":"_J~.' ',--,,.:~ I }'-4-!J,-- r'I..,-J 6 ----.) ~ ; '1 r I \'" ~ :::r...,) ~},..r -~ ... ;.~l - l ( , 1) \ (c... I }?~~-'c:_\(J- ,-h,-"__ ...... ~~ , I (I (i\ t· ~ L,_~J ~"\- "y- ~< - f ;~ ~ -:1 I,~) I I ~Li \, I '... ,0 L-::' r' -~-~ ~"'-~r-, ... _- ,_~ ~ I" '-'-"':.-,-:::.----' ::::7 ~ ( 1~~ - '-~Ljc Flgure4.25 '!'errestlfull3oos)'~em. ML'lPLCling ofhaii"ml suilabilll)' (ot .he St::UlOOlll ReiJ-backed yole ill tlJC IJUl'JlS Bog sLlldyarea (aoo]Kcd trcl:Ill Gebaoco< W)O). Gebauer (2tXX}) descrired Cl'IlegDrtes as "poremialllilbitm ~I suitlbillty" _ 01 - . r:J l. ,_< jl ___ I .-.~,~-'~~;~ '" \0 _- ,-+2.." ", S;g~'" '1i.. :~ ,~ \""",J;;j,=",!Jj(~lt"J;flt~.~,,~,,> Ls 1-- "'i "I!1i",.J" ," i '11,0' ,-' j ---r-______-) L . ~ _--;::::i"-~-- ~ J ~~\-- ,,*,I~ UTMLono}ll, CW.1f1ll NAClll ------:::::::~ .~ - -"'/ .. )',- . --~~_" n fI-

Vegetation and Wildlife Impact Assessment

Technical Volume 12 of the Environmental Assessment Application

The following map shows the mammal habitat within the red-listed polygon. The South Fraser Perimeter Road is planned right through this area where the endangered Southern Red-backed vole was found in 1999. The three properties through which the freeway is going are publically­ owned bog lands that were not included in the protected Bums Bog Ecological Conservancy Area in 2004. .. Proposec. I·~igr.way Aligr.mer,t Footpnr,t

HABITAT ASSESSMENT

I~ .... .J Rea Ustec Polygor. [:=J Blue Listed Polygor. D Other Polygon POLYGON CODES BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

5/11'. t:.~.,=, t,,~d \tVinter BIn:! Forest Survey ABUNDANCE C;.ll; • t:.1'.I:! ~~;""tid CA·C-'I1-'1 Owl Playback Transect Noctumal Waterfowl Diurnal Wmerfowl C~5· Cr3ltl~"'Fi,"d a 5)-";)) s-r:.(;,,~dS"'1 Call Playback Station .. 5)- H») ;.~. f:li~J Insect St.;rvey 1':!l-2l) 10J-2JJ r.0"il.- ;:'«"9> (;;:tN·~..i"l * • • 2))-!iG) BlJttertly SampUr.g Location IIAY·'k", C ~ 2)0- !»J Lr ·L.,.15)0 "'5)) ?:)T·Pt=,,~ '".'. ~N· R1,I~"" RUT·R:J.!:I:J'I:..-·...... :-'l'ld 2),)- 5)0 + 2003 POir.t COunt Survey ~'«..-i 2)J~!i)J ,..500 ,..5·)) + 2004 Point Count SLrvey ~-.,~,,~{,~- • Wildlife Hesources N GATEWAY PROGRAM• t SOUTH FRASER PERIMETER ROAD m WILDliFE RESOURCE MAPPING HEMMERA FIGURE 3 FRASER RIVER /

SUNBURY INDUSTRIAL AREA

S46 _ Proposed Highway Alignment Footprint

HABITAT ASSESSMeNT r", I Red LIsted Polygon D Blue Listed P-olygon D other Polygon POLYGON CODES BIOI.OGICAL ASSESSMeNT BM'·e.,..l'IoIcI Winter Bird Fotest Survey ABuNDANce B),a. ~r..a'''i'Flo\d IjA·CIiwPQ;\I!ra * • • ~L.O. FloodOdL • .,. 100·200 @ 100·200 FOFI.Foiii' Insect Survay eRN·Groln auttatfly Sampling L.ocatlon • 201}. 5011 HAy-.I/t)' o :«10·500 L!'-L.n~RII OI'£)'llloFI,kI .. ~ ftaptor Nest Loca\ion . QW·~n'W.I" ::>500 • l!9T'POIIIIOlOCrop F!N·ftIIIUr.­ Small Mamma] TrappIng "" ~.~bli'.C'.P ~ Shorebirds FfCGk of Gulls R~·R ••d sa-10a 50.100 TL·Tr ..omI"lo~Un. • • Small Mammal HabilatAssement '!RF'1'IUForrn [iI • • 1\JF·ru..rFarm 100-200 i) 100.20£1 UR·Ut'oan ® 'M.·W.~omI 200·500 2oo.5QO + 2003 Point Count Survey ~ ,,, + 2004 Point Count Survey ~ "" • . ., Re,ource, GATEWAY PROGRAM• ""'1l'" AI SOUTH FRASER PERIMIiTER ROAD I:NVlROt'lMENTA!. ~ - SlffiVlce:> I.TD. "' WILDLIFE RESOURCE MAPPING ,1 Cl HEMMERA • .,.., .. """~ ." "'1 JUNES,200si I FIGURE 3 .~,,,,.. Bums Bog Ecosystem Review FrilSer ~-

Z()m::t.ofCl.'1.ilog,k1d ~'Illbility

Z!":IOO I

/ve-Il.~ ·...,·lthln Ill<: \,\,'m¢.l" iUoond A 'i\.'illlllttriilllles :requiredlO -p1!$I.'O"C tlill! \'iOibilily of t3umsBog

Arell:S outsi(b 111~ \Valer moumt B wilb OIl1ribtlles roquin":d to pl"esctvc: lbe \'iablUlY of Uvrns.Bug

t'ZJ Approxi mlLl~ MrLda()' belw:..'Cn 7.Ol~e" I and 2 D Z\!>Ue 2 ArellS with 5e\'eral :attributes sUJiPOI'LiIl~. bu1 JM I\"qui~c.(L f(1r [he viabiliLy orRum$. Bog D Zone:) ArcI1:S with lew ()( llO auribuli.-'S supporting the viilbility of Burn:>))og o Insuflit..ie-m DaLa N f:.::;.)./ogkil.! 1102 ooulidary

N Hydrological bI"~ ixlUlKUUY

City ofVatlcouver Tc.andrm Figw:e 6. I 0 Summary map' of"''>Cl)kl~:i ..'a! .'iablIIIY in Burns. Bog. For discuss-kin oftl:e hilslS Gfille 1.()U(.'<~ .uw 1..000 bowKlru"ko,s. see 6.7.

'1'~~~ I 1A1!tri8 I,'

~1".dIIMZoo~lD. O="~ NAIl83 """"""' .. ..,.l.oO~l..""(".-dl...,-.,.,.Oil'l"" $drl& Appendix I

Burns Bog Ecosystem Review Spatial Analysis as it Pertains to Municipally Owned Lands Adjacent to Burns Bog

On October 6, 1999 Delta Council passed a resolution "that Council endorse a partial ecosystems review of the Delta owned properties adjacent to Burns Bog to incorporate water chemistry, hydrology, geology, native soils, birds; and wildlife, aquatic insects and plant communities at a cost not to exceed $30,000." In support, the Enviromnental Assessment Office (EAO) executed contracts (funded by the Corporation of Delta) with consultants undertaking the respective field studies. The purpose of this additional work was to collect new data on municipally owned lands adjacent to Burns Bog (Figure Ll) to supplement existing data collection and to add value to the Ecosystem Review analyses. Table I.1 contains a summary the Burns Bog Ecosystem Review spatial analysis as it pertains to these lands.

Figure 1.1 Locations of 15 municipally owned lands adjacent to Burns Bog where additional data was collected (Corporation of Delta 1999). Table 1.1 Burns Bog Ecosystem Review spatial analysis as it pertains to municipally owned lands adjacent to Burns Bog.

parcel polygon importance to number number(s)' ecological values ecosystem viability2

1. 310a, 314, 315, water mound(?); natural transition to required 309 lagg; undisturbed vegetation; wildlife values

2. 308 cultivated field; storage(?), but poorly low connected to main water mound

3. 306,307 possibly in lagg; greater than 25% low Sphagnum cover in part; some wildlife values

4. 72, 79, 70 laggtransition; possibly Southern supporting Red-backed Vole

5. 285,38,67,296 part of water mound; connected to required lagg; undisturbed ecosystem (?); high rating for small mammals

6. 295,29,36,37, outside the lagg; potential connection supporting 41,42,305 to the Fraser River; high wildlife diversity values

7. 4 wildlife diversity values; connection required - supporting to upland

8. 11, 19,30,25,24, undisturbed vegetation; wildlife required 4 values; connection to upland zone

g. 61,47,53,50,25 water supply and water storage; rare . required species and ecosystem values; wildlife diversity values; connection to upland

10. 61,47,53,50,25- rare species and ecosystem values; required wildlife diversity values; connection to upland'

11. 137,155,169 (?) possible connection to upland; supporting wildlife values

12. 322 none low Table 1.1 (continued) Burns Bog Ecosystem Review spatial analysis as it pertains to municipally owned lands adjacent to Burns Bog.

parcel polygon ecological values importance to number number(s) 1 ecosystem viability2

13. 304, 303 possible connection to Watershed low Park

14. a) east of City of water mound; lagg; water chemistry; required Vancouver landfill connectivity; Sphagnum accumulation 265,320,317, 319,316

b) south of City of undisturbed vegetation; wildlife supporting Vancouver landfill values; mostly disconnected from water mound 302,316,318

15. 230 and others water mound; connection to lagg; required undisturbed vegetation; moderate to high wildlife values

I As specified in Madrone Consultants Ltd. (1999). Balded numbers represent dominant polygons. 2 See Figure 6.10 for detailed explanation of viability ratings. 314 IO=DELT AlOU=HALLlCN=CAO/CN=MAYORCOUNCIL

From: Alison Acheson [[email protected]] [--­ Sent: Tuesday, July 2.0, 2010 10:05 AM ._-! To: Mayor & Council genda - , Subject: Re: composting smell. .. once again A FILE # ola~0o-aD my address is: 5642 52nd Ave. Ladner, bc V4K 2C5

Thank you--

Alison Acheson [email protected]

On 20-Jul-10, at 9:53 AM, Mayor & Council wrote:

> Dear Ms. Acheson, in order for our Mayor and Council to receive your > correspondence in a timely manner your legal mailing address is > required. Thank you, Clerk's Office > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alison Acheson [mailto:[email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20,20109:29 AM > To: Mayor Lois Jackson; Mayor & Council > Subject: composting smell ... once again > > Hello Mayor and Councillors, > > It's happening again, isn't it...that dreadful smell. .. wafting over > Ladner. It's not a natural manure smell. I just drove through the > Valley yesterday, and don't mirid at all a natural agricultural smell. > But this is who-knows-what. > When is something permanent going to be done "!bout this? > > Alison Acheson > [email protected] Staff has investigated the complaint' > and contacted Ms. Acheson with > recommendations that the odour is > related to regular farm practices. > >------~------> > This message is provided in confidence and should not be forwarded to > any external third party without authorization. If you have received > this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately > by telephone or by return email and delete this message along with any > attachments. >

1 Mayor Council

From: Lois Jackson Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 9:55 AM 315 To: Mayor & Council Subject: FW: Della Suslainabilily Proposals Attachments: TAP submission Go Green_2010.doc

-----Original Message----- From: Barbara Hinson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 23,20102:16 PM '-" To: Mayor Lois Jackson; Scott Hamilton; Robert Campbell; Heather King; Bruce McDonald; Anne Peterson Cc: Paul Biedermann; Margaret Ferguson; Jean Wightman; Carol Vignale; Abby Armstrong; [email protected] Subject: Delta Sustainability Proposals

July 23, 2010

Dear Mayor and Council,

Attached is a document for your consideration from a Tsawwassen discussion group called GO GREEN Delta. During the recent TAP process we submitted a form of this document to the TAP committee (receipt confirmed by Barry Konkin). However, we would now like you to individually consider the sustainablity proposals that we have worked on as a group. We hope that our proposals inspire you to continue thinking and acting in a sustainable way for our municipality in the upcoming years.

Thank you, Staff will review this submission at the next Ba,rbara Hinson, interdepartmental Climate Change Working ;J~ 'btl-ClhIlOc'l;) ~l, !>fl-1I'; Ide.. Group meeting and respond to the writer. As on behalf of GO GREEN Delta noted in the correspondence, this has also been submitted to the Tsawwassen Area Plan

Committee. I

This message is provided in confidence ani '----______---'- _____...J without authorization. If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or by return email and delete this message along with any attachments.

1 'GO GREEN Delta' Sustainability Initiatives The following proposals are respectfully submitted to the 'Delta Mayor and Council' - from a local discussion group entitled 'GO GREEN Delta'. We are a small group of Delta residents who have been meeting for two years, once a month to share our environmental concerns. Our motto is to 'connect, inform and inspire' on issues and projects related to 'sustainability' within our local, regional and global communities. This submission is sent to you as a group submission from 'GO GREEN Delta' for your consideration. We hope that our suggestions inspire you in a green way.

Through our own GO GREEN-TAP discussions we have found common ground on goals that we believe the municipality should consider. We believe that these proposals can set a sustainability foundation within our Tsawwassen and Delta communities. We hope that the following proposals will be seriously considered during the TAP process and beyond.

PROPOSAL 1: A Tsawwassen Community Centre - a welcoming place at the entrance Currently we have a recreational center (South Delta Recreation Centre) that houses leasees. The recent announcement that the gymnastics group will be vacating a big portion of the site opens up a timely opportunity to phase in a community center concept that could welcome and/or accommodate a variety of community groups for ongoing dialogue and representation. A 'Tsawwassen Community Centre' could give us the missing heart to our town. We also propose that this community center have a strong sustainability focus. For example, the large "gym" could be used by a group such as the Business Improvement Association to showcase a green businesses and practices fair. Local schools and other educational groups may be interested in showcasing green ideas for an Earth Week or month. A summer/fall Farmer's Market could also attract tourists (on the way to or from the ferries). Many small town communities also transform their common space into theatre centers for monthly environmental movies. RECOMMENDATION: As a first step, we recommend that the 'South Delta Recreation Centre' be renamed 'The Tsawwassen Community Centre'.

PROPOSAL 2: A Sustainability Centre - a strategic concept for TsawWassen and metrovancouver From what was heard at the TAP meetings Tsawwassen residents want new businesses BUT do not want additional traffic and cars in the town center core. We also want to build on our agricultural heritage and "healthy living" status. The simplest solution is to promote Tsawwassen as a destination center with a green mandate. 'GO GREEN Delta' proposes the establishment of an environmentaL education site to attract visitors and provide a new income stream. This center would be located on the outskirts of town close to the highway to capture the attention and imagination of the passing traffic. It would be visible and easily accessed and would not bring too much traffic into the "downtown" core. Tsawwassen needs to build a "green" image for itself and others to view and support. We need to promote our area as a "green location" in our words and deeds. This 'Sustainability Centre' could be similar in concept to what 'Science World' in Vancouver offers. However, with this different theme we could connect families to relevant social issues such as urban farming, recycling and metrovancouver regional initiatives (' Zero Waste Challenge', 'Tap Water Campaign' ...) These great ideas need to come alive in an interactive way and a Sustainability Centre would be a cutting edge forum. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the parcel ofland owned by the Delta municipality at the comer of 56th Street and Highway 17 remains zoned as 'recreational' and that it be developed to support a Sustainability Centre concept.

PROPOSAL 3: Community Buses - 56th as the Free Street At present the community bus seems to be under-used. Theoretically it is a great idea but economically it is not attractive. The fare is much too high to encourage full participation. It is also bad modeling to see virtually empty buses circulating the perimeter of our town, using up gas and not being valued. We need to have aserious data-driven dialogue with Translink to come up with local solutions. One idea is to introduce an experimental Community Bus fare that is lower than the 'One Zone' regional fare. Also to be considered is a Special Tsawwassen Transit Project: local transit users can sign on for a year-long reduced rate similar to what post-secondary schools and employee groups now enjoy. Ultimately, could we consider a free local bus? RECOMMENDATION: That discussions take place with Coast Mountain Bus / Translink about an innovative community bus fare andlor routes for Tsawwassen. 'Safe Route Tsawwassen' has established a good working relationship with Coast Mountain Bus and could be of assistance.

PROPOSAL 4: Community Outreach and the Climate Change municipal program The Delta municipal office of 'Climate Action & Environment' has begun a program of environmental initiatives, beginning with improvemerit of municipal buildings and services with such actions as Building Efficiency, Green Fleet Management, Infrastructure Improvement, Community Outreach & Education, Sustainable Development, Urban Forest Management and Natural Areas Management. Notable is the Solar Hot Water Municipal Hall project and Sungod Facility Energy Retrofit. The Corporation of Delta has initiated best management practices in its development of new facilities and open space. Consideration is made for sustainable products and methods in the construction of new buildings, fields, lighting, and planting. RECOMMENDATION: To support and cooperate with Delta's Climate Change Initiatives in the community of Tsawwassen within a Sustainability Centre forum or a Tsawwassen Community Centre. Local connections for 'Public Education and Action' could be made with Tsawwassen schools including Southpointe Academy, Tsawwassen Library, the Kinsmen Centre, TsawwassenBusiness Association and Tsawwassen Business Improvement Association, Churches, and other key social institutions. CONCLUSION What is most lacking in Tsawwassen to take us into the complex demands of the coming decades is a continuing forum for dialogue through sharing of information and consensus- building. With the establishment of either a Tsawwassen Community Centre in the near future and/or a Sustainabilty Centre in the long-term we, the 'GO GREEN Delta' group, believe that Tsawwassen, can create an alternative forum to "connect, inform and inspire" on sustainability issues. This would contribute to Delta a new image, create vibrancy and help educate our community to become fully responsible global citizens. We believe that this brand of community building will also support our next generations in the best possible way. Thank you for your consideration, submitted by the following members of the 'GO GREEN Delta' discussion group:

Barbara Hinson 23 Sherwood Place Delta BC V4L 2C7 604 502-1066 [email protected]

Jean Wi~htman 554 - 55' Street Delta BC V4M 3J7

Abby Armstrong #253 1440 Garden Place Delta, Be

Carol Vignale 782 Kingfisher Place Delta V4L 2J3 [email protected]

Paul Biederman 604 943-1734

Margaret Ferguson 604943-8603 genda 316 . FILE # 0')2'(']Q·0 Ph Michele Harris A

From: Anita Den Dikken [[email protected] Sent: Saturday, July 31,2010 11 :21 AM To: Mayor & Council TYPE: k<"Ol1CgJ qgmdq .••• Cc: Sandor Gyarmati; Editor Delta Optimist Subject: BURNS BOG PROPOSED ANNUAL MEETINGS DEPT:cA t E: QC. L-S ,,' ;---. A.T.#: IQbl4-9 Dear Mayor Jackson: Comments: 4vt~ I ~ II 0 te0Vi/;;'.~ yYleef,~ ::: I read with. interest Sandor Gyarmatis article on page 9 of the July 28, 2010 Delta optimist. .- ; ~ I concur that regular meetings should take place between all four levels of government which are stakeholders in the Burns Bog Covenant. I also think that because the bog has a health benefit (absorption of carbon from the air), the public should have an input to, and knowledge of discussions and decisions impacting the bog. As President of the Burns Bog Conservation Society, Eliza Olson represents these interests of the public. For this reason, it would be appropriate to include her as a member of any such meetings.

Yours very truly

Anita den Dikken Citizen of Delta 1530 Farrell Avenue DELTA, B. C. V4L 1V7 Council's request was for annual meetings of the four Burns Bog partner agencies: Environment Canada, BC Ministry of Environment, Metro Vancouver and Delta. If these meetings occur, details of these discussions will be reported to the public through Delta Council.

1 317 OeaaffiIf'itaI"FOUNDATION

, ,

July 16, 2010

Mayor and Council Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Drive Delta, BC V4K3E2

Dear Mayor and Council,

Re: Sewage connection fee and plumbing pennit for Forest for Our Future located at Delta Hospital, 5800 Mountain View Boulevard, Delta, BC

We're very pleased to let you know that construction has started on the Forest for Our Future project, being built in partnership with the Corporation of Delta, Fraser Health and Delta Hospital Foundation.

In an effort to keep project costs to a minimal, please accept this letter as a formal request to waive all fees related to the sewage connection fee and plumbing permit for the project.

Wesgrae Constnction Ltd has been engaged by Delta Hospital Foundation as Constructiou Manager for the project, and a number of local contractors and Chair of the Board businesses are generously supporting this community project by supplying materials, Lois Wilkinson labour and their time.

Past Chair Stephen Millen We look forward to inviting you all to join us in the fall to share in the

Vice,C!lair celebration of the Forest. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to contact Shelley Keith McGee Slaughter at 940-9695 or [email protected] if you need further information or have any questions. TfG'asurer Allan Baydala

Directors Thank you for your consideration on the above. Kevin Brennan Eileen Campbell Bruce Fougner Sincerely, Doug Miller Margo Peerless Sarah Toigo Bruce Warren

5800 Mountain View c Boulevard ~"f!t::-Executive Director Delta, British Columbia, Canada V4K 3V6 Delta Hospital Foundation Telephone 604 940 9695 Fax 604 940 9670 Email: [email protected] 8:aff from Engineering and Olmmunity Ranning & Development are www.deltahospita!.com current Iy reviewi ng t he pi ans to cal cui at e the appJi cat ion and servid ng fees and will prepare areporl to Olundl for the Rogular Meeting of August 30, 2010, . genda l'6~tY$-.D'- 318 LCLt,;),; I 10 DELTAlOU-HALLlCN-CAO/CN MAYORCOUNCIL A FI LE # '5;1- -::r

From: Carell Bayne [[email protected]] TYPE: ~6~f'-I \ fl:i2 &~ Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 11:57 AM To: Mayor & Council DEPT ew Cc: Carell Bayne Subject: South lands AT #: 10\903:0, Cornm<;lnts: L, 11 dD I\) (21?i:liLU'Tf2: I'iJ-LU, (:to p' mr;;ti-jlul» Please consider that the majority of residents have said No to development on the property called Southlands. As my representatives on council I am asking that you represent my requests by voting "j against any proposal of development. Carell Bayne, 402 Ce,ntennial Parkway, Boundary Bay

Farmland is for farming

, As resolved by Council at their Regular Meeting on April 12, 2010, the development application for South lands will not proceed at this time as the' Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy has yet to be adopted, The development application has been returned to the applicant.

1 genda· A FILE # \3D~o--ab-\;?A- IO=DELT A10U=HALLlCN=CAO/CN=MAYORCOUNCIL

From: Marjorie [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 23,20103:28 PM To: Mayor & Council Subject: Tsawwassen Golf Course Redevelopment

Dear Mayor and Council,

I just learned that the Tsawwassen Golf Course will be closing in October for at least a year. When the development was first proposed, we were told we would always have a golf course. There would be no early closure. Is this how Developers get their ideas passed - by not telling us the whole truth. All those people who presently work at the golf course won't have a job in October. This is not fair at all and not the way Deltans should be treated.

There's probably not anything you can do but I feel frustrated by not being able to do anything myself.

Thanks for listening.

Marjorie Fisher Sr/0 FrfiUg,?f 50ft.} ~ Difctfjl roe../

Staff will cont.act Ms. Fisher and advise that at least nine holes of the golf course will remain open throughout the construction process and that the developer plans to open the new 18-hole golf course and clubhouse in 2012.

1 320 Michele Harris

From: Lois Jackson genda Sent: Tuesday, July 27,201010:46 AM A FILE # \3Q~o - clD-'\SA To: Mayor & Council Subject: FW: Tsawwassen Area Plan Review TYPE: RrbWnl MJf?JJI?A- DEPl: CpeO. 2 A.T. #: io'(g09 L , , ' -----Original Message----- Oeitlffil!fI!§! From: Phil Horan [mailto:[email protected] M.b~lb/lO ~ttVI\~Lh~ Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 9:03 AM To: Tsawwassen Area Plan Review Cc: Mayor Lois Jackson; Heather King; Robert Campbell; Bruce McDonald; Scott Hamilton; Anne Peterson Subject: Tsawwassen Area Plan Review

I am a long time resident of Tsawwassen, 'having first moved here in 1970. Though I left Tsawwassen as a young adult, I chose to return here when I married for the environment Tsawwassen offered to me to raise a family. My home is 5168 Winskill Drive.

I was greatly dismayed to learn that the TAP Committee is considering allowing high density development in my quiet, single family home neighbourhood. This is completely' unacceptable to me and my family.

What attracted me to Tsawwassen, in no particular order, was:

1. The low crime rate. 2. Safe streets for my children with relatively little traffic. 3. Quiet, small town feel close to Metro Vancouver. 4. Access to natural, undeveloped beaches and other wild areas. 5. Decent, safe schools.

I did not choose to move to Tsawwassen for access to a highly urbanized setting with all its concomitant problems. I feel that the Tsawwassen I (and everyone else who moved here) chose is· under attack. While I could have chosen Richmond, Surrey, White Rock, North Vancouver or any of the other high growth areas in Metro Vancouver. I did not. Tsawwassen is the last bastion of a quieter lifestyle in the lower mainland. I see no reason for the massive change being proposed.

In,particular, as I understood the survey, we were being asked about densification in the town core. In no way could I have imagined that your view of the core included almost a third of Tsawwassen. The town core is generally considered a couple of blocks on either side of 56th street running from 16th Avenue to Winsldll park. The massive and invasive expansion of this,to include most of 12th Avenue to Cliff Drive school and the blocks on either side Is in my opinion a totally unacceptable amount of growth for Tsawwassen. We are already facing 5000 new units on the TIR and the Toigo development on the golf course. These two developments alone will overwhelm the infrastructure in Tsawwwassen.

I look to Delta as the last level of government that actually listens to the people they serve. You have shown support for the people of Tsawwassen over the years by trying to limit the damage caused to the area caused by the Province. I appeal to you to leave us the Tsawwassen we chose to make our home and which we hope to be allowed to continue to enjoy. Do not to destroy it in favour of yet another overdeveloped, noisy, congested urban environment. There are plenty of those already in the lower mainland.

1 At the June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting, Council endorsed a motion that the Tsawwassen Area Plan Review Committee 'consider incorporating' recommendations into the new Tsawwassen Area Plan based upon the results of the Ipsos Reid Tsawwassen Area plan public opinion survey.

With respect to the town centre, Council endorsed the following recommendation for consideration by the Committee:

Develop policies and land use designations, for consideration by Mayor and Council, permitting the development of more townhouses, condominiums and apartments close to the town centre.

The Tsawwassen Area Plan Review Committee will report the recommendations for the new Tsawwassen Area Plan to Delta Council by August 30, 2010. Following this Council meeting, first and second reading of the bylaw for the new Tsawwassen Area Plan will take place along with a public hearing process. genda A FILE # 1'60d.o -J.o :-rSf-\ 321 Michele Harris

From: Ed Ries [[email protected] a.. Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11 :39 AM TYPE: [ec,OvJtr:z- /rfr::'Ne;~ .,1 To: Mayor & Council f' n 0 Cc: Tsawwassen Area Plan Review DEPT: -11,.,..'y~t~,- ____ Subject: Fw: Letter to the Editor A.T. #: jab l.s,o ','. . Comments:A11b Ib/tv {:.I{JiJ Jtw liM'ifln0: As discussed in the following letter to the Optimist, it is time for you to thank and dismiss your Tsa'Wwassen (J Area Planning Committee. I now understand that after I left their July 28 meeting they decided to meet again " on August 17th to focus on the Southlands: Some members are trying to get the plan's designation changed, c. even though it's clear the public does not want this.

Regards, Ed Ries 5644 Greenland Drive, Delta BC, Canada, V4L 2J5 Phone or Fax (604) 943-9016 [email protected]

----- Original Message ----- . From: Ed Ries To: Ted Murphy Sent: Thursday, July 29,20104:48 AM Subject: Letter to the Editor

Editor,

When Delta staff requested the TAPC be directed to incorporate Ipsos Reid survey results into their recommendations, council instead directed "consideration" of the results. This seems a courtesy, not an excuse for invalidation. I believe the committee fails to understand this.

I spent an hour observing their July 28th consideration of the survey results - then left. I learned the results are suspect because questions were unclear, procedures flawed, and responses few. Residents are less informed than enlightened committee members c and more meetings are needed to decide the future of the Southlands!

I also heard support for the survey's validity, but as always with this committee, consensus was lacking. The chairman even advised consensus is not needed, citing 1991 T APC member resignations and a minority report.

It is time for Delta to thank and dismiss this costly, dysfunctional and useless committee. In my opinion they have repeatedly proven themselves incapable of discerning and accepting the wishes of the people they are appointed to represent. Staff, guided by Ipsos Reid survey results, can finish the area plan.

Ed Ries 5644 Greenland Drive, Delta BC, Canada, V4L 2J5 Phone or Fax (604) 943-9016 edries!iV.dccnet.com At the June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting, Council endorsed a motion that the Tsawwassen Area Plan Review Committee 'conSider incorporating' recommendations into the new Tsawwassen Area Plan based upon the results of the Ipsos Reid Tsawwassen Area Plan public opinion survey. With respect to the "South lands", Council endorsed the following recommendation for consideration by the Committee: Retain the current policy and land use designation, as agricultural, for the Southlands. The Tsawwassen Area Plan Review Committee will report the recommendations for the new Tsawwassen Area Plan to Delta Council by August 30, 2010. Following this Council meeting, first and second reading of the bylaw for the new Tsawwassen Area Plan will take place along with a public hearing process. 322 Michele Harris

From: Lois Jackson Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 3:51 PM genda To: Mayor & Council A FILE # 1:30dD-dCffs,A i: Subject: FW: Tsawwassen OCP - re: ' Iinfill' rezoning TYPE: ~fqvvN( IrbmiDA DEP1: rEf\? -F~o"';: Joh;;-[mailt~-:;[email protected]~:~~~~~~;I~--""? ~tyiWi-~J-! . Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 3:42 PM I ~ ~,: To: Tsawwassen Area Plan Review; Mayor Lois Jackson; Robert Campbell; Scott Hamilton; Heather King; Bruce McDonald; [email protected] Subject: Tsawwassen OCP - re: ' linfill' rezoning

Madam Mayor. Councillors and Mr. Barry Konkin:

My wife and I live in Tsawwassen at 1275 - 52 Street and I wish to advise the Planning Committee that we are totally opposed to the rezoning of our own and adjacent properties to Multi-Family 20 upa. According to the draft plan our property falls within the area designated as 6916 and is the northern most lot to fall within the proposed Multi family area. I am aware that my property value has the potential to increase given re-zoning but the area does not need increased density.

My concerns are also based upon traffic congestion particularly with the proposals for rampant development of the Tsawwassen First Nation properties not to mention the Southlands - I was against that particular development 20 years ago and still am.

I do not want Tsawwassen or Delta as a whole to become yet another community blighted by urban sprawl - just look again at Surrey and Richmond, we do not need or want that Delta does not have the transit infrastructure to be a true Vancouver bedroom community and it never will - rapid transit to South Delta will never happen.

Please listen to the majority of Tsawwassen residents and not the blatantly profiteering property developers.

Regards,

John M. Horsfall ... The Tsawwassen Area Plan Committee has worked with staff to develop a draft land use map which outlines potential redevelopment opportunities in Delta. The land north of 12 Avenue from 55 Street to ___~_Inf( Brandrith Park has been proposed for re-designation from Single Family to Townhouse Residential. This proposal is in keeping with the recommendations of the Housing Task Force, would provide new housing options near schools and services, and would be supportive of locating higher densities in proximity to The message wa: the town centre. http://www.eset.< Details of the proposed land use changes will be presented formally to Council in a report from the Tsawwassen Area Plan Committee scheduled for the August 30, 2010 Regular Council Meeting. Following this Council meeting, first and second reading of the bylaw for the new Tsawwassen ------~.-.-----.-- • Area Plan will take place along with a public hearing process. This message is p, yo u have received L" "',,~-:-:,,-:::,c::~:::~=as;:;:c=n:C'~=,=, vC:,=, =1-'::::,c:::a:::~=c'7,::-,v~u:-;, y:-,:::,,::::,,'7 v=, =,,,=,,7:,,,:7, -:::~;::";-;IIu;-;";:;I~':-;IIC;;II;;fI e;=;u:;;,>ia,;;;e;;;,ymoy;;Um;;;, e;;p"'nvovn;;:e;-;o"'r:-;oC;;y"r;;;emw"r:;;n'e;;:m<;;a;;,', ----' and delete this message along with any attachments.

1 323 Michele Harris

From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 8: 18 PM To: Mayor & Council Subject: Delta Website - Comments, Compliments & Inquiril\ genda .n FILE # 00340 - ;;(0 ******Feedback Form Completed******

Directed To: Mayor Council

Response Requested

Comments: Could you tell me why Delta is not looking into alternatives with the Ministry of Agriculture regarding the use of propane cannons? It is absolutley absurd that in this day and age they are still in use. As blueberry farms increase so too does this disturbance. Not only that but who actually monitors their proper use? Thanlcs

Completed by : Don Sukkau

Address: 5688 Clark Drive

Phone Number: 6045971132

Email: sook5ia1dccnet.com .

In 2008/2009, the BC Farm Industry Review Board (BCFIRB) reviewed the issue

< of blueberry cannons used to protect blueberry crops. The BCFIRB concluded it could neither support a categorical ban on propane cannon use nor incorporate further restrictions in the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands' (MALs) guidelines on wildlife management. In February 2009, Delta modified its Noise Bylaw to incorporate BCFIRB and MALs most recent changes to guidelines on the use of bird scare devices. Staff will ensure that the BC Blueberry Council's Liaison Officer is advised of the writer's concerns.

1 324 Michele Harris

From: [email protected] genda Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 2:55 PM . FILE # ot.?Ao-aQ To: Mayor & Council A • ~ .. Subject: Delta Website - Comments, Compliments & Inquiries

•./,l ******Feedback Form Completed****** TYPE: UMu W&--4 v t Directed To: DEPT: C(tO . , t,~ 1 Mayor Council A.T. #: IOblSl Comments: /~ (bit 0 • Response Requested ~/f!edI~ Comments: I live in East Ladner and have done for 18 years. Although I love blueberries, I'm having a problem with the time in which the cannon's start on the weekends. After reading the bylaw on the times in which they can operate I see there isno comments regarding different times on weekends and weekdays. Couldn't council change the bylaw and put a note in there about weekend operation starting after 8:00am instead of 6:30am. Or better yet, why can't the farms close to residence use quieter methods all together. I have seen many farms use those bright reflective items as well as fake hawks that circle above. Construction noise bylaws distinguish between weekends and weekdays, couldn't the farming bylaw do the same?

Completed by : Sharon Wright

Address: 6458 Meadow Place Ladner, BC

Phone Number: 604-946-5437

Email: [email protected]

In 2008/2009, the BC Farm Industry Review Board (BCFIRB) reviewed the issue of blueb~rry cannons used to protect blueberry crops. The BCFIRB concluded it could neither ~UPP?rt a categorical ban on propane cannon use nor incor orate furth,er restrictions In the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands' (MALs) gUideli~es on ~lldilfe management. In February 2009, Delta modified its Noise B law to I~corporate BCFIRB and MALs most recent changes to guidelines on th: use of blr~ sc~re d~vlces. Staff will ensure that the BC Blueberry Counc'l' L" Officer IS adVised of the writer's concerns. I s lalson

1 genda A FILE # 01070 -it'S 325 Michele Harris

From: Don Hildebrand [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:03 AM To: Mayor & Council Subject: Service to the Public.

To anyone who cares to listen to its citizens:

We must change the government bureaucratic attitude toward its citizens.

Who is serving.who? Every time I deal with a government bureaucrat·1 feel like their attitude towards citizens is 'they are really being put out'. Government agencies give the impression they are in control and the bosses of the people and they are doing us such a favor and it is a privilege to have them, not a service they are being paid to provide.

No where would a business in the private sector be able to survive with such an attitude towards its customers.

And yes, I think the government attitude in general towards its citizens is awful.

First, all I need is a plumbing inspector to come and inspect rny plumbing. All done by a contractor etc with all the permits and reams of paper work and fees required. Do you think I could talk to an inspector on the phone as to when he might come out - no - between 9:00am and 3:30 is the best answer you can get. The worst thing is, you can't even get that vague answer from a person, just by guess and by golly from my contractors best guess. Try and phone one of these departments and have a conversation - you get dead ended with some recording that will get you no where.

Then the revenue people ccra want more hoops and time of mine to fill out more forms for some stupid rebate for home renovations, of which there are so many forms and hoops and fees to jump through it hardly makes it worth my time. But it is the attitude and the lack of willingness to participate and treat the citize'ns like tax paying citizens that bothers me .. Citizens are approached with such seeming authority like we are all axe murder suspects and need to prove our innocents.

Many more incidents of this I could go into to.

But then you hear of governments with scandals and millions if not 1 OO's of millions of dollars going missing and there is no receipts or accountability on a grand scale - but you all want my last dollar and insist I'm wholly accountable for proving where my last dollar is - and making me spend all kinds of time and money backing it up - and it seems. governments have the ability to track my every last dollar, but not their own.

Good article on the internet, so many and so easy to find - like the one on: "Sponsor-gate just one of many scandals."

Thanks, Don Hildebrand, P.Eng The letter writer installed a new kitchen sink and dishwasher, which received Rnal TEAFORD CANADA, INC. Inspection on JJly 29, 2010. Mr. Hildebrand's concerns have been discussed with Phone: 778-578-5665 inspectors and staff who book inspections to ensure that customer cells'requests . Cell: 604-910-5589 Fax: 888-59009845 are addressed in a timely and appropriate fashion. Rees for permits and . #234 c7164 - 120th Street, inspections are set by bylaw and have not been increased in several years. Surrey, BC, Canada V3W3M8 [email protected] www.teafordco.com

1 326 genda Michele Harris A FILE #01070-:'>-0 From: James Ronback [email protected]] Sent: Monday, July 26,20109:16 PM To: Mike Brotherston; Marcy Sang ret; Mayor & er"n~il Cc: Marc Eburne RASe LPA chair; Vicki Huntingl South Delta Leader Subject: Street lights around my home bother me A.T. #: \Q(Qo9sj. Comments: Dear Mayor and Council, frt1~ I ~110 ~Ci\.tO( tvW;hny . "1/ v BC Hydro has incentives for municipalities to improve the quality and efficiency of their street lighting. I am ion favour of this since street lights shine over the neighbouring houses and trespass into our bedrooms and backyard. In my area, the major street light trespass culprits are located near 1522 Baird Road, 1511 Kirkwood Road and 1542 Farrell Crescent. Something must be done to mitigate these disturbing light trespasses, light pollution, glare and waste of energy and its effect on climate change.

I currently have low wattage dark sky friendly lighting fixtures with motion detection at my front and rear entrances but that is not enough to allow me to enjoy the night sky. The light pollution, sky glow, glare and trespass from these neighbouring street lights also seriously hinder my ability to see awe inspiring deep sky objects like globular star .clusters and nebulae using my binoculars or telescope. The magnificent Milky Way is hardly visible.With the increasing levels of light pollution every year, I fear my grandchildren may never know what the Milky Way really looks like.

By retrofitting these street lights, there are Significant energy savings and happier residents that a sustainable Delta could enjoy. Under the BC Hydro Power Smart rebate program funds and resources are available. They are encouraging. municipalities to replace these street lights with more efficient full cutoff ones.

Flat lens streetlights do not cost much more than dropped lens streetlights. And with BC Hydro's incentives, they may actually cost less.

Through BC Hydro, if you replace an existing ...

* 150 watt high-pressure sodium streetlight with a 100 watt energy-efficient high­ pressure sodium streetlight with a flat lens, you will receive $100; * 150 watt metal halide streetlight with a 100 watt energy-efficient high-pressure sodium streetlight with a flat lens, you will receive $80; . * 175 watt mercury vapour streetlight with a 100 watt energy-efficient high-pressure sodium streetlight with a flat lens, you will receiVe $120; * 175 watt metal halide streetlight with a 150 watt energy-efficient high-pressure sodium streetlight with a flat lens, you will receive $20; * 200 watt high-pressure sodium streetlight with a 150 watt energy-efficient high­ pressure sodium streetlight with a flat lens, you will receive $100; * 250 watt high-pressure sodium streetlight with a 150 watt energy-efficient high­ pressure sodium streetlight with a flat lens, you will rei::eive$150; * 250 watt mercury vapour streetlight with a 150 watt energy-efficient high-pressure sodium streetlight with.a flat lens, you will receive $150; * 250 watt metal halide streetlight with a 150 watt energy-efficient high-pressure sodium streetlight with a flat lens, you will receive $130.

The above incentives include retrofit kits. All new energy-efficient luminaires must meet required IESNA and/or applicable federal, provincial or municipal codes. In my case, these 1 improved street lights may still require additional shielding to prevent the light spilling onto my property, especially into the bedrooms and the back deck.

Anything Delta council can do to replace these lights, reduce green house gasses and mitigate this light trespass problem would be appreciated.

Yours under clear dark night skies,

Jim Ronback, P.Eng. (retired) 1530 Kirkwood Road Tsawwassen, BC V4L 1G1

604 948 1589

BC Hydro Power Smart rebates for municipalities http://www.bchydro.com/news/articles/conservation/power smart rebates.html http://www.bchydro.com/powersmart/ps communities/local government/program overview.html

Product Incentive Program for businesses http://www.bchydro.com/rebates savings/product incentive program.html

The following web sites give a heads up on a new bylaw/ ordinance template that Delta should use for their Lighting Bylaw.

The 2nd draft of a Model Lighting bylaw/ordinance (MLO) by Illuminating Engineer Society and the International Dark-Sky Association has been issued for public comment until Aug 23, 2010 http://www.darksky.org/mc/page.do?sitePageId-84399&orgId-idsa http://docs.darksky.org/MLO/2010/MLOdraft19July.pdf http://docs.darksky.org/MLO/2010/MLO Public Comment Form-6-2010.doc

Delta as an active participant of the BCHydro Fbwer Snarl rebate program replaoesstreet lights with more effective cutoff fittings on a regular basis in our street lighting program. S:aff will respond to the requestor.

2 327

1600 - 4720 Kingsway Burnaby, BC V5H 4N2 ,--: Canada Tel 604-453-4500 Fax 604-453-4626 d www.translink.bc.ca ~:t:: A ~~~E ~OI),tta-dD -Gt\fsT~ Coast British COlumbi;: Transportation Authority ".~,

,'.. j I 'TYPE: gtf/IJvlli-Mfl\')Qj '.', DePT:J:~ A.T. #: IDW8]- July 26,2010 Comments: I\\lbI.19jn briO IZRell\ttV Mfth~

VIA COURIER

Mayor Lois Jackson Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, BC V4K 3E2

Dear Mayor Jackson:

In compliance with the requirements of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act (the "Act"), please find enclosed the 2011 Base plan and Outlook entitled the "Funding Stabilization Update" and the associated bylaws and resolutions in relation to revenue measures and borrowing limits.

The plan was approved by the TransLink Board of Directors on July 15, 2010 and is also being forwarded to the Regional Transportation Commissioner for his review. In accordance with the Act, the Regional Transportation Commissioner will render his opinion on the reasonableness of the assumptions and parameters contained in the 2011 Base Plan and Outlook by August 31, 2010.

Yours truly,

Carol Lee Corporate Secretary

Enclosures

On July 15, 2010, TransLink's Board of Directors approved the Base Plan for 2011· h' h d sup t ddT If d' ,W IC oes not f t por a d. 1 lona un mg be~ond previously approved tax and fare increases. According to Translink ' u ure f un mg supplements WIll be needed to increase mode share for transit cycling and walkin ' .. beyond 2012. " g ACKNOWLEDGED I)ATI,t~ &740 2011 BASE PLAN AND OUTLOOK ASSOCIATED BYLAWS AND RESOLUTIONS

Section 1 Current and Proposed Transit Tariff Bylaws

Section 2 Proposed Property Tax Bylaws

Section 3 Proposed Replacement Tax Bylaws

Section 4 Current Parking Sales Tax Bylaw

Section 5 Current Motor Fuel Tax Bylaw

Section 6 Current Golden Ears Bridge Tolling Bylaw

Section 7 Current Borrowing Resolution This page is left blank intentionally SECTION 1-CURRENT AND PROPOSED TRANSIT TARIFF BYLAWS This page is left blank intentionally SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

BYLAW NUMBER 67-2010

A bylaw to amend the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2010 Tariff Amendment Bylaw Number 63-2010

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enact as follows:

1. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2010 Tariff Amendment Bylaw Number 67-2010";

2. The attached South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Transit Tariff is part ofthis bylaw.

3. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on April 1, 2010.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this 24th day of March, 2010.

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this 24th day of March, 2010.

Original signed by Dale Parker Dale Parker, Board Chair

Original signed by Carol Lee Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

(TRANSLINK)

TRANSIT TARIFF

Effective April 1, 2010 This Tariff is available for public inspection at:

I. TransLink Head Office, 1600 -4720 Kingsway, Burnaby Transit Police Office, 307 Columbia Street, New Westminster

2. The following Coast Mountain Bus Company Ltd. offices:

• Head Office, 13401 - 108th Avenue, Surrey • Vancouver Transit Centre, 9149 Hudson Street, Vancouver • Burnaby Transit Centre, 3750 Kitchener Street, Burnaby • North Vancouver Transit Centre, 536 East 3rd Street, North Vancouver • Surrey Transit Centre, 7740 132nd Street, Surrey • Port Coquitlam Transit Centre, 2061 Kingsway, Port Coquitlam • SeaBus Administration Office, 2 Chesterfield Place, North Vancouver

3. West Vancouver Transit, 221 Lloyd Avenue, North Vancouver

4. British Columbia Rapid Transit Company Ltd., 6800 - 14th A venue, Burnaby

5. West Coast Express Limited, 295 - 601 West Cordova Street, Vancouver

6. HandyDART Operator - MVT Canadian Bus Inc., 17535 - 55B Avenue, Surrey

7. TransLink Website: www.translink.ca TRANSLINK';"TRANSIT TARIFF Date: 'Aprjl2010

PART A-Defihitions , Page: 3

PART A- DEFINITIONS

In this Tariff the following tenns will have the following meanings:

Add-Fare Additional fare amount as required by this Tariff.

Adult Person who is not a Child, Student or Senior.

Adult Fare Fare required to: (i) obtain the Adult Transfer required to travel on Conventional Transit for the applicable Hours and Zones, as set out in Appendix "2"; (ii) obtain an Adult WCE One-Way Ticket to travel on WCE Service, for the applicable Hours and Zones, as set out in Appendix "2"; (iii) pay the cash fare required to travel on HandyDART, for the applicable Zones, as set out in Appendix ~'2"; and (iv) travel between Canada Line Bridgeport and Templeton Stations, as set out in Appendix "2" as an Add-Fare, in addition to one of the fares described in paragraphs (i), (ii) or (iii) above.

Attendant A person who is required io accompany and assist an Eligible HandyDART User in using HandyDART service or a HandyCard Holder in using Conventional Transit or WCE Service.

Bowen Island Transit Transit service operated by or on behalf of TransLink on Bowen Island. Service

Business Day Any day other than a Saturday, Sunday, or Statutory Holiday.

Child Person who is 13 years of age or younger.

Community Pass A person who: Holder (i) is a resident of a community which has entered into a written Community Pass agreement with TransLink; and (ii) has completed TransLink's enrolment fonns and been issued a Community Pass.

Conventional Transit Transit service provided by or on behalf of TransLink in the Transportation Service Region, except WCE Service, HandyDART service, and Canada Line service between Bridgeport and Templeton Stations. '

Eligible Employer Person who: Pass Holder (i) is employed by an employer that has signed an Employer Pass Program Agreement with TransLink; and (ii) has completed TransLink's enrolment process.

Eligible HandyDART Person who: User (i) has a temporary or pennanent physical or cognitive disability, confirmed by a medical practitioner, that is sufficiently severe that he or she is unable, without assistance, to use Conventional Transit; and iRANSUNK- TRANSIT TARIFF . Date: April 2010 PART A - Definitions Page: 4

(ii) has completed TransLink's registration process.

Employee Person who is: Pass Holder (i) an employee of TransLink or TransLink subsidiary; (ii) a spouse or dependant child of an employee described in subsection (i); (iii) a retired, former full-time employee ofTransLink or TransLink sUbsidiary who retired after 2 years of employment (or who, after 5 or more years of employment, ceased employment by reason of medically proven total disability); (iv) a retired, former full-time employee ofBC Transit who retired prior to April I, 1999; (v) a spouse of a person described in paragraph (iii) or (iv) above; (vi) a full-time employee of a HandyDART Operating Company; or (vii) an employee of an Operating Company that has been designated and approved by TransLink as eligible for Employee Passes; and has been issued an Employee Pass.

Fare Paid Zones All transit vehicles (including buses, SeaBuses, SkyTrain cars and WCE cars) and other transit property deSignated as "fare paid zones" from time to time by TransLink.

FareDealer TransLink-authorized vendor of FareCards, FareSavers, and DayPasses.

FastTrax Student Person registered as a student at one of the following public post-secondary educational institutions (which have entered into an agreement with TransLink to participate in the FastTrax program) and who has a valid TransLink FastTrax decal affixed to his or her student card: • British Columbia Institute of Technology • Douglas College • Emily Carr Institute of Art ·and Design • Institute ofindigenous Government • K wantlen University College • Native Education Centre • Pacific Marine Institute • Vancouver Community College.

GoCard Identification card issued by TransLink which displays a Student's photograph, name and school and validated, in the space provided, by an official of the school.

HandyCard Holder Resident of the Transportation Service Region who: (i) is a person with a permanent physical or cognitive disability, confirmed by a medical practitioner, which is sufficiently severe that he or she is unable, without assistance, to use Conventional Transit; and (ii) has completed TransLink's registration process and been issued a HandyCard. TRANSLlNK- TRANSit tARIFf' ...... Date: April 2010

PART A - Definitlon~ Page: $

HandyDART Custom transit service, which provides Eligible HandyDART Users with accessible service from a pick-up location to a drop-off location, in accordance with the policies, procedures and guidelines ofTransLink's Custom Transit Policy·& Procedure Manual.

Hours Regular Hours and Off-Peak Hours.

Mobility Device Wheelchair or scooter required by a passenger with a physical disability.

Off-Peak Hours Hours of service after 6:30 p.m. from Monday to Friday (excluding Statutory Holidays), and all day on Saturday, Sunday and Statutory Holidays.

Operating Company Company, including a subsidiary ofTransLink, operating transit service on behalf of TransLink.

Proof of Payment TransLink fare media or personal identification designated as Proof of Payment in Appendix "2".

Regular Honrs Hours of service other than Off-Peak Hours.

Senior A person who is 65 years of age or older and holds: (i) a Gold Carecard issued by the Province of BC; (ii) a valid driver's license, passport, birth certificate indicating date of birth; (iii) a Health and Welfare Canada Old Age Security Identification Card; or (iv) equivalent picture identification issued by any national, provincial or state government agency showing age or date of birth.

SkyTrain Rail rapid transit service on the Expo Line, Millennium Line, and Canada Line.

Statutory Holidays New Year's Day, Good Friday, Victoria Day, Canada Day, BC Day, Labour Day, Thanksgiving Day, Remembrance Day, Christmas Day and Boxing Day.

Student Person, other than a Child, who: (i) at the start of the school year is in grade 8, or is between the ages of 14 and 19 years (inclusive); (ii) regularly attends full-time classes at a public or private school up to and including Grade 12 in the Transportation Service Region or, for the purposes ofWCE Service, in the Central Fraser Valley transit service area; and (iii) holds a valid GoCard or, for WCE service, other valid student identification.

TaxiSaver Coupons Coupons that may be: (i) purchased by HandyCard Holders from TransLink at 50% of the face value of the coupons; and (ii) used by HandyCard Holders to pay their metered taxi fare, up to the face value of the coupons, when travelling on taxis operated by participating taxi companies in the Transportation Service Region. TRANSLlNK~ TRANSliiARIFF Date: Aj)riI2010 .• ·.. PART A -Definitions page: .6

Transit Employee Employee of TransLink or an Operating Company, or an employee of an agent or contractor of TransLink or its subsidiary.

Transit Police South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Police Service.

TransLink South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority.

TransLink POP Proof of Payment issued by or on behalf of TransLink.

Transportation All municipalities and rural areas located within the Greater Vancouver Regional Service Region District.

U-Pass Student Student who: (i) is attending a post-secondary educational institution that has entered into a written agreement with TransLink to participate in a U-Pass program; and (ii) has been issued a valid U-Pass.

WCE West Coast Express Limited, a subsidiary ofTransLink.

WCE Service Commuter transit service provided by WCE between Vancouver and Mission utilizing rail service or bus service known as "TrainBus."

Zones Designated fare zones for Conventional Transit, WCE Service, and HandyDART service as shown in Appendix" I" of this Tariff. TRANS~INK~ TfRANIilFFTARIPP .... Date: April 2010·

PART H~Terms ana Conaitions·· . . Page: T .

PART B - TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. APPLICABILITY

(a) The terms and conditions contained in this Tariff are applicable to transit services operated by or on behalf of TransLink within the Transportation Service Region and WCE Service in the City of Mission.

2. ENFORCEABILITY

(a) This Tariffis authorized by and made pursuant to the Be South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

(b) Any Transit Employee may exercise all of the rights ofTransLink under this Tariff and enforce all provisions of this Tariff.

3. SERVICE DELIVERY/NON-GUARANTEE

(a) Transit services operated by or on or behalf of Trans Link are under continuous review and subject to change. While efforts are made to advise the public of service revisions and schedule adjustments, TransLink does not undertake or guarantee that any transit service will be operated in accordance with published timetables and notices, or at all.

(b) Further, TransLink does not undertake or guarantee that HandyDAR T service will be operated in accordance with scheduled reserved trips, or at all.

(c) TransLink, its subsidiaries, and their Boards of Directors and employees, are not responsible for any loss, damage or inconvenience caused by any operating failure, transit service disruption or any lack of or delay in transit service.

4. REFUSAL OF TRANSPORTATION

(a) TransLink reserves the right to refuse to carry in any transit vehicle, or cause to be removed fmm any transit vehicle, Fare Paid Zone or other transit property:

(i) any person who is sick, intoxicated, boisterous, disorderly or profane, or who for any other reason may be offensive or dangerous or pose a risk to others or their property; (ii) any person who does not tender the required fare or does not possess and present a valid Proof of Payment; (iii) any passenger with a Mobility Device that a Transit Employee considers unsafe; (iv) anything (including baggage) that, in the sale opinion of a Transit Employee, might cause inconvenience to others, soil or damage transit property, or represent a safety hazard; or (v) any person who does not comply with the terms and conditions of this Tariff.

5. REQUIREMENT TO PAY FARE AND POSSESS PROOF OF PAYMENT

(a) Except as otherwise permitted by this Tariff, all persons (other than Transit Employees acting in the course of duty) boarding a transit vehicle or entering a Fare Paid Zone must: (i) pay an Adult Fare before boarding a transit vehicle or entering a Fare Paid Zone; TRANSLINK - TRANSIT TARIFF Date: April 2010 PART B - Terms and Conditions ... Page:s .

(ii) obtain valid Proof of Payment for an Adult Fare before boarding a transit vehicle or entering a Fare Paid Zone; (iii) possess valid Proof of Payment for an Adult Fare for the entire duration of his or her journey; and (iv) present valid Proof of Payment for an Adult Fare to any Transit Employee upon request.

Failure to do so may result in fines being levied pursuant to the Be South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

(b) Except as permitted by this Tariff, Proof of Payment is not transferable and must not be used by any person, unless it was purchased for use by such person at the required fare. Use of Proof of Payment by any person other than to whom it was issued or by whom it was purchased is considered fraudulent use of the Proof of Payment.

(c) Any TransLink POP is the property ofTransLink, may be cancelled by TransLink at any time, and must be surrendered to TransLink or a Transit Employee upon request.

(d) Proof of Payment is invalid if mutilated, altered, taped, waxed, validated more than once, modified in any manner, or expired.

(e) Ifa Transit Employee is of the opinion that Proof of Payment is being used fraudulently or improperly by any passenger, the passenger must immediately surrender the Proof of Payment to the Transit Employee upon request and pay an Adult Fare prior to continuing his or her journey. The passenger will not be entitled to any refund of payment or other compensation.

6. FARES OTHER THAN ADULT FARES

(a) The persons described in Table" I" of Appendix "2" are entitled to use the forms of Proof of Payment described in snch table, in accordance with the conditions and restrictions set out therein.

(b) Any passenger paying a fare other than an Adult Fare, presenting Proof of Payment for a fare other than an Adult Fare, or presenting a non-transferable Proof of Payment, must present evidence of eligibility for, or entitlement to, such fare or Proof of Payment to a Transit Employee upon request. The evidence must be satisfactory to any Transit Employee who requests such evidence.

(c) A Transit Employee is entitled to seize any TransLink POP if he or she is not satisfied as to the validity of the identification produced as proof of eligibility for any fare other than an Adult Fare, or as to the identity of the holder as being the person indicated on such identification. After seizure, an Adult Fare must be paid. Where such identification is issued by or on behalf of TransLink, such identification must be surrendered to the Transit Employee upon request.

(d) TransLink reserves the right to withhold TransLink POP from any person who has not complied with the terms ofthis Tariff or has previously been required to surrender a TransLink POP. TRANSUNK - TRANSIT TARIf;F Date: Apri(2010

PART B ~Term$andCon.ditions Page: 9. L-__~~~~~~~~ ______~ ______L- ______~~~ ....

7. ADD-FARES

(a) Passengers may upgrade any Proof of Payment for travel in additional fare zones or on additional transit service by paying, in advance, an Add-Fare equivalent to the difference in fares. An Add­ Fare receipt may be obtained from a ticket vending machine, a transit bus operator, or WCE Office (for WCE Service) upon payment of the required Add-Fare amount. The original Proof of Payment and the Add-Fare receipt must be retained together as upgraded Proof of Payment.

8. EXEMPTIONS FROM PAYMENTmrSCOUNTS

(a) The persons described in Table "2" of Appendix "2" are entitled to the exemptions described in such table, in accordance with the conditions and restrictions set out therein.

(b) The TransLink Board of Directors may, from time to time, reduce the fares required to be paid by this Tariff on selected days and for a limited number of days to promote the introduction of new transit services, to encourage the use of specific transit services, or to facilitate travel for special or seasonal events without the necessity of amending this Tariff to reflect such temporary fare modification.

(c) TransLink and its subsidiaries may, from time to time, provide Proof of Payment at no charge to specified persons or groups for promotional purposes, service recovery, fare replacement, or advertising.

(d) TransLink may, upon request and subject to eligibility, provide up to 4 one-zone FareCards at no charge to educational institutions for use by an educator in providing ~nstruction in the use of transit, as part of a special program to persons with mental disabilities. Any other use of such FareCards is not permitted.

(e) TransLink will provide Conventional Transit FareCards (18 months of Concession FareCards, 12 months of I Zone Adult FareCards, 9 months of 2 Zone Adult FareCards, or 6 months of 3 Zone Adult FareCards) at no charge, to participants in the Provincial SCRAP-IT Program as agreed between TransLink and the Province.

(I) TransLink may, upon request and subject to eligibility, provide Proof of Payment at no charge to Police Departments within the Transportation Service Region for use by undercover police officers while on duty. Requests should be directed to Transit Police.

(g) TransLink has absolute discretion in making decisions regarding fare reductions, stored value card bonuses or provision of Proof of Payment at no charge, under this Tariff.

(h) If TransLink chooses to offer stored value cards in relation to WCE Service, TransLink may add a bonus of up to 20% on the card 'for each dollar paid and loaded onto the card. The bonus value may be applied toward the purchase ofWCE Bicycle Passes, WCE One-Way Tickets or WCE Return Tickets where a stored val ue card is used to make the purchase.

9. PURCHASE OF PROOF OF PAYMENT AND G02CARDS

(a) Conventional Transit - FareSavers, FareCards and DayPasses may only be purchased directly from TransLink, an Operating Company or a FareDealer. TRANSUNK -TRANSIT TARIFF Date: April2010 PART 13- Tern1s. and

(b) WCE Service - All WCE Service Proof of Payment, except quarterly bicycles passes, are available for purchase from WCE ticket vending machines and the WCE office. Quarterly bicycle passes are available for purchase from the WCE office and other locations designated by WCE from time to time.

(c) HandyDART - Adult FareSavers, FareCards, and DayPasses may only be purchased directly from TransLink, an Operating Company or a FareDealer.

(d) TaxiSaver Coupons - Each month, a HandyCard Holder is eligible to purchase TaxiSaver Coupons, with a face value of up to $100, through the mail from:

Access Transit Office 1340 I - 108th Avenue Surrey, BC V3T 5T4

10. FARE PAYMENT ON VEHICLES AND AT STATIONS

(a) Bus Service - Cash payment for Transfers On bus service must be paid using exact change in Canadian funds and deposited in fareboxes. Upon payment of the required fare, a Transfer will be dispensed and must be retained as Proof of Payment.

(b) SkyTrain and SeaBus - Cash fares or debit/credit transactions for SkyTrain and SeaBus service must be paid in Canadian funds at ticket vending machines. Upon payment of the required fare, a Transfer will be dispensed and must be retained as Proof of Payment.

(c) WCE Service - Cash fares or debit/credit transactions for WCE Service must be paid in Canadian funds at WCE ticket vending machines. Upon payment of the required fare, a WCE Ticket will be dispensed and must be retained as Proof of Payment.

(d) HandyDART Service - Cash payment for fares on HandyDART service must be paid using exact change in Canadian funds and given to the driver.

11. FARESAVER VALIDATION

(a) A FareSaver must be validated in the farebox when boarding a bus or in a ticket validation unit prior to boarding a SeaBus or SkyTrain or otherwise entering a Fare Paid Zone. A validated FareSaver must be retained as Proof of Payment.

(b) If a HandyDART passenger intends to transfer to Conventional Transit, his or her FareSaver must be validated by the HandyDART driver upon boarding the HandyDART vehicle. A validated FareSaver must be retained as Proof of Payment While travelling on Conventional Transit.

12. INSUFFICIENT FARE .

(a) TransLink reserves the righ~ in its absolute discretion, to issue a fare deferral receipt in emergency or exceptional circumstances where a passenger is unable to tender all or part of the required fare, provided such passenger presents valid identification and signs the fare deferral receipt form agreeing to pay the amount owing to TransLink by the date specified. The fare deferral receipt is valid Proof of Payment for the remainder of the passenger's journey. .... TRANSUNK- TRANSIT TARIFF .... iDate( • April 2010 •

PART B - Terms and Conditions . .. . Page: 11 I ... I

(b) Failure to remit the required fare in accordance with the fare deferral receipt or repeated requests for a fare deferral may result in refusal or suspension of transit service to the individual.

13. FARE DISPUTE

(a) If a Transit Employee is not satisfied with the validity of a Proof of Payment or identification demonstrating eligibility for any fare other than an Adult Fare, passengers must pay an Adult Fare and obtain Proof Payment for an Adult Fare before continuing their journey. Such passengers may subsequently dispute the Transit Employee's determination by writing to:

For WeE service: For all other fare disputes:

West Coast Express TransLink Suite 295 - 601 West Cordova Street 1600 - 4720 Kingsway Vancouver BC Bumaby,BC V6B IGI V5H4N2

14. REFUND POLICY

(a) No requests for refunds, other than those described in this s. 14, will be considered or granted by TransLink.

(b) TransLink's Revenue Operations Department will consider, and in its absolute discretion may grant, requests for refunds for FareCards if: (i) transit service is completely shut down for at least 3 consecutive Business Days (Monday to Friday) in anyone month, in which event a prorated discount may be applied to the purchase of a FareCard for the next month upon presentation and surrender ofthe previous month's FareCard; (ii) a FareCard cannot be used due to illness, as substantiated in writing by a medical practitioner, in which event a prorated refund may be paid, by cheque, calculated from the date the FareCard is physically surrendered to TransLink or the post-marked date for a FareCard returned by mail; or (iii) a FareCard is physically surrendered to TransLink for refund (or exchange) prior to the first day of the month for which the FareCard is valid.

(c) WCE will consider, and in its absolute discretion may grant, requests for refunds for WCE One­ Way Tickets, Return Tickets, Weekly Passes, or 28 Day Passes if: (i) an unscheduled cancellation ofWCE Service occurs, in which event an extension or partial refund of the prepaid Proof of Payment may be granted upon presentation of the Proof of Payment rendered unusable by such cancellation; (ii) a WCE pre-paid Proof of Payment cannot be used due to illness, as substantiated in writing by a medical practitioner, in which event an extension or partial refund may be granted; (iii) a WCE pre-paid Proof of Payment cannot be used due to unforeseen circumstances such as job loss, change in job location, bereavement or other hardship circumstances as determined by WCE, in which event an extension or partial refund may be granted; or (iv) a passenger, who wished to travel within additional zones, had to purchase an additional full Adult Fare from the ticket vending machine in order to travel the extra zone, in which TRANSUNK~ TRANSIT TARIFF Date: April 2010 PART B - Terms and Conditions Page: 12

event a prorated refund may be made on presentation of the pre-paid Proof of Payment and the full Adult Fare Proof of Payment.

(d) TransLink will (through the Access Transit Office) refund expired TaxiSaver coupons at 50% of face value.

15. ACCESSIBILITY

(a) Wheelchair accessible. transit vehicles, including HandyDART vehicles, will accommodate Mobility Devices provided the following guidelines are met:

(i) Mobility Devices: • must be safe and well maintained with functioning brakes; • must not carry any aerials, flagpoles or other projections which could injure others or interfere with the securement of the Mobility Device; • must have secure and suitably located compartments to which securement straps can be attached (passengers must ensure that securement straps do not cause damage to the Mobility Device); • must be secured only at designated locations on the transit vehicle; • for HandyDART service, must have escort handles if passengers require assistance to board HandyDART vehicles; (ii) Wheelchair lifts: • Conventional Transit buses (including community shuttle) - combined weight of the Mobility Device and passenger must not exceed 205 kgs, and Mobility Device must be smaller than 61 cm wide x 122 cm long; • HandyDART - combined weight of the Mobility Device, passenger and HandyDART driver must not exceed 364 kgs, and Mobility Device must be smaller than 94 cm wide and 122 cm long; (iii) passengers in electric Mobility Devices are responsible for controlling the movement of the Mobility Device to ensure safe loading and un-loading.

16. CARRIAGE OF SPECIFIC GOODS

(a) Animals - TransLink has no obligation to carry any animals except assistance animals recognized by the BC Guide Animal Act which are assisting or being trained by an accredited animal training school. Small pets, including dogs, cats, rabbits and small fur bearing or feathered pets, may be permitted on Conventional Transit vehicles provided they are in hand held cages.

(b) Bicycles and Other Personal Transportation Devices - Two wheeled bicycles, having a maximum length of73 inches (185 cm), are permitted on Conventional Transit and WCE cars in accordance with this Tariff, any rules established by TransLink from time to time, and any posted signs. Bicycle trailers are not permitted. TransLink reserves the right to restrict the carriage of bicycles at any time, in its absolute discretion. No motorized bicycles or other personal transportation devices are permitted except as set out in this Tariff or in accordance with rules established by TransLink or posted signs.

Buses - Bicycles are permitted on exterior bike racks of buses at no additional charge. Passengers travelling with bicycles are reqUired to load and unload the bicycles. TRANSUNK - fRANSfffARIFF . .... Dale: April :2010 PARTS - TermsandConditio:ns . Page: 13

SeaBus - Bicycles are pennitted on SeaBus at no. additional charge. Passengers with bicycles must enter the SeaBus through the doorway closest the stem (rear) section.

weE - WCE service may carry up to two bicycles per car; provided the charge set out in Appendix "2" is paid and Proof of Payment is retained.

Sky Train - Bicycles are pennitted in SkyTrain cars at no additional charge, and are limited to two bikes per car.

17. PRIVATE CHARTER SERVICE

(a) Transit vehicles (with operator or driver) may be chartered at the absolute discretion of TransLink, provided that TransLink's ability to provide public transit service will not be adversely affected or the transit vehicle is not otherwise required. TransLink reserves the right, in its absolute discretion, to refuse any request for charter service. TransLink will require a written agreement and may require pre-payment of fees and/or payment of a damage deposit prior to . providing the charter service.

(b) Minimum rates and charges for charter service are set out in Table "3" of Appendix "2". TransLink reserves the right, in its absolute discretion, to charge a higher charter rate if limited availability of labour or transit vehicles increases TransLink's cost to provide charter service. Charter rates will be calculated from the time the transit vehicle leaves its depot or garage until it is returned to the same depot or garage. Charter service cancelled by the charterer with fewer than 12 hours notice will be subject to the cancellation fee set out in Appendix "2".

(c) Despite the rates set out in Appendix "2", where public institutIons require charter service in excess oftwo consecutive weeks, charter rates will be calculated based on the actual cost of providing the charter service less any fare revenue accruing to TransLink for providing such charter service, as specified in the written charter agreement. TAANSLiNK - TRANSIT TARIFF Date: . APPENDIX "1" - FARE ZONES

APPENDIX "I"

FARE ZONES

Conventional Transit

Zone 1 City of Vancouver University Endowment Lands

Zone 2 District of West Vancouver District of North Vancouver City of North Vancouver City of Burnaby Bus stops located on Barnet Highway at the Petro-Canada refinery City of New Westminster Common Fare Zone on North Road for bus stops located between Cottonwood Avenue and Highway #1 Annacis Island (common zone for trips as described below "Suburban Zone Boundary (Zones 2 and 3)") City of Richmond Village ofLions Bay Bowen Island

Zone 3 Corporation of Delta, except Annacis Island City of Surrey City of White Rock City of Langley Township of Langley Village of BeIcarra Village of Anrnore Electoral Area "c" east of Indian Arm City of Port Moody City of Coquitlarn City of Port Coquitlarn District of Pitt Meadows District of Maple Ridge

Common Fare Zones

Certain designated locations of fare zones along fare zone boundaries have been classified as common to each adjacent zone. Passengers are permitted travel to/from such designated common fare zone locations for a I-Zone Fare.

Urban Zone Boundary (Zone 1 and Zone 2) - Passengers connecting between the following bus stops and destinations along the #28 bus route may travel for a I-Zone fare. Kootenay Loop To Zone I Hastings at Boundary To BurnabyfNew Westminster in Zone 2 Boundary at Lougheed to/from Zone I, or to/from BurnabyfNew Westminster in Zone 2 Kincaid at Smith: to/from BurnabyfNew Westminster in Zone 2 T~ANSLfNK~ TRANSIT TARIFF ,Date:,' April 2010 APPENDIX "l"~FARE ZONES , , J";;lge: 15 " "

Boundary and Vanness to/from Zone 2, by walking to/from Kingsway on Boundary Road; Joyce Station: all Zone 1 bus service and westbound SkyTrain service

Regular fares are applicable for any other connections

Suburban Zone Boundary (Zones 2 and 3) ~ Passengers travelling between Annacis lsland and eitber Fare Zone 2 or Fare Zone 3 are permitted to travel for a one-zone fare.

Passengers connecting from all bus stops on North Road between Cottonwood Avenue and the Highway #1 overpass (including the Lougheed Mall transit exchange) are permitted to travel into either Zone 2 or Zone 3 for a I-Zone Fare.

Starting Destination Fare Point Cash FareSaver FareCard 1-Zone FareCard identified as Zone "3" 1-Zone FareCard identified as Zone "2" Zone 3 I-Zone Fare 1-Zone FareSaver Jllus $1.25 Add-Fare I-Zone FareCard identified as Zone" I" Lougheed plus $2.50Add-Fare Mall I-Zone FareCard identified as Zone "2" I-Zone FareCard identified as Zone "I" Zone 2 I-Zone Fare I-Zone FareSaver plus $1.25 Add-Fare I-Zone FareCard identified as Zone" I" plus $1.25 AddcFare . , TRANSUNK ~ TRANSIT TARI Ff= . Date: April 2010

APPENDIX "1" - FARE ZONES .. Page: 16

Conventional Transit - Fare Zone Map TRANSLfNK~ TRANSn 'tARIFF ...... Date: April20'to .

... APPENDIX "1" ~ FARE ZONES .... Page: 17

HandyDART - Fare Zone Map

.':• :t.anglll;¥ l- .,., • • ---- .. -.... --.~-..

HandyDART

Zone 1 City of Vancouver University Endowment Lands

Zone 2 District of North Vancouver Distri ct of West Vancouver City of North Vancouver

Zone 3 City of Burnaby

Zone 4 City of New Westminster (including Queensborough) City ofCoquitlam City of Port Coquitlam City of Port Moody Village of Anmore Village of Belcarra . TRANSUNK ~ TRANSIT TARIFF Date: April2lJ10 APPENDIX ,,1 "-'-FARE ZONES Page: 18

Zone 5 City of Riclunond

Zone 6 North Surrey (north of Colebrook Road)

Zone 7 Corporation of Delta (Tsawwassen, Ladner, North Delta, Annacis Island)

Zone 8 City of Langley Township of Langley South Surrey (Colebrook Road and South) City of White Rock

Zone 9 District of Pitt Meadows District of Maple Ri,dge

Zone 10 (not shown on above map) Horseshoe Bay, Lion's Bay (Bowen Island excluded) TRANSLlNK'-- TRANSIT TARIFF ·Dafe;· Aprtl2010 APPENDIX"1" - FARE ZONES·F'!jge: 19 L-~~~ ______~~ ______~ ______~ ____~ ____~~ __~I

West Coast Express

Zone I Vancouver station (Waterfront station) Zone 2 Burnaby [no station yet]; Zone 3 Port Moody, Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam stations; Zone 4 Pitt Meadows, Maple Meadows and Port Haney stations; Zone 5 Mission station.

West Coast Express - Fare Zone Map

, APPENDIX "2" - FARES AND PROOF OF PAYMENT

Table "1" - Cash Fares and Proof of Payment

-- ValiditvlConditions Canada Line Proof of Payment or Fare or Cost- Fare or Cost- Trans~ YVR Add·Fare - Eligible Person fer· Cash Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Conventional West Coast HandyDART (10 Travel Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and Templeton . . Stations***

: '. Cpn.ventjonaJTran,.it(:iZon~s);·, . ··.L .' .'...... "" . ..'. .,''J' .,.;••..• ;.. : . BC Transit Employee An employee of BC Transil NIA No Valid for unlimited Not valid Not valid No Add·Fare Pass~ who displays a valid BC travel through all required Transit employee pass Zones BC Transit Eligible person, as NIA No Valid for unlimited Not valid Not valid No Add·Fare Government Bus determined by the Province travel through all required Pass .. of BC, who displays a valid Zones Government Bus Pass issued byBC Transit Canada Post Postal carrier employed by NIA No Valid for travel Not valid Not valid Add·Fare Corporation Postal Canada Post Corporation, through all Zones required*"** Carrier - Uniform" while in uniform between the hours of 5:00 a,m, and 6:00 p,m, on Business Days, to the extent required for postal route only CNIB 10 Card' Person with vision NIA No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid No Add·Fare impairment who displays Zones required valid identification issued by the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB) Community Passu Community Pass Holder All Zones - fare of $395,00 per year No Valid for unlimited $2,50 credit toward Not valid No Add·Fare (calendar year) who displays a valid travel through all WCE applicable required Community Pass Zones fare DayPass - Adult Purchaser who displays a All Zones - fare of $9,00 No Valid for unlimited $2,50 credit toward Valid for an Eligible No Add·Fare DayPass" (on valid Adult DayPass travel through all WCE applicable HandyDART User required Zones fare -"pecifieddatel __ -

April 1, 2010 Page 1 Validity/Conditions Canada Line YVR Add·Fare Trans~ Proof of Payment or Fare or Cost - Fare or Cost - - Travel Eligible Person fer· Conventional West Coast HandyDART (10 Cash Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and I Templeton Stations*** '------Jb ------~ -

DayPass - Concession Child, Student, Senior or All Zones - fare of $7.00 No Valid for unlimited $1.75 credit toward Not valid No Add·Fare OayPass** HandyCard Holder who Iravellhrough all WCE applicable required (on specified date) displays a valid Concession Zones fare DavPass Employee Pass" (until Employee Pass Holder who N/A No Valid for unlimited travellhrough all Valid for an Eligible No Add·Fare revoked or expired) displays a valid Employee Zones HandyDART User required Pass Employer Pass" Eligible Employer Pass 1 Zone $846, All Zones - $846 No Valid for unlimited Valid for WCE if Not valid No Add·Fare (calendar year) Holder who displays a valid 2Zones • $1,139, per year travel during the specified· $2.50 required Employer Pass 3 Zones· $1,561 Hours and through toward WCE per year the number of applicable fare if Zones paid for; on not Sundays and Statutory Holidays only, also valid for (a) 2 Adults, Seniors or Students and (b) 4 Children Enhanced Employer Employees of Employers 25 - 3,000 FareCards , 15% discount; Same features as Monthly FareCard Program who have entered into a 3,000 - 5,000 FareCards, 20% discount; written agreement with 5,000+ FareCards, 25% discount TransLink, committing to (maximum). purchase monthly Based on the Monthly FareCard rate.

FareCards in bulk------

April 1, 2010 Page 2 Validity/Conditions . Canada Line Trans .. YVR Add·Fare Proof of P~yment or Fare or Cost- Fare or Cost- - Travel Eligible Person fer· Conventional West Coast HandyOART (10 Cash 'Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and Templeton Stations***

FareCard - Adult Purchaser who displays a 1 Zone-$81, All Zones· $81 per Yes Valid for unlimited $2.50 toward WCE For an Eligible No Add·Fare FareCard" (calendar valid Adult FareCard 2 Zones· $110, month travel during the applicable fare HandyDART User, required month) 3 Zones· $151 Hours and through 1 Zone FareCard is per month the number of valid in 1 or 2 Zones paid for; on HandyDART Zones; Sundays and 2 Zone FareCard is Statutory Holidays valid in 3 only, also valid for HandyDART Zones; (a) 2 Adults, 3 Zone FareCard is Seniors or valid in all Students and (b) 4 HandyDART Zones Children FareCard - Child, Student, Sehior or All Zones· $46.50 per month Yes Valid for unlimited $1. 75 toward WCE Not valid No Add·Fare Concession HandyCard Holder who travel through all applicable fare required FareCard" (calendar displays a valid Concession Zones month) FareCard FareCard -Adult 1 FastTrax Student who All Zones· $81 (plus 1 time sticker cost No Valid for unlimited Valid toward Not valid No Add·Fare Zone FareCard with displays a valid Adult 1 of $2.50) travel through all purchase ofWCE required FastTrax sticker** Zone FareCard and a valid Zones FastTrax 28 Day (calendar month) student card with FastT rax Pass sticker FareSaver - Adult Purchaser who displays a 1 Zone -1 yellow All Zones-1 No Valid for unlimited $2.50 toward WCE For an Eligible No Add·Fare FareSaver" (90 min. valid Adult FareSaver that ticket (book of 1O, yellow ticket (book travel during the applicable fare HandyDART User, required from validation, except has been validated $21),2 Zones-1 of 10, $21) Hours and through 1 Zone FareSaver Bowen Island (110 red ticket (book of the number of is valid in 1 or 2 min. from validation)) 10, $31.50), 3 Zones paid for HandyDART Zones; Zones -1 green 2 Zone FareSaver ticket (book of 1O, is valid in 3 $42) or 2 yellow . HandyDART Zones; tickets 3 Zone FareSaver is valid in all HandvDART Zones - _ ___ L.. ______

April 1,2010 Page 3 Validity/C onditions Canada Line YVR Add·Fare Trans· Proof of Payment or Fare or Cost- Fare or Cost- - Travel Eligible Person fer· Conventional West Coast HandyDART (10 Cash Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and Templeton Stationsm

FareSaver - Child, Student, Senior or 1 Zone -1 brown Ail Zones-1 No Valid for unlimited $1.75 toward WCE Not valid No Add-Fare Concession HandyCard Holder who ticket (book of 10, brown ticket (book travel during the applicable fare required FareSaver" (90 min. displays a valid Concession $17),2 Zones-1 of 10, $17) Hours and through from validation, except FareSaver that has been brown ticket + $.75 the number of Bowen Island (110 validated Add-Fare, 3 Zones Zones paid for min. for validation)) - 2 brown tickets or 1 brown ticket + $1.75 Add-Fare Fire Department Employee of a fire N/A No Valid for unlimited Not valid Not valid No Add-Fare Employee ID' department within the travel through ail required TransLink Transportation Zones Service Region who displays valid employee identification Group Travel Letter" Groups of 15 persons or Payment of Payment of No Valid for unlimited Not valid Not valid Add-Fare (specified period) more, traveiling together applicable fares, in applicable fares, in travel during the required*** who display a letter signed accordance with accordance with Hours and through by TransLink's Manager, fares for Adult fares for Adult the number of Revenue Operations Transfers and Transfers and Zones paid for Concession Concession Transfers Transfers GraaPass" (2 Grade 12 students in the N/A No Valid for unlimited travel through ail Not valid No Add-Fare specified days Transportation Service Zones for specified period required between May 15th and Region, who are graduating June 30th) in that year, who display a valid GoCard and a valid GradPass Government Bus Eligible person, as Purchased by the Province of BC from No Valid for unlimited Eligible for WCE Not valid No Add-Fare Pass" (calendar year) determined by the Province TransLink and sold directly to eligible travel through ail Concession fare required of BC, who displays a valid persons by the Province, at a user cost Zones Government Bus Pass determined by the Province

April 1, 2010 Page 4 Validity/Conditions Canada Line YVR Add-Fare Trans- Proof of Payment or Fare or Cost - Fare or Cost- - Travel Eligible Person fer- Conventional West Coast HandyDART (10 Cash Fare Regular Hours Off-Peak Hours Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and Templeton Stations***

Multi-Pass" (specified Members of delegations N/A for officials of other transit agencies No Valid for unlimited travel through all $2.50 toward WCE No Add-Fare dates) with a specific business Zones applicable fare required interest in transit matters or $5.75 per pass (if> 500 passes officials of other transit purchased per day); agencies, all as approved by $4.75 per pass (if> 5,000 purchased per the Manager, Revenue day) Operations Police Officer or DFO Police Officer (including N/A No Valid for unlimited Not valid Not valid No Add-Fare Enforcement Officer RCMP Officer) or travel through all required 10' Department of Fisheries and Zones Oceans (DFO) Enforcement Officers, employed within the TransLink Transportation Service Region, who displays valid identification Special Event Ticket" Purchaser Payment of Payment of No Valid for unlimited travel during the Hours Not valid Add-Fare (specified period) applicable fares, in applicable fares, in and through the number of Zones paid for required"'''* accordance with accordance with fares for Adult fares for Adult Transfers and Transfers and Concession Concession Transfers Transfers Transfer - Adult Purchaser who displays a 1 Zone $2.50, All Zones $2.50 No Valid for unlimited $2.50 credit toward For an Eligible Add-Fare Transfer" (90 min.) valid Adult Transfer 2 Zones $3.75, travel during the WeE applicable HandyDART User, required"''''* 3 Zones $5.00 Hours and through fare 1 Zone Transfer is the number of valid in 1 or 2 Zones paid for, HandyDART Zones; other than on 2 Zone Transfer is Bowen Island valid in 3 HandyDART Zones; 3 Zone Transfer is valid in all HandvDART Zones - -

April 1, 2010 Page 5 Valid.!!l1Conditio ns Canada Line Trans· YVR Add·Fare Proof of Payment or Fare or Cost- Fare or Cost - - Travel Eligible Person fer· Conventional West Coast HandyDART (10 Cash Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and Templeton

- Stations***

Transfer- Concession I Child, Student, Senior or 1 Zone $1.75, TransferH (90 min.) HandyCard Holder who 2 Zones $2.50, I travel during the I applicable fare I required""" displays a valid Concession 3 Zones $3.50 Hours and through Transfer the number of Zones paid for, other than on Bowen Island agreement No Valid for unlimited Valid toward Not valid No Add-Fare dates) I displays a valid U-Pass I between the post-secondary educational travel through all purchase of a required institution and TransLink Zones WCE 28 Day U- Pass or $2.50 toward WCE fare Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid No Add- Zones required

1 Zone - $2.50, 2 Zones - $2.50, 3 Zones No Not valid Not valid Valid for travel N/A - $3.75, 4 or more Zones - $5.00 through the number of Zones aid for

1 day - $1,1 week - $5,28 days - $17 Allows WCE Not valid N/A

Add-Fare required"''''*

N/A No Not valid toward WCE applicable required*** fare

April 1, 2010 Page 6 ValidLty/Conditions Canada Line Trans- YVR Add·Fare Proof of Payment or Fare or Cost- Fare or Cost- - Travel Eligible Person fer· Conventional West Coast HandyDART (10 Cash Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and Templeton Stations*** ~ ~

WCE 28 Day Pass Purchaser who displays a 1 or 2 Zones - $134.75,3 Zones- No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an Eligible No Add-Fare Adult WCE 28 Day valid Adult 28 Day Pass $178.75,4 Zones - $217,5 Zones- number of Zones paid for HandyDART User required' Pass" (28 consecutive $298.50 dayst WCE 28 Day Pass - FastT rax Student who All Zones - $134.75 (plus 1 time sticker No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid No Add-Fare Adult 1 Zone WCE 28 displays a valid Adult 1 cost of $2.50) Zones required Day Pass with Zone 28 Day Pass and a FastTrax sticker" (28 valid student card with consecutive days) FastTrax sticker WCE 28 Day Pass - Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones - $82.75,3 Zones- No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid No Add-Fare Concession WCE 28 HandyCard Holder who $110.15, 4 Zones - $137, 5 Zones - $193 number of Zones paid for required Day Pass" (28 displays a valid Concession consecutive days) 28 Day Pass WCE28 Day Community Pass Holder All Zones -$94 per month asa WCE No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid No Add-Fare Community Pass" (28 who displays a valid Add-Fare Zones required consecutive days) Community Pass and a valid WCE 28 Day Community Pass WCE28 U-Pass Student who WCE Add-Fare as determined by the No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid No Add-Fare Day U-Pass Pass" (28 displays a valid U-Pass and agreement between the post-secondary Zones required consecutive days) a WCE 28 Day U-Pass Pass educational institution and TransLink . WCE Employer Pass" Eligible Employer Pass 1 or 2 Zones - $122, 3 Zones - $164,4 No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid No Add-Fare (calendar month) Holder who displays a valid Zones - $200,5 Zones - $275 per month number of Zones paid for; on Sundays required WCE Employer Pass and Statutory Holidays only, also valid for (a) 2 Adults, Seniors or Students and (b) 4 Children WCE One-Way Ticket Purchaser who displays a 1 or 2 Zones - $5, 3 Zones - $6.75, 4 No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an Eligible Add-Fare - Adult WCE One-Way valid Adult WCE One-Way Zones - $8.25, 5 Zones - $11.25 number of Zones paid for HandyDART User required*** Ticket" (3 hours) Ticket WCE One-Way Ticket Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones - $3, 3 Zones - $4, 4 Zones No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid Add-Fare - Concession WCE HandyCard Holder who - $5, 5 Zones - $7 number of Zones paid for required*""" One-Way Ticket" (3 displays a valid Concession hours) WCE One-Way Ticket WCE Return Ticket- Purchaser who displays a 1 or 2 Zones - $9.50, 3 Zones - $12.50, 4 No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an Eligible No Add-Fare Adult WCE Return valid Adult WCE Return Zones - $15.50, 5 Zones - $21 number of Zones paid for HandyDART User required

Ticket" luntil midnioht) Ticket - April 1, 2010 Page 7 Valid!!y!Conditions Canada Line YVR Add·Fare Trans· Proof of Payment or Fare or Cost- Fare or Cost- - Travel Eligible Person fer· Conventional West Coast HandyDART (10 Cash Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Between ability Transit (3 Zones) Express (5 Zones) Zones) Bridgeport and Templeton Stations*** -----

WCE Return Ticket Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones· $5.75,3 Zones· $7.50, 4 No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid No Add·Fare Concession WCE HandyCard Holder who Zones· $9.50,5 Zones· $13.25 number of Zones paid for required Return Ticket" (ulitil displays a valid Concession midniqht) WCE Return Ticket WCE Weekly Pass- Purchaser who displays a 1 or 2 Zones· $42.25, 3 Zones· $58, 4 No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an Eligible No Add·Fare Adult WCE Weekly valid Adult WCE Weekly Zones· $70.50,5 Zones· $97.50 number of Zones paid for HandyDART User required Pass" (7 consecutive Pass days) WCE Weekly Pass- Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones· $28.25,3 Zones - $38.25, No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid No Add-Fare Concession WCE HandyCard Holder who 4 Zones - $47.25, 5 Zones - $65.75 number of Zones paid for required Weekly Pass" (7 displays a valid Concession

~ecutive_daYSl WCE Weeklv Pass' --_._-_...... __ .... ------indicates Proof of Payment (POP) "I ndicates TransLink POP ". Canada Line YVR Add-Fare is a short term fare premium over the applicable fare in the amount of $2.50 each way, which will be collected as a return fare premium of $5.00. payable at YVR­ Airport Station, Templeton Station or Sea Island Centre Station.

April 1, 2010 Page 8 Table "2" - Exemptions

Exemption Canada Line YVR Add·Fare - Travel Eligible Person Conditions West Coast Conventional Transit HandyoART Between Bridgeport and Templeton Express Stations Any person None Exempt from fare Not exempt from fare payment N/A payment while travelling between Canada Line stations located on Sea Island Attendant Only one Attendant is eligible for Exempt from fare Exempt from fare Exempt from fare payment, when Exempt from Add·Fare, when the exemption payment, when payment, when accompanying HandyoART user accompanying a HandyCard Holder accompanying accompanying HandyCard Holder HandyCard Holder Child under 5 years of Child must be accompanied by a Exempt from fare payment, if accompanied by Exempt from fare payment, if Exempt from Add·Fare age passenger possessing Proof of a passenger possessing Proof of Payment who accompanied by a passenger Payment is travelling with fewer than 5 Children under possessing Proof of Payment who is the age of 5 travelling with fewer than 3 Children under the age of 5 Child or Student who Exemption only during International Exempt from fare Exempt from fare payment Exempt from Add·Fare displays a valid Walk to School Week payment GoCard during International Walk to School Week Ordinary and Life Exemption only on Remembrance Exempt from fare Exempt from fare payment Exempt from Add·Fare Members of Royal Day, November 11. payment Canadian Legion, Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans and Korean Veterans Association displaying valid membership card Uniformed members of Exemption only on Remembrance Exempt from fare Exempt from fare payment Exempt from Add·Fare the Armed Forces, Day, November 111h payment

Coast Guard -- --_ ... _--

April 1, 2010 Page 9 Table "3" - Private Charters

Rates, Charges and Cancellation Fees

$50.00 per Y, hour or part Conventional Bus, Community Shuttle and HandyDART Vehicle Minimum charge of $1 00.00 (includes operalor or driver) Bridge and road tolls, special licence fees and other out-of-pocket expenses extra Cancellation Fee $100.00 WCE train To be determined by WCE on a case-by-case basis

April 1, 2010 Page 10 SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY PROPOSED 2013 TARIFF BYLAW

In 2013, the average fare in the 2011 Base Plan is forecasted to increase by an average of 12 per cent, as assumed in the 2010 Funding Stabilization Plan and approved by the Mayors' Council in October 2009. The specific allocation of increases amongst different fare products will be determined in 2012 based on a Fare Revenue Review and analysis of fare revenue data. Any increases in short term fares in 2013, such as those contemplated in the approved 2010 Funding Stabilization Plan, will be submitted to the Regional Transportation Commissioner for approval as required. Pending such approval, the fare rates shown in the 2011 Base Plan for 2013 are based on short-term fares at the 2010 level previously approved by the Commissioner; the 12 per cent average increase is derived from increases to long­ term fares and the elimination of the discounted fare saver tickets and day passes. If Commissioner approval is secured for in short term fare increases in 2013 as contemplated in the approved 2010 Funding Stabilization Plan, long-term fare levels will be amended and discounted fare saver tickets and day passes will likely be restored in future plans and associated bylaws. SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY PROPOSED 2013 TARIFF BYLAW

A bylaw to amend the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2010 Tariff Amendment Bylaw Number 67-2010 (as amended)

WHEREAS the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority is required to balance its operating budget;

AND WHEREAS there has been consultation on the merits of the proposed expenditures and necessity of a fare increase;

NOW .THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enact as follows:

1. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Proposed 2013 Tariff Bylaw";

2. The South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2010 Tariff Amendment Bylaw Number 67-2010, as amended, is further amended as follows:

A. The effective date on the first page is changed from April 1, 2010 to January 1, 2013; and

B. Appendix 2 - Fares and Proof of Payment, attached to this Bylaw replaces the Appendix 2 attached to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2010 Tariff Amendment Bylaw Number 67-2010; and;

3. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1,2013.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this day of ____~ ___

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this day of ______

Dale Parker, Board Chair

Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary APPENDIX "2" - FARES AND PROOF OF PAYMENT

Table "1" - Cash Fares and Proof of Payment

ValiditY/Conditions Canada Line Trans· YVR Add·Fare- Proof of Payment Fare or Cost- Fare or Cost- Conventional West Coast Eligible Person fer· HandyDART (10 Travel Between or Cash Fare Regular Hours Off·Peak Hours Transit (3 Express (5 ability Zones) Bridgeport and . Zones) Zones) Templeton Stations ...... Con~eiitionar1rllh~it(3Zoncesl· ...... ;.:. ' .. :'...... • ' ..::.' .... . c· •• · c.:· .. BC Transit An employee of BC N/A No Valid for Not valid Not valid No Add·Fare Employee Pass' Transit who displays a unlimited travel required valid BC Transit through all Zones employee pass BC Transit Eligible person, as N/A No Valid for Not valid Not valid $2.50 Add·Fare Government Bus determined by the unlimited travel required Pass * Province of BC, who through all Zones displays a valid Government Bus Pass issued by BC Transit Canada Post Postal carrier employed N/A No Valid for travel Not valid Not valid $2.50 Add·Fare Corporation Postal by Canada Post through all Zones required Carrier - Uniform' Corporation, whfle in between the uniform hours of 5:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Business Days, to the extent required for postal route onlv - ._- --- _ ..

Effective Date: January 1, 2013 CN[B [0 Card' Person with vision N/A No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare impairment who displays Zones required valid identification issued by the Canadian Nationa[ [nstitute for the Blind (CNIB) Community Pass" Community Pass Holder All Zones - fare of $482,00 per year No Valid for $2,50 credit Not valid $2,50 Add-Fare (calendar year) who displays a valid unlimited travel toward WCE required Community Pass through all Zones applicable fare

Emp[oyee Pass" Employee Pass Holder N/A No Valid for unlimited travel through all Valid for an No Add-Fare (until revoked or who displays a valid Zones Eligib[e required expired) Emp[oyee Pass HandyOART User Emp[oyer Pass" E[igible Emp[oyer Pass 1 Zone - $1 032, All Zones- No Valid for $2,50 toward Not valid $2,50 Add-Fare (calendar year) Ho[der who displays a 2 Zones- $1032 per year unlimited travel WCE app[icable required valid Emp[oyer Pass $1390, during the Hours fare 3 Zones - $1904 and through the per year number of Zones paid for; on Sundays and Statutory Holidays only, also valid for (a) 2 Adults, Seniors or Students and (b) 4 Children

Effective Date: January 1, 2013 FareCard - Adult Purchaser who displays 1 Zone-$99, All Zones - $99 Yes Valid for $2.50 toward For an Eligible $2.50 Add-Fare FareCard** a valid Adult FareCard 2 Zones - $134, per month unlimited travel WCE applicable HandyOART required (calendar month) 3 Zones - $184 during the Hours fare User, 1 Zone per month and through the FareCard is valid number of Zones in 1 or 2 paid for; on HandyOART Sundays and Zones; 2 Zone Statutory FareCard is valid Holidays only, in 3 HandyOART also valid for (a) Zones; 3 Zone 2 Adults, Seniors FareCard is valid or Students and in all (b) 4 Children HandyOART Zones FareCard - Child, Student, Senior or All Zones - $57 per month Yes Valid for $1.75 toward Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare Concession HandyCard Holder who unlimited travel WCE applicable required FareCard** displays a valid through all Zones fare (calendar month) Concession FareCard FareCard - Adult 1 FastT rax Student who All Zones - $99 (plus 1 time sticker No Valid for Not valid Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare Zone FareCard with displays a valid Adult 1 cost of $2.50) unlimited travel required FastTrax sticker" Zone FareCard and a through all Zones (calendar month) valid student card with FastTrax sticker Fire Department Employee of a fire N/A No Valid for Not valid Not valid No Add-Fare Employee 10' department within the unlimited travel required TransLink Transportation through all Zones Service Region who displays valid employee identification Group Travel Groups of 15 persons or Payment of Payment of No Valid for Not valid Not valid Letter" (specified more, travelling together applicable fares, applicable fares, unlimited travel period) who display a letter in accordance in accordance during the Hours signed by TransLink's with fares for with fares for and through the Manager, Revenue Adult Transfers Adult Transfers number of Zones Operations and Concession and Concession paid for

Transfers .- . Transfers

Effective Date: January 1, 201.3 , GradPass" (2 Grade 12 students in the N/A No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid $2,50 Add-Fare , specified days Transportation Service Zones required between May 15th · Region, who are and June 30th ) graduating in that year, · who display a valid GoCard and a valid GradPass Government Bus Eligible person, as Purchased by the Province of BC No Valid for Eligible for WCE Not valid $2,50 Add-Fare Pass" (calendar · determined by the from TransLink and sold directly to . unlimited travel Concession fare required year) Province of BC, who eligible persons by the Province, at a through all Zones displays a valid user cost determined by the Government Bus Pass Province Police Officer or Police Officer (including N/A No Valid for Not valid Not valid No Add-Fare OFO Enforcement RCMP Officer) or unlimited travel required Officer 10' Department of Fisheries through all Zones and Oceans (OFO) Enforcement Officers, employed within the TransLink Transportation Service Region, who displays valid identification Multi-Pass" Members of delegations N/A for officials of other transit No Valid for $2,50 toward Not valid $2,50 Add-Fare (specified dates) with a specific business agencies unlimited travel WCE applicable required interest in transit matters through all Zones fare or officials of other transit $5.75 per pass (if> 500 passes agencies, all as approved purchased per day); $4.75 per pass by the Manager, (if> 5000 purchased per day) Revenue Operations Special Event Purchaser Payment of Payment of No Valid for unlimited travel during the Not valid $2,50 Add-Fare , Ticket" (specified applicable fares, applicable fares, Hours and through the number of required period) in accordance 1n accordance Zones paid for with fares for with fares for AdultTransfers Adult Transfers and Concession and Concession Transfers Transfers

, . .. , .

Effective Date: January 1, 2013 Adult Purchaser Transfer" (90 min.) a valid Adult Tr-::lncfo.r unlimited travel HandyOART during the Hours User,1 Zone and through the Transfer is valid number of Zones in 1 or 2 paid for, other HandyOART than on Bowen Zones; 2 Zone Island Transfer is valid in 3 HandyOART Zones; 3 Zone Transfer is valid in all HandyOART Zones or 1 Zone $1 Concession HandyCard Holder who Zones -$2.50, 3 unlimited travel required Transfer" (90 min.) displays a valid Zones -$3.50 during the Hours Concession Transfer and through the number of Zones paid for, other than on Bowen

U-Pass" (specified U-Pass dates) displays a valid U-Pass between the post-secondary educational institution and TransLink

NlA

Zones - $3.75, 4 or more Zones - $5.00

Effective Date: January 1, 2013 ". .. '.' l<\{esle()astliij(press(WGIiiJ$~fVice{;5 ZqM$j'" "C""i"(i"' .. . "... . '.. i' ...... "'ii ..•. " . •. ,i 'i' i,:...... '" ." . . Bicycle Pass" WCE passenger who 1 day - $1, 1 week - $5.00, 28 days - No N/A AliowsWCE Not valid N/A , (specified period) travels with a Bicycle and $17 passenger to displays a valid Bicycle travel with a Pass Bicycle Valley Max Person who displays a N/A No Not valid $1.75 credit Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare Transfer, Monthly valid transfer, monthly toward WCE required Pass or U-Pass- pass or U-pass issued by applicable fare Adult' Valley Max Valley Max Person who displays a N/A No Not valid $1.50 credit Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare Transfer, Monthly valid transfer, monthly towardWCE required Pass or U-Pass- pass or U pass issued by applicable fare Concession" Valley Max WCE 28 Day Pass Purchaser who displays 1 or 2 Zones-$164.00, 3Zones- No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an $2.50 Add-Fare - Adult WCE 28 a valid Adult 28 Day $218, 4 Zones - $265, 5 Zones - number of Zones paid for Eligible required Day Pass" (28 Pass $364 HandyDART consecutive days) User WC E 28 Day Pass FastTrax Student who All Zones - $164,00 (plus 1 time No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare - Adult 1 Zone displays a valid Adult 1 sticker cost of $2.50) Zones required WCE 28 Day Pass Zone 28 Day Pass and a with FastTrax valid student card with sticker" (28 FastTrax sticker consecutive days) WCE 28 Day Pass Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones - $101,3 Zones - $135, No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare - Concession WCE HandyCard Holder who 4 Zones - $167,5 Zones - $235 number of Zones paid for required 28 Day Pass" (28 displays a valid consecutive days) Concession 28 Day Pass

WCE28 Day Community Pass Holder All Zones-$115 per month as a No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare I Community Passu who displays a valid WCE Add-Fare Zones required (28 consecutive Community Pass and a days) valid WCE 28 Day Community Pass WCE28 U-Pass Student who WCE Add-Fare as detenmined by the No Valid for unlimited travel through all Not valid $2,50 Add-Fare ' Day U-Pass Pass" displays a valid U-Pass agreement between the post- Zones required (28 consecutive and a WCE 28 Day U- secondary educational institution days) Pass Pass and Translink

Effective Date: January 1, 2013 WCE Employer Eligible Employer Pass 1 or 2 Zones - $149,3 Zones - $200, No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare Pass" (calendar Holder who displays a 4 Zones - $244, 5 Zones - $336 per number of Zones paid for; on required month) validWCE Employer month Sundays and Statutory Holidays only, Pass also valid for (a) 2 Adults, Seniors or Students and '(b) 4 Children WCE One-Way Purchaser who displays 1 or 2 Zones - $5.00, 3 Zones - No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an $2.50 Add-Fare Ticket - Adult WCE a valid Adult WCE One- $6.75, 4 Zones - $8.25, 5 Zones - number of Zones paid for Eligible required One-Way Ticket" Way Ticket $11.25 HandyDART (3 hoursi User WCEOne-Way . Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones - $3.00, 3 Zones - No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare Ticket - HandyCard Holder who $4.00, 4 Zones - $5.00, 5 Zones - number of Zones paid for required Concession WCE displays a valid $7.00 One-Way Ticket" Concession WCE One- (3 hoursi Way Ticket WCE Return Ticket Purchaser who displays 1 or 2 Zones - $9.50, 3 Zones- No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an $2.50 Add-Fare -Adult WCE a valid Adult WCE Return $12.50,4 Zones - $15.50,5 Zones- number of Zones paid for Eligible required Return Ticket" Ticket $21.00 HandyDART .tuntil midnigh1) User WCE Return Ticket Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones - $5.75, 3 Zones- No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare - Concession WCE HandyCard Holder who $7.50,4 Zones - $9.60, 5 Zones - number of Zones paid for required Return Ticket" displays a valid $13.25 (until midnight) Concession WCE Return Ticket WCE Weekly Pass Purchaser who displays 1 or 2 Zones - $47.50, 3 Zones - No Valid for unlimited travel through the Valid for an $2.50 Add-Fare -AdultWCE a valid Adult WCE $62.50, 4 Zones - $77.50, 5 Zones - number of Zones paid for Eligible required Weekly Pass" (7 Weekly Pass $105.00 HandyDART consecutive days) User WCE Weekly Pass Child, Student, Senior or 1 or 2 Zones - $28.75, 3 Zones - No Valid for unlimited travel through the Not valid $2.50 Add-Fare , - Concession WCE HandyCard Holder who $38.25, 4 Zones - $48, 5 Zones - number of Zones paid for required : Weekly Pass" (7 displays a valid $66.25 consecutive days) Concession WCE Weekly Pass' J

'indicates Proof of Payment "indicates TransLink POP

Effective Date: January 1, 2013 Table "2" - Exemptions

Eligible Person Exemption I

Canada Line YVR Add· ! Conditions Fare - Travel Between Conventional Transit West Coast Express HandyDART Bridgeport and Templeton I Stations Any person None Exempt from fare Not exempt from fare payment Not exempt from Add·Fare payment while travelling between Canada Line stations located on Sea Island Attendant Only one Attendant is eligible for the Exempt from fare Exempt from fare Exempt from fare Exempt from Add·Fare, exemption payment, when payment, when payment, when when accompanying a accompanying accompanying accompanying HandyCARO Holder HandyCard Holder HandyCard Holder HandyOART user Burkeville Resident Resident of Burkeville who obtains and Not exempt from fare payment Exempt from Add·Fare . displays a Burkeville Resident 10 Card Child under 5 years Child must be accompanied by a passenger Exempt from fare payment, if accompanied by a Exempt from fare Exempt from Add·F are of age possessing Proof of Payment passenger possessing Proof of Payment who is payment, if I travelling with fewer than 5 Children under the accompanied by a I age of 5 passenger possessing Proof of Payment who is travelling with fewer than 3 Children under the aqe of 5 Child or Student Exemption only during International Walk to Exempt from fare Not exempt from fare payment Not exempt from Add·Fare who displays a valid School Week payment GoCard during International Walk to

School Week I Sea Island Any employee who works for an employer Not exempt from fare payment Exempt from Add·Fare I Employee based on Sea Island (as set out in an , agreement between TransLink and YVR) who displays a valid Sea Island Employee 10 Card or YVR Security ID Card

Effective Date: January 1, 2013 Table "3" - Private Charters

Rates, Charqes and Cancellation Fees $50.00 per Y, hour or part Conventional Bus, Community Shuttle and HandyDART Vehicle Minimum charge of $100.00 (includes operator or driver) Bridqe and road tolls, speciailicence fees and other out-of-pocket expenses extra Cancellation Fee $100.00 WCE train To be determined by WeE on a case-by-case basis

Effective Date: January 1, 2oi3 ~ ro c o :;:::; c .....OJ C -'" c ro .n ..::= OJ

.~ OJ tlJJ ro a. .~ ..c I- SECTION 2 - PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX BYLAWS This page is left blank intentionally SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

PROPOSED BYLAW

A Proposed Bylaw imposing 2011 Property Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, as defined in the Act, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act.

AND WHEREAS in assessing the tax the Authority must adopt a variable tax rate system in which individual tax rates are determined and imposed for each property class.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. In this Bylaw, "transportation service region" means all municipalities and rural areas located in the Greater Vancouver Regional District and any area added to the Region pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

2. There is assessed and levied on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act, a tax at the variable rates set out in Schedule 1 attached thereto.

3. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2011 Property Tax Proposed Bylaw".

4. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2011.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this day of ______

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this day of ____~ ___

Dale Parker, Board Chair

Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary

Page lof2 SCHEDULE 1 attached to and forming part of

SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

2011 PROPERTY TAX PROPOSED BYLAW

TAX RATES PROPERTY CLASS DOLLARS OF TAX PER $1,000

01 Residential 0.3717 02 Utilities 2.5407 03 Unmanaged Forest 1.4514 04 Major Industry 2.1485 05 Light Industry 1.8685 06 Business/Other 1.5619 08 Recreational and Non-Profit 0.3204 09 Farm 0.3610

Page 2 of 2 SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

PROPOSED BYLAW

A Proposed Bylaw imposing 2012 Property Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, as defined in the Act, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act.

AND WHEREAS in assessing the tax the Authority must adopt a variable tax rate system in which individual tax rates are determined and imposed for each property class.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. In this Bylaw, "transportation service region" means all municipalities and rural areas located in the Greater Vancouver Regional District and any area added to the Region pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

2. There is assessed and levied on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act, a tax at the variable rates set out in Schedule 1 attached thereto.

3. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2012 Property Tax Proposed Bylaw".

4. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2012.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this day of ____~ ___

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINAllY ADOPTED this day of ____~ ___

Dale Parker, Board Chair

Carol lee, Corporate Secretary

Page 1 of 2 SCHEDULE 1 attached to and forming part of

SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

2012 PROPERTY TAX PROPOSED BYLAW

TAX RATES PROPERTY CLASS DOLLARS OF TAX PER $1.000

01 Residential 0.3808 02 Utilities 2.5724 03 Unmanaged Forest 1.4876 04 Major Industry 2.1794 05 Light Industry 1.8993 06 Business/Other 1.5841 08 Recreational and Non-Profit 0.3294 09 Farm 0.3700

, Page 2of2 SOUTH COAST BRITISH COlUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

PROPOSED BYLAW

A Proposed Bylaw imposing 2013 Property Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, as defined in the Act, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act.

AND WHEREAS in assessing the tax the Authority must adopt a variable tax rate system in which individual tax rates are determined and imposed for each property class.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. In this Bylaw, "transportation service region" means all municipalities and rural areas located in the Greater Vancouver Regional District and any area added to the Region pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

2. There is assessed and levied on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act, a tax at the variable rates set out in Schedule 1 attached thereto.

3. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2013 Property Tax Proposed Bylaw".

4. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2013.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this day of ____~ ___

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this day of ______

Dale Parker, Board Chair

Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary

Page lof 2 SCHEDULE 1 attached to and forming part of

SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

2013 PROPERTY TAX PROPOSED BYLAW

TAX RATES PROPERTY CLASS DOLLARS OF TAX PER $1,000

01 Residential 0.3900 02 Utilities 2.6048 03 Unmanaged Forest 1.5246 04 Major Industry 2.2108 05 Light Industry 1.9307 06 Business/Other 1.6067 08 Recreational and Non-Profit 0.3387 09 Farm 0.3793

Page 2 of 2 SECTION 3 - PROPOSED REPLACEMENT TAX BYLAWS This page is left blank intentionally SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

PROPOSED BYLAW

A Proposed Bylaw imposing 2011 Replacement Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, as defined in the Act, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region if the additional tax generates property tax revenue that is not more than $18 million in this fiscal year and the additional tax is collected only from property classes 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 in whatever proportions the authority may determine.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. In this Bylaw, "transportation service region" means all municipalities and rural areas located in the Greater Vancouver Regional District and any area added to the Region pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

2. There is assessed and levied on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act, a tax at the rates set out in Schedule 1 attached thereto.

3. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2011 Replacement Tax Proposed Bylaw".

4. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2011.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this day of ____-' ___

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this day of ____-' ___

Dale Parker, Board Chair Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary

Page 1 of 2 SCHEDULE 1 attached to and forming part of

SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

2011 REPLACEMENT PROPOSED TAX BYLAW

TAX RATES PROPERTY CLASS DOLLARS OF TAX PER $1,000

01 Residential 0.0173 02 Utilities 0.1695 04 Major Industry 0.1726 05 Light Industry 0.1539 06 Business/Other 0.1393

Page 2 of 2 SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

PROPOSED BYLAW

A Proposed Bylaw imposing 2012 Replacement Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, as defined in the Act, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region if the additional tax generates property tax revenue that is not more than $18 million in this fiscal year and the additional tax is collected only from property classes 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 in whatever proportions the authority may determine.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. In this Bylaw, "transportation service region" means all municipalities and rural areas located in the Greater Vancouver Regional District and any area added to the Region pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

2. There is assessed and levied on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act, a tax at the rates set out in Schedule 1 attached thereto.

3. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2011 Replacement Tax Proposed Bylaw".

4. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2012.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this day of _____. ___

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this day of ____~ ___

Dale Parker, Board Chair Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary

Page lof2 SCHEDULE 1 attached to and forming part of

SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

2012 REPLACEMENT PROPOSED TAX BYLAW

TAX RATES PROPERTY CLASS DOLLARS OF TAX PER $1,000

01 Residential 0.0171 02 Utilities 0.1678 04 Major Industry 0.1709 05 Light Industry 0.1523 06 Business/Other 0.1379

Page2of2 SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

PROPOSED BYLAW

A Proposed Bylaw imposing 2013 Replacement Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, as defined in the Act, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act.

AND WHEREAS the Authority may, by bylaw, assess a tax on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region if the additional tax generates property tax revenue that is not more than $18 million in this fiscal year and the additional tax is collected only from property classes 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 in whatever proportions the authority may determine.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. In this Bylaw, "transportation service region" means all municipalities and rural areas located in the Greater Vancouver Regional District and any area added to the Region pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.

2. There is assessed and levied on the net taxable value of land and improvements in the transportation service region, other than land and improvements that are taxable for school purposes only by special act, a tax at the rates set out in Schedule 1 attached thereto.

3. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority 2013 Replacement Tax Proposed Bylaw".

4. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2013.

READAFIRST,SECONDANDTHIRDTIMEthis dayof ______

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this day of ____----' ___

Dale Parker, Board Chair Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary

Page lof2 SCHEDULE 1 attached to and forming part of

SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

2013 REPLACEMENT PROPOSED TAX BYLAW

TAX RATES PROPERTY CLASS DOLLARS OF TAX PER $1,000

01 Residential 0.0169 02 Utilities 0,1662 04 Major Industry 0.1692 05 Light Industry. 0.1508 06 Business/Other 0.1366

Page 2 of 2 SECTION 4 - CURRENT PARKING SALES TAX BYlAW This page is left blank intentionally SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BYLAW NUMBER 61-2009

A Bylaw imposing Parking Sales Tax SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BYLAW NUMBER 61-2009

A Bylaw imposing Parking Sales Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act (the "Act"), the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS p.ursuant to section 30.1 of the Act, the Authority may, by bylaw, set, as the rate of tax payable under section 61(1) of the Social Service Tax Act, a rate of tax on the purchase price of the parking right in respect of which the tax is paid.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. The rate of tax payable on the purchase price of parking rights under section 61(1) of the Social Service Tax Act shall be 21%.

2. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Parking Sales Tax Bylaw Number 61-2009."

3. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2010.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this 28th day of October, 2009

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2009

Original signed by Dale Parker Dale Parker, Board Chair

Original signed bv Coral Lee Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary SECTION 5 - CURRENT MOTOR FUEL TAX BYLAW This page is left blank intentionally SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BYLAW NUMBER 60-2009

A Bylaw imposing Motor Fuel Tax SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BYLAW NUMBER 60-2009

A Bylaw imposing Motor Fuel Tax

WHEREAS pursuant to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act (the "Act"), the Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose.

AND WHEREAS pursuant to the Motor Fuel Tax Act the rate of motor fuel tax currently payable to the Authority within the transportation service region is 12 cents per litre.

AND WHEREAS under s. 27.1 of the Act the Authority may, by bylaw, set, as the rate of tax payable under sections 4(1)(d) and lO(l)(d) of the Motor Fuel Tax Act, a rate of tax that does not exceed 3 cents per litre.

AND WHEREAS the Authority wishes to assess a rate of motor fuel tax of 3 cents per litre pursuant to s. 27.1 of the Act, which will increase the rate of motor fuel tax payable to the Authority within the transportation service region from 12 cents per litre to 15 cents per litre.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1. The rate of tax payable under sections 4(1)(d) and lO(l)(d) of the Motor Fuel Tax Act shall be 3 cents per litre.

2. This Bylaw may be cited as the "South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Motor Fuel Tax Bylaw Number 60-2009."

3. This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2010.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this 28th day of October, 2009.

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2009

Original signed by Dale Parker Dale Parker, Board Chair

Original signed by Carol Lee Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary SECTION 6 - CURRENT GOLDEN EARS BRIDGE TOLLING BYLAW This page is left blank intentionally SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BYLAW NUMBER 57-2009

A BYLAW ASSESSING TOLLS FOR GOLDEN EARS BRIDGE

AMENDED: DECEMBER 4, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Title ...... 1

2. Definitions and Interpretation ...... 1

3. Billing Organization ...... 6

4. Requirement to Pay Designated Toll ...... 6

5. Leasing or Licensing of Transponders ...... 6

6. Designated TolI- Toll Commencement Date to the Toll Adjustment Date ...... 7

7. Designated Toll Subsequent to the Toll Adjustment Date ...... 8

8. Prepayment of Designated Tolls and Customer Account Agreements ...... 9

9. Toll Accounts and Liability for Designated Tolls ...... 9

10. Payment of Designated Tolls ...... 10

11. When Designated Toll Not Payable ...... 11

12. Dispute Resolution ...... 12

13. Appeal to Arbitrator ...... 13

14. Interest Rate ...... 14

15. Account Statement/Invoice ...... 14

16. Authority May Act as Billing Organization ...... 15

17. Board May Establish Procedures, Policies, Forms and Documents ...... 15

18. Traffic Demand Management ...... 15

19. Notices and Mailing Addresses ...... 16 SOUTH COAST BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BYLAW NUMBER 57-2009

A BYLAW ASSESSING TOLLS FOR GOLDEN EARS BRIDGE

WHEREAS:

A. Under the Act, the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority must manage and operate the regional transportation system and generate and manage funds for that purpose;

B. Under the Act, the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority may, by bylaw, assess toll charges or other charges in relation to tolls or the collection of tolls on persons who use, or the owners or operators of motor vehicles that are driven on, a designated project as defined in the Act; and

C. The Golden Ears Bridge forms part of a designated project under the Act.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority enacts as follows:

1.(1) This bylaw may be cited as South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Golden Ears Bridge Toll Assessment Bylaw Number 57-2009,

2. Definitions and Interpretation

2.(1) In this bylaw:

"Account Statement/Invoice" means an invoice which includes a statement which'sets out for each Designated Toll

(a) a statement as to whether the person to whom the Account Statement/Invoice was sent was identified by detection of a Transponder or by the reading of a Num ber Plate;

(b) the date and time at which the Transponder was detected or the Number Plate was. read,

(e) the Designated Toll and all interest or other charges; and

(d) the time within which the Account Statement/Invoice must be paid and how it may be paid, the Interest Rate and the enforcement measures which may be taken to recover amounts owing under an Account Statement/Invoice; - 2 -

"Act" means South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act, SBC 1998, Chapter 30;

"Authority" means the Chief Executive Officer of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority;

"Best Recent Address" means

(a) for a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner who has established a Toll Account, the most recent address (including email address) provided for that Toll Account or in correspondence with the Billing Organization or the Authority;

(b) for a Motor Vehicle Owner resident in British Columbia who has not established a Toll Account

(i) the most recent mailing address shown on the records of ICBC, or

(ii) the most recent address provided by a Motor Vehicle Owner in correspondence with the Billing Organization or the Authority; and

(c) for a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner who has not established a Toll Account, the most recent mailing address obtained from the government of a relevant province or other jurisdiction in Canada or an agency of that government or a corporation or entity in Canada that has legal access to that information, the relevant government of a state of the United States or an agency of that government or a corporation or entity in a state of the United States that has legal access to such information;

"Billing Organization" means the organization, if any, which is authorized to charge and collect Designated Tolls and interest on DeSignated Tolls on behalf of the Authority under an agreement referred to in section 3.(1);

"Board" means the board of directors of the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority;

"Car" means a private Motor Vehicle primarily designed to carry not more than 1S passengers and includes a taxi, a station wagon, a passenger van, a sport utility vehicle, a hearse, an agricultural tractor and a pick-up truck;

"Collection Agency" means a third party collection agency which must have a valid licence under the Business Practices and Consumer Pratection Act or, in respect of collection agencies operating in other jurisdictions, which must be legally registered or licensed in accordance with the laws of those jurisdictions;

"Customer Account Agreement" has the meaning set out in section 8.(1); - 3-

"Designated Toll" means the toll charges set out in sections 6 and 7 for a Motor Vehicle using the Golden Ears Bridge that has passed a Vehicle Identification Device together with any charges set out in section 5 and any other charges levied by the Billing Organization on behalf of the Authority in relation to the collection of tolls, which have been authorized by resolution of the Board;

"Excessive Toll Debt" means a Toll Debt that exceeds $25;

"Exempt Motor Vehicle" means

(a) an ambulance,

(b) a fire truck or other fire department emergency vehicle responding to an emergency requiring the use of the Golden Ears Bridge,

(c) a vehicle owned or operated by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or by a police force as provided in the Police Act responding to an emergency requiring the use of, or engaged in highway patrol on or near, the Golden Ears Bridge,

(d) a vehicle operated by or on behalf of or contracted to the Department of National Defence, 'the Canadian Forces or a visiting force responding to an emergency requiring the use of the Golden Ears Bridge,

(e) a transit bus or other transit vehicle owned or operated by or on behalf of the Authority or a subsidiary,

(f) a Motor Vehicle owned or operated by or on behalf of the Authority or a subsidiary, used for transit supervision, maintenance, mechanical support or conducting the business of the Authority, and

(g) a Motor Vehicle owned or operated by or on behalf of a concessionaire or service provider to the Authority used for operation, maintenance, repair and rehabilitation of the Golden Ears Bridge Project;

"Golden Ears Bridge" means the bridge crossing the Fraser River to the east of Barnston Island forming part of the Fraser River Crossing project as defined in the Act;

"Golden Ears Bridge Project" means the Fraser River Crossing project as defined in the Act;

"ICBC" means Insurance Corporation of British Columbia;

"Interest Rate" means interest calculated and compounded monthly at a rate set by, resolution of the Board, but not to exceed 2% per month and interest on overdue interest at the same rate; - 4-

"large Truck" means a Motor Vehicle consisting of an articulated truck or tractor trailer combination;

"Motor Vehicle" has the same meaning as in the Act;

"Motor Vehicle Owner" means the person to whom the Number Plate for that Motor Vehicle was issued;

"Motorcycle" means a Motor Vehicle that runs on 2 or 3 wheels and has a saddle or seat for the driver to sit astride;

"Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner" means a person who is the registered owner of a Motor Vehicle that does not have a Number Plate issued for the Province of British Columbia;

"Number Plate" has the same meaning as in the Motor Vehicle Act;

"Payment Account" means an account maintained by a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non­ Resident Motor Vehicle Owner with a bank or credit institution or an account related to a credit card or debit card (in each case, being an account in respect of which instructions may be given authorizing debits to being made from it) or such other account as may be approved by the Authority and from which the Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner has authorized the Authority to effect payment;

"Post-paid Account" means a Toll Account maintained by a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner with the Authority under which payment of any Designated Tolls and any other amounts due under a Customer Account Agreement is made within the applicable period by a mechanism acceptable to the Authority, including credit card, debit card, or by direct debit from a Payment Account or such other payment mechanism as the Authority may from time to time approve;

"Pre-authorized Post-paid Account" means a Toll Account maintained by a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner with the Authority under which an amount equal to the amount due in respect of Designated Tolls and any other . amounts due under a Customer Account Agreement incurred during a particular period (the "outstanding amount") and recorded in the Toll Account and paid by debiting by pre-authorized credit, debit or other acceptable payment mechanism from time to time of the then outstanding amount from the Motor Vehicle Owner's or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner's Payment Account;

"Pre-paid Account" means a Toll Account maintained by a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner with the Authority under which amounts are paid in advance to be credited to that account with amounts due in respect of Designated Tolls and any other amounts due under a Customer Account Agreement being subsequently - 5 -

. deducted and with the facility for replenishing the Pre-paid Account by way of debiting by pre-authorized credit, debit or other acceptable payment mechanism from time to time of further amounts from a Payment Account (or otherwise paid in such manner as approved by the Authority) and credited to the Pre-paid Account;

"Registered Transponder Account" means a Toll Account maintained by a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner with the Authority in respect of which a Transponder has been issued for installation in a Registered Vehicle;

"Registered Transponder User" means a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner who has been issued a Transponder and has a Registered Transponder Account;

"Registered Vehicle" means the Motor Vehicle registered under a Toll Account;

"Registered Video Account" means a Toll Account maintained by a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner with the Authority other than a Registered Transponder Account;

"Registered Video User" means a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner who does not have a Transponder and has a Registered Video Account;

"Repeat Offender" has the meaning set out in section 10.(6);

"Small Truck" includes the following: a Car towing a trailer (as defined in the Motor Vehicle Act), a light duty delivery van or truck, a dump truck, a cement truck, a tractor or single unit truck Without a trailer, a moving van, a motor home, a school bus, an intercity bus or coach, a tour bus and a transit bus that is not an Exempt Motor Vehicle;

"Substantial Completion Date" means the date the Golden Ears Bridge Project is Substantially Completed as defined in the Project Agreement entered into by the DBFO Contractor (as defined in the Project Agreement) and the Authority in respect of the Golden Ears Bridge Project;

"Toll Account" has the meaning set out in section 8.(1);

"Toll Adjustment Date" means the date twelve months after the Substantial Completion Date;

"Toll Commencement Date" means the first business day immediately next follOWing the expiry of the Toll Grace Period;

"Toll Debt" means the portion of a Designated Toll that remains unpaid more than 30 days after receipt by the owner, or the agent of the owner of a Motor Vehicle, of an Account Statement/Invoice, together with interest owing in relation to the unpaid Toll Debt; - 6-

"Toll Grace Period" means the 30 day period commencing on June 16, 2009 and ending on July 15, 2009, during which Designated Tolls will not be charged to users of the Golden Ears Bridge;

"Toll Reader" means equipment located on the Golden Ears Bridge Project that detects Transponders;

"Transponder" means a device that

(a) may be installed or carried on, or in or attached to, a Motor Vehicle, and

(b) allows electronic identification of the person who is to pay the Designated Toll, or the Registered Transponder Account from which a Designated Toll is to be paid, arising from the Motor Vehicle's use ofthe Golden Ears Bridge;

"Unregistered Video User" means all Motor Vehicle Owners or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owners who do not have a Registered Transponder Account or a Registered Video Account; and

"Vehicle Identification Device" means a Toll Reader, a video camera or any other device or equipment located on the Golden Ears Bridge Project for detecting or identifying Motor Vehicles that are driven on the Golden Ears Bridge.

2.(2) A reference in this bylaw to an enactment means an enactment of British Columbia and includes all amendments to that enactment and any enactment replacing or substituted for that enactment.

3. Billing Organization

3.(1) The Authority is hereby authorized from time to time to enter into an agreement with a person to act as the Billing Organization in which the Billing Organization is authorized to charge and collect the Designated Tolls and interest and other charges on behalf of the Authority and to provide such other related services on the terms and conditions set out in that agreement.

4. Requirement to Pay Designated Toll

4.(1) A Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner whose Motor Vehicle passes a Vehicle Identification Device on or after the Toll Commencement Date must, within . the time period set out in section 10, pay the applicable Designated Toll for that Motor Vehicle set out in sections 6 and 7.

5. leasing or licensing of Transponders

5.(1) The Authority or the Billing Organization on behalf of the Authority may, but is not required to, issue and lease or licence a Transponder to any Motor Vehicle Owner or Non- - 7 -

Resident Motor Vehicle Owner who requests a Transponder upon execution of a Customer Account Agreement setting out the terms and conditions for such lease or licence .. The Customer Account Agreement will provide for payment of:

(a) a non-interest bearing security deposit (the "Security Deposit") adjusted in accordance with the consumer price index set out in the Customer Account Agreement; and

(b) a monthly fee (the "Monthly Fee") adjusted in accordance with the consumer price index set out in the Customer Account Agreement.

The Monthly Fee will form part of the Designated Toll for the Motor Vehicle detected by the Vehicle Identification Device.

5.(2) Transponders will not be issued for Motorcycles unless the Board determines otherwise by resolution.

6. Designated TolI- Toll Commencement Date to the Toll Adjustment Date

6.(1) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Cars equipped with a Transponder and registered under a Registered Transponder Account will be $2.75.

6.(2) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Cars registered under a Registered Video Account will be $3.30.

6.(3) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Cars that are not registered under a Registered Transponder Account or a Registered Video Account will be $3.90.

6.(4) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Small Trucks equipped with a Transponder and registered under a Registered Transponder Account will be $5.55.

6.(5) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Small Trucks registered under a Registered Video Account will be $6.10.

6.(6) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Small Trucks not registered under a Registered Transponder Account or a Registered Video Account will be $6.65.

6.(7) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Large Trucks equipped with a Transponder and registered under a Registered Transponder Account will be $8.30. -8-

6.(8) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Large Trucks registered under a Registered Video Account will be $8.90.

6.(9) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Large Trucks not registered under a Registered Transponder Account or a Registered Video Account will be $9.40.

6.(10) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Motorcycles registered under a Registered Video Account will be $1.40.

6.(11) Upon the Toll Commencement Date and continuing until the Toll Adjustment Date, the Designated Toll for Motorcycles not registered under a Registered Video Account will be $2.50.

7. Designated Toll Subsequent to the Toll Ad)ustment Date

7.(1) Commencing on the Toll Adjustment Date and for each subsequent 12 month period thereafter, the respective Designated Toll for Cars, Small Trucks, Large Trucks and Motorcycles set out in sections 6.(1) to 6.(11) inclusive will be adjusted for each such subsequent 12 month period effective on the respective anniversary dates of the Toll Adjustment Date in accordance with the following formula:

Designated Toll' = Designated TolI'-' x {CPI' / CPI'-'}

Where:

Designated Toll' = the Designated Toll that will be charged for Cars, Small Trucks, Large Trucks and Motorcycles respectively for the next 12 month period (beginning with the same month in which the Toll Adjustment Date occurs). For example, if the Toll Adjustment Date is June 1, 2010 and the year is 2014, the Designated Toll 2014 will be the toll rate for Cars from June 1, 2014 until May 31, 2015.

Designated TolI'-1 = the Designated Toll that was charged for Cars, Small Trucks, Large Trucks and Motorcycles respectively for the preceding 12 month period (beginning with the same month in which the Toll Adjustment Date occurs). For example, if the Toll Adjustment Date is June 1, 2010 and the year is 2014, the Designated To1l 2013 was the toll rate for Cars from June 1, 2013 to May 31,2014.

CPI' = the value of the all items consumer price index for Canada using the most recent base date as published by Statistics Canada in the year t.

CPI'-1 = the value of the all items consumer price index for Canada using the most recent base date as published by Statistics Canada in the Index Month in the year t-1.

The resulting Designated Toll will be rounded to the nearest five cents ($0.05). - 9-

8. Prepayment of Designated Tolls and Customer Account Agreements

8.{1} In order to pay for the use of the Golden Ears Bridge, a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non­ Resident Motor Vehicle Owner may enter into a Customer Account Agreement with the Authority to establish:

(a) a Registered Transponder Account;

(b) a Registered Video Account; or

(c) such other type of account as the Authority may establish from time to time; in respect of one or more Motor Vehicles for each vehicle classification which will be registered in relation to the Registered Transponder Account or the Registered Video Account {collectively "Toll Accounts" and individually sometimes a "Toll Account"}.

8.{2} A Registered Transponder Account may be a Pre-paid Account, a Pre"authorized Post­ paid Account or a Post-paid Account or such other type of payment mechanism account as the Authority may determine from time to time.

8.{3} A Registered Video Account may be a Pre-paid Account, a Pre-authorized Post-paid Account or a Post-paid Account or such other type of payment mechanism account as the Authority may determine from time to time.

9. Toll Accounts and Liability for Designated Tolls

9.{1} Payment of Designated Tolls and other amounts must be made by the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Customer Account Agreement.

9.{2} If a Toll Reader detects a Transponder in or on a Motor Vehicle and there is, in relation to that Transponder, a Toll Account established pursuant to a Customer Account Agreement, the Designated Toll must be paid in accordance with the provisions of the Customer Account Agreement.

9.{3} If a Vehicle Identification. Device other than a Toll Reader detects a Motor Vehicle Number Plate and there is, in relation to that Number Plate, a Toll Account established pursuant to a Customer Account Agreement, the Designated Toll must be paid in accordance with the provisions of the Customer Account Agreement.

9.{4} If a Vehicle Identification Device detects a Motor Vehicle in respect of which no Toll Account has been established, an Account Statement/Invoice will be issued to the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner.

9.{5} Subject to a contrary determination under the dispute resolution and appeal processes set out below, when a Account Statement/Invoice is issued by the Billing Organization on behalf - 10- of the Authority to the Motor Vehicle Owner or the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner, the Motor Vehicle Owner or the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner is indebted to the Authority for the Designated Toll and any interest or other charges payable in relation to the Designated Toll or the collection of the Designated Toll.

10. Payment of Designated Tolls

10.(1) A Motor Vehicle Owner and a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner (and in the case of paragraph (b), a person who has established a Toll Account) who has received an Account Statement/Invoice in respect of which

(a) no Toll Account has been established to pay for Designated Tolls; or

(b) a Toll Account has been established, but there are insufficient funds to pay the Account Statement/Invoice, or the payment mechanism established under the Toll Account and the Customer Account Agreement failed to effect payment of the Account Statement/Invoice, as the case may be;

must pay the Account Statement/Invoice in full within 30 days of receipt of the Account Statement/Invoice.

10.(2) Where the Billing Organization, or the Authority, incur charges due to insufficient funds to pay the Account Statement/Invoice or failure of the payment mechanism to effect payment, an amount equivalent to the charges incurred will be charged to the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner.

10.(3) Subject to section 13.(3), if a Toll Debt is not paid in full on or before the 30th day after the receipt of the Account Statement/Invoice, interest will accrue from and including the 31't day after receipt of the Account Statement/Invoice at the Interest Rate on the resulting Toll Debt until the Toll Debt is paid in full.

10.(4) The Billing Organization will issue Account Statement/Invoices on behalf of the Authority within 30 days of the end of the billing period within which a Motor Vehicle was detected by a Vehicle Identification Device.

10.(5) Subject to a referral to the dispute resolution procedure under section 12 and any appeal to an arbitrator under section 13 and subject to subsection (6), if a Toll Debt has not been paid in full within 150 days of the date of the first Account Statement/Invoice rendered in respect of that Toll Debt becoming due, then the Billing Organization on behalf of the Authority may at any time thereafter

(a) if a Transponder has been issued to the debtor, cancel the Transponder without refunding any charge, Security Deposit or other monies paid in respect of the Transponder; -11-

(b) in respect of that Toll Debt and any other subsequent Toll Debt that in the aggregate exceeds the Excessive Toll Debt, request ICBC to exercise on behalf of the Authority the rights and remedies available under section 26(1)(f) and section 26(2)(d) of the Motor Vehicle Act [refusal to issue licences]. For the purpose of this paragraph (b), "that Toll Debt and any other subsequent Toll Debt that in the aggregate exceeds the Excessive Toll Debt" means any Toll Debt which is overdue more than 150 days in combination with any other Toll Debt, whether or not overdue by 150 days, that in the aggregate is greater than the Excessive Toll Debt. For example, if there is a Toll Debt in the amount of $20 outstanding for more than 150 days and subsequently a Account Statement/Invoice for $10 is not paid within the applicable payment period, the aggregate Toll Debt of $30 entitles the Billing Organization to request ICBC to exercise on behalf of the Authority the remedies under section 26.(1)(f) and 26.(2)(d); and

(e) pursue on behalf of the Authority such other rights and remedies available to the Authority under the Act or the regulations and any other rights and remedies available to the Authority at law for the collection of debts.

10.(6) For the purpose of this section 10 "Repeat Offender" means a person indebted to the Authority in respect of whom the Billing Organization has at any prior time been entitled to exercise on behalf of the Authority the applicable remedies under subsection (4) in respect of a previous Toll Debt.

10.(7) The 150 day period of time in which the Billing Organization becomes entitled to exercise on behalf of the Authority the applicable remedies under subsection (4) for a Repeat Offender is

(a) in respect of the first repeat offence, reduced to 120 days, and

(b) in respect of any subsequent repeat offence, reduced to 90 days.

11. When Designated Toll Not Payable

11.(1) No Designated Toll is payable in relation to the use of the Golden Ears Bridge by an Exempt Motor Vehicle.

11.(2) In addition to subsection (1), no Designated Toll is payable by a Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner if

(a) the Designated Toll was attributed to the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner by virtue of reading the Motor Vehicle Owner's Number Plate or the number plate of a Motor Vehicle owned by a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner and, at the date and time for which the Designated Toll is being charged, the Number Plate issued to the Motor Vehicle Owner or· the number -12-

plate issued to the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner was not on a Motor Vehicle using the Bridge;

(b) the Designated Toll was attributed to the Motor Vehicle Owner by virtue of the detection of the Motor Vehicle Owner's Transponder or the reading of the Motor Vehicle Owner's Number Plate and, at the date and time for which the Designated Toll is being charged, the Motor Vehicle Owner's Transponder or Number Plate, as the case may be, or the Motor Vehicle in or on which it was located was stolen; and

(e) the Designated Toll was attributed to the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner by virtue of the detection of the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner's Transponder or the reading of the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner's number plate and, at the date and time for which the Designated Toll is being charged, the Non­ Resident Motor Vehicle Owner's Transponder or number plate, as the case may be, or the Motor Vehicle in or on which it was located was stolen.

12. Dispute Resolution

12.(1) A Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner, who has received a Account Statement/Invoice for a Designated Toll mayan one or more grounds referred to in section 11 dispute Ii.

12.(2) The Billing Organization will establish a fair and impartial administrative review procedure for Motor Vehicle Owners or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owners who dispute Designated Tolls.

12.(3) A Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner, who disputes a Designated Toll and any related interest or other charges may serve a notice of dispute on the Billing Organization setting out the grounds for the dispute together with facts upon whicn the dispute is based no later than 150 days after the date of the Account Statement/Invoice for the Designated Toll.

12.(4) The Billing Organization must make a determination of the dispute set out in the notice served under subsection (3) within 30 days of receipt by it of the notice.

12.(5) A Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner may no later than 30 days after the determination made by the Billing Organization under subsection (4) request, in writing, a reconsideration of that determination where

(a) evidence not available at the time of the original determination has become available, or

(b) all or part of the original determination was based on evidence that was incorrect or false. - 13 -

12.(6) The Billing Organization must make a determination of the reconsideration within 30 days of receipt by it of the written request under subsection.(5).

13. Appeal to Arbitrator

13.(1) A Motor Vehicle Owner or a Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner, who is not satisfied with the outcome of the determination of the Billing Organization under section 12 may, on one or more of the grounds referred to in section 11 and on paying to the Billing Organization a fee of $30, appeal to an arbitrator that person's liability for the Designated Toll.

13.(2) The following provisions will apply to the arbitration initiated under subsection (1):

(a) the arbitration will be conducted by a single arbitrator appointed by the Billing Organization from one or more arbitrators selected for that purpose by the Authority who are independent from the Authority and the Billing Organization;

(b) the arbitrator must render a decision within 45 days of the arbitrator's appointment;

(e) the arbitrator may make any order the arbitrator considers appropriate, including

(i) an order that the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner is liable to pay none, some or all of the amount invoiced in the Account Statement/Invoice,

(ii) an order that the Billing Organization repay to the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner some or all of the monies provided by the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner on account of the disputed Account Statement/Invoice,

(iii) an order as to costs of the arbitration;

(d) the decision of the arbitrator is binding on the parties and may not be appealed to any court;

(e) subject to paragraph (c)(iii), the costs of the arbitrator will be for the account of the Billing Organization; and

(f) subject to paragraph (c)(iii), the $30 fee paid by the Motor Vehicle Owner or the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner will be refunded by the Billing Organization if the arbitrator finds in favour of the Motor Vehicle Owner or the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner.

13.(3) Interest at the Interest Rate on the Designated Toll and on interest and other charges will continue to accrue - 14-

(a) during the ·dispute resolution procedure and any reconsideration of a dispute resolution determination, if applicable. If the dispute resolution procedure or . any reconsideration determines that the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner is not liable for all or part of the amount of the disputed Account Statement/Invoice, no interest will be payable on the portion in respect of which the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner is found not liable;

(b) during the appeal process, if the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner appeals the outcome of the dispute resolution procedure under section 13.(1). If the arbitrator determines that the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner is not liable for all or part of the amount of the disputed Account Statement/Invoice, no interest will be payable on the portion in respect of which the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner is found not liable; and

(c) in all other cases, until the Designated Toll interest and other charges have been paid in full.

13.(4) If, after a determination by the Billing Organization unfavourable to the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner under either the dispute resolution procedure or the reconsideration procedure referred to in sections 12.(3) ·and 12.(5), the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner has not either filed for reconsideration or appealed to an arbitrator, as the case may be, and has not paid in full the outstanding Designated Toll, interest and other charges within 30 days of the unfavourable determination by the Billing Organization, then the Billing Organization may enforce payment under the provisions of section 10.(5).

13.(5) If after a determination by an arbitrator unfavourable to the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner has been rendered and the outstanding Designated .TolI, interest and other charges (and any costs awarded against the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non­ Resident Motor Vehicle Owner by the arbitrator) have not been paid in full within 30 days of the arbitrator's determination, then the Billing Organization may enforce payment under the provisions of section 10.(5).

14. Interest Rate

14.(1) In this bylaw, any reference to interest means interest at the Interest Rate.

15. Account Statement/Invoice

15.(1) The Billing Organization must issue and send an Account Statement/Invoice to each Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner whose vehicle has been detected by a Vehicle Identification Device. - 15 -

15.(2) The Account Statement/Invoice may contain sufficient information

(a) to allow a Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner to proceed with the dispute resolution and reconsideration procedures and to appeal to an arbitrator under this bylaw; and

(b) such other information as the Authority or the Billing Organization deems necessary or desirable.

16. Authority May Act as Billing Organization

16.(1) The Authority may, from time to time, elect not to appoint a Billing Organization and may on its own behalf charge and collect DeSignated Tolls and interest on Designated Tolls and carry out the functions of a Billing Organization, in which case applicable references to a Billing Organization in this bylaw shall be deemed to be references to the Authority.

17. Board May Establish Procedures, Policies, Forms and Documents

17.(1) The Board may, from time to time, by resolution establish such procedures, policies, forms and documents as the Board deems necessary or desirable to give effect to the objectives of this bylaw.

18. Traffic Demand Management

18.(1) In order to support Greater Vancouver Regional District's regional growth strategy, it is the intent of the Authority and this bylaw to consider or introduce high occupancy vehicle ("HOV") lanes on the Golden Ears Bridge under the following conditions:

(a) HOV lanes will be considered by the Authority when Level of Service D, as defined in the latest version of the Highway Capacity Manual published by the Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., U.S.A. ("HCM"), for controlled access highways persists for a continuous period of more than one hour, either during the morning or afternoon weekday peak travel period, in each direction, averaged over a four-week period between September 1st and November 30th;

(b) HOV lanes will be introduced by the Authority when Level of Service E, as defined in HCM, for controlled access highways persists for a continuous period of more than one hour, either during the morning or afternoon weekday peak travel period, in each direction, averaged over a. four-week period between September 1st and November 30th;

(c) HOV lanes will be considered by the Authority when HOV lanes have been extended on the Trans Canada Highway to the vicinity of 200th Street and on the Lougheed Highway to the vicinity of the Abernethy Connector and when HOV lanes have been extenSively implemented on municipal roads connecting to the Golden Ears Bridge Project, such that the inclusion of HOV lanes on the Golden - 16-

Ears Bridge would be. necessary to form a complete and integrated HOV network;

(d) The consideration or introduction of HOV lanes pursuant to 18.1 (a) to (c) inclusive will be subject to the Authority:

(i) determining that HOV lanes on the Golden Ears Bridge will move more people during the morning and afternoon weekday peak travel periods than the per lane peak period average of the adjacent general-purpose lanes without having an adverse impact on transit services,

(ii) considering alternatives to HOV lanes, such as differential toll charges, that could support an equivalent or greater movement of people during . the morning and afternoon weekday peak travel periods without having an adverse effect on transit services, and

(iii) determining that implementing HOV lanes, differential toll charges or other alternatives will not have an adverse effect on the financial viability and the Authority's financial obligations in respect of the Golden Ears Bridge Project.

18.(2) Traffic flows will be monitored at appropriate locations on the Golden Ears Bridge Project and connecting roads to give effect to this section 18.

18.(3) For the purpose of calculating the Levels of Service under section 18.(1)(a) and (b) reductions in traffic flows caused by lane closures; motor vehicle accidents and other incidents shall not be taken into consideration.

19. Notices and Mailing Addresses

19.(1) Notices of dispute under section 12.(3), requests for reconsideration under section 12.(5) and appeals under section 13.(1) and other communication or correspondence to the Billing Organization must be in writing and shall be physically delivered, transmitted electronically or mailed by prepaid registered mail to the Billing Organization at the address

(a) set out in the Account Statement/Invoice; or

(b) displayed on the Authority's website or on the Golden Ears Bridge toll website established by the Billing Organization.

Notices, requests and other communications under this section 19.(1) shall be deemed to have been received, if physically delivered, at the time of delivery, if sent by prepaid registered mail, on the seventh day after mailing and if transmitted electronically, on the date of transmittal. - 17-

19.{2} Account Statement/Invoices and all other communications to a Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner may be physically delivered, transmitted electronically or sent by regular mail to the Best Recent Address of the Motor Vehicle Owner or Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Owner.

19.{3} Account Statement/Invoices and other communications under section 19.{2} shall be deemed to have been received, if physically delivered, at the time of delivery, if sent by regular mail, on the seventh day after mailing and if sent electronically, on the date of transmittal.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this 4th day of December, 2009.

RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this 4th day of December, 2009.

Original Signed by Dale Parker Dale Parker, Board Chair

Original Signed by Carol Lee Carol Lee, Corporate Secretary This page is left blank intentionally SECTION 7 - CURRENT BORROWING RESOLUTION This page is left blank intentionally Translink 1600 - 4720 Kingsway Burnaby. Be V5H 4N2 Canada Tel 604-453-4500 Fax 604-453-4626 www.translink.bc.ca

South Coast British Columbia CERTIFIED RESOLUTION Transportation Authority

The South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Board of Directors considered the report entitled "Borrowing Resolution" and subsequently passed the following resolution:

"WHEREAS; A. Under section 31(4} of the South Coast British Columbia Tronsportatian Authority Act (the "SCBCTA Act"), the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority ("TronsLink") may, subject to section 31(1} of the SCBCTA Act: (a) borrow sums of money TronsLink considers necessary, and . (b) on its own, through any fiscal agent it appoints or otherwise, issue securities bearing interest at rotes, if any, and payable as to principal and interest in currencies, at places, at times and In a manner TronsLink determines;

B. TransLink considers it necessary to borrow from time to time an amount which, together with any other debt obligations of TronsLink arising from borrowings then outstanding, shall not exceed, in the aggregate, the principal amount of $2 billion, 800 million and which TransLink considers is necessary to realize the net sum required for the purpose of TransUnk;

C Under section 31(2} of the SCBCTA Act, the Municipal Finance Authority of British Columbia ("MFA") may provide financing for and on behalf of TransUnk for borrowing authorized under the SCBCTA Act;

D. Prior to the date hereof TransUnk borrowed for its purposes through the Greater Vancouver Regional District ("GVRD") and MFA pursuant to the provisions of 8.C Reg. 173/90, as amended by B.C Reg. 49/99, which regulations were passed pursuant to section 799 of the Local Government Act (the "Prior Financing Model");

E. It has been determined that it is now in the best interests of TransLink to borrow through MFA directly pursuant to the provisions of section 31(2} of the SCBCTA Act instead of borrowing from MFA through GVRD; Certified Resolution Page 2 of7

F. Pursuant to section 31(1.2) of the SCBCTA Act, TransLink, GVRD and the municipalities in the transportation service region (as defined in the SCBCTA Act) are jointly and severally liable for obligations arising under a security issued by TransLink to MFA;

G. MFA is authorized to provide financing by the issue of bonds, debentures and other evidence of indebtedness of MFA and lending the proceeds therefrom to TransLink on whose request the financing is undertaken;

H. Under the Prior Financing Model the following were enacted: (a) TransLink resolution adapted by the board of TransLink on December 10, 2003 which: (i) increased the authorized borrowing debt obligation cap from $2.4 billion to $2.8 billion (the "Debt Obligation Cap"); and (ii) requested the board of GVRD to ratify the increased Debt Obligation Cap by resolution pursuant to section 31(l)(b) of the then Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Act; (b) Resolution dated February 27, 2004 of the board of GVRD ratifying the increased Debt Obligation Cap; (c) TransLink Borrowing Resolution adopted by the board of TransLink on November 17,2006 which: (i) approved the borrowing by TransLink up to an aggregate principal amount which, together with any other debt obligations of TransLink arising from borrowings would not exceed $2.1 billion (increased from $1.639 billion), and (ii) requested the GVRD board of directors to adopt a bylaw thot would enable GVRD to borrow for TransLink up to $600 million on behalf of TransLink through MFA; and (d) GVRD Bylaw No. 1058 adopted by the board of GVRD on November 24, 2006 ("Bylaw 1058") under which MFA was requested to borrow for TransLink an amount not to exceed $525,000,000;

I. TransLink has borrowed under Bylaw No. 1058 $224,464,544 leaving a balance of authorized borrowing of $300,535,456 which has not been borrowed;

J. TransLink has determined that it will not draw down on the outstanding authorized balance of $300,535,456 under Bylaw No. 1058 under the Prior Financing Model, but will instead borrow that outstanding sum and other borrowing up to the Debt Obligation Cap (calculated in accordance with B.C. Reg. 86/99 or such other regulation that may be made under section 46(1) of the SCBCTA Act (collectively "B.c. Reg. 86/99")) directly through MFA under section 31(2} of the SCBCTA Act or otherwise as authorized under the SCBCTA Act. For the Certified Resolution Page 3 of7

purposes of section 31 (1) of the SCBCTA Act, the outstanding debt obligations of TronsUnk arising from borrowings are defined by B.C. Reg. 86/99;

K. On July 18, 2008 the board of GVRD adopted Greater Vancouver Regional District Security Issuing Amending Bylaw (GVTA) Number 1094, 2008, which amended Bylaw 1058 by reducing the amount GVRD authorized MFA to borrow for the financing requirements of TransLink from an amount not to exceed the aggregate principal amount of $525,000,000 to an amount not to exceed the aggregate principal amount of $224,464,544;

L. it is necessary for TronsUnk to borrow on amount not to exceed the aggregate principal amount which together with any other outstanding debt obligations of TransUnk arising from borrowings wiff not exceed the Debt Obligation Cap to be applied for the purposes of TransUnk. Amounts borrowed hereunder are necessary to realize the net sum required for such TransUnk purposes;

M. TransUnk proposes to borrow some or all of such monies through MFA by entering into an agreement with MFA under section 26 of the Municipal Finance Authority Act (the "MFA Act"), which agreement wiff rank as debenture .debt of TronsUnk. Nothing in this resolution prevents TransUnk from borrowing portions of such monies from other parties as authorized under the SCBCTA Act; and

N. For the purposes of financing under section 31(3) of the SCBCTA Act, the provisions of the MFA Act, except section 24, apply to TransLink as if it were a regional district except that a loan authorization bylaw or security issuing bylaw is not required for the borrowing.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the TronsUnk Board of Directors, enacts as follows:

1. TransLink be and is hereby authorized to borrow at such time or times and in such amounts from time to time (all as may be determined pursuant to paragroph 2 of this Part I) from MFA pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 10 of Part II or from another person or persons (the ·Other Financing") funds in an aggregate principal amount which together with any other outstanding debt obligations of TronsUnk arising from borrowings (including without limitation borrowing under paragraphs 1 to 10 of Part II) will not exceed the Debt Obligation Cap of $2.8 billion.

2. The Chief Executive Officer or the Choir of the board of TransUnk is hereby authorized to determine the follawlng: Certified Resolution Page 4 of7

(a) the aggregate principal amount of Other Financing, subject to the limitation specified in paragraph 1 of this Part I; (b) the princfpal amounts to be borrawed from time to time in respect of the Other Financing, and the timing and manner of such borrowing; (c) the currencies in which any borrowings in respect of the Other Financing will be made; (d) the kind or nature, and the principal amount, of securities (the "Securities"), if any, of TransUnk to be issued or otherwise disposed of in connection with the Other Financing; (e) the price at which the Securities will be sold, and whether such Securities will be sold at par value or at less or more than par value; (f) the rate or rates, if any, at which the Securities will bear interest; (g) the date upon which the Securities will be issued and, if applicable, the date upon which the Securities will mature; (h) whether the Securities or any other securities of TronsLink will be charged, pledged, hypothecated, deposited or otherwise dealt with as collateral security in connection with the Other Financing; (i) whether or not the Securities will be redeemable, and if redeemable, all matters relating to the redemption of such Securities by TransLink prior to their maturity; (j) whether or not there will be a sinking fund for the Securities, and if so determined, 0/1 matters relating to such sinking fund for the Securities; (k) whether the Securities will be secured by any charge, pledge, hypothecation or other security interest in or over any or all of the assets of TransLink; (I) whether any other or additional covenants of TransLink will be applicable to the Securities; (m) the form of the Securities and, without limitation, whether the Securities will be held by a depository agency in a book-based system for the central handling of securities that provides for the transfer of the Securities by bookkeeping entry without physical delivery of the Securities; (n) whether anyone or more persons will be retained as underwriter or selling agent with respect to the sale of the Securities; (0) whether any trustee or paying agent will be appointed in relation to the Securities and, if so determined, the appointment of such trustee ar paying agent, as applicable, and the approval of any trust deed or agency agreement, as applicable, to be entered into by TransLink; (p) all matters relating to any repayment, refunding, repurchase or redemptian of any securities of TransUnk in connection with the Other Financing; (q) whether any currency exchange, spot and future currency, interest rate exchange or future interest rate agreement will be entered by TransLink Certified Resolution Page 5 of7

in relation to the Other Financing and, if so determined, the approval of any such agreement; and (r) the approval and filing with any securities regulatary authority of any document, notice or application, together with any related fee, required by any applicable law.

3. The Chair of the board and one of the Chief Executive Officer or the Vice President, Finance and Corporate Services of TransLink are hereby authorized and directed in the name of and on behalf of TransLink to execute and deliver or cause to be executed and delivered any agreements or documents that may be required in respect of the Other Financing and execution by such persons shall be conclusive praof of their authority to act on behalf of TransLink.

4. The Chair of the board and one of the Chief Executive Officer or Vice President, Finance and Corporate Services of TransLink are hereby authorized for and on behalf of TransUnk to toke all such actions, do such things and execute, with or without the seal of TransLink, and deliver all such agreements, documents or instruments as they may deem appropriate in connection with or to give effect to the foregoing resolutions, and execution by such persons shall be conclusive proof of their authority to act on behalf of TransUnk.

1. Without limiting the generality of poragraphs 1 and 2 of Part I, MFA is hereby requested and authorized to finance from time to time at the sale cost of and on behalf of TransLink an amount not to exceed the aggregate principal amount which together with any ather outstanding debt obligations of TransLink arising from borrowings will not exceed the Debt Obligation Cap of $2.8 billion in such currency or currencies and at such rate or rates of interest, and having such maturity date or dates and with such discounts or premiums and expenses, all as MFA deems consistent with the suitability of the bond market for the sale of securities by MFA. Requests to MFA for financing from time to time in respect of the borrowing authorized under this paragraph shall be made in writing by either the Chief Executive Officer or the Vice President, Finance and Corporate Services, of TransLink.

2. For the purpose of effecting the borrowing set out in paragroph 1 of this Part II, TransLink is hereby authorized to borrow up to the amount set out in paragraph 1 by entering into and executing one or more agreements pursuant to section 26 of the MFA Act substantially in the form annexed hereto as Schedule "A" or such other form of agreement as MFA may from time to time determine (such agreement or agreements as may be entered into, delivered or subsatuted, hereinafter called the "Agreement" or "Agreements") providing for payment by Certified Resolution Page 6of7

TransUnk to MFA of the amounts required to meet the obligations of MFA with respect to its borrowings. undertaken pursuant to this resolution, which Agreement or Agreements shall rank as debenture debt of TransUnk.

E. The Agreement or Agreements shall be dated and payable in the principal amounts of money in Canadian dollars or as MFA shall determine in such other currency or currencies as shall be borrowed by MFA under porogroph 1 of this Part" and shall set out the schedule of repayment of the principal amount or amounts together with interest on unpaid amounts as sholl be determined by the Treasurer of MFA.

4. The obligation incurred under the Agreement or Agreements shall bear interest from the date that TronsLink is proVided funds under the Agreement or Agreements and shall bear interest at a rote to be determined by the Treasurer and approved by the Board of Trustees of MFA.

5. TransUnk shall raise in each year of the Agreement or Agreements sufficient sums of money to pay interest and prinCipal falling due from time to time.

6. TronsUnk shall provide and pay over to MFA such sums of money as are required to discharge its obligations in accordance with the terms of the Agreement or Agreements, including all costs of any redemptions of securities by MFA before maturity and the costs of reissuing securities and any refinancing or refunding. If the sums of money provided for in the Agreement or Agreements are not sufficient to meet the obligations of MFA, any deficiency in meeting such obligations shall be a liability of TransUnk to MFA and TransLink shall make provision to discharge such liability.

7. The obligations incurred under the Agreement or Agreements as to principal and interest shall be payable at the head office of MFA in Victoria and at such time or times as shall be determined by the Treasurer of MFA.

8. At the request of the Treasurer of MFA and pursuant to section 15 of the MFA Act, TransUnk sholl pay over to MFA such sums of money and execute and deliver such demand promissory note or notqs as are required under section 15 of the MFA Act, to form part of the debt reserve fund established by MFA in connection with the financing undertaken by MFA an behalf of TransLink pursuant to the Agreement or Agreements.

9. The Agreement or Agreements and the demand promissory note or notes referred to in paragraph 8 of this Part" shall be sealed with the seal of TransUnk and signed by the Chair af the board, and one of the Chief Executive Officer or the Vice PreSident, Finance and Corporate Services, of TransUnk and the execution by Certified Resolution Page 7 of7

such persons shall be conclusive proof of their authority to act on behalf of TransLink.

10. The Chief Executive Officer or the Vice President, Finance and Corporate Services of TransLink, are hereby authorized on behalf of TransLink to do all such things and to execute, with or without the seal of TransLink, and deliver all such other agreements, documents or instruments as they deem appropriate in connection with or to give effect to the foregoing and the execution by such persons shall be conclusive proof of their authority to act on behalf of TransLink. The Chief Executive Officer, the Vice President, Finance and Corporate Services, or the Secretary ofTransLink are also hereby authorized to sign and deliver any officer's certificate with or without the seal of TransLink required by MFA in relation to any financing by MFA on behalf of TransLink.

11. This resolution shall take effect on the date it is passed and adopted."

I, Carol A. Lee, hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and correct copy of a Resolution as finally adopted on September 3, 2008 by the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Board of Directors.

Dated at Burnaby, British Columbia, this 8th day of July, 2009.

Carol A. Lee Corporate Secretary This page is left blank intentionally I I 2011 Base Plan and Outlook I Transportation and Financial Base Plan for I 2011 to 2013 and Outlook for 2014 to 2020 I July 15, 2010 For the purpose of the Be South Coast British Columbia Transportation Autl)ority Act, this 2011 Approved by the TransLink Board Base Plan and Outlook constitutes the Base Plan prepared in 2010 for the 2011 to 2013 and submitted to the Mayors' Council I period and the Outlook for the 2014 to 2020 period. on Regional Transportation and the Regional Transportation Commissioner. I

If \]

~ II CONTENTS II Executive Summary 1

1. Background and Context 4 1.1 2011 Base Plan and Outlook Context 4 The Region's Integrated Transportation System 4 The Olympic Legacy 5 I Spotlight on Efficiency and Effectiveness . 5 Legislative Planning Framework 5 2014 to 2020 Outlook 6 I 1.2 Consultation and Approvals Process 6 Governance Framework 6 I Governance Outreach & Public Consultation 7 1.3 Planning Framework 8 I Transport 2040 8 TransLink's Sustainability Policy 9 Provincial Transit Plan . 9 Regional Growth Strategy 9 Air Quality Management Plan & Provincial Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets 9 Collaboration with Partners 10

2. Transportation Plan 12 2.1 Prioritizing Investments 12 2.2 Strategic Initiatives 12 Organizational Process Review 13 Optimizing Transit Services 13 Smart Card and Faregate Project 14 Rapid Transit Studies . 14 Transit Service Guidelines Update 15 Integration of Land Use and Transportation Planning 15 Area Transit Plans 16 Major Road Network (MRN) Sub-Regional Reviews 16 Goods Movement 16 Regional Cycling Strategy 16 Fare Policy Review 17 AirCare Review 17 Mid- and Long-Range Planning 17 2.3 Transportation Programs, Investments and Services 18 Transit Services 18 Roads and Bridges 20 Cycling 21 Customer Service 22 . TravelSmart . 23 Security 24 2.4 Outcomes 24 2011 to 2013 24 2014 to 2020 (Outlook) 31

3. Financial Strategy 33 3.1 Financial Context 33 Funding Source Summary 33 3.2 Revenue Projections 35 User Fees 35 Taxation Sources 38 3.3 Expenditures 42 3.4 Balance Sheet and Cash Flow Statement 45 ~ H ~ 3.5 Outlook for 2014 through 2020 47 a::: 3.6 Assumptions and Risks 48 3.7 Capital Program 51 t:f 3.8 Key Performance Indicators 53 I• II::, I' ApPENDICES II:: r Appendix 1: Consolidated Statement of Financial Position 55 111:1 Appendix 2A: Statement of Operations 56 , Appendix 2B: .Funded Statement of Operations 57 Appendix 3: Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows 58" -=I Appendix 4: Projected Borrowing Compared to Borrowing Limit and Select Financial Ratios 59 Appendix 5: Capital Cash Flows - Projects Approved and Proposed 60 II:: Appendix 6: Transit Service Hours 61 Appendix 7: Schedule of Transit Fares and Projected Fare Revenues 62 IE= -= -= Ii: I; I:;: t= r: Ii: t: Ii: t: c: !:= t:: c:: ~ g::

1= !-- ~ ii ~

~ I I I I I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Translink's 2011 Base Plan and Outlook is an update to, and is substantially consistent with, the2010 I Funding Stabilization Plan that was adopted in 2009. It has two components, a financially committed three-year Base Plan and an Outlook for the following seven years. The Base Plan for 2011 to 2013 outlines strategic initiatives, transportation programs and serviCeS that Translink will deliver usin·g I current revenue sources. The Financial Outlook for 2014 to 2020 demonstrates that TransLink's plans for 2011 to 2013 are responsible in the longer term. . \ The Metro Vancouver region has experienced unprecedented investment in transportation· infrastructure, including expansion in transit, over the past five years, which has translated into strong transit ridership growth. This growth is forecast to continue over the next two years on the strength of recent investments and Translink's focus on efficient and effective use of the region's transportation assets. The ongoing emphasis on enhanced performance will position Translink to maximize investments in programs and service expansion when additional funding is available. Without service expansion, by 2013 the efficiency and effectiveness improvements will not alone be sufficient to maintain the momentum of recent years, and the region will no longer be on the path of Transport 2040, the region's long-term strategy for a sustainable transportation system.

An evaluation of the performance of this Base Plan and Outlook relative to the six Transport 2040 goals . indicates a step backwards in the livability of the region by 2020. There '-:ViII be more cars on the road, more people living andworking in auto-dependent locations, the total amount of vehicle kilometres travelled in the region will grow, Translink will not be effective in reducing transportation-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the region and mobility for goods movement will be reduced.

Under the Base Plan without investment in expansion, the· weekday mode share of transit, cycling and walking is forecast to grow only through 2012, due to strong transit. ridership growth, before reaching plateau and then declining through 2020. The region's share of jobs and housing along the frequent transit network will increase slightly by 2013 and then decline by 2020. Total vehicle kilometres travelled in the region will grow more slowly than population growth from 2010 to 2012 but will almost match population grOWth from 2013 onwards. Because ofTransLink's constrained ability to improve mobility in the region, congestion refieffor goods movement.is unlikely by 2020.

With TransLink's current funding envelope for transportation programs and services under the 2011 Base Plan, investments were evaluated based on the priorities of maintaining services, state of good· repair, and then, upgrades to improve efficiency and effectiveness. The fourth priority is expansion, for which there is insufficient funding in this Plan. As summarized below, between 2011 and 2013,. TransLink's current funding will support transit services at current levels, fleet replacement and state of good repair investments for bus, rapid transit, SeaBus and custom transit services, projects related to smart cards and faregates, some road and cycling investments, and continued customer service and TravelSmart programming. Translink is currently working actively with the Mayors' Council and the Provincial Government to find a way to secure TransLink's share of the funding for the Evergreen Line.

11Page ,iifir ':If Planning initiatives will be undertaken to define the region's mid- and long-term transportation t ', intentions for improving the efficiency of the transport system through upgrades and expansion, and for :1I ~ managing demand, both of which respond to growth and meet the changing needs of communities. • ,I &:f TRANSIT \. ROADSr BRIDGESc I' PLANNING FOR SERVICE AND CYCLING ~ THE FUTURE -=+=. I

". Transit Service hours • Operations, maintenance • Rapid Transit Studies -= maintained at 2010 levels and rehabilitation (OMR) • Station Upgrade Planning funding to municipalities -= • Aging bus fleet replaced remains at current level • Station Area Plans ($14.075/Iane km -= • Refurbishment of older + • Other Planning Studies SkyTrain vehicles 2%/year) and below (including Area Transit Plans) -= identified needs • Sea Bus Replacement Ij:: • Fare Review • Road Minor Capital • Ongoing maintenance Program reduced to $10MI • Transportation Demand 1= of transit infrastructure year (from $20M/year) Management Strategy and systems 11= • Bike Capita I Prog ram • Sustainable Funding • Elevator & AccessibiUly reduced to $3M/year Strategy Roads and Bridges D= Improvements at (from $6M/year) Scott Road Station • Major Road Network Review Il= • Pattullo Bridge Replacement • Smart Card and • Goods Movement Strategy Project (funding for design; Faregate Project ri= no capital funding) • Completion of Regional • Hamilton Transit Centre Cycling Strategy ~ g: • Corporate cost reductions and efficiency improvements m: Ii: This Base Plan maintains overall transit service hours and TransLink-owned infrastructure in goodTepair by drawing on existing revenue sources and accumulated savings. Taking into acco'unt committed I[: investments, Plan assumptions and extrapolation of trends, TransLink's operating expenditures are forecast to be greater than revenues through.20l7. While the cumulative surplus is drawn down to ~ account for this discrepancy, the modest investments made within 2011 to 2013 are financially sustainable over the longer term. !i= t;:: TransLink intends to explore options for making renewed investments in the regional transportation system through future supplements to get "back on track" to achieving the sustainable transportation b: system envisioned in Transport 2040. !;:

2\Page 328 gende A FILE # 05Lt?IF60-swmp ~4 .. metro vancouver Greater Vancouver R(::gionai District' Greater Vancouver Water District Greater lJancolJvei' Sewerage and Drain3qe District> Metro Vancouver I-lousing Corporation 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby;BC, Canada V5H 4GB 604-432-6200 www.metrovancouver.org Office of the Chair JUL Z 1 2010 Tel. 604432-6215 Fax 604 451-6614

File: CP-18-01-LS5 Mayor Lois Jackson Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, BC V4K 3E2

Dear Mayor Jackson and Council:

Re: Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan

At their meeting on May 21 , 2010, the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Board considered and adopted the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan (the Plan). The Plan, dated May 2010, as adopted by the Board is attached. The Board directed that the Plan be circulated for member councils' endorsement specific only to the municipal actions in the Plan. The Plan was jointly developed by Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities and through an extensive consultation process considered the input from numerous participants.

I would appreciate your municipal council's endorsement, specific only to the municipal actions in the Plan, being forwarded to me by September 30, 2010. Council endorsements will be assembled by Metro Vancouver and forwarded to the BC Minister of the Environment.

If you have any questions regarding the Plan, please contact Fred Nenninger, Regional Utility Planning Division Manager, Metro Vancouver, at (604) 432-6478 or email fred. nenni [email protected].

Thank you for your participation and support in this important Metro Vancouver and municipal management plan. The Plan will serve the region well and advance the management of liquid waste in the region for the remainder of this decade.

''----

ois E. Jackson Chair, Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

LEJfTAlfn

cc: Regional Administrative Advisory Committee (RAAC) Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC)

Attachment Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan, May 2010 (4133094)

A Council report on the ILWRMP is scheduled to be brought forward August 30 at the Regular Meeting of Council.

4107851 u ~ m I I I I A. Liquid \/Vaste Management Plan I for the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District I and Member Municipalities I I I I I I I I :,'-:,.:: .\-,';.- May 2010 I ~iill metro vancouver www.metrovancouver.org , . . I c ~ 'f ~~ '-I ~ Peter Schaad 4931 6th Ave, Tsawwassen BC V4M 1L3 [email protected]

To: Mayor Lois E. Jackson Attn: Clerks Department 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta BC, V 4K 3E2

July 30, 2010

RE: Tree Removal from Corporation property

Madam Mayor!

I believe we both have the same vision ... a beautiful, green and desirable Delta to call home. Sadly, the 4 fir trees on city property outside our home at 4931 6th Ave are neither beautiful, nor desirable. They would however be suitable for a horror movie set! I've had an arborist (Mountain Maple Ltd) assess the 4 fir trees, (which were obviously not planted by the Corporation) and we've had Urban Forestry (Rob lJiggar) do a check up as well. Both agree, the trees are in sad shape, in decline and dying. This is doing our property value, curb appeal and neighbourhood, no favours. I'm requesting to remove the 4 trees at my expense, in exchange for the Corporation to plant replacement trees that are more consistent with the neighbourhood, the city plan and our unique climate and growing conditions. This will require a Corporation permit for the tree removals, and a formal request for replacement trees to be planted afterwards. Over the next several years, we will continue to rejuvinate a badly neglected property, at a substantial expense to us, in order to improve our neighbourhood, and ultimately the value of our property, as well as the neighbouring ones.

We hope you can help us resolve this issue in a fair and timely manner.

Sincerely,

Peter Schaad

8:aff has confirmed that Mr. 8:::haad'scomments are correct and that the trees are in a state of decline. 8:affwill work with Mr. 8:::haad to have the trees removed and replaced as per the e-mail. . 330 Michele Harris

From: Lois Jackson genda Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 9:40 AM A FILE # oSa-70 e$O To: Mayor & Council Subject: FW: Trucks on 72nd Ave TYPe: R €.."l t,tl.0-" fhj .eJa- DEPT:(C f\J Ir c C ('0 L- ,'., A.T. #: )O~151..u -----Original Message----- Comments: ~. I (P I tv , From: Neil N [mailto:[email protected]] ',-,' Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 8:S1 AM ('djv1H (YIf(ilhff To: Mayor Lois Jackson Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Trucks on 72nd Ave

To: The Right Honorable Mayor Lois Jackson and Council:

I have lived on 72nd Ave just west of 112th St for the last 6 years. Now I knew when I bought this house that it was on a busy street\but it was the one compromise that we had to make to be able to afford our dream house in the wonderful community of .Delta. We love living in Delta, close to the bog it is truly amazing. However recently we have noticed a real increase in the number of trucks using the street to access Hwy. 91. It's mostly dump trucks, loaded and empty. It starts early in the morning.and continues all day long. To the best of my knowledge 72nd Ave is not a truck route and these trucks are prohibited from being on this street. There appears to be no enforcement of the bylaws and these trucks are being allowed to race up and down this street unimpeded . .

All of the other access routes to Hwy 91 that allow these trucks all have large setbacks in place to reduce the sound impact on the residents,we however have no such provisions here and are forced to endure this noise on a continual basis. Now I understand that access to Hwy 91 from 72nd Ave has been a contentious issue for years and I'm not complaining about that but strictly containing my complaints to the misuse and open defiance of the bylaws put in place by Delta council. As I sit here now I'm counting about one truck every minute going by the house, some loaded some empty some going east some going west, all of them noisy and all of. them openly breaking the bylaws put in place to protect the citizens of this community.

Living on this street is not easy at the best of time. Getting in and out of my driveway can be a harrowing experience, the traffic is either racing by at 50 mph on their sprint to the connector or stopped and backed up so badly that it doesn't move at all. Then you have all the idiots with modified mufflers, screaming stereos with the bass turned up so loud that the windows in the house rattle and oh yes the trucks. It's gotten so bad now that we can't open the windows on the front of the house because of the noise and I personally along with several of my neighbors are becoming very frustrated. I know that there are bylaws about the trucks and·bylaws about racing away from traffic light and loud exhaust as well as loud stereo's but none of them are being enforced in any way shape or form.

This noise issue is seriously deteriorating the quality of our lives and I would request that city council take a look at this issue and perhaps the Police could be requested to do some enforcement down here. It wouldn't take much a few tickets here and there a couple of days a week for a while and word would spread quickly among the trucking community that this street is off limits to trucks. Having been a professional driver for more than 30 years I understand what's going on with these guys. Times are tough and a shorter route saves fuel and puts more money in their pockets and if Delta doesn't step up enforcement it's just going to get worse and worse. I see no reason why all of the residents who live on 72nd west of

1 112th should just be left to live in this mess while all of the other residents of Delta are able to enjoy a quiet peaceful existence in their little slice of heaven.

I would request of you Mayor Jackson that you look at this issue seriously and do something to help alleviate this problem.

Sincerely;

Neil D Nutbrown 11175 72nd Ave N.Delta cc Guy Gentner MLA Delta North

This message is provided in confidence and should not be forwarded to any external third party without authorization. If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or by return email and delete this message along with any attachments.

72 Avenue is neither a regional nor a municipal truck route and is signed so asto prohibit trucks from using it. Delta Police will enforce this prohibition. aaff will respond to the requestor.

2