Mayor and Council Correspondence Summary

r!"!"'?rll~tB . [~'_0; H.01 Mayor and Council External Correspondence Summary May 13.2013

I FROM I TOPIC I DEPT.. . . 203 B. Morrell & G. Bohn, Board in Brief for Metro Vancouver CLERK'S 116826 External Relations, Metro Meetings on Friday, April 26, 2013 Vancouver

204 Hon. G. Ritz, Minister of Delta Council's Resolution HR&CP 116762 Agriculture and Agri-Food Concerning Shark Finning cc: CA&E

205 Hon. K. Ashfield, Minister Impact of Shark Finning HR&CP 116799 of Fisheries and Oceans .

206 G. Moore, Chair, Metro Burns Bog Operating Agreement and HR&CP 116816 Vancouver Board Delta Nature Reserve

207 D. Jones, Coordinator, Coal Transport Through Delta HR&CP 116802 Cougar Creek Streamkeepers

207a D. Jones, Coordinator, Update on Project Permit HR&CP 116883 Cougar Creek Application Status - Fraser Surrey Stream keepers Docks

208 M. Piombini, Supervisor, An Analysis of the Report of the HR&CP 116825 Aboriginal Relations, Standing Senate Committee on Corporate Services Aboriginal Peoples on the Additions Department to Aboriginal to Reserve Process in Relations to Relations Committee, Local Government Interests . Metro Vancouver

209 R. Silvester, President & Information Regarding Port Metro HR&CP 116796 CEO, Port Metro Vancouver's Project Review Process cc: CAO Vancouver and Coal Exports Through Port Metro Vancouver

210 P. Monteith on behalf of Bill S-8, The Safe Drinking Water for HR&CP, 116815 The Right Hon. Stephen First Nations Act ENG Harper, Prime Minister

211 C. Shyong Annual Meeting at Sunshine Hills PR&C 116759 Tennis Club

212 G. Moore, Chair, Metro Metro Vancouver Environment and PR&C, 116817 Vancouver Board Parks Committee CA&E

213 M. Nicholl Gates on River Road ENG 116763

214 R. Burgess River Road Planned Closure by the ENG 116795 Corporation of Delta H.01 Mavor and Council External Correspondence Summary Mav 13,2013

I FROM I TOPIC I DEPT. I A. T. # I

215 H. Zimmermann Road Maintenance ENG 116764

216 P. Vetleson, Director, Notification of a Proposed CP&D 116813 Board & Information Amendment to the Metro Vancouver Services, Metro Regional Growth Strategy - Type Vancouver RGS 3 Amendment to Add Three Special Study Areas in the City of Port Moody

217 L. Webb File No. LUOO6821 CP&D 116818 203

...... 111 metrovancouver ~ SERV1CES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION BOARD IN BRIEF 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, Be, Canada V5H 4GB 604-432-6200 WVJW metrovancouver.org genda A FILE #; C1~,jQao~b'1fft For Metro Vancouver meetings on Friday, April 26, 2013

Please note these are not the official minutes. Board in Brief is an informal summary. Material relating to any of the following items is available on request from Metro Vancouver.

For more information, please contact: Bill Morrell, 604-451-6107, [email protected] or Glenn Bohn, 604-451-6697, [email protected]

Greater Vancouver Regional District - Parks

Belcarra Regional Park - Admiralty Point Lands Statement of Significance APPROVED

Belcarra Regional Park is the "Stanley Park of Metro Vancouver's Northeast Sector," comprising 1,104 hectares of land located within the municipalities of Belcarra, Anmore and Port Moody. The 76-hectare Admiralty Point lands, which are owned by the federal government, are a key component of this park.

A 99-year lease for the Admiralty Point lands expired in May, 2011. The Government of Canada has found these lands to be surplus to Parks Canada's needs. The Admiralty Point lease had no renewal provision.

The Board affirmed the importance of Admiralty Point as part of Belcarra Regional Park, as well as the Regional Parks system.

Regional Parks Service Review APPROVED A report proposes an outline and process for a service review of Regional Parks. Metro Vancouver's Regional Park system is composed of 22 regional parks, 5 greenways, 2 ecological conservancy areas and 4 regional reserves, totalling more than 14,500 hectares of parkland. Over 10 million people visited regional parks in 2012.

The Board approved a timeline and process for a Regional Parks Service Review between April, 2013 and October or November, 2013. A draft report about the review will be referred to member municipalities for input.

This correspondence is provided for Council's information.

1 ~111 metrovancouver ... SERVICES A,ID SOLUTIONS fOR A LIVABLE REGION BOARD IN BRIEF 4330 Kingsway. Burnaby, BC, Canada V5H 4GB 604~32~6200 www.metrovanCOUVN.tJrg

Greater Vancouver Regional District

Request by the City of Port Moody for Three Additional Regional Growth APPROVED Strategy Special Study Areas

The City of Port Moody has requested that the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) be amended to add three new RGS Special Study Areas: the Petro Canada refinery lands, the Mill and Timber site, and the Imperial Oil lands.

The three proposed special study areas cover a total of 496 hectares, most of which is designated RGS industrial. A special study area is an overlay in the RGS and does not impact the underlying RGS land use designation, only the process for amending a RGS land use designation.

The Board approved a resolution to: a) Initiate the process for a Type 3 amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy in accordance with section 857 of the Local Government Act for the amendment requested by the City of Port Moody to create three additional RGS Special Study Areas; and b) Direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed Type 3 amendment to all affected local governments and appropriate agencies.

Regional Growth Strategy Implementation Guidelines for Identifying APPROVED Freq uent Transit Development Areas

Identifying areas for growth that are well served by public transit is a key objective of the Regional Growth Strategy. Metro Vancouver worked with TransLink and municipal staff to develop guidelines.

Frequent Transit Development Areas are intended to coordinate complementary land use planning for higher density development and improved transit service through cooperation between municipalities and TransLink.

The Board adopted Regional Growth Strategy Implementation Guideline #4 - Identifying Frequent Transit Development Areas.

Opportunities for the Intensive Use of Industrial Lands - Summary Report APPROVED

Key elements of Metro Vancouver's Regional Growth Strategy are the protection of the region's established industrial land base and the intensification of industrial use capacity on those lands.

A discussion paper and summary report identifies opportunities and best practices for increasing the potential for intensive use of industrial lands. The Board endorsed the report as a means to promote , RGS objectives for industrial land protection and intensification. I

2 ~4 metrovancouver .., SERVIcES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION BOARD IN BRIEF 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VsH 4G8 604-432-6200 WWW,n'lerfOvanCCluver.org

Office Development in Metro Vancouver's Urban Centres Discussion APPROVED Paper

A discussion paper explores the factors which influence regional-scale office development and occupancy decisions, and identifies challenges and opportunities for office potential in Urban Centres.

The Board received the discussion paper for information, as context for local and regional planning. It directed staff to circulate the discussion paper to member municipalities and the development industry and to report back with an action plan based on opportunities identified in the Areas for Further Exploration section of the discussion paper.

Results from the ALR Landowner Survey APPROVED In November 2012, Metro Vcincouver hired Ipsos Reid to conduct qualitative telephone interviews with Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) landowners to help determine what can be done to encourage landowners to farm or lease their land. The survey results suggest that the current situation of unfarmed land in the ALR will not change without some significant intervention.

The Board received the results from the ALR Landowner Survey for information. It also directed staff to proceed with working with the Ministry of Agriculture and the Agricultural Land Commission on next steps described in the report.

2013 Caring for the Air Report RECEIVED Caring for the Air 2013 is a plain-language report that provides information about air quality and climate change activities carried out by Metro Vancouver and partners in the Lower Fraser Valley airshed in 2012.

On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Program - Update and 2013 Work APPROVED Plan

In 2012, Metro Vancouver in collaboration with the BC Ministry of Environment, the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, the Fraser Valley Regional District, AirCare and Port Metro Vancouver, conducted a study of the diesel pollution from thousands of heavy-duty vehicles across the region.

During a 55 day period from July to October 2012, emissions from over 11,700 semi-trailer trucks, dump trucks, buses and other heavy-duty vehicles were tested as they drove past specialized testing equipment.

The results of the study confirmed that national emissions standards have been successful in reducing air emissions from heavy-duty vehicles, with newer vehicles producing significantly lower emissions than older models.

The Board directed staff to forward the report dated March 8,2013, titled "On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel

3 ~1111 metrovancouver ..., SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION BOARD IN BRIEF 4330 Klngsway. Burnaby, BC, Canada V5H 4GB 604-432~6200 wWIN.menovancouvN.org

Vehicle Program - Update and 2013 Work Plan" to the Provincial Minister of Environment with the request that the Province work with Metro Vancouver and other agencies in the development and evaluation of policy and program options to address air emissions from on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles.

Update on Communications with the Federal Government Regarding the APPROVED Additions to Reserve Policy

A repor(updates the Intergovernmental and Administration Committee on Metro Vancouver's previous efforts to convey its position paper on Federal Additions-to-Reserve Process (ATR) and correspondence with the federal Minister and Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) staff on this topic.

The Board will await further deliberations of the Aboriginal Relations Committee of the Senate report, in relation to Metro Vancouver's position paper, before considering whether to resubmit the position paper to the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples and the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

Update on Communications with the Federal Government Regarding APPROVED Legislative and Jurisdictional Barriers to Utility Servicing Agreements with Non-Treaty First Nations

A staff report provides an update on communications between Metro Vancouver and the federal government on legislative and jurisdictional barriers to utility servicing agreements with non-treaty First Nations.

The Board received the report for information and approved Metrq Vancouver continuing discussions with the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada to ensure that Board's concerns are considered with respect to the negotiation of utility servicing agreements with non-treaty First Nations.

Proposed Transportation Forum APPROVED At the March 6, 2013 meeting of the Transportation Committee, staff was directed to explore options for a Transportation Forum.

Staff recommended that the Transportation Committee organize a forum on the topic of goods movement for the Fall of 2013 involving key stakeholders. The objective of the forum would be explore how to resolve some of the regional and local challenges associated with the growth in the goods movement sector.

The Board directed staff to organize a Transportation Forum in the Fall of 2013 and report back on a more detailed program and agenda.

4 ~~ metrovancouver ~ SERVICES At--IO 50LUT10NS FOR A UVABLE REGION BOARD IN BRIEF 4330-KingswlIY, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5H 4GB 604-4j2~6200 www.metrovancouvN.org

Delegation Executive Summaries Presented at Committee - April 2013 RECEIVED The Board received a summary from Kevin Wash brook, Director, Voters Taking Action on Climate Change

Draft Audited 2012 Financial Statements APPROVED The Board approved the Audited 2012 Consolidated Financial Statements for the Greater Vancouver Regional District. It also received, for information, the Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation Audited 2012 Financial Statements.

2012 Financial Results Year-End RECEIVED Board policy requires that the Finance Committee be provided, three times per year, an update on the actual financial performance of the Metro Vancouver Districts and Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation with the report on the year-end results also sent to the Board.

Status of Reserves APPROVED The 2013 Greater Vancouver Districts' Final Budget approved in October contained estimates of reserves and their proposed uses. Some of these proposed uses were based on forecasts of year end results.

Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

MicroSludge and Green Biomethane Project Update APPROVED On June 24, 2011, the GVS&DD Board of Directors authorized the expenditure of up to $13.1 million of capital funds for the MicroSludge and Green Biomethane Project. A staff report provides an update on the status of the MicroSludge and Green Biomethane Project, and alternatives for proceeding.

The Board directed staff to continue participating in the British Columbia Utility Commission's broader inquiry into regulatory exemption for providers of biomethane and biogas to public utilities, and to file a GVS&DD-specific exemption application.

Delegation Executive Summaries Presented at Committee - April 2013 RECEIVED

The Board receiveD for information the report dated April 16, 2013 titled Delegation Executive Summaries Presented at Committee - April 2013 containing a summary received from the following delegate: Paradigm Environmental Technologies Inc. Jeff Plato, Paradigm Environmental Technologies, Inc.

5 ~~ metrovancouver ..,.. SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION BOARD IN BRIEF I 4330 Klngsway, Burnaby, Be, Canada V5H 4G8 604~432-6200 www,metrovancouver.org

2012 Financial Results Year-End RECEIVED Board policy requires that the Finance Committee and Board be provided, three times per year, an update on the actual financial performance of the Metro Vancouver Districts and Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation.

Status of Utilities Capital Expenditures to Dec. 31, 2012 RECEIVED Capital projects are typically multi-year in nature. A staff report provides a comparison between the total project budgets and total projected expenditures to project completion.

Greater Vancouver Water District

6 Mayor _Council

From: TasneemAli Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 20133:31 PM To: Mayor & Council Subject: FW: Board in Brief - April 26, 2013 Attachments: Board in Brief - April 26, 2013.pdf

Importance: High

From: ExternalRelations Date: Wednesday, 1 May, 2013 3:25 PM Cc: Glenn Bohn , Bill Morrell Subject: Board in Brief - April 26, 2013

Attached is the Metro Vancouver Board in Brief :April 26, 2013 for your information.

Material relating to any ofthe items available on request. Please contact Bill Morrell, External Relations, 604-451-6107, or Glenn Bohn, External Relations, at 604-451-6697.

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.

1 204

Minister Ministre of Agriculture and de l'Agriculture et de Agri-Food l'Agroalimentaire

Ottawa, Canada K1A DC5

~-,;~ 1 11013 Quote: 186246

Her Worship Lois E. Jackson Mayor of the Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, British Columbia V4K 3E2

Dear Madam Mayor:

Thank you for your letter, which was co-addressed to the Honourable Keith Ashfield, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, regarding Delta Council's resolution concerning shark finning. I appreciate the time you have taken to share the Council's views.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) regulates the importation of fish and seafood products based on the legislative authorities of the Fish Inspection Act, the Fish Inspection Regulations, the Food and Drugs Act, the Food and Drug Regulations, the Health ofAnimals Act, and the Health ofAnimals Regulations. The CFIA's activities focus on verifying whether seafood imports are in compliance with product and process standards related to acceptable quality, safety, and identity (labelling), and on preventing the introduction and spread of significant diseases of finfish, molluscs, and crustaceans into and within Canada.

The Government of Canada is committed to addressing the practice of shark finning, In fact, this practice has been banned in Canada since 1994 under the Fisheries Act, which is enforced by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. All licence holders for Canadian shark fisheries and for fisheries

I where sharks are landed as bycatch are subject to licence conditions that prohibit them from , engaging in shark finning. Canada was one ofthe first countries to implement a national plan of action for the conservation and management of sharks.

Our government believes that the most effective way to prevent unsustainable practices such as finning is to work with regional fisheries management organizations, such as the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, to ensure strong global management and enforcement practices. Preventing the import of products from shark species that are currently listed as endangered and that are protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is a legal obligation that we take very seriously. Environment Canada has the lead responsibility for implementing CITES on behalf ofthe federal government.

This is the Minister of Agriculture and MAYOR'S OFFICE .. .12 Agri-Food's response to Mayor Jackson's January 30, 2013 letter regarding shark APR 262013 finning. RECEI"I=D Canada Her Worship Lois E. Jackson Page 2

It is the Government of Canada's view that a complete trade ban on shark fins would penalize responsible, legitimate fishing practices without addressing overfishing or improving global fisheries management. The CFIA is exploring options to see what further actions may be taken by the Agency in this regard. The Government will continue to support responsible, legal shark harvesters while cracking down on those who break the rules.

Your concerns also fall within the jurisdiction of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Environment Canada. I trust that the Honourable Keith Ashfield, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, will give your letter every consideration, and I have taken the liberty of forwarding your correspondence to the Honourable Peter Kent, Minister ofthe Environment.

Again, thank you for writing. Your input is tremendously valuable to me.

Sincere! ,

c.c.: The Honourable Keith Ashfield, PC, MP The Honourable Peter Kent, PC, MP

! ---I .....• W From the office 'tt.. J:) THE CORPORATION OF DELTA The Mayor, ~ tois E. Jackson (.t..) ,1 ...... I .-~ genda /Sf" .0 A FILE #o!o'5d.O-DD w January 3D, 2013

The Honourable Keith Ashfield, P.C., M.P. The Honourable Gerry Ritz, P.C., M.P. Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, and Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, and ;1 Min ister for the Atlantic Gateway . Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board ; House of Commoris House of Commons Ottawa, ON K1A OAS Ottawa, ON K1A OAS

Dear Ministers,

Re: Shark Finnlng

Shark finning is an inhumane practice that threatens the sustainability of the ocean's ecosystem. Although some municipalities in Metro Vancouver and elsewhere have banned shark fin in one .form or another, such bans are largely symbol1c and the real responsibility for action lies with senior levels of govemment.

Since this issue is outside the jurisdiction of local governments, Delta Council, at its January 26, 2013 Regular Meeting, resolved to send a letter to you requesting that the senior levels of government take steps to prohibit the import, possession, sale, and distribution of shark fin.

I submit this request, along with the staff report from the Jan.uary 28, 2013 Regular Meeting ~.-JlI..L.i.oouncil for your consideration. TYPE:Jd F"D DEPT: . H'~b:e A.I. #: 115779>· Commel!.ts: 'YYl on 'f-(eJ. frI \ 15 II I

Enclosure

I cc: Kerry-Lynne Findlay, ac, MP, Delta - Richmond East, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice Jinny Sims, MP, Newton - North Delta Guy Gentner, MLA, Delta-North !"JFORMATION TO COUr,ICIL Vicki Huntington, MLA, Delta-South Delta Council ~ J' George V. Harvie, Chief Administrative Officer r:',:., ,.. ";(1V1:l?J ,US :._~~_ Sean McGill, Director of Human Resources and Corporate Planning

4500 Clarence Tayiqr Crescent, Delta, British Columbia, Canada V4K 3E2 Tel: 604 946-3210 Fax: 604946-6055 E-mail: mayor@corp delta,beca 205 Minister of Ministre des ., Fisheries and Oceans Peches et des Oceans J... ("..)

Ottawa, Canada K1A DEB ::0 '"tJ :;;0, I"\,j APR Z3 2013 . I.J.:J ~ I::' I">.J

Her Worship Mayor Lois Jackson The Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, British Columbia V4K3E2

Dear Mayor Jackson:

Thank you for your correspondence of January 30, 2013, regarding the impact of shark finning.

In 1994, the Government of Canada prohibited the practice of shark finning, the act of removing the fins from sharks and discarding the rest of the carcass, in Canadian waters. The Government of Canada promotes the full use of sharks harvested by Canadians and supports our country's shark fisheries.

The Government of Canada regulates the trade of all shark species that are protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora: the great white shark, basking shark and whale shark. These species are also protected under Canada's domestic laws, which prohibit the possession, collection, purchase or sale of these species in Canada.

The Government of Canada's approach to the management and conservation of sharks is based on a commitment to ecological sustainability, integrated fisheries management, and the precautionary approach. This approach ensures that Canada's shark fishery is managed using the best scientific advice available in order to ensure that shark populations in Canadian waters will continue to thrive. In fact, Canada's largest shark fishery, the Pacific spiny dogfish fishery in British Columbia, recently became the first shark fishery in the world to be certified as sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council.

Please be assured that Fisheries and Oceans Canada will continue to work internationally to promote the sustainable management of sharks.

Thank you for taking the time to express your concerns about this important matter.

This is the response from the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada to Mayor Jackson's January 30, 2013 letter regarding shark finning.

MAYOR'S OFFICE APR 292013 Canada RECEIVED 206

4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4GB 604-432-6200 www.metrovancouver.org

Office oj the Chair Tel. 604432-6215 Fox 604 451-6614

APR 2 5 2013 File: CR-07-01-DEL

Mayor Lois Jackson r. Yr>t:)2Ufy. 'Iut&Jdv Corporation of Delta ',".)EPT: H'f.- .;.-~_ 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, BC V4K 3E2 I ..-11-"7 A ,fl. lll~~ \to :.. " "B ~- c~m~ent~"k~~ CiJ~~I? \A l? Dear M~n: ~(J'- ~I /'"'[ ::> O'V ~ Re: Burns Bog Operating Agreement and Delta Nature Reserve 'i.-(e,t; AT I 1031~

Thank you for your letter dated March 18, 2013 noting your Council's March 4, 2013 resolutions regarding the Burns Bog Operating Agreement and Delta Nature Reserve. The successful conclusion of the Operating Agreement is consistent with commitments that Delta and Metro Vancouver agreed to in the 2004 Burns Bog Management Agreement.

I am pleased that both Delta and Metro Vancouver are putting the final touches on the Operating Agreement. In addition, I can confirm that Eliza Olson of the Burn Bog Conservation Society has already been in touch with me regarding future discussions on their societies' continued involvement in the Delta .1 Nature Reserve lands. Please note that your letter and Delta Council March 4, 2013 resolutions were included in the correspondence section of the April 11, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee agenda package. I Staff from both the Corporation of Delta and Metro Vancouver will now proceed to complete both the Operating Agreement and work on the transfer of Delta Nature Reserv.e lands into joint Delta and Metro Vancouver ownership as agreed to in the 2007 Burns Bog Ecological ConservancyManagement Plan. Metro Vancouver's involvement in the management of Delta Nature Reserve will have to be delayed until we have 'I appropriate tenure in the Delta Nature Reserve lands.

:1 In closing I would like to thank you and your Council for your ongoing work in supporting the actions i.' 1 outlined in the 2007 Management Plan and look and forward to our continued partnership in managing this great resource.

Yours truly, Staff are currently working on the instruments required to facilitate the subdivision and transfer of a half interest of the Burns Bog boundary parcels and Delta Nature Reserve. An update will be provided to Council. Chair, Metro Vancouver Board

GM/MS/tp MAYOR'S OFFICE cc: Carol Mason, Chief Administrative office, Metro Vancouver APR 3 0 2013 George V. Harvie, Chief Administrative Officer, Corporation of Delta 7256344 RECEIVED 1-" tJ) ::r.::z::, ';.p Jt rom me office!j - THE CORPORATION OF DELTA The Mayor, ~ Lois E. Jacl{son S .:J1 I"lJ

March 1B, 2013 i I Mayor Greg Moore, Chair .1 ! Metro Vancouver Board of Directors 4330 Kingsway Burnaby, BC V5H 4GB

Dear Chair Moore,

Re: Bums Bog Operating Agreement and Delta Nature Reserve

At the March 4, 2013 Regular Meeting, Delta Council considered the enclosed staff report regarding the Bums Bog Operating Agreement and. resolved as follows:

THAT the Mayor and Municipal Clerk be authorized to sign the Operating Agreement between Delta and Metro Vancouver for the Bums Bog Ecological ConseNancy Area substantially in the form included as AttachmentA. .

THAT a letter be sent to Metro Vancouver requesting that they work with the Bums Bog ConseNation Society to develop an agreement that will set out the terms of the ongoing use of the Delta Nature ReseNe by the Bums Bog ConserVation Society.

I am pleased that Council has endorsed the local government Operating Agreement for' Burns Bog and I look forward to executing this agreement in the near future.

As per the above resolution, we respectfully request that Metro Vancouver work with the Burns Bog Conservation Society (the Society) to develop a formal agreement that provides ongoing tenure for the Society within the Delta Nature Reserve. The intent of this . agreement would be to enable and authorize the ongoing use of the Delta Nature Reserve for the delivery of educational and associated programs by' the Society, once Metro Vancouver assumes the overall management responsibilities for the Delta Nature Reserve. The Society has well-established programs that are delivered in the Delta Nature Reserve which provide a valuable service to the public and encourages conservation and protection of our valuable peatlands. . .

f ;:" ". ,.. . .. /2

4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent, Delta, British Columbia, Canada V4K 3E2 Tel: 604 946·3210 Fax: 604 946-6055 E-mail: ma"or@cQflJ delta.bc.ca . ,'.. March 18, 2013 Page, 2

Thank you for your attention to the above. Please contact me at 604-946-3210 if you have any questions.

ii I '!

Enclosure

cc: Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer, Metro Vancouver . Burns Bog Conservative Society Delta Council George V. Harvie, Chief Administrative Officer Sean McGill, Director of Human Resources and Corporate Planning

~.~ "1

:. i!

, I ,.J, F.14 The Corporation of Delta COUNCIL REPORT Regular Meeting •To; Mayor and Council From: Human Resources and Corporate Planning Department

Date: February 6, 2013 .'

Bums Bog Operating Agreement

. \ The following report has been reviewed and endorsed by the Chief Administrative Officer.

• RECOMMENDATIONS: .

A. . THAT the Mayor and Municipal Clerk be authorized 10 sign the Operating Agreement between Delta and Metro Vancouver for the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy . Area substantially in the form included as Attachment A. B. THAT a letter be soot to Metro Vancouver requesting that they work with the Bums Bog Conservation Society to dElvelop'an agreement that will set Qut the terms of the ongoing use of the DeHa Nature Reserve by the Bums Bog Conservation Society.

-_..... _------_._._.. _----_... • PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report Is to seek COUncil's endorsement of an Operating Agreement between Delta and Metro Vancouver for the Bums Bog Ecological Conservancy Area. In I ; addition, the report is seeking Council's approval for a letter. to be sent to Metro Vancouver '1 asking them to work with the BUrns Bog Conservation Society to develop an agreement that will see the Society's tenure In the Delta Nature Reserve continue .

.~:

• BACKGROUND: ''S .. The Burns Bog Ecological COnservancy Area consistS of approximately 5000 acrel> of land ~1 that were purchased in 2004 collectively by all four levels of government. The 5000 acres I consist of land owned by the Province (Provincial Land) and land owned jOintly by Metro ~:l., Vancouver and Delta (Local Government Land). i~ .:i At the January 7, 2013 Regular Meeting, Couricil provided direction to staff to develop the ::l necessary agreements and covenants to add approximately 1000 acres to the Burns Bog i Ecological Conservancy Area. Council also provided direction to staff to develop an ",j Operating Agreement for the Burns Bog -Ecological Conservancy Area with Metro 1 Vancouver. :1, ;~ The Burns Bog Management Agreement signed at the time of the purchase of Burns Bog in ::, "2004 by all four levels of government. sets out the general mariagement responsibilities of :j ::', the parties with respect to Burris Bog. Metro VanCouver agreed to undertake management "j

;:. "' Page 2 of 4 Burns Bog Operating Agreement February 6, 2013

responsibilities ofthe ongoing oper.atlon, maintenance and capital improvements and Delta agreed to undertake management responsibilities for the drainage system in and around Burns Bog. The Burns Bog Management Agreement includes a condition that Metro Vancouver and the Province negotiate an Operating Agreement to facnitate Metro Vancouver's management of the Provincial ,Land and also that Metro Vancouver'and Delta negotiate an Operating Agreement to facilitate Metro Vancouver's management of the Local Government Land. Metro Vancouver signed an Operating Agreement wlth the Province In ' 2008.

• DISCUSSION:

Operating Agreement

A draft Operating Agreement is' included as Attachment A for Council'S conSideration and it Is recommended that the Mayor and.Municipal Clerk be authorized to sign the agreement In the, form substantially included as Attachment A.

This agreement addresses the Bums Bog lands purchased In 2004 - the Local Government Land and Provincial Land and also includes Additional Local Govemment Land. The Local Government Lands currently include an additional 1000 acres whiCh Is discussed further in this report :; Section 3 of the draft Operating Agreement sets out the responsibilities of Metro Vancouver :l and Delta in accordance with the terms agreed to in the 2004 Management Agreement. "I 1 , ' , I ' Metro Vancouver agrees to undertake overall management responsibilities for the ongoing I operation, management and maintenan~ of capital improvements. Metro Vancouver also ,i has an overall role wlth respect to coordination and approval of projects and work plans in " consultation with Delta. Also included is the coordination of the Bums B6g Ecological Conservancy Area Scientific Advisory Panel and the development and management of scientific research and monitoring programs.

I Metro Vancouver is also responsible for regulating access to Burhs Bog for scientific purposes through a permit system and taking measures to protect Burns Bog against trespass, fire, pollutants, hazards and dumping.

Delta agrees to take responsibility for the drainage system and fire management. This , includes management of the retention, storage and release of water to preserve arid protect the features that are characteristic of a raised bog ecosystem. Fire management includes ,",' development ,of wildfire control procedures specific to Bums Bog. ,1 ; ·1 It is important to note that while a formal Operating Agreement has not been signed date, . ~ to Metro Vancouver and Delta have been cooperatively wOrking'together under the principles sefout in the draft agreement

Additional Local Government Land

The draft Operating Agreement also includes a provision for the operation of Additional Local'Govemment Land under the same terms with an sl1owal)ce for parcel specific terms to be appended to the agreement as required. The AddiUonal Local Government Land ·.' ,,'

"~ Page30f4 ,~ Burns Bog Operating Agreement ,! February 6, 2013 (j I 'includes Parcel 2_ (the parcal north of the Vancouver Landfill transferred to Delta and Metro .~ ] Vancouver in 2008), the DeHa Nature Reserve, and "future additional local government .~ ~: land". Future additional local government land Includes the remaining boundary parcels thai Council has directed to be added to the Burns Bog ,Ecological Conservancy Area, ~ :1 The Delta Nature Reserve is a component of the larger Burns Bog ecosystem and has been

~;" owned by the Corporation of DeHa: for many years. Delta has promoted the Delta Nature Reserve as the only part of Burns Bog that is accessible to the public. The Bums Bog Conservation Society (the Society) uses this site for their educational tours and for hosting summer day camps. The Society has also built a boardwalk system at this location, which is heavily used by the public for recreation. The Society has also recently been successful In obtaining a $1 0,000 grant from Van city towards improvements to the boardwalk.

In the draft Operating Agreement section 4.2, acknowledges that the Delta Nature Reserve Is in the process of being transferred into joint ownership with Metro Vancouver and when this occurs it will formaHy be considered "Additional Local Government Land" and be designated a regional park. Metro Vancouver would then be responsible for the overall .? management of the land. Accordingly, it Is recommended that Metro Vancouver be sent a leiter requesting that they enter into discussions with the Burns Bog Conservation Society to develop an agreement that will set out the terms of the ongoing use of the Delta Nature Reserve by the Burns Bog Conservation Soqiety. , ~ :! General Provisions There is a requirement in the draft Operating Agreement for a Management ,Committee formed of senior staff from Delta and Metro Vancouver that would meet twice a year to i ".! discuss Burns Bog issues; This would formalize current practice. '

Implications; , Financial Implications - There are no direct financial implications with this report. I ~~ ::- • CONCLUSION: : ) .. H',' l~! It is recommended that Council endorse the BUrr)s Bog Local Government Operating ~;: Agreement that formalizes operating responsibilities for these lands with Metro Vancouver. It is 'also recommended that Metro Vancouver be formally requested to enter into . ! .i discussions with the Burns Bog ConservatiCinSociety with respect to the Society's - ~~ continued use of the Delta Nature Reserve for Burns Bog educational programs.

'·:i ::; /2--:- :;:: 1 Sean McGill ! ',1 Director of Human Resources and Corporate Planning ,<:",. :i Department submission prepared by: MikEl Brotherston, Manager of Climate AC\llon and'Environment ,,:j

:,1

:1 ::1

\:.' Page 40f4 Burns Bog Operating Agreement February 6, 2013

This report has been prepared in consultation with the followIng listed departments.

-i I ConcurrIng Departments ...... ' . . Department. ' .. r •• • • '. '''!a!11El . Slgnatu~ • " " ,,' Engineering .. Steven Lan .~~- I Par~s, Recreation & Culture Ken Kuntz ~. ~ i'J/.,I. J::&IJ is, I ,t '1MPf Municipal Solicitor ,! . Greg Vanstone I~~~~.. ;/'" "-"" Della Are and Emergency Dan Copeland J....-< ,/ I Services , .. :>r· ~ " d,./ " • ATTACHMENT:

A. Draft Burns Bog Local GovernTTient Operating Agreement B. Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area

.i 1 I ! I

-! ~. ::i

i I .. , ;j

:.-J •

~I ,

..l , " ., ,} Attachment A ,:, (~ Page 1 of 17 oJ I, H ,.i , ',., LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAND OPERATING AGREEMENT il ;-j :\ I.: i~i THIS AGREEMENT effective the 1st day of January, 2013. I. i ~" ,i ~, BElWEEN:

THE CORPORATION OF DELTA, a municipal corporation under the British Columbia Community Charter having its principal officefl~t 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent, Delta, British Columbia V4K 3E2 ,;Jill" 'I", 1 r ,dl;,k"I' ! . ,.\ ("Delta') 'iiil,i:""ii:H\!ili •. t, .·H ,I (.. , , AND: 'litH" t;. :l!W.~L .,·'i _ ,d!W" >'~l. ·",lmh. GREATER VANCOUVER REGIOAAI!i'DISTRICT, a regiona! diflti:\ct under the British Columbia Local Govemmenrt\llb/,!1aving illl principal office~I~!q43'30 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Colurribia'1\)ItR1]I.,4G8,i:ll;;" JiI" "1'1'1"q.h>, 'i' Ii ' (,Metro Vancouver") . '·iltHI1.· . 'ttL,. '[kll L lhU!jf' 'It ll~!, iHji,HH':lll' ~!mh " WHEREAS' "Ii"";!"!))!l';'I' ,)l tl:,;" . '{1 -;: '!Il{(~ fL, .~~;~I j' 'lh, '~"HHlr!Ph . .~;' . ! i', A.. . In reco~nition of the"ecological and ~n~;~a!ioiilliA~'~~s of the lan~ located I~ Delta, j , Bntlsh Columbia an~ cO,r;mt1I?n!W,known as parti'iif BurnsWorg an~ the desire to a~UI':8 and I 1. preserve such land In ,~rpetuity.HPelta, Metro:'Y:ancouver, Her Majesty the Queen In. Right of Canada ('Canada'1Jdi~iIepresen~~o;I by the Mlnl!;)!,!r of the Enviro.nment, and Her Majesty the I~ i' i i Queen in Right onhe';lfr:~y'ince !i>r British COlurTI~j1'f'(the "Province"), as represented by the "I Minisler of the Environmelrl\f,lltpr(liijtlIDl~~M~inist~r~f Water, Land and Ai~ ~.rotection), enter~ " Into a ~em9[,~\\~\l!lh9funde'~\~Rdln9'I(\H~nM,m~") In respect of the acquIsition of such lan~ In '\ "1 :J connectlof'l)!WltH'lllUiiljHr~perv~H~fb!and pnit~'ction as part ,"of the Burns Bog EcologIcal of Consel1l~hCY Area; "ii;;;))j )11'\ ''l!P.!, Illl!,lh\ l'l) ,:' - . :i~, .. i1i~illlt, '\lUll, 11,lil!' . . . i!{ B. ., pUWHR:nt to the Mod}!!!tr.e Prl?)ilhce, Metro Vancouver and Delta entered Into with certain :., ~.-, other partu:is:mfil,AQreemen(Mff Purchase and Sale dated for reference the 8'h day of March, 2004, by whi~!tltl!! to the folJ~iNing BBECA lands was transferred to Delta (as to an undivided '.'d ~.: 15931/44400 in't'$fj:l/>)) and )'IiIl

::i ::j "I fJJ i ,. ::: , Attachment A ;:; Page 20117 ;,< i~ .:!., tIIavlgation Company as shown on Plan with Fee Deposited 8825F; Secondly: . -·1 :! ,, Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 15997); Thirdly: Part on Highway Plan 73154, New 'i .;'j I Westminster District; .~ H ~ i ,I ~ ; (3) Parcel Identifier 000-915-084 "i q Parcel One (Reference Plan 25703) of the North East Quarter of Section 14, ,i Township 4; Except: Firstly: Part subdivided by Plan 26104; Secondly: Part 'i subdiVIded by Plan 40037; Thirdly: Part dedicated as road on Plan 50544; I Fourthly: Part on Highway Plan 73154; Fifthly; PlIrt subdivided by Ph.n BCP10128, New Westminster District; and l,!jlllh j , .1 1"\' /', . A. :.!, (4) Parcel Identifier 000-915-114,l!lJ!!k. ,.1, p~rcel 1 (Reference Pla.n. 8648) District LO\f~' !~fPh'P 2, New Westminster District, Except Part subdiVided by Plan BCf.'1'1~67, 'lin!!;. ii!:jHL.. 'i;' lqH!b~. (coilectively, the "Local Government Land"); .,y·· '1(!:, . . ' i ji; . - ':; i:~ ~ I' _ , :',' C. Pursuant to the MOU, the ConservatioriHHt~i!~~ant .J~~. regist~red ail~\~ii(t~e Local Government Land, Canada, Delta, Metro VancoLlU~ri!il~1t!11/fie"provlnce entered Into the Management Agreement an(j Metro Vancouver, in coifs~nr.~on with Delta, the Province and Canada, prepared and adopted the Mal:l.~w.ement Plan; , Illllll" q'{rlh '~i Hh D. Metro Vancouver and Delta h~~~;lil~Gb passed bt\lMlIa",dedicating or otherwise recognizing the management of the Local ~qveit\'i\!I,~tJlInd as r~~¥{al park; ,I ,.'. Ilk .~jlliiiHH1~t!" .... "\ ,. E.Metro Vancouver ha~,.\\9reed to undenah~I'ovenj.lI\~Ii!igement responsibilities for the !; .' ongoing operation, mair;ll!!nil~;i\!'1d capital i;\!i.Rtovements!~1 the Local Government Land and ,, Delta has ·agreed to"yp'ilertake 'r~~~,onsibilily fon~he drainage system In ~nd around the. Loc~1 ,. ,.', Government Land .~n'i!llIrftr.,flre .mlagement, all'~n)~e terms and conditions set forth In thiS ,. . ,~ Agreement, as required ~lm~~~)!m,~?, ~,f the Ma1~gement Agreement; and

;;, F, 2 anc! the Del\

:~ -;-.t:~ In this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided or as the context otherwise reqUires: ;":i' il' (a) "Additional Local Government Land" means Parcel 2 and such other land as :.~ may be owned by Metro Vancouver and Delta as tenants in common from time 'I;. l~ ¥ 2

;': ,.; Attachment A r: Page 30t 17 !. ,. to time and designated by Metro Vancouver and Delta in accordance with the terms of this Agreement or otherwise in writing as "Additional Local Government Land" for purposes of this Agreement;

(b) "Agreement' means this agreement and· every Schedule attached hereto or made a part hereof, as amended or supplemented from time to time;

(C) "Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area" or "BBECA" means those portions of the lands commonly known as Burns B~R that are subject to the provisions of the Management Plan, namely the LI/,IfP~\l?overnment Land, the Provincial Land, and the Additional Local Governl]1eht Larid;; -" (d) "Conservation Covenant' means a covenaniit!~m!ti~E:lction 219 of ;he British Columbia Land Title Act registered against 'tHe Loca¥iliio.l(ernment Land, which :'j includes the Terms pf Instrument set olltliitScheduleA n\\l~to; .: i; '; :~; I;!' i (e) 'Defaulting Party' has the meanl"!j!~iven to It in Section 8,1;:"'" I ,., . . ,Y.;··~;ii; \i. ji;~.,; ~: (f) "Delta Nature Reserve" means a ·pfllrnrr.ty 9piilhE( east side o~;l:iflghway 91 in :.l Delta legally described as "'\iil'll!i" . ! 'lliHi:, . (1) Parcel Identifier 0~N\T~~7-960. "%i::h i All that portion of Lb~la19fL~I~trict Lot 431''Gn~\!P, 7 Plan 1180 Lying So.uth and West of Part shO!tvn'6WI\'1J!!,'I.,1 0770 Exceptl'hrstlY N 386 FT i .1 (Explanatory Plan 150~7);Se~~!¥i!"Part S~DdlVlded by Plan 35714; Thirdly':, ,Part on Plan 29J.a~iiPO~~IU!Hfll~1t on Statutory Right of Way J ~'; PI\\~!\lll~~,,!'Iew Westmllilrer Dlstnct;i~hd i~~' . :,;jif "I~: i "J ,~: (2) /!ffl~rpelldeO\l~r 01 0-397 -6il~. • I ,,,. I [e~iYi \:xcePi!;jlFirstly: Part orilrnterence Plan 6608; Secondly: Part On i .,. Staiill~~"fil~~~l~lW{,jIJ. P!~11 Jf0770; !hirdly: Part on Statutory Right o! , ... !illllliiu",Way ~~ii!7,3156:i~IiUtl~)~!Ij5art dedicated road on Plan LMP 7860 Dlstnct •.• ·I '1 ,!I!!II" ""!;!lJli~!!t437 (!l.' 0 2 New Westminster District Plan 1180, ' I, 1"'1'1 ' [ " J "i'.iI' ' Iii .1\, "'I"'iii 'j , 'j I I;!ilhw 'Envlr~nlh~tal dlq{~Wrh~ans all applicable fed,eral, provincial, mu~icipal. or "'llii\;< local laws~;t~lfltU,tes prl o~d,lnance~ r~lating to ~nVlfon,menlal matters, Including . "\;;!kall rUles, re9i'4!\'atlons, poliCIes, gUidelines, cntena or tlie like promulgated under ';:W~,~,pursuant1Wany such laws; .\., ~h I~,' .'.; i~ f i -.. .! ;1 . (h) 'lla~~9~~' Subst,mce" mean,s any contaminant, pollutant, dangero!Js good, waste·lu!6X1c substance, speCial waste or other hazardous, prohibited or ., contr~lred substance or material as defined in or pursuant to, or regulated by, Environmental Laws;

(i) "Indemnified Parties" has the meaning given to it in Section 6,3;

0) "Indemnifying Party' has the meaning given to it in Section 6,3;

(k) 'Local Government Land" has the meaning ascribed to it in Recital B hereto;

3 Attachment A Page 4 of 17.

_'Local Government" means Delta or Metro Vancouver, or any of their respective successors or assigns, as the context requires;

"Management Agreement" means the 8urns Bog Management· Agreement dated as of March 23, 2004 among Delta, Metro Vancouver, the Province and Canada; . .. (n) 'Management Plan' means the management plan for the 88ECA and all :! natural, scientific, environmental, wildlife or plant life values or attributes :\. relating to the 88ECA completed in accordanm!il1~\th the Management i l~ ':, Agreement and attached hereto as Schedule 8; 1Ijm:', I· ! (0) 'MOU' has the meaning ascribed to it In Re~if~I!A I~~~~j,;.

~ (p) "Non-Defaulting Party' has the meani!lllitl!l;~Rto it in'~~m\'~n 8_1; . .!F' '\, It, i~ti (q) "Parcel 2" means the land descri~l1~;'as Parcel Identifier 02'§~~k30~ Parcel 2 (Reference Plan BCP6339) of,~a:il]>prt of P~ryel D (Explamit0/lfj/Plan 2515) District Lot 437 Group 2 as shown onlffl\i\l1 61~\i'S'~ew Westmin~'tIlr District; "IiJ1hi!;'

,; (r) "Parc~l. 2 Conse,,:,ati~n C~venant" ~eaij~\e, co~enant under Sectio~ 219 of the Bntlsh Columbia UI~!1H.r;'/1e Act reglster~l!IiaQalnst Parcel 2, which Includes the Terms of Instrument '$~:~ijhirrt~chedule c~~~mi!' 'I • "P'j"!·' q-I" (8) "Provincial Land" means tliF. fOlt6~!ri~!~m~~be.dt;l~nd, collectively: 'I; in- -"h·;'i~~F!~ (a),p,IiI~!!ll\;}~entifi~r ~25if!~1:090 Lot;lif District Lot 437, Group 2, New .",IWeSfrn\i1ster Dlstnct plan BCP10127 .dit. -·\Ij{)j Iii ";!!;iB~!l!'i~rcel 1~I'i~tifier 00O:~1;sr122 Section 16, Township 4, New 'IV~U {1-' -PI' ,.. .;~Iill,\~iil~nffii~\n~~, ~~Ii'" . - ,wlmnH"I- .. l!'i"1!_ '-'l,;,jh~jiiiIF- ' .. .'I!i,IIHHI"';'''Hl~;,parcMllliM!lntifier 02~945-688 Lot A"District lot 437, Group 2, New .i;;P' ·'!il!lffl(estm n~~r,~~~~rlct Plan BCP11267;. . i .,Ht'j'· - "flll!- lhllqh . "·'-1(t)':, ·provlncia~14and q'PElrating Agreement" means the operating agreem,:nt '"i;:" between Me,m~ VanCouver and the Province for the operation of the Provincial ·

(v) "Proportionate Interest" means ali the right, title and interest of a Local Government in and to the Local Government Land or any Additional Local Government Land, expressed as a fraction; and

(w) "Term" has the meaning given to it in Section 9.1.

:.: 4 J 'I Attachment A :~ ~~ Page 50f 17

y. ,. ~- '.1 1.2 Additional Provisions " I ,i: In this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided or as the context otherwise requires: i I:. '.' . (a) the headings and captions will be considered as provided for convenience only I, ".. ! ";' and not as forming a part of this Agreement. and further will not be used to interpret, define or limit the scope, extent or intent of this Agreement or any of I ::1 its provisions; " (b) a reference tei a statute includes every regulation .mw.~~ pursuant thereto, all amendments to the statute or to any such regul~iP.1'i in f6'rce from time to time and any statute or regulation that supp'ementsl$~I$upersedes such statute or :. any such regulation;.i!fl' 'lim!,! f~HI "ih(~~i. (C) the word "including", when follOWing "1,~~neral leftY! dPi:«~,emenl, will not be construed as limiting-the general te.,iti· or 'stalement to 'H\«!specific items or matt~r~ set forth after such word, J11Ho simil~r items or maill))'~.".~~f, ralher as . permitting the general term ~r ,~t~j~lnrrnt to rilf~~ to all other ~Elmr;'or matters that could reasonably fall Within Its br!j~~rr~.~~s'Slb!e scope; )1' '" i;'~Lii (d) each reference in this /;\greement to a "S~JW1", "Recital' or 'Schedule" is to a Section or Recital of, O(i\\!§~edUle to, this A!l~;\l~ent; ,ipTi(~th ''', .. , (e) a word imp~rting the ma~Hhl!I~~!)~W include~;lj~.~;~~minine or neuter and a word importing the singular\(I,1,clude!iit"~p'!Jral, ano vice versa; and ·l~· _./ '~~nj:;!~!1;"'" ];. (I) a capital~!~gnate of a de~hF~'term h~~~:h,eaning corresponding 10 that of . the defi.u!d te~i/lHl'I'! 'il, . "!f }' III !~HPc 1 IlHHi'I" h':i ill. " 1.3 Amimdmeht'il'\I~lh .Jll} , I!!l!il" . Excep~ , 'agreemehts and undertakings set out heflrm'will be of a:rl~ltli~r.e or e~Vlf,tun~ss, the same is reduced to writing and duly executed by tne'I~i!!ties hereto. I:]!;!!, "111<:;;" . . J." lIiliL;"" q~iL ":!!.' 1.4 wUili~r.;W; .... "fiLii';, ld, 'I!t !?:.~ !l!!" .. Except as exp~~#~IY, provkj~i::t, no waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement will J constiMe a waiverilm~an~:Jother similar or dissimilar provision hereof and no w~iver will constitute a continuingl, .. Wer. ,W" 1,5 Severability .

Each provision of this Agreement is Intended to be severable and accordingly:

(a) if any provision contained in this Agreement is invalid, illegal or unenforceable '," in any respect, the validity, legality and enforceability of any other provision contained herein will not in any way be affected or impaired thereby except that if, on the reasonable construction of this Agreement as a whole, the applicability of the other provision presumes the validity and enforceability of

5 i· Attachment A

" Page 6 0117 ~~ ,;, .:. ::: _the particular provision, then the other provision will be deemed also to be .. ~~ invalid or unenforceable; and ;.~ ;;

·:i ':"": .:i (b) if any provision of this Agreement is invalid or unenforceable, the balance of :j this Agreement will be construed and enforced as if all provisions so ,1 ., '. determined to be invalid or unenforceable were not contained herein . j '., "! ·1 2. PROPORTIONATE INT.ERESTS 2.1 Local Government Land -ji'h i~!~IIt'1!\1 .f~~Jf' t I • I The Local Governments acknowledge and agree that: .,ji1illlil!1l 1, I (a) as of the date of this Agreement, they have tHijl~ollowlHijl~/},divided Proportionate Interests in the LOGllIGovernment Land:,dPIl1h,'l., ',Hill!!;, Delta 15931/44400 (;315".88%) ':':: , Metro Vancouver 28469J44401ili:~~i'.12%) ·":ljii;;· .: .·';{~r:;: .::Hri:. yl (b) each Local Government owns the LO'~rihNiavemment Land as a tenant-in common with the other Local Governmenliii!liH~ccordance with its Proportionate . " Interest; and 1%11'· ·;IH!I!! . ". ,'II' I J! h, (c) except as ma~ be expressWi~~WlIinMI~~nder this'~~~~~ent or the Conservation Covenant, nBlther Local GO\lernmenl::WJllv~!l?W an¥.'f~lrd party t? .use the Local Government Land for any purpose )NItho'/it'fi!i!(:pbtalmng a permit In accordance wi~h the P~!l~qP.rm,set out in Sii~!dule E hef,$'tii or otherwise obtaining the prior written .~flnsent Ofi,m!! other Local-povernment. /1'1'1 \);\1 !H-I' , Ii \ i ~;Il' . ". \j, 'j 2.2 Addltional''(oC~~~overrl!t'ent Land '!hlt' !;..,dt ,f'IJ... li" The Local GO)(!lrI!l:I!I1Elflts a~iJj~~~~Ul~li~i~~!*!lhat:. . ,~dP~!,j:~:·:I}~~;H;l:. ·"~t~bL ·'-.:IW· .".". ,,{ff)i'" as of 'ih~l~~ of iHI~\1wre~\"ent, they have the following undivided Proportionate ""i:1!!1!1" Interests U1\m~~~eI2: '1m!!)! . ';;;1;:Delta '!ill, ~0/100 ':r~~tro vancouR#r 50/100; 'Tiq, .Ii' (b) eabW\~I?I!, .~i:ivernment owns Parcel 2 as a tenant-in-common with \!Ie .eIther Local ~~y.EIInment in accordance with its Proportionate Interest; and ,. (c) except; as may be expressly permitted under this Agreement or the Parcel 2 Conservation Covenant neither Local Government will allow any third party to use Parcel 2 for any purpose without first obtaining a permit in accordance w~h the procedure set out in Schedule E hereto or otherwise obtaining the prior written consent of the other Local Government.

6 Attachment A Page 70117

3. MANAGEMENt OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAND

3.1 Management by Metro Vancouver of the Local Government Land

Pursuant to the terms of the MOU and the Management Agreement, Metro Vancouver agrees to undertake overall management responsibilities for the ongoing operation, management and maintenance of, and all capital improvements, if any, to, the Local Government Land, all in accordance with the Conservation Covenant, the Management Plan and this Agreement. W~hout limiting the generality of the foregoing but subject to Se,ction 3.2 below, Metro H '.( Vancouver covenants to perform or cause to be performed the follo~ll1g.services in respect of H the Local Government Land during the Term and to pay all costs ~~sociated therewith, subject to the prior approval of such costs by the board of Metro Vanc~~~l:!, ~1 oil!! <;!ilh, i (a)· in consultation with Delta the coordlnatiop '~nd appIH~~!. of all projects, work plans and other ~ctivitles of a Local ~~1-i~l'Ilrrlent Withlnli~F!;~ffecting the Local Government Land, ,\1' "'" , ,1 " ,,, , 'O,I (b) subject to Section 3.2(b), site mana~ent ancitazard reducti~;~;~~tvi6es and all I, remediation actions reasonably requlrElijl~~ec,'l\~~!th~ Local Gov~riiinent Land; r: : .I ,I ''iii ii'ili' I (c) security services, Includ(rg the preparatiorlll~nlj. maintenance of an inventory of ,! points of access to theH~ft"al Government :)i.~d, signage, patrols, and the i installation and maintenan~ Q¥,:ga\es and fence~i\iiSi,~quired from time to time to f' reasonably protect the Loca~l¢b'il$fpm.~~t Land ad~/t!I~t trespass, fire, pollutants, I ·,i hazards and dumping' 'ii, "1":':;'1;:" . :'1 l '-t' ' I .. ~. I ij\,. ,,;jji L";~\i\;1i;/! i the prepar.~(~~!!qf"an inven!or\halid maps l#iid the establishment of property ,-( r: 1 mark~'reqWi~ito identify a~ If necessary and in consultation with Della, to i"·1 take :' , against!l~rcroachment~l, . .\ P . . ,j. - )I~dh\ j "Ii: 'tHw -! ; (e). regulation ~j~lj\dIP~lff~jI1QI~~.IfJ!I!r~rand en!orcement services to pr?,ect agai~st, ! .,J!1l1ff1n~li!iJ,~\!ing, il~~91IhIn9:"\~P.RIi19: vegetation :.removal or other Inappropriate H" . 'act.~~~~lll 'H," . ) '! ,~ I r '1¥fN I~ -l,EI, ' , -Itt' ';iiif l . ·I;.~~~;. '- ,. H Publltiilnf9ltnation dissemination and education services; • ij!l'~~" communi~~~)j\, ~"-!!HH~. . 'tIil); Y . (g)";E\~\)e Installatl~lland 'maintenance of regulatory and informative signage as .~

, l~!1fiffi~ed from ~!re to time; " 'Idl", .,,) (h) .the IlBlillt:;tillriland removal of garbage as' required frorn time to time; '~\'!i1IV I (i) develoam~nt and managem~nt of scientific research and monitoring. programs :1 ·1 with respect to the Local Government Land; :, "" -'1 (j) managament and administrative services with respect to the BBECA Scientific Advisory Panel and with respect to meetings of representatives of Canada, the 1 :.\ Province, Metro Vancouver and Delta; ! (k) development of a database for the collection, storage and retrieval of spatial geo referenced information and other information;

7 Attachment A ". Page ~ of 17

(I) work plan development and review in coordination .with Pelta, including facilitating annual or other required approvals by the board of Metro Vancouver and council of Pelta; and ; E ! .' .. j I< . (m) facilitatlng non-bog hydrology research and inves~gations and managing on-site , remedial measures with 'respect to vegetation, wildlife (includIng invasive ,species) and other matters,

3.2 Services PrOVided by Delta in Respect of the Local Gover~hent Land

: Pursuant to the terms of the MOU and the Management Agreem~p'wl15~~;iI, agrees to undertake " responsibility for the .drainage syste~ and fire man~gell1!!Plllnr.., and around the Local Government Land, all In accordance with the conservatlo~II¢\)Ve'tli~fltru' the Management Plan 1'.. I .•; and this Agreement. Without limitin~ the genera.lily of the tOYi;($Oing, El~ lp.l.~ovenants to perf~rm or cause to be performed the follOWIng services In res~~!lie Local qr.~ment land dunng the Term and to pay all costs associated therewith, !!!~Bject'to the prior ap~~ql{al of such costs by the council of Delta: ',::;!: 'I ·;Ii)!h,,. ,,' , !~ .' !J! (a) management of the retention, so as and [. sto~~~~i~~~,~~lel'l~~:Gfowater ~8!teserve L protect those features that are characteil~tl~l'!if a raised bog ecOsystem as well ., as the natural, scientific",environmental, wilij!jf!!, and plant life values 'relating to the Local Government La~~\i!l'1h ';ilUi" . ':' (b) development of wildfire ~~umlii~rqc!f~ures t~ IW{ja'~s fire monitoring and response, ~he identification '~rmun\l;I~~Hf;rr~ionaFand provincial resources, to address wlld,!res, access wl~n ,Ilie LO'i5IIl;l9:~i1ernment Land for fire-fighting .. personnel.,,~h~n~Wpment andllwliter supply"to fight wildfires, which wildfire, control ,pt'ocedure~hwill inClude l1ii~mitoring for Wildfire and trespass during high risk ,~tibl;pnditions!ij", ·coordinatid~i. with Metro Vancouver's services noted in sectlon~)f;IRI; andilE '~:l;p!' , ~'. ; , . .i :~" (c) ,,'I1;lYIIiI~nifI~ a~~I!U~~@)~~WgJiI~*~f.~I~~onse andfirecommands~rvices, inclu~ing :,ilv prd\lrci\\IjI~H~,<)uIPll\~"and personnel. and engag1ng other agenCies. and ~ervlces i • i I , ",iill\;" as requl~~;l? as jclt.~m~~.appropnate by Delta Counc~ or Delta Fire Chief . , , ;" t! Delt~ resi4W(;l,s the right tcil\!i~velop ~l-\b publish communication materials relating generally to Bums Bog"iifiiGonsullation W~ Metro Vancouver, provided that any such materials relating specifically t6'~~l!Vjces not p~ded by Delta as described in Section 3.2 may not be published Without the prior\i~P'Proval ooilletro Vancouver, which approval wnt not be unreasonably withheld did '.. 'U,. .:" or eaye . """,-QH,ir.:- ,';:. Id'~ 3.3 Environmen~rMatters ".~ Each Local Government will comply with all Environmental Laws pertaining to its use and .. occupation of the Local Government land. Neither Local Government will place, store, use, manufacture or release, or' allow the placemen~ storage: use, manufacture or release of, any Hazardous Substance in, on, within or from the Local Government Land except as may be permitted by and In accordance with Environmental Laws. If ~ Is determined that Hazardous Substances are present on or in the Looal Government Land as a result of a Local Government's use or occupation of the Local Governrnent" Land, that Local Government will

6 j Attachment A ~~; J'age 9 of 17

!" ~~, take all necessary action, at its own cost, to remediate the Local Government Land in j accordance with E;pvironmental Laws. "1 ::1 ", 4. ADDITIONAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAND ~'i ;;: 'I '.; Parcel I i~ 4.1 2 ~j \I The Local Gove'rnments acknowledge and agree that Parcel 2 will be managed under the same' I terms as those set out In Article for the Local Government Land (except with reference to the i 3 :1, ; Parcel 2 Conservation Covenant in place ofthe Conservation Covenaritlh, dW!' "'1, ;.j :.( 4.2 Delta Nature Reserve , ,;ll"!: 11 ii ,?1 1!;:::.,,, , ,) ;,; The Local Governments acknowledge and agree that u~ Metro,~;v.lIl)couver acquiring an ": ;.1 interest in the Delta Nature Reserve as tenant-in-commaNwiifi ,Delta, t~!belta Nature Reserve I will be designated by the Locar Governments as'lr~ditlilnal Local d~~~rnment Land" for I pu~poses of this Agreement and will be manage?,[lllllder th~, same terms ~!tlM;lse"set out, in :1, Article 3 for the Local Government Land (excep'~j\lii,l.~lreferenill! to the apphcal'il'Eil!lllnservation ;:1 ' cov~nant registered again~t the Delta Natur~ .ReseArell~,p'lali~lIMq!"e Conse.rva.~1h," Covenant), n~ subject to any parcel-specific terms and conditions set OIl\~iW\I!;!'Chedule F to thiS Agreement 'J -I!HIIL The Local Gover~~ents ~rther a~know\~:~~,and agree th~~\I\l~llbeir intenli~n that, up?n Metro Vanco,;!"er acqUI~ng an Interest In the ~~lt~\l~Wure Reservell~~fm ,land Will be dedicated or otherwise recognized as regional park b~Lb~~il?iiI,Ssed by e~l}!i!of Metro Vancouver and I q :! Della.:. ';\!\'l!;;i!lli!IHUii:i,;) , " f ... ,"1, , !. 4.3 ;'" Future Additiona,'il\l\ii.~ Governmeri\ltWlnd "',:!il" , 'llll" T!;r;H=~'r- III I , , , The L~~al '~overnmJ'fi!«*~~ckn~IJjjjbe and agre~l~r.at if the Local Governments become owners , 1 :1. of any laM as ter\an¥S"l~~ommW which the LdollP'Governments desire to be managed as .'1 , Additional 'Local Govern'lt! m,;o.~~i1~mtn~J ,~oc~IJ~'bvernments Will modify .t,hiS .agreement to II Include sucl'LJl!~\Il!lI:'Addit iil]llt.Locai tlldllfltliiljiient Land". Upon such deSignation, such land will be ~~\iIi~~'UH~nllll~ sa\fi'«,it!1rms as ifiose set out in Article 3 for th~ Local Government '.;\ Land (~~ept with rereifEj~~ ~o aii~ii~pI19able conservation covenant registered against such ;i land),Jii'iIl\lI!ce of the Cons!!.t\i.~llon Co'i/~aht), subject to any parcel-specific terms and conditions '! to be seti~~!if1 Schedule F!t~ltri8 Agr.eement. The Local Govemments further acknowledge and .~ agree that''ilIiiRi,tbelr intenticlp!\that, upon the Local Governments acquiring an interest in any ; . .,! additional lan\lJh~lll lenants-i~t~ommon as contemplated in this Section 4.3, such land will be ~:, ", dedicated or o!h~~~e r~~jI9niZed as regional park by bylaws passed by each of Melro ~.~ Vancouver and Delt~i!j!H(H', " :; , i:ml' :) I 6. PROVINCIAL tJAND

"" I, ~~ :;/ 'J 6.1 Sublicense ,! In accordance with section 8.01 of the Provincial Land Operating Agreement,' Metro Vancouver hereby grants Delta a non-transferable sublicense to occupy and use the PrOVincial Land solely' "':: for the purpose of performing the drainage and fire management services set out in Section 3.2 of this Agreement in respect of the Provincial Land and Delta hereby accepts such sublicense :! ,I ~'I and agrees to perform such services, all in accordance with this Agreement, the Management ~ ; Agreement, the Conservation Covenant and the Management Plarl. Unless earlier terminated 1 ~ .:: :~ ;;! ''I" g 1!: .!l~ it Attachment A :i Page 10 0117 ~" 5: by Metro Vancouver upon written notice 10 Delta, the term of the sublicense granted under this :j ::: Section 5.1 will be concurrent with the term of the license granted by the Province to Metro i"~ ~;" "i .' :oJ,. Vancouver pursuant to Article 2 of the Provincial Land Operating Agreement and will i automatically terminate on the effective date of any termination of the Provincial Land Operating i ~~ '" Agreement. 1 ' .. "",1 I " 5.2 Third Parties , ,1I ,I t! Except as may be expressly permitted under this AgrE!9menl or the ,Conservation Covenant, .j .1, Delta will not allow any third part,Y to use the Provincial Land fo~jl'\y,. purpose without first ·'i obtaining a permit in accordance with the procedure set out in S.'ii ,.. ule f hereto or otherwise 1 obtaining the prior written consent of Metro Vancouver or the Pr~m llIl. ' I ~'l , 1'1., '\nll~' ! ,J! !, '11,1"] 'I 5.3 Provincial Land Operating Agreement 'lU: ',I1ililt, " "- " .}iI~h~,. ;~h 'illHhi~ Delta acknowledges. and agrees thilt the sublicense ~r~nted pursuant to ~W~~.. ? 5.1 is limited to 1 the extent of the rights granted to Metro Vanc~iler under the Provlncla~ll~and Operating I Agreement and for which it has been granted (1ae'1\fu!!1.t to Sublictense. Delta a~1~@B: to comply '": ',I I with those terms of the Provincial Land Operating Ag'tiilitm~nt t~hHljre applicable ~b"the provision :"t·1 of the services described in Section 5.1 and that are b'1!j~~~to the attention orDelta by Metro i Vancouver from time to time. 'I,!;\. ",: ',: :~.!i. ) ill)h, ~U..fJ!.H -flnt!!· 5.4 Covenants Regarding provlncl~~iI~~I.. !!,'jlU,l!,;p"· , 'll -" II ;IHH{iI' i " In performing the services described in Sectl~~ 5.1 ,:J~~~1r'it .. ,,, :\ , '1, 'ji ;.il' "r;~q;ijii'" "'j , (a) observe"JI~(~i!';by and comp,ly' with ali:i;applicable laws, bylaws, orders, 'directiQ.ris, cif'dl~ces and r,

;.~. aU\lilqH\M,I~ a~y 1i#'Y affecting theip,rovincial Land, any improvement thereon or Delta's'lip'\!yltles \Hilreon; H!li" ' i " I "lU!!' 'iH1li!'jl"' ,i' 'dHh ,'I!ll)1 111 h!J-th' .t;' [ , (bJ""ll'il!l!lt'i~mmitH~!lX. wltfdili~ijIlH~Wliiary was!e,spollage or destruction on the ,,;ii" ,I. P~~Wm~J Lari'd!~t'dO anythlnlj' on the Provlncii31 Land that mElY be or become a .J ,,;l!iP' 'hazafd, , "!:!'Rr.ovlnclal L,!ijCl any Improvement, including any cteanng, excavating, digging, , ~~ ',~ ;tlffJliI\g, tunl1iilling, filling, grading or ditching of, in, on or under the Provincial Latlil\l~X,CfI#>'! as may be reasonably required for the purposes of perfor:.millg the servlili\lllHontemplElted,', hereunder; , " ";i' (d) if any claim or lien over the Provincial Land is made under the Builders Lien Act f 1: as a result of its activities, immediately take all steps necessary to have the lien :.'1 ;~. discharged, unless the claim of lien is being contested in good faith by Delta I ;"i and Delta has taken the steps necessary to ensure that the claim of lien will not 1,. subject the Provincial Land or any interest of Delta under the sublicense I () i-:;. granted hereunder to, sale or forfeiture; and :1 ~' .. ;~ not permit any person to enter on any part of the Provincial Land that is, in ~;::, (e) :1 Delta's reasonable opinion, unsafe due to an existing or potential hazard, ,:'.1 . " ~~n ;:~~,.; 10 ,~:i ':! ";'i .:;; ::i ":. Attachment A Pil@1Lof17

including fires and dangerous animals, except to the extent necessarily './ reguired to perform its selVices hereunder.

·'1 H 6. RELATIONSHIP BElWEEN THE PARTIES 6.1 Bums Bog Management Committee

:! The Burns Bog Management Committee will consist of senior Metrq;i¢lii;l;9ouver and Delta staff

;) 'J appointed by the respective parties and will meet on a semi-anm.j!!I'l)asis:' This Committee will " address but not be limited to, issues relating to the operational. r~\i~Q.nsibilities and services set :\ ' out in this Agreement. Metro Vancouver will take the !!I~a (W1Ar,-Qanizing and recording .' management committee meetings. ,"1; ·d\il'.;, . ,",i. .. ~ lHih, . ".. ,;:~ \ '·111 '" 6.2 Limit on Authority .d'·'· .. ·'L "ii!!!i:" .11 '.,,1" Neither this Ag;eement nor the relationship of tI,\~jSij~e~ as r~~~9ted herein ~~!Mi~~!~;'y way be construed to: " 11\11:,., ,p"';i, iiT" j. 11~1\!b(Y}' ", .1 (a) create a partnership b!7tween the Locat';G:~v,\,!mments or constitute any party the partner of the other~~mY!I~~reto; '!jiHi!:; (b) make either Local Gover~~J~f,\~~y way resPo~.$;'li~ for any act or omission, : I '.1 debt or loss of the other ~Rcal~R~~m/l';\l(~t, ellEiept in accordance with this Agreement; or;\ , jP"

(b) the non-obselVance or non-performance by such Indemnifying Party (or any agent, employee or representative of such Indemnifying Party) of all or any part ,I, of its obligations under this Agreement, 'j :i 'I

11 Attachment A Page 12 of 17

except to the proportionate extent that such costs, losses, charges, fees, damages, expenses, judgments, liabilities, claims, demands, actions, causes of action, suits or proceedings were caused by the negligence or wilful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties or any of them.

:1 The rights and obligations of the Local Governments under this Section 6,3 will survive expiry or termination of this Agreement. Any indemnification required to be paid by an Indemnifying Party pursuant to this Section will be paid within 30 days after notice and demand for payment has been given by the other Local Government.

7 FINANCIAL MATIERS ,jil" • fi (jl m!\" ,I l' '; .1 . ."J 7.1 other Expenses ,: Hili;. - .A1.~.· ~~l~nJ!1 ;1 Subject to .Section 7.2 and except as otherwise express~y,prll1}lded h~f~I1l,(in~Uding, for gre,ater ,'; certainty, In Sections 3,1,3.2 and 6.3) or as othervyl~mli!~h~ed to Iril\Wntlng by authonz~d signatones of each of the Local Governments; each ,~~Hal Government wlni11lm·accordance With j its Proportionate Interest, be severally responsible,~~!li' and wil.l pay, as and v:Mt~lhdue, all costs, expenses, debts, liabilities and other moneta~i\Q~ll\!ations'iJlPurred in conri~~~o\l with the operation and management of the BBECA and in acdil'~~ffn~,1f.~liltl;1iS Agreeme~r'!' "f;-:HfW 7.2 Liabilities and Obligations Inc;urred by One Lo~llc:qovernment ;:;.uJ' _ 'If!!Hf)_ . Any liabil~y or obligation incurred by one!~~p.~1 i~overnment ;;;rt~lr!\"~8Iect to the BBECA before or after execution of this ~reement with04~ t'iNhloiltNfm .. cons~nt .~f!~~ oth?r Local Government , or as otherwise prOVided In this AgreemenllWl1i be"\"~l~~Jff Ilabll,tY or obligation of such local Gov.ernment, without any ,right to contri15~p'o,ljl;)i¥roril:j1!!?ftlji~emnity by, the other Local Government. ";'i\1.H~\!~, -i~llP' 'ill- . . .;~(.:!·-"~!;~i~~~~::· 1lii. p' - 7.3 Grants >:iHqi}k _. ;tiH ":1'T" Each of the L,ocal GO~~~~w,~~!~lb~~~~~n}O o~V~ the writte~,consen~ of th~ other Lo~al' Government~OR~irl!, 6ubmiWiljl~)lan~tlim!hl!i«ll~~1~or a grant or Similar assistance In connection with the ~~£t:)Ii ot,6i»»!iYt!se iiil~M~rection wlm its obligations hereunder, Which consent will not be unr~~onably wlthl\\1;liilii~rdelaYIi\~ll>, , ' .,:~:~~;H)·, :qfHi~ '~~IIHW' . 7.4 'l'1i1,~"rance ''''ill. Ii' "~\i~" 'liIl!' I' . , Each Local GUIII"rr.ment willlP.1aintain during the Term, at its expense, the following insurance ): with regards to under this Agreement: . " I ili rn\~ponsibi'}ie6 , ~: ~ : ~ l , . , ! I ; . (a) com'm~tillal general liability insurance in an amount not less than $5,000,000 per o!icurrence;

(b) ,automobile liability insura~ce for commercial use on all vehicles owned or operated by such Local Government in an amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence; and

(c) watercraft liability insurance for all watercraft owned or operated by such local Government in amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence.

::; Attachment A Page 130f17

?~ '," Each Local Government acknowledges that the other Local Government may, from time to time, by written notice require it to Increase the amount of Insurance set out in this Section 7.4 to an amount that, taking into considecation rates of inflation and other factors, provides a substantially similar amount of coverage as on the date of this Agreement and such Local Government will cause the amounts to be changed within thirty (30) days of receiving such ::.,: notice, Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Local Government's obligations under this Section 7.4 will be suspended for so long the Local Governments provides notice that it will self-insure in respect ofthe matters set out herein: . .

8. DEFAULT «ii" . " . .- "I? 1~ . . 8.1 Events of Default.ti<1\El,. . ~~~; \{Jilj. A Local Government (the "Defaulting Party') shall be in d~f!!ijlr Und~fll~!~,~greeinlmt if: (a) such Local Government fails to pO:rfPvmIl2f;~bserve ~~gllafh~s covenants or agreements under this Agreementj'lPr. "In:ji], ,

'. !',11,1)-11;, "'11" \ I ",i'ili")'(1."., (b) . ~uch Local Government falls to -~~~IR~ ,\lW~qserve any otH~r obligation Imposed on it by or pursuant to the" ~P,/ll$ervatlon Covenant, the Parcel 2 Conservation Covena!).t, any other con~ilrilation covellant registered against the Additional Local G~M~m,ment Land, tH~l~~nagement Agreement or the Management Plan; Ij,i'.lii::ii" +:"'i' . ", . . .. - )!!i . -:'!ldJlt(iJ" '~fNU; r~ and fails to cure such default within 60 daygji!fter'f~U~I\!i~~;]Nrltten'liotlce thereof from the other 'r. " Local Government (the "Non·Defaulting Pai'liv,"), ~qf s'dtl!l\i~lWJre (other than a failure to make a requi~ed payment) Sha\\.~~mUl14\\:lle. but of a ~~illre requi!!~~"m~r~ than 60 days to cu~e, if the Defaulting Party shalll,llIli to 1';'0)~i;\lence to cUll~, such failUre WIthin such 60 day penod and ;l thereafter. to contil)'IiI~.-lij9, _corredtlliiuch failure \ll{W,'l due diligence until the same has been it: corrected "';:~thin 30'aay'S!ftWl?~ngd\~?,,~XPiryof the,!n!tlt!l 60 day period. . 8.2 . P~~~m:

':i 8.3 Remedies on Default 'I' . .:-,: If any of the events of default provided in Section 6.1 occurs and is not remedied within the , period provided, the Non-Defaulting Party may do anyone or more of the following (in addition ':1 to all other remedies provided herein): .; ',1 '-J

:~ 13 '1:: :1 , ;: ! '·c •••• : o ,, Attachment A Page 140117 :'~

, " (a) -waive the event of default; ij ~~ ~~ (b) pursue any remedy available to the Non-Defaultlng Party at law or equity, including specific performance, injunctive relief (mandatory or otherwise) or ',j other equitable relief; .1 'j , I j (c) take any action In the Defaulting Party's name that may reasonably be required ! to cure the default and the Defaulting Party will pay the Non-Defaulting Party, ! on demand, all of the costs and expenses incurred by the Non-Defaulting Party "i as a resu~ of that action; or , ,::i:\. .. ,HI· "Ii ~l :!~ . :., .,:: (d) terminate this Agreement upon 60 days written,n~Hft~ to the Defaulting Party. .-!}F ·'1!H1h. ':. 9. TERM AND TERMINATIOIli ,i , 'lilt ',llllUI!!, ,I!jl!h '), ' ·{{plk. 'i 9.1 Tann . d\IW' " 'i!ltjllh, .:~ .tlP \~!f;:i' Subjectto Section 6.3, the term of this AgreemenVaoinmence~ion the effective Ii*~:a'nd expires .,{ on October 31, 2038 (the "Tenn"), Provided that idsl;n'~t.then!i(rtlcj~fault of its objii;lations under 'J this Agreement and provided that the Provincial Lari' ,,-;! J '.~: (b) ,.::::m:~R,~rdan~i'Mth 'se(jtlo~i~H~'\'d)· ." 10. R'~P'~T~'~~~~lll~;rlo~Hl!!llil' .i~lhib!, fi\nUI: .• ~~ lfHP'} 10.~ 'R,elWestfor Meeti'q,h ,):. !l1111' "'" ~ .1 .'! \i,il\i 'llh' .. . If: IIIHI'11' 1111 . II!!I, '/ . (a) t~~ljr ~,~i~l!.greement regarding a contravention of this Agreement: _ . Ij'ill\!!' (b) there )i~"a disagreement with respect to a demand for indemnification under , I, Section 6.3; or I :" ! ,.'~'. (e) either Local Government reasonably believes that its legislative authority has 'i been fettered by the terms of this Agreement, .. either Local Govemment may give notice (a "Meeting Notice') to the. other that H requires a

.:~ meeting within 10 business days of its receipt of such Meeting Notice. ::' '.'. j \ :) ,I 14 ., ::' ~~: I ,I q Attachment A :1 Page 15 0117

10.2 Resolution I 1 , The Local Governments must, acting reasonably, attempt to resolve any issue set forth in a 1 :1 , Meeting Notice within 20 business days of the receipt of such notice by the Local Govemment 'i "~'I that did not issue it, If the Local Govemments are not abl,e to resolve the disagreement or ,I .r : , alleged fettering of discretion within ,the period set forth above, the Local Governments may appoint a mutually acceptable person to mediate the matter and the Local Governments must I 'II act reasonably and cooperate with the mediator and with each other in attempiing to resolve the " matter within 30 'business days following the appointment of the. mediator. Each Local :.\ Government will be responsible for half of the costs of any mediatioOI'ii'1l;luding the fees of the .! mediator and related expenses, provided that each Local Governm~Wt wilibe responsible for its own costs of preparing for and participating in such mediation, "P:,H:!", I t!j'=' '!'~liij" (I 11. GENERAL ,'Ilt, "Iiillili! jili1, 'il. . ll,tit ,J.,!!.1 lJ I 1'i-'~1 , 11.1 Notices . 'I'li!/!' '. , ""ilHnf!; I Anynolice required or permitted to be given P}iiJWi;;thiS Ag~~ement shall b~q~illfhting and, :}" unless a particUlar provision of. this ~gre~ment requirti~:,q\~liv~t:Y'!il'l,a spe?ified "?,itimer, shall be deemed to haVe been duly given If detivered by hand.:: Wailed by registered pos~ faxed or l emailed to the party to whom such notice is given addressetl, ,as set out below or to such other address as they may advise in writing fl:~time to time. A'A~:i\l!ch notice shall be deemed to have been given and received if delive'i~j[ti\(i!t1\lnd, when a6t~MYJjelivered, if posted, four f business days after the posting thereof, ari~,iHj;\~~r,llmailed, wli~fl transmitted. In the event ':"\.. of a disrup!ion of normal postal service, all Ml?~ices}lr.\I~~;~~II~e~d by hand or transmitted by -',' fax or email. ':; ,'p" "'["nl,(1' , ,111111'1'- 'i! liP lli1 I .;j dHl~i -.lIlith. !1 {~r' .t·" Ifto De1m"! , "liili:, 'n ':t • ' ~,ijHt ,,~ ,.I "iHlll I" '/111';(1' ~I , 4500 Cla~tn;}aY\~f.,~rescent 'filii"~ ,:i Delta, BC ~~,3Ej'l!li!i;;:!'ii',,,,, ,.f .;; iH!1fA'i~~~(; i,;;. ' ··i{HI~;:., .. ~- '~~lia;~HW'

,,,,"i'" Emalb.""j'',,, 'I; <. "',,,"'~l\ \1) .' ,~~r'- Attentiont:~fl! ;iHq~" .J!:L~W~:I' '-:;~f~H~ "4ji~!lPj!' , "'lW',. If to Metro Varlllouver:,i!' '!i1',il jQlr" ',! illr ",'1 i!il1!. ) ;l!~~ KingswaMk " giJ~y, BC,i~5H 4GB , Fax:!~Hih; !!ij!' Email: ~lHj;- Attentiqlli': •

11.2 Applicable Law " I This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with; the laws of the ,I Province of British Columbia and the laws of Canada applicable therein.

I 'I ,J :i 15

"! ; : ',,' Attachment A Page 16 of 17 \!t., il ':: i 11.3 Assignment ·'1 ·1 ., ·.1 .... , No Local Government may· assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, without the prior written I 'I ,. consent of the other Local Government, which consent may be withheld for any reason. No ,j Local Government may subcontract any of Its obligations hereunder without the prior written

~ i consent of the other Local Government, which consent will not be unreasonably w~hheld or :i delayed provided subcontract does not absolve either Local Government of Its obligations under I this Agreement. i 'I i .. ,. f, 11,4 Entire Agreement 'iF" l!lljil lI\h~l. :1 This Agreemen~ together with the MOU, the Co.nservation ~o,:"I1\~~iih,t~? Parcel 2 Conservation ., Covenant, any other conservation covenant registered agalnll~~l'ie l\!oi!itltlonal Local Government

~,: Land, the ~anageme~t Agreement, the Management Pla(l iI'Ill the C/l~!J~nt un~er secli?n 219 of the British Columbia of the Land Title A, at with 1'e1\~~. t&the bin\ll~"of titles registered ·i against the Local Govemment Land under serial g\1tl\&r 'BW113706,ll*Wutes the entire agreement between the parties and superseql!s all prior agreementsjllj\}f)per;;tandings, :'~ . neg~tiations and discussions, whether oral or wl'i'fl!~~lhbetwe~Mhe parties witilj~pect to the subject matter hereof. 'Fili" 'V·'·l, -,' i~ tH~;l,!; ,di'-!' ' t:; 'fnP ll' 11.5 Enurement·,ll",j ; t!·, . Illt~it i .. Except as provided shall of and be binding ~ I e~ressly h~rein, thi~\~~f.~~!lj\~~ en~~~li~mn,be~efit upon the parties hereto and their respectlvBj~u~~p~m,and perrrif~,l!I assigns. i j IlL !1!JH\,Hl~h' I~' I i ., 11 6 Further Assurances '1'\, 11\1' ";'H.ll/HIP,';' . . i ~ - 1-' . I'. 'Ii" 'lli~ll" , ... dHljfilSj . '1"~; ,~;.!s , The parties hereto a9,rF'Iii'i~ .1MR~~~te and dell~r all suc~'further and other documents and :~j, perform and causeJgi\~~ perfotlj}~d all such f~l1her and other acts and things as may be fl', necessary or desirable'fti((ilrder to ijlve full effect t6!l!ljS' Agreement and every proviSion hereof. ·1 :.. .1 ~~~ 11.7 I C~0~'I~~":;(~~;~:~:t~'~~~~~~$);/ " '. I ,,', .; i:, The rignts' ~nd remedi~l~r,qvided:Wii1his Agreement are cum~lative ~nd ar? given in a~dition to iJ any pill!!f;;nghts and reme!jl,\w'~ avalla~!~lll~ law, statute or ordinance, In eqUity or otherwise, and, !:1 except a:S:*,,~erwise provid~l~erein'I~He use of anyone right or remedy shall not preclude the 1'1 :> r1 use of othe~ljlli;i! Hl!l t' :~ '."-!I> I" U 11.8 counte~;i~ ,i/ ' ;j~H~h, .,£i~!T _ . ·i" This Agreement may't!~¢Xecuted and delivered by the parties In any number of counterparts as may be necessary, ea'i:h of which so signed shall be deemed to be an original, and such !,,' counterparts together" shall constitute. one. and the same instrument and notwithstanding the date of exe.cution shall be deemed to bear the date as first set forth above.

[Signature page follows.]

," :;.

.. I, ::: 16 :,:1 :::; ;;'! ~:~ Alla¢hment A pago '17 of 17

", -~

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties haVe executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.

THE CORPORATION OF DELTA by Its authorized signatories:

:i Lois E. Jackson, Mayor ,;'

oJ :.; Anglla Bains, Municipal Clerk i~- ~~ :. :,

';I Name: ",,' J , TiUe: ~;

j. !, :1 "; -I , oj ;;1 ...:i G )A ~~

.! .-j ,I, j :1 'J .~ " ) .~l

" j i 17 j !

',' Attachment B

Ii .! :1

,I :! :.;

;; I

,.i

j .i

;: " .' Mayor Council

From: TasneemAIi Sent: _ Monday, March 18, 2013 1:37 PM To: -Mayor & Council; George Harvie; Sean McGill Cc: riilike Brotherston; Angila Bains; Leanne Salmon; Dona Packer Subject: Ltr to Metro Vancouver re Burns Bog Agreement & Delta Nature Reserve Attachments: Ltr to MV re Burns Bog Operating Agmt & Delta Nature Reserve.pdf

Please find attached for your information.

Thank you.

Tasneem

r~Ali/ Administrative Secretary to the Mayor The Corporation of Delta P: (604) 946-32io F: (604) 946·6055

This message is provided in confidence and should nolbe forwarded to any external third party without authorization. If you have received this message in error, please notlfy the original sender immediately by telephone or by return email and delete this message along with any attachments.

·-1

1 207 Mayor Council

::\11;:;1 From: Deborah Jones ] ,:,;.1 Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 1 :57 PM C;' To: Mayor & Council ''§' Cc: Surrey / North Delta Leader; Now Newspaper; Eliza Olson; [email protected]!t~ [email protected]; adrian.dix,[email protected]; [email protected]; ': ••: vickihu ntington. [email protected]; Guy Gentner; jim, [email protected];\ [email protected]; Mike Brotherston; Cougar Creek Stream keepers Subject: Coal transport through Delta Attachments: Mayor & Council re coal transport through Delta.doc

Dear Mayor & Council:

Please find attached my letter regarding coal transport through Delta.

I also recommend the following articles, if you haven't already read them:

What coal train dust means for human health http://earthfix.kuow,org/energy/article/coal-dust-a-closer-Iook/

Coal dust's environmental impacts http://ea rthfix, kuow. 0 rg/ en ergy/a rticle/ coa I-d usts-e nvi ro n mental-i m pacts/

Thank you for your attention.

Regards,

Deborah Jones Rain Gardens Coordinator Cougar Creek Stream keepers (North Delta/Surrey BC)

>«(((0> >«(W> >«(W> >«(((0> >«(((0>

This correspondence has been forwarded to Port Metro Vancouver and Fraser Surrey Docks. The comments submitted by Delta on this proposed project stressed the importance of dust suppression for the rail cars and requested monitoring of the effectiveness of the dust mitigation measures should the project proceed. It was also submitted that that additional dust control measures should be implemented as determined by a monitoring program. Two public open houses on the proposed project have been proposed for late May. Once details are confirmed, this information will be communicated to Council and posted on Delta's website.

1 Deborah Jones 5612 Fairlight Crescent Delta BC V4E 1B4 CANADA April 29, 2013

Delta Mayor & Ccuncil 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta BC

Dear Mayor & Council:

Re: Coal transport through Delta

I urge you to oppose additional coal transport through Delta, unless and until all train cars and barges are completely covered and coal dust emissions reduced to 1% or less,

I'm aware that the spraying of surfactants can reduce coal dust emissions from open cars by 85%, It's the other 15% that concerns me -- as much as 100 pounds of coal dust per rail car over a 400-mile trip, according to BNSF's own figures, This is equivalent to a quarter-pound of coal dust per mile, per rail car, Multiply that by hundreds of rail cars every day, and you get a sense of the huge and costly impact this can have on human and environmental health over the long term, It's totally unacceptable,

Also at issue is the fact that if it rains (which it certainly will, as you well know), coal dust and possibly heavy metals wash out the weep holes in the bottoms of the rail cars, These toxins are very likely to seep into adjacent wetlands and salmon streams, with devastating results for the small-lunged animals that depend on these habitats, As for agriculture, how healthful will our lucrative blueberry, cranberry and potato crops be when exposed long-term to these contaminants? And how will humans fare, especially children, when exposed long-term to a known agent of lung disease?

Taken together, the Westshore and proposed Fraser Surrey Docks coal transport routes pass alongside or through virtually every single one of Delta's environmental treasures.

It's bad enough that the existing CN/CP/BNSF route to Westshore Terminals fragments and pollutes Delta's agricultural lands and migratory bird habitats around Boundary Bay, The proposed new route via BNSF tracks to Fraser Surrey Docks runs directly past Watershed Park, a stone's throw from its salmon stream Watershed Creek, The tracks then pass within 3 meters of Cougar Creek's best spawning grounds, before they enter the Delta Nature Reserve (the only public-access portion of Burns Bog), As they continue northward for 3 km (2 miles) through the DNR, they parallel the Cougar Creek salmon migration route, residential backyards and heavily-used recreational trails - again, mere meters away, The coal barge route from Surrey Fraser Docks to Texada Island goes right past Reifel Bird Sanctuary, Alaksen National Wildlife Refuge, and critical juvenile salmon habitat at the mouth of the world's greatest undammed salmon river, the Fraser. These sensitive ecosystems are irreplaceable. In the case of habitats for migratory birds and juvenile salmon, they are of international significance and absolutely critical to species survival. Yet they are being nickel-and-dimed to death by one new environmental assault after another - the proposed Fraser Surrey Docks coal terminal being just the latest of many. At some point, the last straw breaks the camel's back.

If it's so urgent and important to ship coal through Delta, then those who are profiting from this activity should pay the full cost of protecting both environmental and human health - by figuring out how to completely cover all coal trains, barges and storage areas so that coal dust emissions are reduced to 1% or less.

Thank you for your attention.

Yours sincerely, 'D..hh'-J\ Jc~s Deborah Jones Rain Gardens Coordinator Cougar Creek Streamkeepers (North Delta I Surrey BC)

Copies: Mike Brotherston (Delta Climate Action & Environment) Duncan Wilson (Port Metro Vancouver) Jim Crandles (Port Metro Vancouver) Vicki Huntington Guy Gentner Christy Clark Adrian Dix Jane Sterk John Cummins Eliza Olson The Now Newspaper The Surrey I North Delta Leader Cougar Creek Stream keepers What Coal-Train Dust Means For Human Health· EarthFix . KUOW Page 10f7

LISTEN PROGRAMS NEWS SUPPORT EVENTS CONTACT ABOUT DONATE NOW»)

FI Ilews fixed 011 til!! IIlIvironmellt

WhatClima"lo;, Chan~e Co~ld Bringing Art To Narwhal ConH

Home 1 Land Water Communities Flora and Fauna Energy ~ I I Follow us: ~

Don't Miss: \<:!wha Dam Removal C0<111n The Northwest Vokes of Coat CJean Wtltcr; The Next Act What Coal-Train Dust Means For Human Health LATEST HEADLINES March 11, 20131 KUOW Northwest Growers Worry Ahout Antihiotic Ban April 29, 20131 by COUHTNEY FLATT

Ending Year-End Checks For Green Energy Surpluses April 26, 20131 by AARON K\.JNZ ASHLEY AHEARN Court Tosses Agreement Over Rare Forest Species April 26, 2013 I by liP

Lake Managers Get New Tool To Combat Algae Aedul tour of the April 25, 2013 I by TOM BANSE The Westshore Terminal near VancDuver, B,C, handles about 30 million tons of coal per year, Westshore Terminals lOading it onto ships for export, Westshore spent $7 million llpgrading pumps, rain guns and view more headlines ) misting devices around the site used to dampen and control coal dust. I credit: Katie Campbell I roilover image tor more Share

11115 is thefirstin a two-part Facebook

series. Twitter

Email TSAWWASSEN, B.C, - With five mal export terminals under consideration in Wa.<;hington and RELATED ARTICLES Oregon, NOlthwest residents are grappling for the first time with issues Coal Dust's that arc old hat in coal states like West Virginia and Kentucky. Environmental Impacts by ASHLEY AHEARN One of those issues: coal dust. How much of it will escape along HIe journey from mines in Wyoming and Montana to proposed expOlt Multnomah County ECOTROPE terminals on the West Coast'? And what might that dust menn for public Health health? Department Report Finds Dirtier West Coast '!'rucks End Releases Coal Up In Oregon Train Report April 26, 1:51 p.m by BONNIE STEWART This Nanotech "Lily Pad" Could Obliterate Stormwater Pollution Coal Export Public }\pril25, 10:18 a.m. Meetings Are The Pros And Cons OfCar~Sharing Drawing April 24, 1:03 p.m. Northwest Crowds Urban Beekeepers Aim To Change by BONNIE STEWART Household Pesticide Use April 23, 8:<12 a.m. Where better to look for insight thall the largest existing coal expOlt terminal on the West Coast'?

At the Westshore terminal near Vancouver, British Columbia there are, at any given moment, about 1.5 million tons of coal stored in piles 8 1/2 stories high.

http://earthfix.lmow.orglenergy/article/coal-dust-a-closer-Ioolcl 4/30/2013 What Coal-Train Dust Means For Human Health· EarthFix . KUOW Page 2 of7

"The big job is to keep it here," says Ray Dykes, a spokesman fat' Westshore on a recent tour. Popular: "That's why all these sprays and new equipment is coming on." 1. Carbon Controversy: Should The Westshore has just spent $7ll1illion upgrading the series of pumps, rain guns and misting devices Northwest Grow Markets For Forest around the site used to dampen ~nd control dust from the coal piles. Water costs them about $1,5 Biofuels? million each year. Westshorc buys the water from the public water system. 2, Getting Ready For World's Largest Underwater Obselvatory 3, Beneath The Surface: An Eal'thFix Special 4, After 90 Years A Southern Oregon Mill Shuts Down 5. Cormorant Management Bill Debuts In Oregon Legislature 6, Scattle's Bn11itt Center: Ready To Debut As World's Greenest Offiee Building 7. Bringing Art To Narwhal Research In The Al'ctic 8, SW Washington Port Announces Crude Oil Deal 9. Sediment Woes For Port Angeles Water Treatment Facility Put Elwha Dam This terminal has been in operation for 40 years, In the local bar, people talk abont black dust Removal On Hold collecting on their Venetian blinds. House painting companies advertise special cleaning treatments 10. Report: Feds Planning To Drop Wolves' to remove coal dust before new paint is applied. There have been complaints about dust in Legal Protections neighboring communities like Point Roberts, just across the border in Whatcom Connty.

But Westshore Terminal has had bigger problems lately. In December, a coal tanker went off course and crashed into the conveyor helt whirring along behind where Dykes is standing. About 30 tons of Public Insight Network' coal ended up in the water.

Share yOUI' experiences as part of EarthFix's Public Insight Network.

iii Do you have a green job?

iii OregonlWashington:!s there buzz in your community about coal'trains or new export terminals? The causeway at Westshore Terminal after the December collision, O'edit: Ray Dykes/Westshore

III Join our Public Insight Network! "This has been a fun day for the environmentalists," Dykes says, "but 8,300 other shil)S went by without an incident and they jumped all over this olle.,,[lccidents happen. Do we not fly because one plane crashes?"

Thousands of ponnds of coal spi11ing into the water is not a good thing for the environment, but it is a relatively rare occurrence,

Here's a more likely scenario for the Northwest:

Dust escaping from coal trains moving through the region every day, Trains en route from Wyoming and Montana mines, through Spokane then down along the Columbia River to teI111inals along the coast.

There's some debate over how much dust comes off those trains along the way,

"The coal dust issue itseU'has been bloul ll out cif proportion in my estimation," says il-filee Elliott, a membel' q/'the Brotlu:rhood qfLocoJnotive Engineers and Tminmen who has been wOl'king on the ]'oils/oJ' almost 20 yew's, "Tt wusn't a issue that was h.appening envoy/rom the mine sites within aboHt Q 30 mile mdius,-"

Hut Elliott's own employer, BNSF Railway, has made statements to the contrary.

http://earthfix.kuow.org/energy/article/coal-dust-a-closer-loold 4/30/2013 What Coal-Train Dust Means For Human Health· EarthFix . KUOW Page 3 of7

BNSF would be the main rail company involved in moving coal through Washington and Oregon if new terminals are built in this region.

In 2009 a representative from the company testified before ufedeJ'(lZl'euiew board. ,He WGS asked bow much dust escapesfrom each coal trGin cal' during a 400 mile ('rip. His answer? 645 pounds per car.

Since the 2009 testimony coal companies have been reql1ired to apply what's called. surfactant or topper agent to the trains before they leave the mines. These compounds are mainly made up of magnesium chloride, 'which is commonly used to suppress dust on logging roads.

Dust comes offqf a coal train 1'11 Campbell County, Wyo. Credit: Michael Wemer

BNSF R.:'1ilway declined EarthFix's repe..1.ted requests for an interview about coal dust. But Comtney Wallace, a spokesperson for the company, emailed a statement.

It said "BNSF has a vested interest to ensure shippers arc in compliance with our coal-loading ntle, as coal dust poses a serious threat to the stability of our tracks,"

BNSF research has shown that the surfactants reduce the coal dust by about 85%.

That should bring the 645-pound figure down to ahout 100 pounds of coal dust escaping per car,

There are usual!y about 125 cars per coal train.

"So 110 matter what (BNSF) and the coal companies have done, we can sayfol' sure the coal dust is not r,ero," says Dan ,Jaffe, a professor of environmental and atmospheric science at the University of Washington.

Last year Jaffe and a student measured the size and distribution of particles of pollution in the ail' as coal trains passed through the Seattle area. Right now a few trains per day come through en route to existing coal export terminals in British Columbia,

Jaffe's rcsearch hasn't been published yet and he stresses that more sampling needs to he done. But his prcliminmyresults show that the air pollution signature from a passing coal train is different from othcr trains.

'Trains that were carrying coal exhibited some largel' particles ,<;llggesting that there was some loss (~f coul dust w; they were traveling by,-" Jqf.l'e said in on interview.

Coal has been transported via train for decades, yet littlc research has been done on the potential health effects for people who live HCal' coal train routes.

Much more is known about the health cffects of exposure to diesel exhaust from thc h'Uin locomotives. These very small particles of air pollution get deep into the lungs and have been connected to asthma, cardiovascular problems,

http:// earthfix.kuow .org/energylarticle/coal-dust-a-closer-lookl 4/30/2013 What CoaJ-Train Dust Means For Human Health· EarthFix . KUOW Page4of7

Credit: Courlney Flatt

Coal dust has been shown to coat the lungs of coal miners, contributing to problems like chronic bmnchitis, decreased lung function, cancel' and death,

"Presumably miners have higher exposures than WOlIld be alongside the tracks bnt we don't know that," says Juliet Van Eenwyk, an epidemiologist with the Washington State Department of Health.

Both Van Ecnwyk and Jaffe say trackside monitOling needs to be done to better ullde'l'stalld the risk of coal dust exposure.

What we do Imow, Van EeU'Vvyk says, is that children's lungs are more vulnerable. If they're exposed to air pollution they can suffer from decreased lung function for the rest of their lives.

"There could be ramifications for children at lower levels of breathing the coal dust," she says.

There arc a lot of factors that could influence Coal dust swirls while crews clean up after 30 train how much coal might escape from trains cars of coal overturned in eastern Washington in 2012. along thcirjourney to the Northwest coast. Cftc/( image for video of Clean-up, Credit: Courtney Flatt Wind, rain and hot dry weather could all play a role in how the coal dust behaves.

Public health officials in Washington and Oregon say there's enough risk to merit more specific sampling and research about coal dust before any decisions arc made about the proposed coal expOlt terminals in the NOlthwest.

Video by Katie Campbell. Coal dust graphic by Courtney Flatt. Bonnie Stewart contributed to this report.

Tuesday: What coal dust means for the environment

©i013KUOW

http://earthfix.kuow.orgienergy/articJe/coaJ-dust-a-cJoser-Jookl 4/30/2013 What Coal-Train Dust Means For Human Health· EarthFix' KUOW Page 5 of7

environment NW coal coal dust Washington Department of Health oregon coal export terminal BNSF Railway coal dust series

http://earthfix.kuow.org/energy/article/coal-dust-a-closer-Iook! 4/30/2013 Coal Dust's Environmental Impacts' EarthFix ' KUOW Page I of7

'"ORO LISTEN PROGRA;>,I$ NEI-\'S SUPPORT EVENTS CONTACT ABOll'!' DONATE NOW) FI !lIlWS fixe!! 011 the IlllllirOllmllllt

Wh3tClirnaw. Ch3ng~ C~uld Bringing Art To Ii arwhal Con;~1V3IjOl\ Group: iSe8rch Ear!hFlx M~an for North ...~""i R~S~MOh In The Alc4iQ Oregon And Idaho R wer, I Lilnililides Among N "'loris 'Most

Home I Land I \Alater ! Communities Flora find Fauna I Ene1'b'Y I Follmvus: Don't Miss: Elwha Dam Removal C'nal1n The NOl'tllwcst Voices of Coal Cle,m Water; The Next. Act Coal Dust's Environmental Impacts LATEST HEADLINES March 12, 20"13 I KUOW Northwest Growers Worry About Antibiotic Ban 112 April2B, 20131 by COURTNEY FLAT\"

Ending Year-End Checks For Green Energy Surpluses APlil26, 20131 by AARON KUN7, ASHLEY AHEARN Court Tosses Agreement Over Rare

Share 0 Forest Species Apri12G. 20131 by AP Facebook Twitter 0 Lake Managers Get New Tool To Email Combat Algae April 25. 20131 by TOM BANSE Dust comes off a cQal train in Campbell County, Wyo. The question is, what might coal dlls! from increased train lra1fie thrQugh the Norttlwest do to tile envirOl1m, Wemer I rollover image for more RELATED ARTICLES This is the second in a lIvo-part What Coal-Train series. Dust Means For Human Health Paul Barber isn't one to let a little by ASHL!\YAlfl~A.RN rain get in the way of doing his job. Multnomah County Begins Health As the plant superintendent for one of the largest open-pit mines in the Study On Coal world, partof Barber's job is to see that more than 100 million tons of coal Export Risl{s get loaded onto trains every year and sent from the Black Thunder Mine in by BONNll"lSTE'Y,\RT northeastern Wyoming to power plants around the country. Coal Export Publie ECOTROPE Meetings Are Barber sits in front of a wal! of computer monitors with blinking multi Drawing colored lights. Asked what happens if it rains on an uncovered coal train, Northwest Cl'owds Report Finds Dirtier West Coast 11.'ucics End his answer isn't nearly as high-tech as his surroundings. by BONNlESTE\'\'ART Up In Oregon Apn126, 1:51 p.m. ''They have weep holes in 'em so water don't necessarily pool in the car This Nanotech "Lily Pad" Could Obliterate grooves," he says, going on to explain that the holes allow water to drain out of the moving cars. Stormwater Pollution April 25, 10:18 a.m. The Pros And Cons Of Car-Sharing April 24. 1:03 p.m. " Urban Beekeepers Aim To Change Household Pesticide Use April 23, 8:42 a.m

Adding water weight to a coal train isn't good for business, but allowing that water to filter through the coal car, taking dust with it, may not be a good thing for the environment.

http://earthfix,kuow,org/energy/article/coal-dusts-environmental-impactsl 4/3012013 Coal Dust's Environmental Impacts' EarthFix . KUOW Page 2 of7

Powder River Basin coal mines already have to deliver coal by train to destinations in the rain Popular: soaked Pacific Northwest Some of that coal is hauled by train to export terminals In British

Columbia. There it's loaded onto ships bound for Asia. And lots more of that coal could be headed 1. Carbon Controversy: Should The to Oregon and Washington, where five coal export terminals are under consideration. Northwest Grow Markets For Forest Biofue!s? With the prospect of increased coal train and barge traffic through the Northwest, some are raising 2. Getting Ready For World's Largest concerns about how escaped coal dust could affect the environment - on the land and under Underwater Observatory water, :.). Beneath The Surface: An EarthFix Specia! 4. After 90 Years A Southern Oregon Mill Shuts Down 5. Cormorant Management Bill Debuts In Oregon Legislature 6. Seattle's Bullitt Center: Ready To Debut As World's Greenest Office Building 7. Bringing Art To Narwhal Research In The Arctic 8. SW Washington Port Announces Crude Oil Deal 9. Sediment Woes For Port Angeles Water Treatment Facility Put Elwha Dam Removal On Hold 10. Report: Feds Planning To Drop Wolves' Legal Protections

Public Insight Network'

Paul Barber is the superintendent of Black Thunder Mine, one of the largest open pit mines in the Share your experiences as part of EarthFix's world. Credit: Katie Campbell Public lmight Network.

The Environmental Protection Agency snys that if rain falls on pUes of coal it can flush out heavy iii Do you have a green job? metals like arsenic and lead. Elevated levels of arsenic have been found in the soi! surrounding a large coal export terminal in Virginia. iii Ol'cgon/\Va;.;hington; Is there bllZZ in your community about coal trains or new CXpOlt The EPA commissioned

Here are some excerpts from the 1978 report:

II "Operation of a rail line to transport coal can cause pollutant emissions, noise, potential for fires, leaching of chemicals and detrimental aesthetic effects."

III "Coal dust will cover the leaves of nearby vegetation and reduce its photosynthesis capabilities. "

II Coal dust could have "toxic effects on wildlife that might browse on this vegetation."

But the effects of coal dust may not be limited to the land. Coal trains will also follow the Columbia River, where some of the coal could be loaded onto barges. If the Gateway Pacific Terminal is built near Bellingham, up to 9 trains per day could make the journey north and south along Puget Sound.

http://earthfix.kuow.orglenergy/article/coal-dusts-environrnental-impactsl 4/3012013 Coal Dust's Environmental Impacts' EarthFix . KUOW Page 3 of7

A coal train travels along Puget Sound, Credit: Katie Campbell

"The fact that mussels and oysters filter feed means that small particles of coal will be taken up by these organisms," says Gary Shigenaka, a marine biologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Shigenaka has over 20 years of experience working emergency response on events like the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska and Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf.

I asked him what happens to marine animals if they ingest coal dust. The answer? Scientists aren't sure. "We call that the 'so what question,'" Shigenaka says. "And that's the really hard question to answer. You're exposing an organism to contaminant A, contaminant B. So what? Why should we care about itT

There are some who say maybe we shouldn't care about coal dust. After all, coal occurs naturally. In Alaska there are places along the coast where waves crash directly onto exposed seams of black coal.

Natural coal seams meet the Chukchi Sea near Wainwright, AK. Credit: Mandy Lindeberg/NOAA

"Coal dust shouldn't have an adverse effect on the marine environment," says Peter Chapman. He's a scientist with Golder Associates, an environmental consulting firm which has conducted research for the fossil fuel industry.

And sure, coal has heavy metals in it, but Chapman says it's a rocl< like any other, It's crystalline structure locks in the arsenic, mercury and other metals.

htlp:llearthfix.kuow.orgienergy/article/coal-dusts-envil'Onmental-impactsl 4/30/2013 Coal Dust's Environmental Impacts' EarthFix . KUOW Page 4 of?

That means shellfish and other animals that ingest coal dust can't get at the harmful substances inside, he says. "Unless you have some very strong acids or ways of changing the matrix they will be held in there and they won't be what we call 'biologically available.'"

But some disagree with Chapma_n's claims and say more research needs to be done - particularly on the chronic, low-level input of coal dust to the environment that steady coal train traffic could bring,

Here's a blurb from one Sludy by scientists in New Zealand:

"There are surprisingly few studies in the marine environment focusing on toxic effects of contaminants of coal at the organism, population or assemblage levels, but the limited evidence indicating bioavailabifity under cs/tarn circumstances suggests that more detailed studies would be justified."

One thing to consider here in the Northwest: the coal that would come from Powder River Basin mines is softer than the coal mined back east in places like West Virginia. That means it breaks down into dust more easily, making it more readily available to animals -- especially the filter feeders at the bottom of the food chain,

Furthermore, heavy metals may not be the most concerning contaminants in coal dust, says John Incardona, a biologist and toxicologist in Seattle with NOAA. Incardona's research focuses on what are called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs. You'll find these compounds in fossil fuels, including coal. And they're a prohlem for fisb,

"It's a very simple matter," Incardona explains. "If it leaves the PAH source and goes into the water and gets taken up by the fish it will be toxic. It doesn't matter if it's coming from coal dust or fuel,"

PAHs have been connected with liver disease and lower reproductive rates in English sole in Puget Sound. Incardona's research has shown that when salmon and zebrafish embryos are exposed to PAHs in the lab, their hearts don't develop normally. That can affect their growth as well as their ability to survive and reproduce.

Scientists don't know exactly how much heavy metals and PAHs escape from coal -- especially when it's in dust form as opposed to solid chunks, but Incardona says it wouldn't be too hard to find out

"There is a lot of simple science that can be done to answer these basic questions," In~1lrJona says, "But even with oil, almost all things relating with fossil fuel, seems like nobody really wants to get those answers. "

Trains have been carrying coal around the country for decades. But there is little research that looks specifically at the environmental impacts of chronic exposure to coal dust.

So far the EPA, the Washington Department of EcoloRV and the Oregon Department of Envinmmcntal Qunlily have raised concerns about coal dust

Some say coal dust isn't as much of a concern as the larger environmental impacts of coal exports -like global C02 emissions, air pollution from Asia or diesel exhaust from locomotives. But as communities in the Northwest consider coal export terminals, and the significant increase in coal train traffic that those terminals will bring, some experts believe coal dust merits a closer look.

Monday: Dust From Coal Trtlins And vVhnt It Meiln~ For I-Iuman He,'l.lth.

http://earthfix.kuow.org/energy/article/coal-dusts-environmentaI-impacts/ 4/3012013 Coal Dust's Environmental Impacts· EarthFix . KUOW Page 5 of7

Ma.p_gata_~@i4-i$ Go,b~r~ (Hover over markers to hear reports on coal in communities of the Northwest. Then click "website" for more EarthFix coverage. crick here for farger map view. Note: Train routes are approximations. They i1fustrate potential corridors based on existing lines and publicly available information)

Related Links:

,III EarthFix TopIc: Coal In The Northwest

environment coal dust NW coal export terminals coal dust series mercUl'Y arsenic Black Thunder Mine marine life

http://earthfix.lcuow.orglenergy/article/coal-dusts-environmental-impacts/ 4/30/2013 ,-..• 207a w ::l: Mayor Council :J:> .....oj From: Angila Bains 0 Sent: Thursday, May 09, 201312:20 PM ~ To: Mayor & Council 0 Subject: FW: Update on Project Permit Application Status - Fraser Surrey Docks c:l I~ CO

From: Mayor Lois Jackson Sent: May-09-13 12:02 PM To: Deborah Jones; Dona Packer; Tasneem Ali; Lauren Munden; Angila Bains Subject: Re: Update on Project Permit Application Status - Fraser Surrey Docks

Greetings: Thank you for your e-mail and the information it contains. There is no doubt that many people have questions regarding the proposal to bring additional coal to the West Coast Terminal and Surrey Fraser Docks. As you may be aware, Delta Council has requested that public meetings be held in order that (in particular) Surrey Fraser Dock personnel would come forward to hold such a public meeting in North Delta before the item is dealt with my Port Metro Vancouver, who is the final authority in the approval process.

I have taken the liberty of forwarding your letter along to our Municipal Clerk in order that she may place same on the Council Informational Agenda. Thank you again for taking time to write to me and sharing your thoughts. As always, I remain,

Lois E • .Jackson Mayor

From: Deborah Jones Date: Tuesday, May 7,201312:27 AM To: Port Metro Vancouver Public Affairs Cc: "[email protected]" , Mayor Lois Jackson Subject: Re: Update on Project Permit Application Status - Fraser Surrey Docks

Thank you for your letter.

,I You say that PMVis upholding "the highest standards of safety, planning and environmental reviews".

If that's the case, then why do you not require coal trains to be covered, plain and simple? Coal dust is toxic to humans and the environment. Small amounts bUild up over time to large amounts -- just as they did in the debacle of leaded gasoline.

Stop selling us out cheaply. Rail, coal, energy and industrial sectors are making lots of money out of exporting coal through the Lower Mainland. You should require them to pay for top-quality protection of our health and our environment. Why should they take the profits, while externalizing the health and environmental costs to us? 1 Yours sincerely,

Deborah Jones ----- Original Message ----- From:·Port Metro Vancouvm Public Affairs To: Undisclosed recipients: Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 12:41 PM Subject: Update on Project Permit Application Status - Fraser Surrey Docks

Dear Community Member,

Thank you for your interest in Fraser Surrey Docks (FSD) Direct Transfer Coal Facility project permit application. We would like to provide you with an update on the project status and some additional background information.

In response to municipal and community interest for more public consultation on this project, Port Metro Vancouver is requiring FSD to conduct further consultation activities this month as they refine their project and finalize their proposed mitigation strategies. As part of this second phase of consultation, FSD will be hosting two open houses in May 2013, with a focus on:

1) clarifying the scope of their project; 2) responding to the concerns raised during the first phase of consultation; 3) communicating their proposed mitigations measures; and, 4) soliciting comments on the materials presented.

Once FSD has confirmed dates and locations for the open houses, we will notify you by email should you be interested in attend i ng.

Background Information:

Our Mandate: Port Metro Vancouver's mandate is to facilitate trade on behalf of Canada. In exercising this mandate, we uphold the highest standards of safety, planning and enVironmental reviews. We strive to ensure that new developments and capacity expansions, driven by demand, meet applicable standards and minimize environmental and community impacts related to the handling and movement of goods.

Port Metro Vancouver recognizes that some citizens or groups may have concerns about the types of commodities that are traded through the Port. If these individuals and groups wish to have a dialogue about commodities, that conversation should take place between the people of Canada and senior levels of government, as it falls outside the scope of Port Metro Vancouver's jurisdiction.

Project review & decision making process: Similar to a municipal development approval process, Port Metro Vancouver assesses project permit applications based on best planning practices.The project permit review will not be finalized until all of the required technical reviews and municipal, First Nations and community consultation are completed. All projects requiring public consultation are posted on our website.

Applicants may be asked to conduct studies to assess potential impacts on air quality, noise, light, traffic and transportation, navigation, safety, security, habitat, fish and Wildlife, and soil and water quality.

Port Metro Vancouver conducts environmental reviews on all proposed projects within its jurisdiction. Projects with in-water works are regularly referred for a coordinated review process with agencies such as the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Province of B.C. and Metro Vancouver. These coordinated inter-agency reviews are for proposed projects or activities that could impact riparian areas and marine and terrestrial environments.

2 At the completion of this comprehensive review process, Port Metro Vancouver makes its decision on the application. If a project permit is approved, it is typical for the permit to include a variety of project and environmental conditions of approval. These conditions will vary depending on the nature of the project and its potential impacts.

, I ; !

3 Concerns over coal dust:

Port Metro Vancouver has been monitoring coal dust at port terminals since the 1970s. The Port upholds the highest and best management practices to mitigate fugitive coal dust on terminals, and dust suppression techniques are important components we consider in our project review process. All our coal handling facilities have air quality permits from Metro Vancouver. Additionally, Port Metro Vancouver regularly refers projects that cannot achieve emission reductions and have the potential for an increase in emissions to the regional health authorities.

The movement of coal by rail along Canada's rail corridors is regulated by Transport Canada in accordance with the Railway Act. Our understanding is that rail service providers take significant steps to minimize fugitive coal dust, such as spraying each rail car at the mine site with a dust suppressant designed to create a crust on top of the coal.

As part of their project permit review application, Fraser Surrey Docks completed an Air Dispersion Modelling Assessment, available on our website. FSD is also required to submit an Air Quality Monitoring Plan as part of their mitigation strategies. We expect this plan to be shared with the public, municipalities and First Nations for their review and comment as part of the FSD's second phase of consultation in May.

We encourage you to visit our website for further information on these and other project permit applications.

We recognize and respect that port communities require meaningful and ongoing input into the operation and expansion of port facilities, along with transparency in consultation processes and adherence to high environmental standards. We are committed to ensuring that our review of all proposed projects meets these high standards.

We hope you find the above information helpful.Thank you for taking the time to write to us.

Kind regards,

RAM CHUNGH on behalf of Public Affairs

PORT METRO VANCOUVER 100 The Pointe, 999 Canada Place Vancouver, Be Canada V6C 3T4 portmetrovancQuver.com I canadaplace.ca

This message is provided in confidence and should n.ot be forwarded to any external third party without authorization. If you have received this message in Ejrror, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or by return email and delete this message along with any attachments.

4 ...... " w 208 ~~ metrovancouver A ~7=:~:....;.;.~~o=lasf)-J. (j-bJJRJ/J~·2 ~ S;::~;'/I('f,;~ /',['.Hl ':,-;'y __ ]r":;:~:i'FJ ~cr;: ,1\ !,:'"I/·.8I,'::' RE(J'I:);'I /hVT ~ Gf!J";"9 ~rr,:;rwti,:tn o .;.. To: Aboriginal Relations Committee ~ From: Marino Piombini, Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations, Corporate Services Department

Date: April 23,2013 Meeting date: May 1, 2013

Subject: An Analysis of the Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples on the Additions to Reserve Process in Relation to Local Government Interests

RECOMMENDATION That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report, dated April 23, 2013, titled "An Analysis of the Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples on the Additions to Reserve Process in Relation to Local Government Interests."

PURPOSE To provide an analysis of the report of the Standing Senate Committee-on Aboriginal Peoples titled: "Additions to Reserve: Expediting the Process" in response to a request by the Aboriginal Relations Committee at its meeting on February 27, 2013.

:·1 BACKGROUND This report examines the report of the Standing Senate Committee .on Aboriginal Peoples titled: "Additions to Reserve: Expediting the Process", dated November 2012.

The Metro Vancouver Board endorsed its position paper on Additions to Reserve (ATR), titled "A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA)", at its meeting on March 30, 2012. The report was based on the current federal ATR policy.

A comparative analysis of the Senate's report and Metro Vancouver's Position Paper is presented as Attachment 1. A copy of the Senate's report, "Additions to Reserve: Expediting the Process" is presented as Attachment 2. A copy of Metro Vancouver's Position Paper appears as Attachment 3.

Federal ATR Policy: The federal ATR policy was developed in the late 1960s to allow First Nations to add land to existing Reserves or to create new Reserves. The policy was first revised in 1991 and then again in 2001. Under the ATR process of 2001, a parcel of land can be added to an existing Reserve mainly to accommodate community growth and meet social needs and legal obligations. Lands have been added to Reserve over time for many reasons, including fulfilling obligations under historic treaties, settling outstanding land claims, returning lands appropriated under the Indian Act and, more recently, for economic development purposes. In British Columbia, as much as 86% of ATR projects completed since 2005 have been for community additions; while only 6% of all ATR applications across Canada originated in Be.

First Nations across the country have raised concerns with the current ATR process describing it as complex, ineffective, time-consuming, and unduly restrictive. Many First Nation communities have

This is provided for Council's Aboriginal Relations Committee - 19 information. asked that the federal government revise the decade-old ATR policy, arguing that it impedes First Nations' economic and social development. Local governments have also expressed concerns about the policy's many implications for municipalities and regional districts, ranging from tax loss, incompatible land use, and lack of consultation mechanisms.

In response to this criticism, in 2010, the federal department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) initiated an evaluation process of the ATR policy. AANDC also established a Joint Working Group with the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) to examine policy changes required to improve the existing ATR policy and process. The results of the ATR evaluation have yet to be released by the federal government.

Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples: The report of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples on ATR policy was released in November 2012. The report summarizes the ATR proceedings held between February 7 and April 3, 2012. The federal government is expected to table a Government Response to the Committee's ATR report in the spring of 2.013.

The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples was created by the Senate in 1990. The general mandate of the Committee is to examine and report on the federal government's constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Metis peoples and on other matters generally relating to the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada. In the last 10 years the Committee has covered over twenty Bills of importance to First Nations, including issues related to education, land management, self-government, land claims, and treaty implementation.

During 2012, a number of First Nation leaders and organizations as well as senior federal government officials and representatives from the Office of the Auditor General were invited to ( appear before the Senate Committee to provide their views and observations on the challenges and deficiencies within the existing ATR process and to offer their suggestions on how to reform the current federal policy.

While the Senate Committee heard from First Nation witnes~es, including those from British Columbia, local governments were not given a similar opportunity to provide input. Despite the many implications of the ATR process for local governments in British Columbia, local governments were not made aware that the Committee was receiving witnesses to discuss ATR policy.

Comparing Metro Vancouver's Report to the Standing Senate Committee's Report: Metro Vancouver's response to the key points raised in the Senate's report, as well as a local government perspective on ATR issues, is set out in the enclosed table, titled: "A Comparative Analysis of the Standing Senate Committee Report and Metro Vancouver's Position Paper on the Additions to Reserve (A TR) Policy" (Attachment 1). The table provides a comparative review between the comments and recommendations included in the Committee report and the Metro Vancouver Position Paper.

Metro Vancouver's position paper identifies the following key areas of interest for local government regarding the ATR policy: engagement process, communications, servicing, land use planning, budgetary stability, approval process, time required for public processes, jurisdictional uncertainty, and third party interests.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 20 The Standing Senate Committee report refers to municipalities in the context of discussing the challenges faced by First Nations in dealing with local governments when applying for ATR. The report includes no reference to regional districts. To improve the existing ATR policy and process, the Senate Committee recommends that AANDC work in collaboration with the Joint Working Group to develop an action plan identifying options for addressing the deficiencies within the existing process that cause the greatest delays. The action plan is to be tabled before the Senate Committee by the end of March, 2013.

The Standing Senate Committee recognizes the need to improve the way the federal government currently deals with municipal and third-party interests and to explore options for supporting more effective negotiations between First Nations and municipalities. Key recommendations and areas for improvement identified by the witnesses in relation to the ATR policy include:

• Managing the Process of Additions to Reserve • Dealing with Municipal and Third-Party Interests

Managing the Process of Additions to Reserve Expediting the ATR process is the main focus for the Senate Committee in the context of reforming the ATR process. Many First Nation communities experience delays in the processing of ATR requests. The lack of dispute resolution mechanisms and inadequate resources on the part of First Nations and AANDC are the main reasons for these delays. Dispute resolution mechanisms are needed to assist First Nations and local governments in their negotiations. Several witnesses noted that lengthy servicing agreement negotiations and third-party encumbrances often hinder the I successful conversion of lands to Reserve status.

As indicated in Metro Vancouver's position paper, First Nations and AANDC need a better understanding of the potential impacts of ATR on local government. Expediting the ATR process without providing sufficient time for meaningful engagement and negotiations between First Nation communities and affected local governments may contribute to greater delays in federal approvals of ATR applications. Local governments need to consider the various processes required for Board and Council reports and public consultations. The provision of needed services to First Nations will also depend upon the service capacity available to local governments and land-use planning considerations. Direct negotiations provide an opportunity for First Nations and local governments to develop ways of working together to find solutions to complex, service-related issues.

The current ATR policy states that municipalities have 90 days to provide written comments in response to an ATR application that is within their respective municipal boundaries. Although regional districts are not formally recognized in the ATR policy, it is AANDC's current practice to inform regional districts of any new ATR applications within their boundaries. Servicing delivery, long-term planning, and capital infrastructure plans can be impacted by ATR applications. Therefore, to further improve intergovernmental cooperation and acknowledge regional districts' interests, it is important for the revised ATR policy to reference regional districts.

Dealing with Municipal and Third-Party Interests Under the current ATR policy, when land selected for ATR is located within municipal boundaries, the applicant First Nation is required to pay property taxes on the land until the ATR process is

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 21 completed and negotiate agreements with municipal governments prior to land conversion. The subject matters .of such agreements include: joint land use planning, bylaw harmonization, compensation for tax loss, and arrangements for the provision and payment of local government services. Many witnesses pointed out that the requirement of paying taxes to municipalities puts additional financial pressure on First Nation communities, thereby inhibiting their opportunities for economic development. The requirement to negotiate tax loss adjustment with municipalities was also questioned by some of the witnesses before the Senate Committee. Witnesses indicated to the Committee that the potential benefits resulting from economic development on First Nation lands will outweigh any municipal tax loss related to an ATR.

The Senate Committee's report also includes inaccuracies which are identified below: • There is a lack of understanding with respect to the difference between municipal tax loss related to property taxes and municipal services related to servicing agreements with neighbouring First Nations. • A comment is made in the report that First Nations are required under the ATR policy to enter into servicing agreements with municipalities for services they do not require. This is contrary to the current practice by which servicing agreements are "fee-for-service" contractual arrangements between First Nations and local governments for the provision of services that First Nation communities require, such as fire protection, water, sewer, police, emergency planning, and libraries. As economic development activities accelerate on Indian Reserves, First Nations' needs for municipal and regional services will likely increase over time. • Some witnesses indicated that school taxes are municipal but, in fact, in British Columbia, they are provincial taxes. Municipalities collect school taxes as part of property taxes and then remit them to the provincial government to fund education. • The school system is provided as an example of a municipal service; education, however, is under the jurisdiction of the province.

ALTERNATIVES This report is for information only. No alternatives are provided.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS While it is difficult to estimate the exact costs of ATR for local governments, the main financial implications would be lost taxation revenues and costs associated with servicing agreements.

Other implications for local government may include: future land use of the added lands, servicing needs, compatibility with Regional Growth Strategies and Official Community Plans, application of bylaws and regulations, and dispute resolution.

SUMMARY I CONCLUSION The Standing Senate Committee publication identifies a number of deficiencies in the management of the ATR process and challenges in dealing with municipal and third-party interests. Local government interests with respect to the ATR policy have been articulated in Metro Vancouver's position paper on ATR. Local government, however, has not been afforded an opportunity to present its views on ATR directly to the Standing Senate Committee, thereby resulting in a knowledge gap in the Senate's publication.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 22 Attachments and References: 1. Analysis Table: "A Comparative Analysis of the Standing Senate Committee Report and Metro Vancouver's Position Paper on the Additions to Reserve (ATR) Policy." (7231362) 2. Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples: "Additions to Reserve: Expediting the Process". November 2012. (7230772) 3. Metro Vancouver's position paper titled: "A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA)". (7231267)

7232002

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 23 ATTACHMENT 1

A Comparative Analysis of the Standing Senate Committee Report and Metro Vancouver's Position Paper on the Additions to Reserve (AIR) Policy and Process**

Issues I Standing Senate Committee Report I Metro Vancouver Position Paper Managing the Process of Additions to Reserve Local Government • In 2012, the Committee received witnesses to • Local government is not meaningfully Engagement obtain input on the challenges and consulted within the ATR evaluation process. deficiencies within the existing ATR policy. • Despite many implications of the ATR policy • Invited witnesses included First Nations' for local government, municipalities and leaders and senior federal government regional districts were not provided sufficient officials. opportunities for input into the process of • Even though local government's role and revising the current ATR policy. interests related to the ATR policy were • Meaningful consultation with all forms of discussed during the Committee proceedings, government is needed. no witnesses from local government were invited to provide input into the ATR study.

ATR Legislation • One of the recommendations in the report is • The ATR process is compared to the Municipal to develop national ATR legislation to replace Boundary Expansion (MBE) process. the existing policy. • In contrast to the MBE process that is covered • Enforceable legislation would contribute to a under legislation, the ATR is only a policy, more efficient and effective ATR system by which creates uncertainty. minimizing the need for federal involvement.

Expedited Process • The ATR process needs to be expedited to • A better understanding of potential better enable First Nations communities to implications of ATR for local government engage in economic development. needs to be gained by AANDC. • Many First Nations experience delays in • Local governments require sufficient time to converting lands to Reserve status due to the consider a proposal for an ATR that takes into following reasons: account the various processes required for 0 Absence of dispute resolution Board and Council reports and public mechanisms between municipalities and consultations (e.g. revising OCPs, approving a First Nation communities; boundary extension). 0 Lacking conSistency in processing ATR • The current 90-day review period is applications across different AANDC insufficient for meaningful engagement on regional offices; and issues such as munidpal tax los5 0 Inadequate resources on the part of First compensation, municipal service provision and Nations and AANDC. bylaw compatibility. ATR process must also be • AANDC needs to develop policy options transparent to the public. relating to dispute resolution mechanisms to A dispute resolution mechanism is lacking for assist First Nations in their negotiations with • local governments and First Nations. local governments. Regional districts are not recognized in the • The report includes no reference to "regional • existing ATR policy. districts", only municipalities are mentioned.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 24 Issues I Standing Senate Committee Report I Metro Vancouver Position Paper Dealing with Municipal and Third-Partv Interests I i Financial Impacts 0 Many witnesses questioned the requirement of 0 Local governments are concerned about negotiating tax loss adjustments and paying financial impacts of ATRs such as servicing property taxes to municipalities on any agreements and loss of property tax revenUe purchased land until such time as the ATR is resulting from the change in land status and completed. jurisdiction.

0 The benefits resulting from economic 0 The current requirement of First Nations developments on First Nations' lands will negotiating directly with the municipality to outweigh any tax loss for municipalities due to determine reasonable adjustments to tax loss an ATR. needs to remain under the ATR policy. First Nations are required to negotiate in good faith with local governments.

Communications 0 The Committee recognize~ the need to improve 0 Local government comments and concerns the way the federal government currently deals regarding new ATRs need to be and communicates with municipalities and to acknowledged and addressed by the federal explore options for supporting more effective government. negotiations between First Nations and 0 Direct communication between First Nations municipalities. and local governments is currently lacking from the ATR review process.

Servicing 0 Consistency is lacking across regional AANDC 0 ATRs could lead to a patchwork of Agreements offices regarding the definition of 'generally jurisdictions and incompatible land use. contiguous' lands for determining the parcels 0 Servicing costs of Inon-contiguous' lands are of land eligible for addition. high for local government. 0 Under the current policy, First Nations can 0 Servicing agreements should be in place apply to add 'non-contiguous' lands to simultaneously with the approval of any ATR Reserves. without any obligation for local government to service new Reserves. 0 Metro Vancouver has no obligation to provide utility services to any entities other than those specified in its legislation.

Land Use 0 The report indicates that consideration should 0 Consideration should be given to Planning be given to pre-Reserve designation. Prior to compatibility with OCP, RGS, as well as converting lands to Reserve status, First general local government zoning, bylaws and Nations could decide about the type of land use related enforcement.

to be applied to a particular parcel of land. 0 The potential for incompatible land uses and 0 Pre-Reserve designation would assist First land use conflicts should be discussed and Nations and neighbouring municipalities in addressed prior to ATR approval. understanding how the land will.be used in the future.

Third-Party 0 The Committee recognizes the need to improve 0 Third party interests such as water rights, Interests the way the federal government currently deals rights-of-way, and access need to be resolved with third party interests. in a timely manner.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 25 Issues Standing Senate Committee Report Metro Vancouver Position Paper Dealing with Municipal and Third-Party Interests Economic • The current policy makes it difficult to add lands • Metro Vancouver recognizes the potential for Development to Reserve for economic development stating market development on First Nations' lands that an addition will not be approved if the to be mutually beneficial for Aboriginal economic benefits could be achieved under communities and their neighbouring local another form of land holding. governments. • Changes to the policy are being contemplated to make the process less restrictive and allow ATR for economic development purposes. • Local governments derive many benefits from economic .development on First Nations' lands, such as revenue from municipal service agreements, job creatiOn,. and new businesses.

Local • Even though the current ATR policy does not • Local governments do not have a veto over Government give a municipality a veto over ATR, many First ATR. Approval Nations are concerned that local governments • Municipal consent is not required for an ATR can often stall the process by refusing to application to be approved by the Federal negotiate or negotiating in bad faith. government. • Under the existing policy, First Nations applying for an ATR must meet various criteria, including resolution of third party interests as well as - >. consultation and negotiation with municipal government for land use planning, loning, tax loss adjustments, etc.

7231362

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 26 ATTACHMENT 2

ADDITIONS TO RESERVE: EXPEDITING THE PROCESS

Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples

The,Honourable Gerry St. Gennain, p.e

Chair

The Honourable Lillian Eva Dyck

Deputy Chair

November 2012

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 27 Table of Contents

MEMBERSIDP ...... ii ORDER OF REFERENCE ...... :...... iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARy...... 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 BACKGROUND ...... 5 WHAT THE COMMITTEE HEARD ...... 7 Article I. Managing the Process of Additions to Reserve ...... 7 1. Minimizing Processing Times ...... 7 2. Application of ATR Policy by Regional AANDC Offices ...... 11 a. Maintenance of File Management Systems ...... 11 b. Regional Differences in Budget Planning: ...... 12 c. Environmental Assessments and Land Surveys ...... 12 d. Interpretations of "Generally Contiguous" Land ...... :...... 12 Article II. Dealing with Municipal and Third-Party Interests ...... 13 I. Negotiating Agreements with Municipalities ...... 14 2. Resolving Issues with Third Parties ...... 16 a. Respect for Prior Legal Interests ...... 16 b. Third Party Pricing Strategies for the Sale of Private Land to a First Nation ...... 17 Article III. Developing Legislation ...... 19 COMMITTEE OBSERVATIONS ...... , ...... 21 APPENDIX A - OVERVIEW OF ADDITIONS TO RESERVE PROCESS ...... 23 APPENDIX B - WITNESSES ...... 24

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 29 MEMBERSHIP () THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON ABORIGINAL PEOPLES 41th Parliament, 1" Session (June 2, 2011 - )

The Honourable Gerry St. Germain, P.C. Chair

The Honourable Lillian Eva Dyck Deputy Chair

and

_The Honourable Senators:

Salma Ataullahjan Patrick Brazeau Larry Campbell * James S. Cowan (or Claudette Tardif) Jacques Demers *Marjory LeBreton, P.C. (or Claude Carignan) Sandra Lovelace Nicholas Dennis Glen Patterson Nancy Greene Raine Nick G. Sibbeston Charlie Watt Vernon White *Ex officio members

Other Senators who have participated in,this study: The Honourable Senators Jane Cordy, Jean-Guy Dagenais, Linda Frum, Don Meredith, Jim Munson and Carolyn Stewart Olsen

Cominittee Clerk: Marcy Zlotnick

Analysts from the Parliamentary Information and Research Service of the Library of Parliament: James Gauthier

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 30 ORDER OF REFERENCE

Extract from the Journals of the Senate of Thursday, June 16,2011:

The Honourable Senator St. Gennain, P.e. moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Champagne, P .e.:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples be authorized to examine and report on the federal government's constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Metis peoples and on other matters generally relating to the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada;

That the papers and evidence received and taken and work accomplished by the Committee on the subject during the Third Session of the Fortieth Parliament be referred to the Committee; and

That the Committee submit its final report no later than December 31, 2012, and that the Committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings until 180 days after the tabling of the final report.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

Gary O'Brien

Clerk of the Senate.

iii

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 31 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The alienation of land and resources has been a major contributor to the economic marginalization of Aboriginal peoples in Canada. In their appearances before the Committee, many witnesses have noted that, from an economic point of view, access to land and natural resources represents one of the most critical issues faced by First Nations today. This issue has become evident to the Committee through its own previous study of economic development, as well as through many other studies, most notably the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) - Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Joint Working Group, established in the fall of 2009 to explore ways to increase the efficiency of the existing Additions to Reserve (A TR) policy and process, and the 1996 Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, which called for a major redistribution of lands and resources upon which Aboriginal people could rebuild their nations and secure a level of economic self-reliance.

During our investigations into the ATR policy and process, the Committee benefited greatly from the valuable insights of witnesses who appeared during meetings on this important subject. A key message conveyed by virtually all witnesses was that, although some positive change has occurred in recent years, major changes are required to the existing system to better enable First Nations to engage in economic development by facilitating the resolution of their Addition to Reserve (ATR) in a fast and effective manner.

Based on what we heard, the Committee observes that there is an urgent need for the federal government to enhance the existing ATR policy and process by improving AANDC management practices, both nationally and within regional AANDC offices, by improving the effectiveness of dealing with municipal and third-party interests, and by exploring options for supporting First Nations in their negotiations with municipalities and third parties. The Committee is especially concerned with testimony provided by officials of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) of Canada, who noted that most of its recommendations from a 2005 audit of the ATR policy regarding deficiencies in ATR management systems had not yet been implemented. As well, the Committee is highly concerned with testimony from First Nations witnesses in relation to the predatory pricing strategies of third-party landowners. According to a report tabled with the Committee by the AFN, inflated land values have had negative consequences, including

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 33 "depleting a First Nation's financial resources" and "limiting future purchasing options.'" The ( ') ./ report further indicates that fair market land values "should be independently appraised to mitigate inflated land values as much as possible," and "should be fairly projected into the future.,,2 The Committee strongly urges the Government of Canada, working with First Nations and other stakeholders, to address the issues of management systems, predatory pricing, and the many other issues highlighted within this report.

To facilitate the development of a more efficient and effective process for converting land to reserve status through the ATR process, the Committee recommends:

That the Department of Abonginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, in collaboration with First Nations through the Joint Working Group, develop and table an action plan before the Committee by 31 March 2013 that establishes clear targets and timelines for implementing agreed upon measures to improve the existing ATR process, and clearly identifies and provides options for resolving areas within the ATR process causing the greatest delays, including legislative or policy options relating to: • Pre-reserve designations and/or recognition of interests for lands identified by First Nations for conversion to reserve status; • Support mechanisms, including dispute resolution assistance, to First Nations in their negotiations with municipalities and third parties; • Identifying best practices and implementing measures to prevent predatory pricing strategies of third-party landowners on the sale of privately held land to First Nations; and • Streamlining the procedural requirements in relation to the federal ATR policy, including implementing recommendations from the OAG on improving management systems.

The Committee believes that, through the development of this action plan, the federal government would be better equipped to enable transformative change for First Nations peoples in reserve communities and, indeed, for all Canadians.

I Assembly of First Nations (AFN), report submitted to the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples (the Committee): Additions /0 Reserve: Regional Dill!ogue Forums, Rolf-up Reporr. March 2012, p. 7. 'Ibid, p. 16.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 34 INTRODUCTION The alienation of land and resources has been a major contributor to the economic marginalization of Aboriginal peoples in Canada. In their appearances before the Committee, many witnesses have noted that, from an economic point of view, access to land and natural resources represents one of the most critical issues faced by First Nations today.3 This issue has become evident to the Committee through its own previous study of economic development; as weH as through many other studies, most notably through the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) - Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Joint Working Group, established in the fall of 2009 to explore ways to increase the efficiency of the existing Additions to Reserve (ATR) policy and process,s and the 1996 Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, which caHed for a major redistribution of lands and resources upon which Aboriginal people could rebuild their nations and secure a level of economic self-reliance.'

First Nations organizations and the Government of Canada have recently initiated a process to review the current policy and process of converting land to reserve status through ATR,7 with the goal of making the existing system more efficient and effective. These efforts have been driven by various developments in recent years. Most notably, in November 2007, a Political Agreement between AANDC and the AFN was signed in anticipation of a growing numbers of ATR requests through the impending establishment of the Specific Claims Tribunal.

See, for example, Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples; Proceedings, I" Session, 41" Parliament [hereinafter referred to as "Proceedings"]: Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8, 2012; Chief Nelson Genaille, President, Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba Inc., and Chief Robert Louie, Chair, First Nations Land Advisory Board, February 14, 2012; Frank Barrett, Principal, Office of the Auditor General (OAG) of Canada, March 7, 2012;and Iody Wilson-Raybould, British Columbia Regional Chief, AFN, April 3, 2012. 4 See Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, Sharing Canada's Prosperitv - A Hand Up. Not a Handollt, March 2007 (pp. 7,39-40).

5 AFN, report submitted to the Committee: Additiol1s /0 Reserve: Regiollal Dialoglle Forums, Roll-up Report, March 2012. 6 Canada, Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996, vol. 2, chapter 5, p. 952. 7 A description of the Additions to Reserve (ATR) policy and process is available through Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC), Land Management Manual.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 35 Through the Political Agreement, it was agreed that the existing ATR policy would be reviewed.'

The Joint Working Group has recognized the need for streamlining the ATR policy and process to enhance the economic development potential of First Nation reserves. In June 2011, AANDC and the AFN agreed to a Canada-First Nations Joint Action Plan (the Joint Action Plan) to improve the long-term prosperity for First Nations people and all Canadians. Through the Joint Action Plan, both parties agreed to "explore concrete initiatives aimed at unlocking the economic potential of First Nations, including improvements to the additions to reserve policy.,,9

In December 2011, to provide fnput into the efforts of First Nations and the Government of Canada to improve the ATR policy and process, the Standing Senate Committee on . Aboriginal Peoples (the Committee) agreed to study the topic of Additions to Reserve (ATR). This study, which focuses on the key issues raised by witnesses, forms a part of the Committee's general mandate to examine the federal government's constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Metis peoples and on other matters generally relating to the Aboriginal peoples of Canada. Over the course of five meetings on this, topic, held () between February 7 and April 3, 2012, eleven organizations provided their input on the challenges and deficiencies within the existing ATR policy and process. Witnesses included First Nations representatives - including those from key communities, public institutions, advocacy groups, and lands managers and advisors - senior federal government officials, and representatives from the OAG.

g The Political Agreement Between. the Minister of' Itulian Affairs' and Northern Development and the National Chief of the Assemblv of First Nations in Relation to Specifh: C/oims Reform, signed on November 27,2007 states: In situations where a First Nation seeks to Ie-acquire or replace lands that were the subject of a Specific Claim, the Minister will review with First Nations' policies and practices respecting additions to reserves with a view to ensuring that these policies and practices take into account the situation of bands to which the release provisions of the proposed Specific Claims Tribunal legislation apply. In particular, the Minister will provide priority to additions to reserve of lands affected by the consequences of the release provisions in the legislation or to lands required to replace them. 9 AANDC, "Canada-First Nations Joint Action Plan," News release, June 2011.

4 (.:.--:....•• 1 "'-->./ Aboriginal Relations Committee - 36 BACKGROUND The Additions to Reserve process involves either the addition of land to existing reserves or the creation of new reserves.1O According to the current policy, A TR proposals are for land which is located in the general geographic area of an existing reserve to which services and infrastructure can be extended at little or no cost. New reserve proposals are for lands that are not in the general geographic area of an existing reserve and, as such, are likely to be uncommon as they involve greater costs.

There are currently three policy categories under which a First Nation acquires land:ll

1. Legal Obligations, resulting from treaty or claim settlement agreements, court orders, or other legal reasons such as return or exchange of lands expropriated under section 35 of the Indian Act; 12

2. Community Additions, including: community growth creating a need for additional land for housing, schools, community economic projects, or infrastructure enhancements; natural geographic enhancements of the existing reserve land base; or First Nation requests for unsold surrendered land to be returned to reserve status, or to be added as a new reserve; and

3. New Reserves/Other Policy, which covers all proposals that do not fall within the other categories, such as for new reserves for landless bands, and band relocations (e.g. due to flooding of existing reserve land, etc). AANDC notes that this category is rarely used, as it "requires extensive analysis and 'justification.",l3

The Government of Canada has noted recently that, to better meet the requirements under the existing ATR policy, the AANDC-AFN Joint Working Group is currently working towards adding a fourth category to the ATR process related to monetary awards of the Specific Claims Tribunal. As some studies on the ATR process have noted, the creation of a fourth ATR category

10 For further details, see: AANDC, Land Management Manual, October 2003, Directive 10-1, p. 10. 11 10-14. !'i Ibid, pp. 12 As described in the AANDC Land Management Manllal (September 2005, Directive 9-1, p. 7): While not a requirement of the Indian Act, Section 35 is usually used when an expropriating authority has negotiated an arrangement with the First Nation. The First Nation then asks Canada to grant or transfer the land or an interest in the land to the expropriating authority. If granting or transferring a less intrusive or destructive interest in the land can meet the expropriating authority's need for the land, it is the department's obligation to use the less intrusive option ... 13 AANDC Land Management Manual, Directive 10-1, October 2003, Ibid, p. 14.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 37 is deemed necessary since Tribunal decisions do not fit within existing ATR categories. In () particular, Tribunal decisions do not create legal obligations for ATR, nor are they meant to 14 satisfy normal community growth requirements.

The process to be applied in carrying out an ATR for the above categories must satisfy various "site-specific" criteria, depeuding on the category, as provided within the ATR policy.15 These criteria include the need to: • Respect the treaty and Aboriginal rights of other First Nations that may be affected; • Consult and negotiate within the First Nation communities and with provincial and/or municipal governments (e.g. for land use planniug, zoning, tax loss adjustmeuts, etc.); • Consider financial implications aud funding; • Ensure good title transfer and resolution of third party interests; and • Undertake environmental assessments .16

The process by which land is added to reserves is set out in AANDC Land and Trusts Services' Land Management Manual, and further clarified in a Toolkit l7 developed by the National Aboriginal Land Managers Association, in collaboration with AANDC.

As noted by the OAG, there are three main phases to the A TR process (note: see Appendix A for a more detailed description of these phases): • Phase 1 includes land selection and (if necessary) purchase of land, which is the responsibility of First Nations. This phase ends with a formal Band Council Resolution (BCR) that transmits the First Nation's proposal on the land selected to the Department and requests that the selected land be added to their reserve; • Phase II includes, among other things, the completion of the required land surveys and ! , environmental assessments, coordinated by AANDC regional offices; and

14 See, for example, Warren Johnson, Additions 10 Reserve: Discllssion P(/per (Working Draft), New Road Strategies, study commissioned by the AANDC-AFN Joint Working Group, Januaty 18, 2010, p. 12. Cited with permission from the author. 15 AANDC Land Management Manual, Directive 10-1, October 2003,pp. 14-18. 16 Ibid. 17 National Aboriginal Land Managers Association, ATR Toolkit, First Edition, Version 1.2, January 18, 2010, chapters 3 and 4.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 38 / I • Phase III is primarily the responsibility of the Department's head ottice. It includes seeking approvals through ministerial orders or orders-in-council to convert land to

reserve status .18

WHAT THE COMMITTEE HEARD

Article I. Managing the Process of Additions to Reserve

1. Minimizing Processing Times

As acknowledged by witnesses 'thiough their testimony to the Committee, attempting to disentangle the reasons behind delays in converting land to reserve status is a challenging task. One key issue relates to the management of the ATR process. As explained by Chief Angus Toulouse (Chiefs of Ontario):

The complex process of converting land to reserve requires sustained human and fiscal resources by both the First Nations and ... [AANDC]. Unfortunately in the current fiscal environment where everyone is competing for ... limited resources, the challenges are mountmg.. 19

Representatives from the OAG discussed the findings of two reports on the Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) process20 in Manitoba and Saskatchewan - .an original audit in 200521 and a

18 See Office of the OAG, "Chapter 4: Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations - Indian and Northem Affairs Canada," Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada, March 2009. 19 Proceedings, Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8, 2012. ",f, ~ 20 As explained by the OAG, "Chapter 4: Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations - Indian and Northern Affairs Canada," Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada, March 2009: A Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) claim arises when a First Nation asserts that the Government of Canada did not provide all of the reserve land promised under an historical treaty signed with the Crown. Once the federal government is satisfied that a First Nation has a valid claim, a settlement is negotiated and set out in a TLE agreement. TLE agreements provide First Nations with the right to select Crown land or with funds to buy private land, or both. These agreements are modern legal commitments that recognize the government's failure to comply with its treaty obligations, an element of which relates to land transfers. 21 OAG, "Chapter 7: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada - Meeting Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations," Report of the Auditor General of Canada, November 2005.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 39 follow-up audit in 2009.22 Although the 2009 audit noted some progress in implementing the ATR policy, such as improvements in communication between AANDC and First Nations, it was highlighted that most of the 2005 audit recommendations regarding deficiencies in ATR management systems had not yet been implemented. As well, it was noted that AANDC had not addressed several underlying weaknesses in its processes for meeting TLE agreements. Jerome Berthelette (OAG) concluded that, "without sustained management to correct the weaknesses we had identified, the department risked being unable to sustain its progress in converting land to reserve status.,,23

According to current information available from AANDC, there are some 600 First Nations living on more than 2,800 reserves covering over 3 million hectares (about 8 million acres) of land across Canada - an area about the size of Vancouver Island, or roughly equivalent . to less than half of the Navajo Nation reservation in the southwest United States.24 Based on data provided by Natural Resources Canada, 575,000 hectares of land (about 1.4 million acres) have been identified by First Nations through ATR requests since 2005, of which about half (312,283 hectares or 771 ,339 acres) have been surveyed for conversion to reserve status (see Table 1, page 9). Overall, there has been a greater emphasis on processing ATR requests related to legal obligations, as almost 90% of ATR requests initiated since 2005 have been recorded under this category. While virtually all ATR land descriptions for First Nations in Saskatchewan since 2005 have been completed, less than half of the land selected by First Nations in Manitoba has been i ! surveyed over that same period?'

22 OAG, "Chapter 4: Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations - Indian and Northern Affairs Canada," Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada, March 2009. 23 Proceedings, Jerome Berthelette, Assistant Auditor General, OAG of Canada, March 7,2012. 24 Source: AANDC, Land Management. Depending on the source, these estimates can vary. For example, Warren Johnson, in his study on Additions to Reserve: Discussion Pope,. (Workine Draft) i (New Road Strategies, January 18,2010, p. 3), estimates that there are some 584 First Nations in Canada with reserve land, involving 3,049 reserves distributed nationally, totalling approximately 3.4 million hectares. 25 Some 479,000 acres have been converted to reserve status since the establishment of the Manitoba Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) agreement in 1997; representing 34% of the total shortfall of 1.14 million acres identified through that 1997 TLE agreement. Source: Brian T. Gray, Assistant Deputy Minister, Earth Sciences Sector, Natural Resources Canada, Letter to Senator Gerry St. Germain, Chair, Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, March 2, 2012.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 40 i Table 1: Additions to Reserve: by Number, Region and Land Area (Since 2005)

Number of ATR Projects Opened Hectares (Area) . .

Region Legal Community New Total Initiated Completed Obligations Reserves Additions ATR Projects IOtber

3,240 2,717 Atlantic 26 22 1 49 (8,006) (6,711)

31,953 547 Quebec 31 24 2 57 (78.958) (1,351)

41,419 39,903 Ontario 64 31 95 (102,349) (98,560)

304,266 126,141 Manitoba 374 374 (751,858) (311 ,568)

112,057 112,057 Saskatchewan 617 617 (276,899) (276,781)

70,555 22,768 Alberta 6 6 (174,345) (56,237)

British 11 ,555 8,150 15 62 77 Columbia (28,553) (20,131)

575,000 312,283 Total 1,133 139 3 1,275 (1,420,000) (771,339) .. Sources: Natural Resources Canada: Surveyor General of Canada (Natural Resources Canada), Addllwns to First Nations Reserves - Land Surveys and Legal Land Descriptions, Briefing for the Senate Standing Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, January 26, 2012; and Brian T. Gray, Assistant Deputy Minister, Earth Sciences Sector, Letter to Senator Gerry St. Germain, Chair, Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, March 2, 2012.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 41 (j In addition to concerns related to the limited number of land selections being completed through ATR, especially in Manitoba, the OAG noted a lack of available information as to whether processing times have been reducing sufficiently in recent years:

For instance, in Manitoba, the department had not developed a plan that outlined how it would manage its operations to process outstanding selections within a reasonable period of time. Furthermore, it had not tracked processing times, and it could not demonstrate that these times had improved over the previous three years?6

As well, in the 2005 OAG audit, it had been recommended that AANDC "develop and implement a plan that sets out the explicit steps it would take to process outstanding selections and reduce processing times to two years.,,2? While representatives of the OAG were aware that an ATR tracking system had since been developed by AANDC, it was noted that a formal audit had not been conducted.28

Although partial information on progress in processing ATR requests has been provided by the Government of Canada over the course of the Committee's study on ATR, a clear picture of the time required to process ATR transactions across Canada and by region is not currently ( available. Most First Nations continue to observe delays in the processing of ATR requests by the federal government. As reported by Chief Nelson Genaille (Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba Inc.), although the former Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development had made a five-year commitment in 2006 to convert a total 600,000 acres of priority TLE land selections to reserve status in Manitoba, to date less than two-thirds have been converted?9

26 Proceedings, Jerome Berthelette, Assistant Auditor General, OAG of Canada, March 7,2012. 27 OAG, "Chapter 4: Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations - Indian and Northe111 Alb;" Canada," Status Report a/the Auditor General a/Canada, March 2009. 28 , Proceedings, Frank Barrett, Principal, OAG of Canada, March 7,2012. ·1 29 Proceedings, Chief Nelson Genaille, President, Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba Inc., February 14, 2012. .

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 42 2. Application of ATR Policy by Regional AANDC Offices

Many witnesses referred to various deficiencies in the management and application of the ATR policy by AANDC officials in the regional offices. In contrasting the situation in Saskatchewan, for example, Chief Angus Toulouse noted that, "First Nations in Ontario must run the gauntlet of an unclear policy and process with much discretion resting in the hands of the federal employees as they interpret the policy on a case-by-case basis.,,3o

As well, through its 2009 audit, the OAG found that, rather than focus on managing its oper,ations for processing outstanding selections under the respective TLE agreements, the regional AANDC office in Manitoba focused on meeting other short-term priorities. 31 In contrast, the OAG found that the Saskatchewan regional office focused more on directly satisfying its obligations related to ensuring minimum required reserve acres under the TLE agreement within that province.32

The most significant issues identified by witnesses included the maintenance of file .! management systems, the ability of AANDC regional officers to allocate their budgets effectively, the' financial burden faced by First Nations in working with AANDC through the ATR process, resource requirements related to environmental site assessments (where required)33 and land surveys, and varying interpretations of "generally contiguous" land.

a. Maintenance of File Management Systems

30 Proceedings, Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8, 2012. 31 OAG, "Chapter 4: Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations - Indian and Northern Affairs Canada," Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada, March 2009. 32 Ibid. 33 According to ATR policy, as specified;n the AANDC Land Management Manaal (Directive 2-5, pp. 35-38; and Chapter 12, pp. 1-27), an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) must be conducted on all lands requested by a First Nation for additions to reserve, where a federal department is: granting an interest in land; performing a regulatory duty; providing financial assistance; or recommending that the Governor in Council perform a regulatory duty. One exception to the ESA requirement can occur in the case where an ATR request does not include a project proposal for the intended use of the land by the First Nation.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 43 Commenting on the different ATR file management systems present in Manitoba and (l Saskatchewan, Frank Barrett (OAG) stated that First Nations in Saskatchewan appeared to have a better relationship with the regional offices and were more familiar with the officials. In the Manitoba office, it was not "nearly as amicable a relationship. There was not as much knowledge back and forth.,,34

b. Regional Differences in Budget Planning

In relation to differences across regions in budget planning, Chief Angus Toulouse explained that regional offices are in control of the majority of the ATR processes, however First Nations "have no assurance that the regions have created any systematic prioritizing of the ATR budgetary needs.,,35 Similar conce~ns were expressed by Kathleen Lickers (AFN) , who noted that "[t]he inability to coordinate the timing and decision-making with the budgetary needs strategically, within the region, leaves everyone with this continuous uncertainty.',36

c. Environmental Assessments and Land Surveys

Many First Nation representatives noted that delays in the completion of surveys and environmental assessments in some regions often occur due to a shortage of qualified personnel or lack of federal funding. These costs can grow if the land selection is located within remote areas. In a submission from the AFN, it was noted in particular that AANDC does not reimburse First Nations who undertake their own ESA, unless it forms a part of a TLE Framework agreement?7 Moreover, even when ESA and survey costs are covered by AANDC through an ATR, witnesses note tMt this funding is often either insufficient or can be delayed as AANDC will only provide funding once all third party interests are resolved."

d. Interpretations of "Generally Contiguous" Land

34 Proceedings, Frank Barrett, Principal, OAG of Canada, March 7,2012. 35 Proceedings, Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, Fehruary 8,2012. 36 Proceedings, Kathleen Lickers, External Legal Advisor, Assembly of First Nations, April 3,2012. 37 AFN, report submitted to the Committee: Additions to Resen'c: Regional Dialogue Forums. Roll~up Report, March 2012. As noted in that report, in the Atlantic region, this applies to lands within 50 kilometres of a reserve, while in British Columbia land within 70 kilometres is eligible. 38 Proceedings, Jody Wilson-Raybould (British Columbia Regional Chief), and Kathleen Lickers (External Legal Advisor), Assembly of First Nations, April 3, 2012.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 44 Witnesses referred to differences in the definition of "generally contiguous" land across regional AANDC offices for purposes of deciding what parcels of land are eligible for :i ! 39 ! conversion to reserve status. It was noted that, while First Nations conducting an ATR request through legal obligations can negotiate the geographic area of the potential ATR lands with federal and provincial governments, First Nations applying outside of a treaty land entitlement (TLE) process (e.g. mainly through category 2: community additions) must adhere to a definition of "contiguous land" that may differ across regional AANDC offices, depending on that office's interpretation of the ATR policy. As stated by Chief Angus Toulouse, " ... a strict interpretation of 'generally contiguous' may mean the First Nation has nowhere to grow either because there is no available land to annex to an existing reserve or land values are so high that the First Nation cannot afford to grow."'"

Article II. Dealing with Municipal and Third-Party Interests

In addition to deficiencies in the management of the ATR process leading to delays in the conversion of land to reserve status, First Nations witnesses expressed concerns regarding the lack of support from the federal government when trying to resolve municipal andlor third party issues. For their part, federal government officials generally considered issues related to dispute resolution among First Nations, municipalities andlor third parties as beyond the control of the Government of Canada. As noted by Margaret Buist (AANDC) in reference to these challenges: ... negotiations have to take place for the purchase [of private land by a First Nation], which can take several years. Once the land is selected by the First Nation, they need to go through their political process, and a band council resolution is required ... most of the delay in ATRs happens before it gets into the department... Often, before they get in the door, it has been five to ten years.41

39 For example, see Proceedings: Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8, 2012; 40 Ibid. 41 Senate, Standing Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, Evidence, 7 February 2012 Margaret Buist, Director General, Lands and Economic Development, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada).

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 45 To shed some light on these issues, this section presents some of the major challenges C) faced by First Nations through the ATR process in dealing with municipal and third-party interests.

1. Negotiating Agreements with Municipalities

When land selected by a First Nation for conversion to reserve status is within a municipality, in addition to the requirement that First Nations pay property taxes on any purchased land until such time as the ATR is completed, federal ATR policy requires that First Nations negotiate agreements with municipal governments. These agreements can include joint land use planning; by-law harmonization; compensation for tax loss; and compensation for basic municipal services such as sewage, - water, and hydro. Many witnesses agreed that these negotiations can cause extensive delays, and that this problem can be exacerbated if a municipality is not entering into these negotiations in good faith. As stated by Jody Wilson Raybould (AFN): "[w ]hile the current policy clearly does not give a municipality a veto over ATR, they can often stall the advancement of ATR, giving municipalities, in a sense, de facto veto.,,42

Both Chief Angus Toulouse, and Gordon Bluesky (National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association) noted that the ATR process puts the onus on First Nations to settle these interests prior to land conversion. In particular, reference was made to the frustration of being put" ... in a position where they [First Nations] are trying to negotiate agreements and settling issues and interests on properties that are not even under their jurisdiction yet.,,43

For many witnesses, the costs involved with purchasing land and paymg fees to municipalities until that land is converted to reserve status serves as an additional barrier to engagement in the ATR process. For example, Chief Nelson Genaille spoke of his community's

42 Proceedings, Jody Wilson-Raybould, British Columbia Regional Chief, Assembly of First Nations, April 3, 2012. Similar ·comments were provided by Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8,2012. 43 Proceedings, Gordon Bluesky, Director, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association, February 14,2012.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 46 challenges in trying to facilitate economic development while paying property taxes on land selected through their TLE agreement that has yet to be converted to reserve status: ... my community keeps telling me, 'Let us buy more land so that we can get into economic development.' I keep telling them that we have two pieces of property that were bought in 2006 and 2008. How can I look to buying more land when my First Nation is paying taxes for the land we just bought? It is a Catch_22.44

Many First Nation representatives questioned the requirement under ATR to negotiate tax loss adjustments with municipalities. In particular, it was noted that, under ATR policy, tax loss adjustments require First Nations to pay municipality fees to compensate foregone municipal taxes (e.g. school taxes, etc.). First Nations generally consider this requirement as a form of double taxation, as reserve communities generally provide their own municipal-like services, such as the on-reserve school system. As stated by Chief David Meeches: " ... we have to address the municipal taxes that we have been paying since [the purchase of the land] and establishing municipal service agreements with those municipalities whose services we will never use.,,4S

As noted by AANDC, municipalities have expressed concerns related to the burden imposed on them for losing their tax base through an ATR 46 In response, Chief lody Wilson Raybould stated that any tax loss for municipalities through an ATR: " ... pales in comparison to the benefits that will accrue by supporting First Nations and establishing a viable land base for them.,,47 This view is supported by various external studies on urban reserves, especially for First Nation reserve communities in Saskatchewan.48 Although it is not known with certainty to what

44 Proceedings, Chief Nelson Genaille, President, Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba Inc., February 14,2012. 45 Proceedings, David Meeches, Chief, Long Plain First Nation, February 8, 2012. Similar comments were provided by other witnesses. See, for example, Proceedings, Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8,2012. 46 For example, see: Proceedings, Margaret Buist, Director General, Lands and Environmental Development, AANDC, February 7,2012 47 Proceedings, Jody Wilson-Raybould, British Columbia Regional Chief, Assembly of First Nations, April 3, 2012. 48 For example, see the paper by Evelyn Peters, Urban Reserves, National Centre for First Nations Governance, August 2007.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 47 extent First Nation-owned businesses on urban reserves might be more or less successful than ( ) those in non-reserve urban areas, these studies point to various success stories such as the Muskeg Lake Cree Nation urban reserve. At the time of conversion to reserve status in 1988, this parcel of land within the municipality of Saskatoon was essentially a vacant lot. Today, it has been noted that this reserve has developed into a thriving business centre, which has generated "millions in revenue" and employs about 300 Aboriginal people 49

To better support First Nations in meeting their obligations related to municipal tax payments and tax loss adjustments, the AFN, in a report submitted to the Committee, has suggested that negotiations should be held with the federal government to arrive at an agreement on fair reimbursement of this cost. As an alternative solution, the AFN pointed to the current process under the Saskatchewan TLE Framework Agreement, in which a clear tax loss compensation formula is specified, and strict timelines are required for finalizing land conversions to minimize First Nations' costs related to paying municipal property taxes (i.e. the federal government is required to take over the payment of property taxes to municipalities if an ATR is not resolved within 75 days).5o

2. Resolving Issues with Third Parties

As acknowledged by essentially all witnesses, lengthy negotiations can often occur when unresolved third-party interests exist for First Nation land, selections and purchases. This problem occurs most frequently in urban areas, as much of this land is typically privately owned, but can also occur in rural or remote areas in relation to private interests in mineral or mining rights. More generally, third party interests can occur when there are unresolved issues related to utility easements or rights-of-way, existence of leases on the land, or private ownership of subsurface rights, etc.

a. Respect for Prior Legal Interests

49 Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce, Background Paper- Urban Reserves, June 2008. 50 For more information, see: AFN, report submitted to the Committee: Additions to Reserve: Regional Dialogue FOrtfIJIS, Roll-up"Report, March 2012; and Evelyn Peters, Urban Reserves, National Centre for First Nations Governance, August 2007,

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 48 According to ATR policy, to respect prior legal interests, the acquisition of land by a I 'i First Nation that· is privately held property must occur on the basis of a willing seller / willing ~ ! buyer relationship.51 Under the current system, although the federal government, working with the provinces and municipalities, can aid in identifying private sector interests on potential land selections, as noted by Chief Angus Toulouse, "The current policy puts the onus on First Nations to resolve these interests before the order-in-council is granted.,,52

A major concern expressed by some First Nations relates to the actions of provincial governments in issuing mining licenses on land prior to the completion of ATR land conversions. In a statement consistent with that of Chief Wilfred McKay Ir. (Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba Inc.) ,53 Michael Sutherland (Peguis First Nation) noted that: "many times over the years since our TLE notification became valid in 1997 provincial departments have been issuing these leases without consultation with our First Nations communities.,,54

b. Third Party Pricing Strategies for the Sale of Private Land to a First Nation

Another issue of great concern to First Nations relates to their experiences in negotiating purchases of privately held land tluough the ATR process. Several First Nation representatives observed that private land holders often inflate the value of their land once they are made aware that a potential buyer is a First Nation.55 While the TLE framework agreements for Crown land in the Prairies include strict provisions for the assessment of fair market value, through an

51 AANDC, Frequentlv Asked Questions - Additions to Reserve. 52 Proceedings, Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8,2012. 53 Proceedings, Wilfred McKay Jr., Member, Treaty Land Entitlement Conunittee Inc., February 14, 2012 54 Proceedings, Michael Sutherland, Councillor, Peguis First Nation, February 14, 2012. 55 For example, see Proceedings: David Meeches, Chief, Long Plain First Nation, February 8, 2012; Chief Wilfred McKay Jr., Member, Treaty Land Entitlement Conunittee of Manitoba Inc, February 14, 2012; and AFN, report submitted to the Committee: AddiliO/lS to Reserve: Regional Dia{o(!lIc Font/us. Roll-up Report, March 2012.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 49 independent appraisal,56 these assessments' do not necessarily apply to separate negotiations with (j landowners on their privately held land. As noted by Chief David Meeches: "[w]hen we settle our TLEs, we settle for a specific amount per acre, All of a sudden, we are buying [privately held] land that has increased in value and everyone around us is consistent in terms of capitalizing.,,57 According to a report tabled with the Committee by the AFN, inflated land values for privately held land have had negative consequences, including "depleting a First Nation's financial resources" and "limiting future purchasing options.,,58 The report further indicates that fair market land values "should be independently appraised to mitigate inflated land values as much as possible," and "should be fairly projected into the future.,,59 While federal officials noted their ongoing work to increase capacity and develop tools such as the ATR toolkit, several witnesses noted that regional offices do not provide sufficient capacity to aid First Nations in resolving disputes with municipalities and third parties.5O Many witnesses pointed more specifically to the lack of sufficient dispute resolution mechanisms. In particular, Margaret Buist stated that" ... there are no formal dispute resolution mechanisms in place when ATR negotiations break down, and sometimes additions to reserve can languish for decades if those negotiations fail.,,6! As noted by Ms. Buist, municipalities are concerned that First Nations and AANDC are able to proceed with the creation of a reserve without their

56 For example, see: AANDC (formerly Department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada), A Synopsis of the SaskatchCr(l{ll1 TreoN Land Entitlement F'/:amework Agreement, Treaty Land EntitlementfSpecific Claims Unit, Saskatchewan Region, p. 13. 57 Proceedings, David Meeches, Chief, Long Plain First Nation, February 8, 2012. Similar comments were provided by other witnesses. See, for example, Proceedings, William McKay Jr., Member, Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba Inc., February 14,2012; and AFN, in their report submitted to the Committee: Additions to Reserve: Regional Dialogue Forums. Roll-lip Rr?port, M_arch 2012, p. 15. 58 AFN, report submitted to the Committee: Additions to Reserve: Regional Dia/oeue FOrtfI1lS, Roll-up Report. March 2012, p. 7. 59 Ibid, p. 16. 60 For example, see Proceedings: Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario, February 8,2012; and Jody Wilson-Raybould, British Columbia Regional Chief, Assembly of First Nations, April 3, 2012. 61 Proceedings, Margaret Buist, Director General, Lands and Environmental Development, AANDC, February 7,2012.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 50 consent, and First Nations are concerned that municipalities and third parties are able to delay the

· . ~ process by re fusmg to negOtiate.

As noted by the OAG, there has been a consistent underutilization of formal dispute resolution mechanisms within the ATR process, even where provisions for these mechanisms exist within TLE Framework agreements.

Dispute resolution mechanisms for resolving obstacles that may arise during the course of implementation can be helpful, but only when the parties involved use them ... Although such mechanisms exist in both regions-the Settlement Board and Arbitration Board in Saskatchewan and the Implementation Monitoring Committee and Senior Advisory Committee in Manitoba--'they are not being used in a way that helps to resolve outstanding issues and conflicts, such as third-party interests.63

Article III. Developing Legislation

Andrew Beynon (AANDC) described the current efforts of the AANDC-AFN Joint Working Group to explore ideas for national ATR legislation. Mr. Beynon noted that the development of such legislation could include common features currently found in the optional claims settlements implementation legislation facilitated through the TLEFramework agreements in the Prairies.64 Various First Nations representatives expressed the need to adapt this type of legislation for application across Canada.65

Witnesses agreed that the benefit of moving to enforceable legislation would enable a more efficient and effective system for resolving the issues noted throughout this report. As well, the inclusion of specific criteria and conditions for negotiating agreements among First Nations,

62 Ibid. 63 OAG, "Chapter 7: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada - Meeting Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations," Report a/the Auditor General a/Canada, November 2005. 64 Proceedings, Andrew Beynon, Director General, Community Opportunities, AANDC, February 7, I:' 2012. i: 65 See, for example, the comments in the proceedings from Committee hearings with Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief, Chiefs of Ontario (February 8,2012); and Chief Robert Louie, Chair, First Nations Lands Advisory Board (February 14,2012). r"i il 19

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 51 f. -\ municipalities and third party interests would minimize the necessity for federal government I . i involvement66 As noted by Kathleen Lickers (AFN): One of the things that both the Saskatchewan and Manitoba TLE Framework Agreements provide is very concrete examples of the benefit of the First Nations in ... [a negotiation]. .. being able to foresee what it is that they are working toward and to actually negotiate a lot of those issues at the front end of the process.67

As well, Andrew Beynon noted that one option available to First Nations under the claims settlements implementation legislation in the Prairies is to arrange for pre-reserve designation on selected lands 68 Mr. Beynon went on to state that "[pre-reserve designation] ... is a very effective tool where, before a reserve is created, First Nations membership can decide what use they would like to see of particular parcels of land. That is very helpful in assisting with existing developments that are on parcels of land that people want to acquire.,,69 In particular, a pre-reserve designation allows a First Nation to hold a vote from its community members, asking whether there is agreement on having a particular third-party interest maintained on a proposed parcel of land once it is converted to reserve status through ATR.7o If the community is in favour, pending approval by the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, this would allow development to occur in a timely fashion as soon as the land has been set apart as a reserve, and would expedite the land conversion process by eliminating the need for negotiations among First Nations and the relevant third party?' While the AFN has indicated its support for I pre-reserve designations, they caution that "more capacity is needed .. .'072 Another option would

66 Proceedings, Jody Wilson-Raybould, British Columbia Regional Chief, Assembly of First Nations, April 3,2012. 67 Proceedings, Kathleen Lickers, External Legal Advisor, Assembly of First Nations, April 3,2012. 68 Proceedings, Andrew Beynon, Director General, Community Opportunities, AANDC, February 7, 2012. 69 Ibid. 70 For further information on the pre-reserve designation process, see: Mary Hurley, Bill C-37: Claim Settlements (Albei"ta (Inri Sas/wtchewol1) Implementation A_ct, Parliamentary Information and Research Service, Library of Parliament, LS-4l SE, Revised 14 March 2002. 71 Ibid. 72 AFN, report submitted to the Committee: Additiolls to Reserve: Regional Dhllogue Forums, Roll-tID Report, March 2012, p. 15.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 52 be for the Minister to issue a written permit granting a third party the right to occupy, use, reside on or exercise rights on reserve land for limited purposes and periods 73

COMMITTEE OBSERVATIONS

During our investigations into the ATR policy and process, the Committee benefited greatly from the valuable insights of witnesses who appeared during meetings on this important subject. We thank all those who took the time to provide their views and suggestions. The Committee observes that a key message conveyed by virtually all witnesses was that, although some positive change has occurred in recent years, major changes are required to the existing system to better enable First Nations to engage in economic development by facilitating the resolution of ATR in a fast and effective manner.

Based on what we heard, the Committee observes that there is an urgent need for the federal government to enhance the existing ATR policy and process by improving AANDC management practices, both nationally and within regional AANDC offices, improving the effectiveness of dealing with municipal and third-party interests, and exploring options for supporting First Nations in their negotiations with municipalities and third parties. The Committee is especially concerned with testimony provided by officials from the OAG, who noted that most of its recommendations from a 2005 audit of the ATR policy regarding deficiencies in ATR management systems had not yet been implemented, and by First Nations witnesses in relation to the predatory pricing strategies <,If third-party landowners. The Committee strongly urges the Government of Canada, working with First Nations and other stakeholders, to address the issues of ATR management systems and predatory pricing, as well as the many other issues highlighted within this report.

To facilitate the development of a more efficient and effective process for converting land to reserve status through the ATR process, the Committee recommends:

73 Ibid.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 53 That the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (j Canada, in collaboration with First Nations through the Joint Working ~I Group, develop and table an action plan before the Committee by 31 March 2013 that establishes clear targets and timelines for implementing agreed upon measures to improve the existing ATR process, and clearly identifies and provides options for resolving areas within the ATR process causing the greatest delays, including legislative or policy options relating to: • Pre-reserve designations andlor recognition of interests for lands identified by First Nations for conversion to reserve status; • Support mechanisms, including dispute resolution assistance, to First Nations in their negotiations with municipalities and third parties; • Identifying best practices and implementing measures to prevent predatory pricing strategies of third-party landowners on the sale of privately held land to First Nations; and • Streamlining the procedural requirements in relation to the federal ATR policy, including implementing recommendations from the OAG on improving management systems.

,.,:

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 54 APPENDIX A - OVERVIEW OF ADDITIONS TO RESERVE PROCESS

PHASE I Main responsibility: First Nations

[nd ~un:d Re,olu;::: (BCR) ~n::;;::;::;:;;] First Nation purchases lands, held in fee simple toAANDC

A=~=:: B::::~~;::on,em' ';~J First Nation submits BCR and ATR proposal to identification of encumbrances or third-party interests AANDC, with legal description of land acquisition '--~.,~~-.-~-..,,-,-~-. "~'''':~''-~'~-~--''' PHASE II Main responsibility: AANDC regional offices

AANDC conducts land otle search AANDC mfonns province of acquisition

First Nation advises municipality of its advises municipality of its acquisition and ",he," ,,;, required (if so, municipal services agreement ne,gotiated) Environmental review conducted

Environmental review conducted

ATR Committee submission provided to Regional Director General for approval in principle ATR Committee submission provided to Regional Director General for approval in principle

Survey conducted for legal land description, if necessary Survey conducted for legal land description, if necessary

AANDC forwards survey to province and requests land transfer First Nation transfers title of land to Canada

ProvinCial order in council transfers land to p, ,v;, >rr ,,'e residual Crown interests to Canada

Canada accepts administration and control under the Federal Real Property and Federal Immovables Act

PHASE III 1Main responsibility: AANDC head office 1 AANDC prepares Governor-in-Council or Ministerial Order for reserve establishment

Canada signs Governor-in-Council submission, followed by a Privy Council Order that establishes reserve status

The Order establishing land as reserve is registered in the Land Titles Office and Indian Lands Registry

Land converted to reserve status

Source: Adapted from OAG of Canada, "Chapter 4: Treaty Land Entitlement Obligations - Indian and Northern Affairs Canada," Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada, March 2009.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 55 i APPENDIX B - WITNESSES

Meeting Date Agency and Spokesperson Brief

February 7, 2012 Aboriginal Affairs and Northern X Development Canada: Margaret Buist, Director General, Lands and Environmental Management; Andrew Beynon, Director General, Community Opportunities; Anik Dupont,Director General, Specific Claims.

Natural Resources Cauada: X Jean Gagnon, Deputy Surveyor General, Surveyor General Branch; Peter Sullivan, Surveyor General and International Boundary Commissioner, Surveyor General Branch; Brian Ballantyne, Senior Advisor, Land Tenure and Boundaries, Surveyor General Branch; ) Brian Gray, Assistant Deputy Minister, Earth Sciences Sector.

February 8,2012 Chiefs of Ontario: X Angus Toulouse, Ontario Regional Chief.

Long Plain First Nation: David Meeches, Chief; Vincent Perswain, Executive Director, Long Plain Trust; Tim Daniels, Special Projects Officer; Ernie Daniels, Elder.

February 14,2012 Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of X i Manitoba Inc.: Nelson Genaille, President; Wilfred McKay Jr., Member.

Pegnis First Nation: X Nathan McCorrister, Executive Director; Michael Sutherland, Councilor.

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 56 National Aboriginal Lands Managers x Association: Leona Irons, Executive Director; Gino Clement. Chairman; Gordon Bluesky, Director.

First Nations Lands Advisory Board: '! Chief Robert Louie, Chair.

March 7, 2012 Office of the Auditor General of Canada: x Jerome Berthelette, Assistant Auditor General; Frank Barrett, Principal.

April 3, 2012 First Nations Tax Commission: C.T. (Manny) Jules, Chief Commissioner and Chief Executive Officer.

Assembly of First Nations: x Jody Wilson-Raybould, British Columbia Regional Chief; Tonio Sadik, Senior Advisor; Kathleen Lickers, External Legal Advisor.

•

'i 25

Aboriginal Relations Committee - 57 ATTACHMENT 3 metrova ncouver GreaterVa ncowerRegiona I District- Greater Va ncoover Water District

GreaterVa ncouverSewerage a nd Dra inage Distrlct- Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4GB 604-432-6200 www.metrovancouver.org

GVRD Board of Directors Meeting Date: March 30, 2012

To: Board of Directors

From: Aboriginal Relations Committee

Date: March 20, 2012

Subject: A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA)

Recommendation: That the Board: 1. endorse the report, dated February 29, 2012, and attachment titled "A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA),,; 2. direct staff to write a letter to the provincial and federal government ministers communicating Metro Vancouver's position paper on Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA) and request an in person meeting with ministers and staff and Metro Vancouver Directors and staff, to further engage in discussions on ATR and FNCIDA; and 3. direct staff to arrange meetings with Squamish Nation to engage in a discussion on the proposed FNCIDA developments within the Metro Vancouver region.

At its March 8, 2012 meeting, the Aboriginal Relations Committee considered the attached report titled "A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA)", dated, February 29, 2012. The Committee subsequently amended the recommendation as presented above in underline style.

ATTACHMENTS

A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA) - Report A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA) - Attachment

Page 1 of 1

.. I GVRD - 37 . Ab angina Relations Committee - 58 metrova nCDUVer GreaterVa ncouverRegional District- Greater Va ncoover Water District

GreaterVanoouverSewerage a nd Dr

Aboriginal Relations Committee: March 8, 2012

To: Aboriginal Relations Committee

From: Marino Piombini, Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations Corporate Relations

Date: 212912012

Subject: A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial DevelopmentAct (FNCIDA)

Recommendations: That the Board:

1. endorse the report, dated February 22, 2012, and attachment titled "A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA),,;

2. direct staff to arrange meetings with the Provincial and Federal governments to further engage in discussions on ATR and FNCIDA; and

3. direct staff to arrange meetings with Squamish Nation to engage in a discussion on the i proposed FNCIDA developments within the Metro Vancouver region.

1. PURPOSE

To provide a Metro Vancouver position paper on Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) and the First j Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA) in response to a request from I the Aboriginal Relations Committee, at its meeting on February 3, 2012, that these issues be given priority status as the Federal and Provincial governments and Squamish Nation are I collaboratively working towards finalizing agreements, regulations and legislation to enable FNCIDA-related developments on Indian Reserves in the Metro Vancouver region.

2. CONTEXT

The Federal government has been evaluating its ATR policy and process for revision and, in 2010, invited local governments to provide their perspectives on this issue. Metro Vancouver, along with several municipalities and Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee (LMTAC), provided their respective comments.

ATR applications are designed to allow First Nations to add land to their reserves mainly to accommodate community growth and meet social and commercial needs. Metro Vancouver and other local governments have previously commented that, while land acquired under the ATR process is not intended to be used for market development, there is no mechanism in place to monitor the use of the ATR lands once the application has been approved. Therefore, it is possible that lands acquired under ATR could be used for commercial and industrial development under FNCIDA

Page 1 of4

.. I GVRD - 38 . Ab angina Relations Committee - S9 A revised ATR policy and process has yet to be released by the Federal government.

In addition, the Federal government, with significant input from the Squamish Nation, passed FNCIDA legislation in 2005 and the accompanying First Nations Certainty of Land Title Act (FNCLTA) in 2010. These two pieces of legislation serve to implement on-Reserve commercial real estate property rights, including a land title system similarto the Provincial regime elsewhere, and clarification of title and property rights to aid investor/developer confidence for on-ReserVe projects, thus making the property's value equal to non-Reserve lands.

Squamish Nation has a significant presence within Metro Vancouver and is proposing FNCIDA-related commercial and residential developments on its four Indian Reserves in this region.

The Federal and Provincial governments are currently finalizing regulations and legislation, along with a tripartite agre'lment with the Squamish Nation, in order to allow for significant FNCIDA-related developments on Sguamish Nation Indian Reserves in the Metro Vancouver region.

While FNCIDA does not contemplate a role for local government as a regUlator, certain utiltty services (e.g. sewerage) require approval from local government authorities such as the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board. Utility services are contemplated to be negotiated between the First Nation and local governments.

The attached position paper, prepared at the direction of the Board (April 8, 2011) and received by the Intergovernmental Committee (July 20, 2011) but deferred until such time as Metro Vancouver and the Province had the opportunity to further discuss regional utility interests, identifies key local government issues for both ATR and FNCIDA, including: , ( ) ATR DCommunications: status of regional district consultation remains uncertain 2) Servicing: Metro Vancouver has no obligation to provide services to entities other than its member governments 3) Land Use Planning: potential for incompatible land uses 4) Budgetary Stabiltty: no requirement for compensation to local governments 5) Local Government Approval Lacking: no local government veto provided 6) Jurisdictional Arrangements and Public Notification 7) Sufficient Time to Undertake Public Processes 8) Jurisdictional Uncertainty 9) Timely Resolution of Third Party Interests

FNCIDA 1) Evaluating Requests for Extensions of the Sewerage Area Boundaries 2) Compatibility with the Regional Growth Strategy 3) Development Cost Charges (DCCs) 4) Application of Bylaws and Regulations

The paper proposes the following recommendations to senior governments:

1) Local governments, including regional districts, need to be engaged by senior governments in a meaningful and formal way on ATR and FNCIDA proposals

.. I GVRD - 39. 60 Ab angina RelatIons Committee - ( 2) A process needs to be established in order for First Nations and local governments to review and provide comments on their respective plans 3) LocaLgovernments cannot be obligated to provide utility services 4) The Greater VancouverSev.erage and Drainage DistrictActneeds to be amended to allow for the collection of municipal and regional Development Cost Charges 5) Application of local government bylaws and regulations, and their enforcement, for any corresponding services provided

Further, the paper identifies a process for ongoing, constructive dialogue and debate on these matters with senior governments, including:

1) Regional MP/MLAIMetro Vancouver caucus meetings 2) Regular briefing sessions althe Ministerial and Deputy Ministerial levels 3) Presentations and discussions at regular Metro Vancouver Committee and/or Board meetings 4) Participation on technical committees; and/or 5) Multi-party forums/processes

Metro Vancouver local governments may also wish to express their respective positions on any specific interests they may have on ATR and FNCIDA

3. ALTERNATIVES

The Aboriginal Relations Committee may wish to recommend that the Board:

a) rely on its earlier comments to LMTAC as its contribution to the current dialogue on ATR and FNCIDA and take no further action; or

b) direct staff to revise the attached position paper as a basis for its further consideration; or

c) endorse this report and attached position paper and direct staff to arrange meetings with representatives from both senior governments and Squamish Nation to engage in discussions on ATR and FNCIDA as well as the proposed FNCIDA developments within the Metro Vancouver region.

Alternative c) is recommended. Given the issues identified in the attached position paper, it is important for the Board to invite representatives from both senior governments to engage in discussions on ATR and FNCIDA as well as invite representatives from the Squamish Nation to engage in a discussion on the proposed FNCIDA developments within the Metro Vancouver region.

4. CONCLUSION

In response to the Board's recommendation, staff has prepared the attached position paper as a basis for further discussion with senior governments on ATR and FNCIDA

The position paper identifies key issues with respect to ATR and FNCIDA, proposes recommendations to senior governments that reflect regional and local interests, and identifies a process for ongoing, constructive dialogue and debate on these matters with senior governments.

.. I GVRD -c40 . Ab onglna Relations ommrttee - 61 ~ is recommended that the Board, upon endorsing this report, invite representatives from both senior governments to engage in discussions on ATR and FNCIDA as well as invite representatives from the Squamish Nation to engage in a discussion on the proposed FNCIDA developments within the Metro Vancouver region.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: A Metro Vancouver Position Paper on the Federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) Process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA)

( !

.. I GVRD - 41. 62 Ab angina Relations Committee - 5.2 Attachment

A METRO VANCOUVER POSITION PAPER ON THE FEDERAL AoDITIONS-TO-RESERVE (ATR) PROCESS AND THE FIRST NATIONS COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT (FNCIDA)

1. PREAMBLE: About Metro Vancouver As a region, Metro Vancouver is one of Canada's three largest urban areas, having a population of over 2.3 million people: over one-half of British Columbia'\; total population.

As an organization, Metro Vancouver is both a non-partisan political body and corporate entity operating under provincial legislation as a ,regional district"{i.e. Greater Vancouver Regional District, or GVRD) and ,greater boards" (Greater Vancouver Water District, or GVWD; and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, or GVS&DD) on behalf of its 22 member municipalities, one electoral area (unincorporated) and one treaty First Nation (Tsawwassen).

Metro Vancouver's three primary roles are: service delivery; planning; and political leadership.

• Service Delivery: Metro Vancouver's core services, which are provided principally to municipalities, are the provision of drinking water, sewerage and drainage, and solid waste management. Regional parks and affordable housing are significant services provided directly to the public.

• Planning: Metro Vancouver's three main areas of planning and regulatory responsibility relate to: regional growth (land use through municipalities); waste management (solid and liquid waste) and air quality management (a delegated Provincial function).

• Political Leadership: Metro Vancouver serves as the main political forum for discussion of significant community issues at the regional level and the focus is to build effective relationships with other orders of government and agencies to secure political and financial support for Metro Vancouver's corporate priorities and capital programs necessary to the future well-being and sustainability of the region. In this regard, Metro Vancouver acts as a facilitator, convenor, partner, advocate and a significant instrument for providing information and education to the community.

2. PURPOSE: The Need for this Position Paper The purpose of this position paper is to provide Metro Vancouver's perspective on the federal Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) process and the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA).

Metro Vancouver's position paper is not intended to replace the Lower Mainland Treaty 'I Advisory Committee's (LMfAC) earlier discussion papers on ATR and FNCIDA, but rather to :1 parallel those earlier documents. II 3. BACKGROUND: Metro Vancouver's Perspective and Involvement in Aboriginal ,I Relations , I Metro Vancouver and its member governments fully support efforts to achieve reconciliation with First Nation communities in BC. To that end, Metro Vancouver has an Aboriginal Relations 'I Committee which provides advice to the Board on: • Aboriginal relations; • Corporate programs and projects that intersect with First Nations" interests;

0000000 .. I GVRD - <12 . A bonglna Relations Committee - 63 Page 12

• Pan municipal issues (local issues) as they arise; and • Treaty negotiations.

Within the Aboriginal Relations Program, regional district staff works cooperatively and effectively towards building better relationships with First Nation communities in this region as well as with those outside Metro Vancouver that have interests within this region. For example, the Metro Vancouver Board appoints liaisons to First Nation communities whose interests intersect with the established priorities within Metro Vancouver''s Action Plan. This approach has proven to be effective for engaging in constructive dialogue between the regional district and area First Nations (e.g. Metro Vancouver-Kwikwetlem First Nation Joint Liaison Committee).

In addition, Metro Vancouver fully supports the efforts of First Nations to encourage socio economic and other development opportunities on their lands through treaty and non-treaty agreements, such as New Relationship agreements between the Province and First Nations. Moreover, Metro Vancouver recognizes the potential for market development on First Nations" lands to be mutually beneficial for Aboriginal communities and their neighbouring local governments.

Building good relationships with First Nations, an objective shared by all communities within Metro Vancouver, should be pursued: however, that process has to be robust enough for Metro Vancouver and its member communities to be able to comment on whether senior government policy and legislation are in the best interests of local government and its constituents.

Local government, including regional districts, are creatures of the Province and subject to the Local GovernmentAct, which is provincial legislation. Metro Vancouver is a federation,of "member governments" within the region; by definition, the member governments are subject to regional district bylaws and pay regional district taxes. Non-treaty First Nations (Le, ,jndian Bands") are subject to the Indian Actwhich is Federal legislation, and Indian Reserves are Federal jurisdiction; therefore, Indian Bands and Indian Reserves are not legally part of Metro Vancouver,

Both ATR and FNCIDA apply to Indian Reserves. There are 22 Indian Reserves in this region, I including four within Metro Vancouver''s unincorporated Electoral Area ,A". With local I governments expected to enter into agreements with First Nations in order to provide utility services to FNCIDA-related developments, it is important for Metro Vancouver to advance its position on ATR and FNCIDA to both senior governments,

4. CONTEXT A. Indian Reserves Indian Reserves are defined as: "an area of land that is held in trust by the federal Crown for the use and benefit of an Indian Band under the authority of the Constitution Act, 1867." First Nations do not have title to their Reserve lands: title remains with the federal government under the terms established by Section 18 of the Indian Act. As such, the federal government has the authority to add land to existing Indian Reserves or create new Indian Reserves. The ATR process was developed by Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC), ~ sets out the criteria and issues that must be addressed before land can be set apart as Indian Reserve. This presents a challenge for First Nations: although First Nations manage their lands, the Minister responsible for AANDC retains the power to veto land use decisions made by the Indian Band, Another consequence of Indian Reserves being under federal jurisdiction is that they are not subject to local government bylaws, nor to provincial land use legislation,

.. I GVRD - 43. 64 Ab onglna Relations Committee - Page 13

B. Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) An ATR is a parcel of land that is added to the existing land base of a First Nation. The legal title is set apart for tlTe use and benefit of the Indian Band having made the application. Land can be added to Indian Reserves in either rural or urban settings. The ATR process can be compared to the Municipal Boundary Expansion (MBE) process. However, the MBE process is covered under legislation, whereas the ATR is only a policy, which creates uncertainty.

There are many reasons why a First Nation community may wish to add land to an existing Indian Reserve or create a new one, such as community growth and economic development. The federal government's ATR policy requires that proposals fit into one of the following three categories:

Legal Obligation I Community Additions I New Reserves I Other Additions to existing Indian Additions to existing Indian The creation 01 new Indian Reserves or creation of new Reserves because of. Reserves due to: Indian ReseMls by way of: • community growth • social or commercial • treaty or claim (e.g. housing, schools) needs settlement • geographic • provincial land agreement enhancements offerings or unsold court order (e.g. rights-ol-way) surrendered land ( • • legal reversion • return 01 unsold • land lor First Nations surrendered land currentlv without land

Granting Reserve status to land exempts the land from municipal taxation, which may result in a significant loss of property tax revenue for municipalities. The ATR policy requires that a First Nation negotiate directly with the municipality to determine reasonable adjustments to tax loss.

ATR applications are addressed on a case-by-case basis. The First Nation must approach the AANDC regional office to discuss the ATR process and to develop an action plan. Given that Indian Reserve land falls under federal jurisdiction, AANDC remains involved throughout the process.

Although municipalities lack any formal, statutory right to negotiate the granting of Indian Reserve status to land, First Nations are directed, by policy, to negotiate in good faith with local governments. First Nations are required to develop a communication strategy with municipal and provincial governments, particularly if the ATR proposal is in an urban area. Under the current ATR policy, municipal and provincial governments are given three months to provide input to the First Nation on issues such as municipal tax loss compensation, municipal service provision, and bylaw compatibility. First Nations are also required to consult with third-parties having an interest in the land being proposed for Reserve status.

An ATR proposal is first granted "approval in principle" by the Deputy Minister of AANDC who determines if the ATR meets the criteria and has addressed the concerns of the municipal and provincial governments. The proposal is then put forth for a review by AANDC. Final approval rests with the federal Cabinet. Administration and control of the land proposed to be added to Reserve must be transferred to AANDC, Which will then register the lands in the Indian Lands Registry.

C. First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA) The First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act, S.C. 2005, c.53 (FNCIDA) is federal legislation that came into force on April 1, 2006.

GVRD 44 Ab angina.. I Relations-e ommlttee. - 65 Page 14

FNCIDA resulted from a First Nation-led initiative and it was developed in cooperation with five partnering First Nations, including the Squamish Nation. The purpose of the FNCIDA is to address the regulatory gap that exists on Indian Act reserves and thereby allow complex commercial and industrial projects to proceed on reserve lands. Off-reserve commercial and industrial activities are usually governed by comprehensive provincial statutes and regulations. Because the federal government has exclusive authority to make laws respecting "Indians, and Lands reserved for the Indians" under s. 91 (24) of the Constitution Act, 1867, provincial regulatory regimes that relate to land use do not apply to reserve lands. This creates what is commonly referred to as a "regulatory gap" on Indian Act reserve lands, which means the absence of adequate laws to govern an activity such as land use regulation, monitoring and enforcement systems.

FNCIDA allows the federal Governor in Council (i.e. federal Cabinet) to make regulations governing commercial and industrial development projects on Indian Act reserve lands. Among other things, such regulations may confer any legislative, administrative, judicial or other power on any person or body that the governor in Council considers necessary to effectively regulate the undertakings and such regulations may incorporate provincial laws by reference, with any adaptations that the Governor in Council considers necessary.

Federal regulations are only made under FNCIDA at the request of participating First Nations. The regulations are project-specific, developed in cooperation with the First Nation and the relevant province, and are limited in application to the particular lands described in the project. Regulations may not be made unless the Minister of AANDC receives a Band Council resolution from the First Nation requesting that the Minister of AANDC recommend to the Governor in Council "the making of those regulations." As well, if the regulations specify a provincial official by whom, or body by which, a power may be exercised or a duty must be performed, then an agreement must be concluded between the Minister of AANDC, the province and the council of the First Nation for the administration and enforcement of the regulations by that official or body.

While FNCIDA targets regulatory gaps, it fails to address concerns about underlying security of title or Reserve projects. The First Nations Certainty of Land Title Act (FNCLTA), which received Royal Assent on June 30, 2010 and came into force on March 1, 2011, amends FNCIDA to provide for a landtitle system for on-Reserve developments that is identical to those off Reserve lands. This Act provides First Nations with the ability to register market developments in a system that mirrors the provincial land titles registry, providing greater certainty for investors and buyers. From a buyer perspective, an interest on a participating First Nation's Reserve is registered and assured in the same manner as it would in a neighbouring municipality.

5. ISSUES A. Additions-to-Reserve (ATR) There are a number of local government issues relating to ATR that need to be addressed.

1) Communications The ATR policy recognizes municipal and provincial governments, but not regional districts; therefore, the status of regional district consultation within the ATR process remains uncertain.

2) Servicing The expectation is that the First Nation and local governments will reach agreement on servicing. However, it is important to keep in mind that Metro Vancouver has no obligation to

) .. I GVRD - 45. 66 Ab onglna Relations Commlttee- Page 15

provide utility services to any entities other than those specified in its legislation (i.e. member governments ).

3) Land Use Planning Local government land use bylaws, zoning and related enforcement would no longer be applicable once the land is added to Reserve lands. As a result, there could be the potential for incompatible land uses and land use conflicts.

4) Budgetary Stability Clearly, federal policy recognizes that there could be a negative fiscal impact on local government from ATR and provides for two methods of mitigation of that impact: tax loss compensation and servicing agreements. Federal policy does not layout specific formulas for compensation or a requirement for servicing agreements; the parties are to decide for themselves on the most appropriate approach in each circumstance. Nor does federal policy require the First Nation to pay compensation in all circumstances; the municipality may not seek compensation or the tax loss may not be considered significant.

Member governments within Metro Vancouver have a fiduciary responsibility to their tax payers to ensure that the full costs of all local services are recovered, including the cost of regional services such that the regional tax payers do not end up subsidizing development projects that are not contemplated in the Regional Growth Strategy. Regional servicing issues, including the collection and remittance of all requisite Metro Vancouver property taxes, clearly need to be addressed under ATR and FNCIDA.

5) Local Government Approval Lacking Moreover, the federal government may allow the addition to proceed even though the First Nation and municipality fail to agree on tax loss compensation. Where compensation is paid, it is intended as a one-time obligation, not a commitment to assist the municipality for an unlimited period of time. The federal government also retains the discretion to approve the addition where it considers the First Nation has made reasonable efforts to respond to the issues identified by the municipality. It does not give the municipality a veto over land transfers.

6) Jurisdictional Arrangements and Public Notification . Business owners or individuals that leaselrent homes or businesses on occupied fee simple lands which are added to Reserve would be faced with a new jurisdiction and may not have the same representation as they had with local government.

7) Sufficient Time to Undertake Public Processes " The regional district and municipalities require sufficient time to consider a proposal for additions to Reserve that takes into consideration the various processes required for Board and Council reports and public consultation. For example, the time required for municipal councils to revise an Official Community Plan or approve a boundary extension may range from six months to one year. The more contentious the issue, the more time is required for public consultation.

GVRD 46 Ab angina.. I Relations-c ommlttee. - 67 Page 16

8) Jurisdictional Uncertainty ( ) Shared/overlapping claim areas as well as lands held jointly by more than one First Nation and the inconsistent manner in which additions may be carried out could lead to overall jurisdictional uncertainties for neighbouring local governments.

9) Timely Resolution of Third Party Interests (water rights, rights-of-way, access for private landowners and infrastructure/utilities, etc.) How a third party right is to be specifically dealt with is not clear. Problems of access may arise if lands are already held by third party interests.

B. First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIOA) There are numerous pieces of legislation which overlap ATR, FNCIDA and FNCLTA. The legislative landscape is complex and includes numerous acts such as the First Nations Land Management Act, the First Nations Fisca/ and Statistical Management Act, and the First Nations Oil and Gas and Moneys Management Act. The one constant is that there is no explicit reference to local governments in the legis lation, nor is there any specific requirement for consultation with local governments.

The FNCIDA Regulation and the corresponding FNCLTA legislation require a tripartite agreement between the federal government, the provincial government and the First Nation - there is no mention of local governments. The only policy tool currently available for local governments to affect FNCIDA projects is in the negotiation of service agreements. If First Nations and other entities, not within the service area (e.g. sewerage), require municipal utility services, they need to apply through a neighbouring municipality that is a member of that service area (i.e. GVS&DD). Even for member municipalities, Metro Vancouver has certain approval rights for new sewerage connections.

1) Evaluating Requests for Extensions of the Sewerage Area Boundaries Sewerage Area boundaries are an important "shape" of urban development patterns in the region. Inclusion in the Sewerage Area allows urban development to be served by the regional sewer system. ~ is GVS&DD procedure regarding extensions to Sewerage Area boundaries to accept requests from member governments only (usually by Council resolution). First Nations and other entities outside the sewerage area boundaries need 10 apply through a neighbouring municipality which is a member of the GVS&DD.

The following criteria are used by Metro Vancouver to evaluate applications requesting sewerage area expansions:

Evaluation Criteria Purpose 1. Financial To determine the financial impactthat can resultfrom the extension of sewer service or as a consequence of development, such as the cost of new facilities or upgrades to existing infrastructure 2. Technical and To assess capacity of existing infrastructure to meet current and Operational future demand, suitability of the proposed connection point, or source control issues for industrial discharges 3. Land Use To confirm compliance to existing municipal community plans and Compliance Regional Growth Strategy 4. Service Levels To ensure that the extension of sewer service does not degrade

.. I GVRD - 47. 68 Ab ongma Relations Commlttee- Page 17

service levels for existing serviced areas 5. Local and To evaluate the potential encouragement for further development Community Interests and the impact of adjacent municipalities or communities 6. Regional Interests To consider the regional interest of extending sewer service to residents because of social benefits, such as public health, that result from a clean environment. other considerations may include: Rights-of-Way; taxation; and future expansion of regional facilities

Wthe review of these criteria reveals no impediment to approval, a recommendation for approval is submitted to the Board. If impediments to approval are identified, a recommendation for refusal is submitted to the Board.

2) Com patibility with the Regional Growth Strategy FNCIDA will heighten the need to explore land use coordination and related issues because a designated FNCIDA project will likely bring increased activity on Indian Reserves largely for the purposes of economic development. FNCIDA projects mayor may not be compatible with the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS). This could be a challenging issue because, while First Nations were involved in the RGS engagement process, First Nations" lands are not subject to the RGS. The Local GovernmentActrequires that all works and services provided by the regional district be consistent with its RGS (Section 865(1)). Metro Vancouver, therefore, may be legally precluded from providing services to lands that are not currently serviced because, pursuant to the Local Government Act, the GVRD must conform to the RGS. All bylaws adopted by the GVRD Board, and all services undertaken by the GVRD, must be consistent with the RGS. These issues remain very challenging: information on utility servicing needs for communities is required and considered for determining the proper capacity for those services (Le. 1O-ye~r capital planning process). These issues and challenges need to be considered, addressed and resolved prior to FNCIDA approvals.

3) Development Cost Charges IDCCs) Metro Vancouver applies Development Cost Charges (DCCs) to users that are part of emerging Lower Mainland developments to pay for new sanitary sewer works such as additional trunk lines, pumping stations, and wastewater treatment plant expansion. This practice should not be any different for potential FNCIDA projects. '

The issue is: how does a municipality or regional district collect DCCs when a development takes place outside its jurisdictional boundaries, such as federal lands, where local governments do not have the ability to approve a subdivision or authorize building permits?

4) Application of Bylaws and Regulations When member municipalities require utility services (e.g. sewerage), the GVS&DD Board is responsible for reviewing, assessing and approving any new utility service hook-ups. Once servicing is provided, the corresponding bylaws (e.g. air quality and liquid waste source control under both the Air Quality Management Plan and Liquid Waste Management Plan, respectively) also apply; in this case, Metro Vancouver undertakes permitting, regulation and enforcement, for air quality and liquid waste source control. Regional district staff works with the operator on the site, not the landowner.

In addition, the Seoor Use Bylaw regulates the types of substances that can be discharged into sewers or sewerage facilities. The sewerage facilities in question are owned and operated by

GVRD 48 Ab orlglna,. I Relations-c ommlttee. - 69 Page 18 the GVS&DD pursuant to its enabling legislation. The discharge of prohibited substances into these sewerage facilities could cause problems with the operation of the facilities themselves and may have p()tentially harmful environmental impacts. Under the Constitution Act, 1867, the Province has jurisdiction over municipal institutions (Section 92(8» and, as such, has the power to enact legislation such as the GVS&DDActand the Local GovemmentAct. ~ also has the power to enact legislation authorizing municipal regulation of local activity that affects the environment, such as waste disposal (Section 30, Environmental Management Act).

6. RECOMMENDATIONS Metro Vancouver proposes the following recommendations to senior governments and First Nations regarding ATR and FNCIDA:

1) Local governments, including regional districts, need to be engaged by senior governments in a meaningful and formal way on ATR and FNCIDA proposals Local governments (municipal and regional districts) would like to work cooperatively with provincial, federal and First Nation governments with respect to ATR and FNCIDA. However, municipal governments as third parties. are merely asked to provide written comments. This approach does not satisfy whether, as third parties, local government issues and interests are understood so that decisions made by AANDC are reflective of "meaningful" input from local governments, which includes the following components: • Provision of adequate notice in order for committees and regional district boards or municipal councils to comment on the proposals • Timely disclosure of accurate and relevant information • Good faith efforts on behalf of the federal and provincial governments to receive and consider Metro Vancouver and member municipal comments on ATR and FNCIDA • Where possible, implementation of Metro Vancouver and member municipalities" views and perspectives into ATR and FNCIDA applications and decisions.

ATR and FNCIDA do not currently provide opportunities to engage in "meaningful" discussions with senior governments. This is particularly troubling as the regional district provides the necessary utility infrastructure and is a "wholesaler" of services to its member governments.

AANDC should consider adding a new mechanism to the ATR policy that would improve stakeholder (including regional district) coordination during the ATR application process.

2) A process needs to be established in order for First Nations and local governments to review and provide comments on their respective plans A mechanism for sharing, reviewing and coordinating long-term plans between First Nations and local governments is clearly lacking with both ATR and FNCIDA. The process should include multi-party forums to further observe, inform and discuss the respective and possible competing interests (e.g. land use designations). Therefore, discussions between a First Nation, local governments, and Metro Vancouver (as well as Translink) need to take place early in the ATR and FNCIDA approval processes in order to determine if, in the case of FNCIDA, the project land use is consistent and can be coordinated with the RGS in terms of requirements for population growth, such as hoUSing, utility services, transportation, and other community and planning-related matters.

3) Local Governments cannot be obligated to provide utility services While local governments do not have an identified role to play with respectto FNCIDA, the expectation is that municipal services will be negotiated and provided to First Nations. Metro

GVRD Ab angina.. I Relations- Committee49. - 70 Page 19

Vancouver's position is clear: if any act, regulation, policy or other senior government decision or action purports to give First Nations or any other entity the right to regional and/or utility services provided by Metro Vancouver, without the same provisions applying as they currently apply to its member governments, then Metro Vancouver will vigorously challenge those decisions or actions. Furthermore, Metro Vancouver and its member governments will not approve any new or expanded local services for Indian Reserve lands that are under ATR or FNCIDA consideration until the federal and provincial governments address the legislative obstacles identified in this position paper.

4) The GreaterVancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act needs to be amended to allow for the collection of municipal and regional Development Cost Charges (DCCs) There are a number of servicing agreements currently being negotiated between local governments and First Nations within Metro Vancouver. In order to obtain municipal water and sewerage services for developments on Federal lands, a First Nation or developer in the case of a FNCIDA project, will need tonegotiate a servicing agreement with the member municipality. In the Gase of sewerage, before the member municipality connects any sewer or drain that is part of a development that is not subjectto its building and planning jurisdiction, the GVS&DD must be advised as per Section 29 of the GVS&DD Act and that that member, as well as the GVS&DD and service recipient should enter into a service agreement before the connection is made. It is through such a service agreement that the member municipality (and GVS&DD) could collect the equivalent of DCCs and ensure that the rest of the municipality is not subsidizing the development on Federal lands.

A recommended solution is to amend the GVS&DD Act. The GVS&DD Act authorizes the GVS&DD to "by bylaw, impose development cost charges on every person who obtains from a member municipality (a) approval of a subdivision, or (b) building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure."

The member governments of Metro Vancouver have a fiduciary responsibility to their tax payers to ensure that the full costs of all local government services are recovered, including the cost of regional services such that the regional tax payers do not end up subsidizing development projects that are not contemplated in the RGS. Regional servicing issues, including the collection and remittance of all requisite Metro Vancouver property taxes, clearly need to be addressed under ATR and FNCIDA

5) Application of local government bylaws and regulations, and their enforcement, for any corresponding services provided There needs to be an effective approach developed to deal with the approval, delivery and i-' enforcement of local services on Reserve by municipal governments and regional districts.

Proposed regulations need to provide the GVRD and GVS&DD with sufficient authority to enforce relevant regulatory bylaws on Indian Reserve lands. This includes consideration of the regional district's regulatory powers under the GVS&DD Act, Local Government Act, Environmental Management Act, GVWD Act and Community Charter.

For example, the GVS&DD's Sel!\er Use Bylaw should also apply to Indian Reserve lands if prohibited substances are discharged into a sewer that is connected to a sewerage facility operated by the GVS&DD.

.. I GVRD - 50 . Ab angina Relations Committee - 71 PagellO

7. CONCLUSION: The Way Forward ( .. ~ There is ample evidence to suggest that local government interests are not being recognized or . , taken seriously by the senior governments on ATR and FNCIDA The ATR process provides municipal governments (not regional districts) with an opportunity for comments, but those comments mayor may not be considered by AANDC. Further, under FNCIDA there is no role contemplated for local governments; only that this piece of legislation serves to create the expectation that First Nations will enter into agreements for utility services with local governments. ATR and FNCIDA do not provide opportunities to engage in "meaningful" discussion with senior governments and this is a priority concern for Metro Vancouver and its member governments.

Metro Vancouver, therefore, commits to a process of dialogue on ATR and FNCIDA As a first step, the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors will attempt to engage with both senior governments on the issues, concerns and obstacles as well as the proposed recommendations identified in this position paper.

Following these preliminary discussions, it is Metro Vancouver''s intention to develOp ongoing, constructive discussion and debate on these matters, which can be accomplished through better informational exchange networks at: • regional MP/MLNMetro Vancouver caucus meetings; • regular briefing sessions atthe Ministerial and Deputy Mnisterial levels; • presentations and discussions at regular Metro Vancouver Committee and/or Board meetings; • partiCipation on technical committees; and/or • multi-party forums/processes.

The impacts of ATR and FNCIDA go beyond the immediate locale of any proposal to involve the whole of the Metro Vancouver region. In addition to the comments provided by Metro Vancouver to LMT AC, and recognizing the precedent being set for future ATR applications and FNCIDA projects, the Metro Vancouver Board has identified the need for this position paper to address the region''s issues and concerns on ATR and FNCIDA This position paper can be a tool or mechanism to further engage in dialogue on these matters with both the federal and provincial governments as they consider future ATR and FNCIDA proposals. Metro Vancouver applauds any and all efforts on the part of senior governments to assist the regional district and its member governments in this regard, and remains confident that these issues can be addressed through open communication, and sincere, cooperative and constructive debate.

.. I GVRD - 51 . Ab onglna Relations Committee - 72 209

April 24, 2013

Mayor Lois E. Jackson and Council I)EPi~~~~~¥~~~ ~:O Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, BC, V4K 3E2 i~:c~;,;£l~f.j),~~ '" cJDr:' Dear Mayor Jackson and Council:

Subject: Information Regarding Port Metro Vancouver's Project Review Process and Coal Exports through Port Metro Vancouver

Over the past few months, there have been concerns raised by municipal leaders and members of the public about our role in reviewing and permitting tenant-led projects on port lands and about the export of coal through Port Metro Vancouver. As a result, we are reaching out to Mayor and Council in communities that host port operations to provide clarification and to offer to meet in person for further discussion.

The purpose of this letter is to provide general information about our project review process; you should have received a specific response from us related to the formal review process for the Fraser Surrey Docks Direct Coal Transfer Facility Project.

For some time, Port Metro Vancouver and other levels of government have been strong advocates for a Pacific Gateway strategy that enables the development of Canadian and North American trade with commercial partners in Asia. On many levels this collaboration has been a success story. There is no question that British Columbia and Metro Vancouver have weathered the global economic storms of recent years better than most other North American jurisdictions. In part, this is due to our evolving trade linkCjges with Asia, including sustained growth in exports of BC commodity based products to that region. Indeed, over the past five years, British Columbia's exports to Pacific Rim economies have expanded to the point where they now apprOXimately equal, in dollar terms, to our shipments to the United States, which remains our biggest market. This trade diversification has been helpful in supporting jobs and sustaining economic activity and tax revenues of the region and the province. And we at Port Metro Vancouver are proud to playa key part of this export success story.

It is Port Metro Vancouver's mandate to facilitate trade in support of domestic and international trade priorities. In exercising this mandate, we uphold the highest standards of project review, dictated by the nature of a proposed project and related to the handling and movement of goods. Our process is similar to a municipal review process in that it considers project permit applications based on best planning practices.

As part of the review process, we assess impacts on local communities to ensure that appropriate mitigation can be put in place prior to the issuance of a project permit. Our role is to ensure that products can move safely through the Port, but we do not have the authority to make decisions on which commodities move through the Port. These are defined by Canada's trade policy and the applicable legislation. . . .(2

100 The POinte, 999 Canada Place, Vancouver, B.C. Canada V6C 3T4 portmetrovancouver.com 100 The POinte, 999 Canada Place, Vancouver, C.-B. Canada V6C 3T4 Canada Mayor Jackson and Council Page 2 April 24, 2013

Attached, please find information that is being shared with the public today and which is intended to provide clarification regarding PMV's project review process and coal exports. If you are interested in more information or would like to arrange a meeting, please contact Naomi Horsford at 604-665-9309 or by email [email protected].

Yours truly,

PORT METRO VANCOUVER

Robin Silvester President and Chief Executive Officer cc: George V. Harvie, Chief Administrative Officer, Corporation of Delta

Encls. (2)

This is provided for Council's information. Details of the public open houses referenced in the document are currently being finalized. Staff will advise Council and post information on Delta's website when this information is received.

POHT iV1ETI"(O Coal Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

GENERAL OVERVIEW for more information: Port Metro Vancouver 604.665.9267

What is Port Metro Vancouver's mandate? • We are responsible for facilitating the movement of Canadian import and export cargo in support of the Government of Canada's trade priorities, and for the safe and efficient movement of marine traffic. • Port Metro Vancouver's mandate is set out in the Canada Marine Act, and includes contributing to the competitiveness, growth and prosperity of the Canadian economy, providing a high level of safety and environmental protection, and managing the marine infrastructure and services in a commercial manner that encourages, and takes into account input from users and its bordering communities. • In order to meet this mandate, Port Metro Vancouver upholds the highest standards of project reView, dictated by the nature of a proposed project and related to the handling and movement of goods. To learn more about our mandate, please visit the Government of Canada's website.

How much coal moves through Port Metro Vancouver annually? • Coal has long been our principal export, and accounts for more than one-quarter of the Port's total volume each year. • In 2012, Port Metro Vancouver handled more than 124 million metric tonnes of cargo, including more than 32.7 million metric tonnes of coal. This makes Port Metro Vancouver the second largest exporter of coal in North America (after Hampton Roads, Virginia). • Approximately 69% of that coal is British Columbia mined metallurgical or steel making coal. • Total coal exports through Port Metro Vancouver have grown by 35% from 2009 - 2012. To learn more about port facts and cargo statistiCS, please visit our website.

What is the expected increase of coal per year if the proposed Fraser Surrey Docks project is approved? • Fraser Surrey Docks, if approved, would handle 4 million metric tonnes per year, with the potential to increase to 8 million tonnes per year. • An increase from 4 million to 8 million metric tonnes would require a separate permitting process. • Port Metro Vancouver's current and permitted coal-handling capacity is 51.5 million metric tonnes; the FSD proposal represents 7% of our overall capacity.

1 PORT METRO VANCOUVER'S PROJECT PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS For more informaUon: Port Metro Vancouver Barbara Joy-Kinsella 604.665.9267

What is Port Metro Vancouver's project permit review process? • In exercising our mandate, we uphold the highest standards of review process dictated by the nature of a proposed project and related to the handling and movement of goods. • All project applications and process updates are posted on Port Metro Vancouver's website. • Each project application is reviewed on its merits, impacts to local communities, and necessary mitigation measures. A project permit will only be issued by the Port when technical reviews and any required municipal, First Nation, and community consultation are complete. All projects requiring public consultation are posted on our website. • As part of the review process, depending on the specific nature, location and complexity of the proposed project, applicants may be asked to conduct additional studies to assess impacts including but not limited to air quality, habitat, fish and wildlife, soil and water quality, Aboriginal interests, traffic and transportation, noise and light, views and shading, odours, navigation and safety, security, and economic impacts. Some projects may also require review from other agencies such as the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Environment Canada. • At the completion of this comprehensive review process Port Metro Vancouver makes its decision on the application. If a project permit is issued, it is typical for the permit to include a variety of project and environmental conditions of approval. These conditions will vary on the nature of the project and its potential impacts.

What environmental assessment process is involved in the permitting process? • Port Metro Vancouver conducts rigorous environmental and planning reviews on most proposed projects within our jurisdiction, regardless of whether or not the scope of the project triggers CEAA 2012. • Projects with in-water works are regularly referred for a coordinated review process, with agencies such as the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Province of B.C. and Metro Vancouver. These coordinated inter-agency reviews are for proposed projects or activities that could impact riparian areas and marine environments.

What is Port Metro Vancouver's relationship with the local Health Authorities? • Port Metro Vancouver regularly refers projects that cannot achieve emission reductions and have the potential for an increase in emissions to the Health Authorities. • We recently met with the Health Authorities to discuss our review process; their concerns weren't specific to coal transport and exports. • As a result of that meeting, Vancouver Coastal Health and the Fraser Health Authority have been invited to participate and comment on our Land Use Plan Update process. • Port staff will continue to work with the Health Authorities to find the best way to include them in our project review process.

2 PORT METRO VANCOUVER'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS for more information: Port Metro Vancouver Barbara Joy-Kinsella 604.665.9267

What is Port Metro Vancouver doing to address climate change? • Port Metro Vancouver is committed to long-term sustainability and has implemented several programs designed to integrate environmental, social and economic sustainability initiatives into our operations. • As part of our Air Action Program dating back to 2006, we have been working to reduce air emissions of criteria contaminants, air toxins and greenhouse gases from port activities. Reducing our emissions now, and as we grow, will help to maintain good air quality and reduce the impacts of climate change for future generations. • We operate a carbon neutral head office, were the first port in Canada to have an Environmental Programs Department, the first in North America to implement a mid-ocean ballast water exchange program, the first in Canada to install shore power for cruise ships, and one of only two ports in the world to issue a Global Reporting Initiative accredited B+ Sustainability Report. • In addition, we have developed programs and partnerships that extend beyond our jurisdiction. An example of this collaboration is the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy. Port Metro Vancouver, in partnership with the Port of Seattle and Port of Tacoma, developed the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy for emission-reduction performance goals from port related sources. The Strategy represents a cooperative effort among the three ports to improve air quality and reduce contributions to climate change in the shared Georgia Basin Puget Sound air shed.

COAL GENERAL for more information: Coa' Alliance Alan fryer 778.987.5523

How important is coal to British Columbia's economy? B.C. is one of the world's most important suppliers of coal. The coal supply chain is responsible for more than 26,000 jobs in B.C. (from mining to terminal jobs). The average wage of jobs in this industry is $107,000 - one of the highest paying sectors in the provi nce. The industry directly contributes close to $400 million to the provincial government.

What is the difference between steelmaking (metallurgical) coal and thermal coal? Steelmaking (metallurgical) coal is used for the production of steel. Steelmaking coal is a key economic driver in B.C., generating $5 billion in economic activity annually. This steel is used in almost all things we use in our daily lives: The construction of our homes Household appliances Rapid transit systems and bicycles Buildings (hospitals, schools, our offices etc.) Thermal coal is used for power generation. Much of the thermal coal exported by Port Metro Vancouver comes by train from the United States.

3 In 2012, 69% of the coal exported through Port Metro Vancouver was metallurgical (22.6 million metrictonnes) and 30% was thermal (9.8 million metric tonnes).

Isn't it true that the coal is burned and creates GHG emissions? o Steelmaking, like many industrial processes, does create some emissions. However, the coal used is an important part of a chemical reaction to create steel - it is not used to generate power. o Steel is essential to projects that actually improve the environment - you need it to build things like wind turbines, hydroelectric facilities, solar power plants, and rapid transit.

COAL TRANSPORT For more informatiol1: IINSF Gus Melona,; 206.625.6220 CP Kevin Hrysak 403.836.3874 eN Emily Hammer 604.589.6512 Trallsport Canada Padfic Region 604.666.1675

Will the communities near Fraser Surrey Docks see an increase in train traffic if this project is approved? o The proposal would result in about one additional train per day. o Trains already travel that corridor.

What coal suppression techniques do the railways use to minimize fugitive coal dust? o The movement of coal by rail along Canada's rail corridors is regulated by Transport Canada in accordance with the Railway Act. o Port Metro Vancouver has been advised that rail service providers take significant steps to minimize fugitive coal dust, such as spraying each rail car at the mine site with a dust suppressant designed to create a crust on top of the coal. o For more specific information, please contact the railways directly.

What coal suppressiol"! techniques do the terminals use to minimize fugitive coal dust? o As part of coal operations at the Port, dust suppression initiatives are important components we consider in the project review process. o Any new facilities that store coal on site would be required to meet the same standards as existing facilities in the Lower Mainland.

How many more ships will be coming to Port Metro Vancouver as a result? o Should this project proceed, coal will be transferred by Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) rail to the terminal and will be loaded directly onto 8,000 dead weight tonnes (DWT) barges at existing Berth 2. It is antiCipated that one train will fill two barges. • When loaded, tugs will take single barges down to the mouth of the Fraser River. Once barges pass Sand Heads, they will be towed in tandem to Texada Island. From there the coal will be stored before transfer to a deep sea vessel for overseas export. No tandem (double) barge tows will be conducted on the Fraser River.

4 Karen Waterberg

From: Mayor Lois Jackson Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 9:08 AM To: Mayor & Council Subject: FW: Llr to Mayor Jackson re Project Review Process and Coal Exports Attachments: 2013-04-24 Llr to Mayor Jackson re Project Review Process and Coal Exports.pdf; Port Metro Vancouver deck for April 23 coal media brief FINAL. PDF; Port Metro Vancouver Permit and Coal FAQs FINAL.PDF

On 2013-04-26 4:54 PM, "Radloff, Nancy" wrote:

> >Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link >attachments: > >2013-04-24 Ltr to Mayor Jackson re project Review Process and Coal >Exports > > >Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent >sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your >e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled.

1 210

Office of the Cabinet du Prime Minister Premier ministre

Ollawa, Canada K 1A OA2 gCinda A FILE # CJ lOOO-80 April 24, 2013

Her Worship Lois E. Jackson Mayor The Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, British Columbia V4K3E2

Dear Mayor Jackson:

I would like to acknowledge receipt of your correspondence of February 8 addressed to the Prime Minister regarding Bill S-8, The Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act. I regret the delay in replying.

Please be assured that your concerns, offered on behalf of the Corporation of Delta, have been carefully reviewed. As copies of your letter have already been sent to the Honourable Bernard Valcourt, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, the Honourable Peter Kent, Minister of the Enviromnent, and the Honourable Denis Lebel, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, I am certain that they will also appreciate being made aware of your concerns and will wish to give them every consideration.

Thank you for writing to the Prime Minister.

Yours sincerely,

This correspondence is in response to the letter Mayor P. Monteith Jackson wrote to the Prime Minster (February 8, 2013) Executi ve Correspondence Officer expressing Delta's concerns regarding Bill S-8. The Honourable John Duncan addressed Delta's concerns (at the request of The Honourable Kerry-Lynne Findlay) in a formal letter written to the Metro Vancouver Chair.

MAYOR' S OFF ICE APR 3 0 2013 Canada RECE IVED <-,• W From the office 'if'TI m THE CORPORATION OF DELTA The Mayor, tp Lois E. Jackson I""""" .I:>.

genda , "A , --,FILE--' # Q\OGQ ,- eo

February 8, 2013

TYPE: ltJ F='o I The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P. i Prime Minister of Canada DEPT: --l:::f.&.t--C{'_ ! House of Commons A. T. # " Ottawa, ON K1A OA6 llQq0q · , CommeRts ' f.-Ye.Ir AfH'52:>S7 Dear Prime Minister,

Re: Bill S-8: The Safe Drinking Water for First Nation~ Act

At the February 4, 2013 Regular Meeting of Delta Council, the enclosed report titled, "Metro Vancouver's POsition Paper on Bill 8-8: The Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Acf was considered and its recommendations endorsed. ,The report identified a number of concerns that could have serious financial and legal implications for local governments across Canada. These concerns must be addressed before The Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act receives Royal Assent in the House of Commons.

The Corporation of Delta is concerned that the Province, through agreement with the ' federal government, could compel regional and local governments to provide water and wastewater services to First Nations within their jurisdiction and to neighbOuring , sove'reign Treaty Nations (Tsawwassen First Nation) who have the'ability,toopt-in to the ,; proposed legislation despite removing themselves from the' Indian Act and assuming ~,i responsibility for their own local infrastructure. Our municipal wastewater system does [; not have the physical capaCity to meet the current and future sewer demands of the two I' First Nation communities that reside in our area. If our municipality is held responsible ~; ; for increasing capaCity to meet service prOVision requirements, the cost of increasing

~ ; water and wastewater capacity, inslalling distribution systems and upgrading pump stations would have severe financial implications for the Corporation of Della.

r: Local governments do not have regulatory authority to enforce municipal bylaws or provincial regulations including those assoCiated with drinking water quality and ,~ wastewater disposal on First Nation,land. Despite this lack of authority, it is unClear in ;" the Act as to whether local governments will be held legally liable for the water and

" ,~i .. ; wastewater services provided. In addition, local governments do not have the authority

... 12 !:,1 , •(~ , 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent, Delta, British Columbia, Canada v4K 3E2 Tel: 604 946-3210 Fax: 604946-6055 E-mail: mi!)lor@corp delta bc ca i,::l:' l " ! .~ r;:',' !.: February 8. 2013 Page 2

, I I to collect taxes from First Nations bands; thus when an overdue utility service charge I goes into tax arrears. local governments do not have the ability to collect outstanding charges. Thus, local governments could be required to provide services without a " mechanism to recuperate the costs of provision.

While Bill 8-8 has good intentions. Delta Council believes that more discussion needs to :1 occur before this Act is passed in the House of Commons. We are concerned that the federal government does not have a clear implementation plan for The Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act nor has it allocated the financial resources required to develop the infrastructure needed to supply First Nations with safe drinking water. It is i our understanding that if this bill passes second reading, it will be referred to the House of Commons' Standing Committee on AbOriginal Affairs and Northem Development. We respectfully request that your office ensure that the issues outlined above be addressed and resolved before The Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act receives third reading and Royal Assent.

cc: The Honourable John Duncan. Mlnisier of Aboriginal Affairs and Northem Development The Honourable Peter Kent, Minister of the Environment The Hononourable Denis Lebel. Minister of Transport."infrastructure and Communities The Honourable Christy Clark, Premier of British Columbia The Honourable Ida Chong. Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation. BC The Honourable Terry Lake, Minister of Environment, BC The Honourable Mary Polak. Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure. BC : .. Kerry-Lynne Findlay, QC. MP, Delta - Richmond East and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice I Jinny Sims, MP, Newton - North Delta I Guy Gentner, MLA, Delta-North Vicki Huntington. MLA. Delta-South Federation of Canadian Municipalities Un"io";,' of British Columbia Municipalities ':~ Metro Vancouver Board of Directors Delta Council George V, Harvie, Chief Administrative Officer

I I 211 Mayor Council ....." , From: Christina Shyong . TYPE. ~6. A/C .-. ~~,.. w Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 7:20 AM •..• __ .J~-< To: Mayor & Council; doug smith; Cheryl Desaulniers; Darcy Ludw

Yesterday I was delayed at home and arrived 2 minutes late to the annual neighborhood meeting that is hosted by the tennis club Thurs April 25th 7pm. There were no executive members there in the clubhouse and no one from the Corp of Delta was there either. I asked two tennis players outside, "Has anyone from the executive committee or the Corp of Delta been waiting in here?" They said, "No". By about 7: 1Opm the neighbors and I decide to phone the 2 numbers on the sign outside and ask. No one knew anything and I left a message. The neighbors and I left about 7:20pm.

To put it mildly, I am so not impressed with the Department of Parks and Rec and with Sunshine Hills Tennis Club. First of all, last year at the annual meeting the Corp of Delta said they would deal directly with Peter Burns to do something to the light pollution to his house. Offering to plant a deciduous tree right up close to their living room window is not an adequate solution. That does very little to reduce light pollution in the shoulder months, early spring and fall. And what about the light pollution to the environment in general? The Corp of Delta knew about light pollution before installation of tennis lights in 2009, but they chose to install lights anyways. What does that say about these guys? Last year I suggested once again to limiting lights to one hour after sunset. Then tennis members can still play longer and the environment is not impacted too much. Other neighborhood issues we wanted to bring up at the meeting yesterday were the graffiti that is allover the clubhouse that has not been addressed

1 for over a month now, the parking lot light was left on some nights, the parking lot gate was left open multiple times this last year. The bottom line is: Sunshine Hills Tennis Club and Department of Parks and Rec has not been very responsible.

Mayor and Council, could you please ensure that the Department of Parks and Rec and SHTC get their act together!

Christina Shyong 11153 Carstone Cr Delta BC V4E 1L4

From: Christina Shyong To: [email protected]; doug smith ; parks commission Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 8:27:36 PM Subject: light pollution caused bySunshine Hills tennis lights

, Dear SHTC and Corporation of Delta,

It's been about a year since the installation of tennis lights at Sunshine Hills and there are two issues I want to bring to your attention.

First, the gates have been locked from last November all winter long, but members are using the club and parking on the street. How do I know that it is SHTC members and not the public that is playing tennis and parking on the street? Lights are being used. I would say, every day whenever the weather is dry enough, there are people playing tennis. There could be sub-zero temperatures with snow on the ground and I see members playing with lights on.

On the October night in 2009 when we had a 2 hour community meeting under a tent, I remember that Doug Smith said "The Club only wants one more hour of playing time, and that's from April to October". Well, things did not turn out as Doug Smith said. Over the year the tennis lights brought a significant amount of activity, noise, and light pollution into a quiet residential neighbourhood.

Sometimes there are so many cars parked on both sides of the street in front ofthe tennis courts that when I approach the stop sign on my street, Carstone Cr., I have difficulty seeing if it safe enough to turn left. In the attachments there are 2 pictures of what the street looks like with all the parked cars. Even one driver chose to park in the forest that day and not in a proper parking spot. I would like to see the tennis parking lot open for use, in the wintertime, as well as the rest of the year.

The second issue is light pollution. Before the tennis lights were installed in 2010, the neighborhood asked for an environmental impact assessment to be done for the forest surrounding 2 the courts. There is at least one owl and several eagles which live in our forest. The lights can be used any day of the year up to 10pm and you can see the intense white light from at least half a block away. The environmental assessment was not done because the people in charge of the project did not believe there were any bad environmental effects. To be fair, light pollution is not a well known problem. I Did not know about the adverse affects of light pollution before I did research on the topic. In the attachment, I have a small sample of the literature that is available. This is what I learned about the effects of light pollution on organisms living in a forest like the one in Sunshine Hills: 1) Insects - Moths are attracted to light and spend too much of their time and energy trying to reach the light. This fixation takes away from the time and energy they would have spent on other activities such as mating and migrating. 2) Birds - Nest have to be built further away from the source of light pollution. Birds lay eggs earlier in the year and thus babies are born earlier in the year. This can result in a mismatch between the time babies are born to the time of optimum food availability. Due to an extended day, parent birds leave nests for longer 3) Plants - Some plants require a short day or long night to flower. Light pollution for these plants would reduce the growth and propagation of the plant. Other plants will flower early due to a longer day or shorter night. For these plants, light pollution could lead to a mismatch between the time the plant flowers and time of peak pollination. Deciduous plants and trees experience a delay in winter dormancy. This will lead to increase susceptibility of disease. 4) Nocturnal Animals - Animals lil(e the raccoon and owl hunt for food at night. Lighted tennis courts shorten the amount of time that it is dark.

In addition to the negative effects on our forest at Sunshine Hills, light pollution causes a widespread problem for birds in general: 1) It is estimated that 4 to 5 million birds die every year due to light pollution. 2) Migrating birds need to see the stars at night for navigation. Nighttime skyglow caused by illumination of large urban centers is a big problem.. This affects ecosystems far away from the original site of light pollution. Toronto runs a 4 week campaign during the fall migratory season called "Lights Out Toronto" which encourages people to turn offlights at night. 3) Birds can be fatally attracted to tall lighted structures. Downtown Toronto has a program called FLAP in which every morning volunteers collect the bodies of birds that have collided with buildings. If the birds are still alive, they are returned to the wild. Many birds fatally collide into tall structures.

Then there are adverse human health effects caused by light pollution: 1) Significantly increases risk of cancer (breast, prostate, and colon) by lowering the body's production of melatonin (a chemical that slows down the growth of cancer cells). Melatonin is a chemical that is made by the body when it is dark. Take a note of much light trespasses into your bedroom at night even when the blinds and curtains are drawn. Try not to use nightlights while sleeping. If your bedroom window faces a streetlight or some other bright light, install blackout curtains.

3 2) Light pollution disrupts the body's circadian rhythm (internal clock) which affects honnone regulation and immune system. This can lead to more disease in general, but in . particular SAD (seasonal affective disorder) and mental instability e.g. depression and anxiety

To summerize, light in itself is not bad, but it is the organism's response to light that causes problems. Artificial light at night modifies natural behavior of plants, insects, animals, and humans. There are many beneficial processes that occur when it is dark. In a forest ecosystem where organisms depend on each other, even small changes in the population of one species affects everything else in that ecosystem.

With the exception of Ian Paton, I spoke to each member of Delta Council in 2009 about tennis lights, and the sense I got was that if the lights became a problem you were willing to do something about it. Remember, 300 households in Delta signed a petition against tennis lights but Delta Council approved the use of $82 000 of municipal money and $82 000 of federal money for a tennis club.

I would like to see Sunshine Hills Tennis Club and Delta Council take action in response to this light pollution problem. Some suggestions are: Rewrite the lease agreement between Delta and SHTC from dawn to one hour after sunset. According to what was said to the residents in October of 2009, this is all that the Club wants anyways. Hopefully, by limiting the use of lights, this amount of light pollution will not impact the Sunshine Hills forest ecosystem significantly. Install light shields along the fence lines to reduce light trespass into the forest and neighboring homes across the street. Raylec Power makes custom light shields in Victoria (phone #250-478-9302). The Corporation of Delta can put in a lighting bylaw to ban the use of unnecessarily exterior lights at night e.g. garden lighting, "decorative" off-roof and up-lighting on building facades. If Delta can outlaw the use of chemical pesticides for our lawns, then why can't they put in laws to protect against light pollution? Another bylaw can be put in to require highrises to use blackout window coverings at night, so birds are not fatally attracted to them. North Delta is planning a lot of new developments along Scott Road corridor. We should make new developments "light pollution friendly" . Upgrade Delta's streetlights to use Envirosmart lighting systems. This has saved the City of Calgary $2 million dollar a year in energy costs. Delta can be BC's leader in light pollution friendliness.

Finally, I would like to thank the following people for providing me with infonnation, answering my questions, and giving me advice about light pollution:

Dr. Brian Lucas and Robert Dick, Royal Astronomical Society of Canada Dr. Brian Starzomski and Dr. Michael M'Gonigle, Environmental Studies, University of Victoria Johnny Noles, Biologist, US Navy, Environmental Division Nadine Diner, UBC Botanical Garden & Centre for Plant Research 4 Dr. Bruce Robertson, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute Dr. Stephen D. Department of Environment and Resource Studies (ERS), University of Waterloo Ana Simeon, Sierra Club BC Dr. Travis Longcore, The Urban Wildlands Group

I am looking forward to hearing a response from you at the annual April meeting with SHTC executives and Delta Parks and Rec.

Sincerely, The Sunshine Hills Tennis Club (Club) is responsible for organizing and conducting the neighbourhood meeting. Parks, Recreation & Culture Christina Shyong staff were not invited to the meeting. Staff have spoken to the Club President, Darcy Ludar. The meeting notice was posted two weeks prior to April 25th and Mr. Ludar was to send a CC: Delta Parks Commission reminder to the executive members, but forgot about the notice and the meeting. The Club is rescheduling the meeting and will post a new meeting sign. Mr. Ludar will email Ms. Shyong directly. The Parks, Recreation & Culture department worked with Mr. Burns and have not received any further complaints from him. The tennis court lights and street light automatically turn off at 10:00 pm. With respect to the graffiti, the Club is planning to paint the clubhouse in the near future. Staff will respond to Ms. Shyong to address her concerns.

I, ~

5 212

~4 .. metrova~~.?~~.~.~ ..... r::l::e(lt'.-'I \/;,nCOlIV(:.-! [-k'gio11cll Di,:'(rict " ()rc'I\"('!I'.\~:~~~.~~~.~~~:::~.~'~~~~~:~:.I::.i~(:.I.I~~~.~'...... ______...... ~ 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada ~~~i:~~'n~~;:~;i~'~:~~' '::'~:~~;:~~~~'~~v~:'::'~) V,n(ocn,,', "n""in, ""pn,,,",,,, Office of the Choir Tel. 604432-6215 Fax 604 451-6614

File: CR-07-01-DEl APR Z 5 Z013

Mayor lois E. Jackson The Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, BC V4K 3E2 . '. ':l-:::' DearMa~VO

Re: Metro Vancouver Environment and Parks Committee

Thank you for your letter of March 7, 2013 regarding Metro Vancouver's Environment and Parks Committee. As requested in your letter, and given that the committee membership is set for this year, consideration will be given to. appointing a representative of Delta on the Committee in 2014.

Thank you for your continued commitment to Metro Vancouver's regional parks.

Yours truly,

, i This correspondence is provided for information.

""""1>-_""-' e, BA Chair, Metro Vancouver Board i·" GM/Dl/dd i '·1 cc: Paulette Vet Ie son, Director, Board and Information Services, Metro Vancouver .···1

,~ . MAYOR'S OFFICE !-': APR 30 2013 RECEIVED

7262056 ayor's fJ A,.} M. FILE # m~5Q--i>4b!l«M'fl'tv' 6 From the offi'f!tsf: TheM.yor, ~! THE CORPORATION Of DELTA ~ ',i lois E. J.ckscc/:. ~ :i o w

March 7, 2013 ~

Mayor Greg Moore, Chair TYPE: I i\J F D Metro Vancouver BOard of Directors . 4330 Kingsway DEPT: f(l..·'rC, c/H··G Burnaby, B.C. V5H 4GB A l. if: .ll!Q:2 0'"::}- Comments: Dear~h~i.' ..

Re: Environment and Parks Committee

The purpose of this letter is to raise our concern about having no representation from Delta on . Metro Vancouver's Environment and Parks Committee.

We would like to·request that consideration be given to appointing a representative of Delta on the Committee in 2014, and also be considered should a vacancy occur prior to the 2014 appointments.

Delta Is home to over 65,000 hectares of Metro Vancouver's 287,736 hectares of regional parkland, and over 300 km of trails and seashore. This represents approximately 23% of Metro Vancouver's total regional park inventory with some of the most popular regional parks located in Delta including, Boundary Bay Regional Park and Deas Island Park that collectively gamer over 1 million visitors per year.

In addition, Delta and Metro Vancouver are jointly managing one of the largest conservancy areas in the world consisting of more than 5,000 acres (3,000 ·hectares) of protected ecological land.

As a major stakeholder in the ongoing management of these lands, a representative from Delta . would provide invaluable insight and expertise to the Environment and Parks Committee. Your consideration of this request is greatly appreciated.

cc: Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer, Metro Vancouver Delta Council .,i George V. Harvie, Chief Administrative Officer , Ken Kuntz, Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture

4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent, Delta, British Columbia, Canada V4K 3E2 Tel: 604 946-3210 Fax: 604 946-6055 E-mail: ma)1OT@ci>rp delta be ca o Mayor ~Council

I From: Tasneem Ali I Sent: _ Thursday, March 07, 2013 3:02 PM I To: Mayor & Council; George HalVie; Ken Kuntz Cc: Angila Bains; Dona Packer; Leanne Salmon; Sonja Lageweg Su~ject: Ltr to Metro Vancouver re Della Rep on MV's Env & Parks Cttee Attachments: Llr to MV Chair re Della Rep on Env & Parks Cttee.pdf

Good afternoon,

Please find attached letter for your information.

Thank you, ;1 Tasneem

r~Ali/ Administrative Secretary to the Mayor The Corporation of Delta P: (604) 946~3210 F: (604) 946-6055

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 I and delete this message along with any attachments. . i

1 213 Mayor _Council

From: Marilyn Nicholl Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 7:24 AM To: Mayor & Council Cc: Gordon Botha; Gordon Botha Subject: Gates on River Road

Importance: High

My neighbor, brought it to our attention that the Corporation of Delta is planning on putting restricted access only gates on River Road by Centre Street.

That is the most ridiculous plan I have heard for quite some time!

We live just off Centre Street on Arbour Place. We access River Road daily to get to the Alex Fraser Bridge and we certainly do not want to have to go all the way up to Nordel Way and fight that traffic down to the bridge!

Have you ever tried going down Nordel Way in rush hour toward the bridge? You should try it sometime! Road Rage is rampant in the early morning rush and the evening rush!

Save the $63K and leave River Road local access only!

There are petitions being signed as we speak to vote down the gates ... hopefully you and your council will respect our wishes and reverse your decision!

Marilyn L. Nicholl Legal Search Administrator

n *_ TYPE raj Asw&tv - DEPT f;N'r - A.T.#: \IlollJ6 ~. ( Comments: eqlM~ OIAA(1 W6..- ~ ~ l'!.,cio l3

Based on the results of prior public consultation, staff have received direction to proceed with closure of River Road to general purpose traffic, just west of Centre Street, after the opening of the South Fraser Perimeter Road. Access will be retained for emergency vehicles, transit, cyclists, and pedestrians. Design work for the closure is proceeding and staff will report back to Council once this is completed.

1 214 ., I· ....'"

~~~~\------~~~~)!"t\ From: Mayor Lois Jackson :::0, Sent: Monday. April 29. 2013 9:01 AM To: Mayor & Council Ofi317oa~> Subject: FW: River Road Planned Closure by the Corporation of Delta :li! '0 I"\,) .t:o.. I~'.,J~

From: Robyn Burgess Date: Monday, 29 April, 2013 6:29 AM To: Tasneem Ali , "[email protected]" Cc: Subject: FW: River Road Planned Closure by the Corporation of Delta

Dear Mayor and Council:

I am writing this so you are formally aware that I do not want a gate installed on River Road.

I have been in contact via email with the Engineering Department and I have received a response from the Engineering Department that advises that at the Regular Meeting of Council on April 15, 2013, staff were directed to proceed with the design for the gates just west of Centre Street. The objective of the River Road restrictions is to limit access along River Road in the vicinity of Centre Street, preventing through traffic while permitting access for transit, pedestrians, cyclists and emergency responders. The Project Rationale reads "Public consultations were held with Annieville and Sunbury residents between 2005 and 2007 by Gateway, to review the proposed routing of the South Fraser Perimeter Road (SFPR). Residents expressed the need for Delta to ensure that regional traffic be removed from River Road once the SFPR is open to traffic. This restriction would prevent through traffic but still allow transit, cyclists, pedestrians and emergency response vehicles access."

I am so opposed to losing timely access to the Alex Fraser Bridge, Tilbury Park and the businesses at the foot of Nordel. have told them (the Engineering Department) that they need to talk to those who live here now and not in 2005-2007. Back in this time period the top of Centre Street had a farmhouse and horses and now it is all houses. There are 16 houses on my street, 11 are people who moved in since 2007 and the "old timers" don't recall being asked the question about River Road traffic.

I am against all the area traffic having to go by the park and/or elementary school (I don't even have children) and as I am sure everyone knows, there are often traffic accidents on Nordel so River Road becomes the alternate route and we need to have an .alternate route as I myself have used Nordel when there is an accident on River Road. When it snows you can't go up Centre Street and coming down Centre Street is very difficult as it is a skating rink.

I have been dealing with two people from the Engineering Department and they have been very pleasant to deal with. They were able to tell me that I need directly addressed my emails to the Mayor and Council so that is why you are getting this email.

I have put together a petition that is only at the Petro Can currently but plan to visit the businesses on Nordel to see if they will also put out the petition. In the first 24 hours I was able to collect in excess of 100 signatures and they are from people who entered the gas station as many people pay at the pump and drive away so are unaware the petition is there. I just want those who are going to be impacted if this gate is installed to know the Corporation's intention before it is too late so have sent my concerns to the local newspapers to see if they can help me inform the area residents.

1 I do know that at meeting that was held in the Sunbury Rec Centre we did express that we did not want River Road closed but I do not know if that information got back to the Mayor and Council.

If I am wrong about how the majority of residents feel then I am wrong but I feel we have not been informed.

I have forwarded a copy of this email to myself at work should someone call me there.

Regards,

Robyn Burgess 8423 Arbour Place Delta

2 215 Mayor Council

From: Hans and Christiane Zimmermann Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 20136:05 PM To: Mayor & Council Subject: Re: Road Maintenance

From: Jonas Zimmermann Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 9:46 PM To: Mayor & Council Cc: Christiane Zimmermann Subject: Fwd: Road Maintenance

Email address correction: our reply email address should have read:

Begin forwarded message:

From: Jonas Zimmermann Date: 28 April, 2013 8:06:42 PM PDT To: "[email protected]" Subject: Road Maintenance

Your Worship Mayor Jackson and council, First I would like to thank you for standing up against the TFN sewer service proposal. We tax payers should have a say or have a vote on this matter. On another subject, the roads in Ladner are in extremely poor shape especially Ladner Trunk Road. I believe the road's conditions and cleanliness reflects the poor stage of a municipality and management. I feel that the current road conditions in Ladner is a reflection of this. The blacktop patches often are not done right: they are either left too high, leaving a bump, or worse, are not filled in enough, so that the tires of vehicles coming down on the road slam into the hard cut edge of the former road surface. As tax payers and home owners we are entitled to have well maintained roads especially as we pay a lot of money to engineers and managers. I drive three times a week to Richmond for my son's soccer practise, and I notice that the main roads and side streets are held in much higher conditions and maintenance. With the BC Hydro construction on Highway 10 it would be an opportunity to bring this road up to safe and higher standard conditions. Mayor Jackson, I would appreciate a reply on this issue.

With best regards Hans Zimmermann After completion of the current works by BC Hydro on Ladner Trunk Road, Delta will replace the aging water-main east of 4949 55B Street Highway 17 followed by a capital project to improve the I I Delta, B.C. V4K 3C2 pavement condition and reduce congestion in this area. Staff will respond to the resident.

1 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5H 4GB 604-432-6200 www.metrovancouver.org

Board Secretariat and Corporate In/ormation Department Tel. 604-432-6250 Fax 604-451-6686

April 26, 2013 File: CR-04-01-RD

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

Dear Mayor Jackson and Members of Council:

Re: Notification of a Proposed Amendment to the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy - Type RGS 3 Amendment to Add Three Special Study Areas in the City of Port Moody

This letter provides notification to affected local governments and other agencies, in accordance with section 857.1(2) of the Local Government Act, and sections 6.4. 2 and 6.4.5 of the Regional Growth Strategy. As per these sections, t he Metro Vancouver Board is to provide a minimum of 30 days for all affected local governments and appropriate agencies to comment on proposed amendments.

Metro Vancouver received a Council resolution from the City of Port Moody requesting a Type 3 amendment t o the Regional Growth Strategy. The City of Port Moody made this request in order to add three new RGS Special Study Areas in their municipality. For more details on the proposed amendment, please see the attached report. A Type 3 minor amendment requires an affirmative majority weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Board to proceed; no regional public hearing is required. For more information about Special Study Areas and amending the Regional Growth Strategy, see RGS Sections 6.3, 6.4, 6.10, and 6.12.

On April 26, 2013, the Metro Vancouver Board initiated the RG S amendment process. Following t he comment period, the Metro Vancouver Board will consider an amendment bylaw along with comments from the Regional Planning Advisory Committee and affected local governments.

You are invited to provide written comments on t he requested amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy. Please provide comments in the form of a Council/Board resolution, as applicable, and • I submit to [email protected] by May 30,2013. If you have any questions with respect to the proposed amendment, please contact Eric Aderneck, Senior Regional Planner, at 778- • I 452-2626 or eric. [email protected]. More information and a copy of the Regional Growth St rategy can be found on our website at www.metrovancouver.org. 'I ,I

J Notification of a Proposed Amendment to the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy ~ Type RGS 3 Amendment to Add Three Special Study Areas in the City of Port Moody Page 2 of 2

Sincerely,

Paulette Vetleson Director, Board and Information Services

PV/HM/ ea

Attachment: Report to the Metro Vancouver Board meeting on April 26, 2013, titled 'Request by the City of Port Moody for Three Additional Regional Growth Strategy Special Study Areas', dated March 27, 2013.

·1

7155997 """'-4 metrovancouver 5.1 ~ SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION

Greater Vancouver Regional District , Greater Vancouver Water District • Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Dra inage District • Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation

To: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee

From: Heather McNeil, Regional Planning Division Manager Planning, Policy and Environment Department

Date: March 27, 2013 Meeting Date: Apri l 5, 2013

Subject: Request by the City of Port Moody for Three Additional Regional Growth Strategy Special Study Areas

RECOMMENDATION That the Board: a) Initiate the process for a Type~ 3 amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy in accordance with section 857 of the Local Government Act for the amendment requested by the City of Port Moody to create three additional RGS Special Study Areas; and b) Direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed Type 3 amendment to all affected local governments and appropriate agencies.

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to respond to a request from the City of Port Moody to create three add itional Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Special Study Areas. This report initiates the proposed RGS amendment and notification process.

BACKGROUND Be low is a concise summary of the t imeli ne as well as key issues leading to the current situation and request by City of Port Moody for the addition of three RGS Special Study Areas. See Attachments 1, 2 and 3 for full details of the City of Port Moody's RGS amendment application.

Timeline • In early 2010, the City of Port Moody Council reso lved that: "Metro Vancouver include the Petro Canada Refinery lands, the Mill and Timber site, and the Imperial Oil lands as Specia l Study Areas in the RGS". However, at the time, the subject lands were not deSignated in the OCP as special study areas, and as such, these Special Study Areas were not added to the RGS. • In March 2011, the City of Port Moody accepted the RGS, however, with the condition that Map 12: Specia l Study Areas and Sewerage Extension Areas would not apply 'to the City of Port Moody. • In November 2012, the City of Port Moody initiated a process to amend its OCP to add municipal special study area land use des ignations. On January 22, 2013 the Port Moody OCP bylaw received final reading by council. • In January 2013, the City of Port Moody Council also resolved that "Metro Vancouver include the Petro Canada refinery lands, the M ill and Timber site, and the Imperial Oil land as Special Study Areas in the RGS". The rationale for this change to the RGS, according to the city staff report, is that "the identification of these areas as Special Study Areas in the RGS would provide a clear indication to the Metro Vancouver Board that these areas have for some time been

RPA -10 - Request by the City of Port Moody for Three Additional Regional Growth Strategy Special Study Areas Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: AprilS, 2013 Page 2 of 4

contemplated for redevelopment by the community at the time of any required future amendments" .

Context - City of Port Moody Proposal • The City of Port Moody Council has requested three Special Study Areas be added in the RGS, covering an area of approximately 1,225 acres (496 hectares), most of which is designated as RGS Industrial (980 acres) and RGS Urban (168 acres) (Attachment 3). • There are two smaller areas currently designated as either RGS Rural (76 acres) and RGS Conservation and Recreation (4 acres) . • The three sites in Port Moody represent large historic industrial areas (3.9% of the RGS Industrial designated lands in the region) with some ongoing industrial uses. • The OCP bylaw amendment includes the addition of the new OCP specia l study areas, and additional text in the OCP Industrial Policies Section provides direction and states that further planning for potential developmentfor these sites, with a variety of land uses contemplated, including residential, commercial, light industrial, institutional, and recreational.

Analysis Further analysis of the proposed RGS amendment, along with comments from the Regional Planning Advisory Committee, affected loca l governments, and agenc ies, will be included in a separate future report to the Board. This will include Metro Vancouver staff recommendations and an associated draft RGS Amendment Bylaw.

RGS Amendment Process A RGS Special Study Area is an overlay in the RGS and does not impact the underlying RGS land use designation, only the process for amending a RGS land use designation. The intent of the RGS Special Study Area was to acknowledge lands for which municipalities had contemplated a possible future need for urban types of development, and consequently, to change the RGS amendment thresholds for these land s. All initial Special Study Areas in th<;! RGS were for Rural, Conservation and Recreation and Agricultural lands.

Section 6.12.4 of the RGS states that "the Specia l Study Areas depicted on Map 12 are not to be expanded nor are new areas to be created". Notwithstanding this, a District of West Vancouver proposed RGS amendment to expand their Specia l Study Area was successfu l after the adoption of the RGS and included the add ition of RGS 6.12.5. This amendment was made only to include lands designated RGS General Urban within the Urban Containment Boundary and therefore had no material effect on the implementation of the RGS.

Adding a RGS Specia l Study Area overlay for the Industrial and Urban lands identified by Port Moody would be a Type 3 amendment to the RGS, requiring a 50% + 1 vote at the Board and adoption of an amending bylaw. No public hearing would be necessary. There is some concern that adding a Special Study Area to Rural or Conservation and Recreation lands would trigger a Type 1 amendment to the RGS under sections 857.1 (2) and (4) of the Local Government Act. This is currently being considered by Metro Vancouver's lega l counsel. Responding to the request would also necessitate the addition of a second RGS notwithstanding clause, 6.12.6 to explain the addition of these Special Study Areas. In addition, the 2011 Port Moody resolution adopting the RGS stated that RGS Map 12 did not apply to the municipality. If the requested Specia l Study Areas are added

RPA-11 - Request by the City of Port Moody for Three Additional Regional Growth Strategy Special Study Areas Regional Planning and Agricu lture Committee Meeting Date: Apri l 5, 2013 Page 3 of 4

to RGS Map 12, the City of Port Moody would most likely need to rescind part of their original resolution to accepJ the RGS.

Creating a RGS Specia l Study Area overlay for RGS Industrial, Mixed Employment or General Urban designations would have no material impact on the RGS land use re-designation process in the future. For example, a RGS Type 3 amendment, requiring a 50%+1 weighted vote of the Board and no regional public hearing, would be required to re-designate from Industrial to General Urban w ith or without the Special Study Area overlay. However, a Special Study Area overlay would have an impact on the process and voting threshold to amend RGS Rural and Conservation & Recreation lands to Urban. Without a Special Study overlay, this would require an RGS Type 2 amendment, requiring a 2/3 weighted vote of the Board and a regional public hearing. With a Special Study overlay, amending the land use designation to Urban would be a Type 3 amendment, requiring a 50%+1 weighted vote at the Board and no public hearing.

Along w ith the Board adoption of the Regional Growth Strategy in July 2011, the Regional Growth Strategy Procedures Bylaw No 1148, 2011, established procedures for the cons ideration of Regional Growth Strategy amendment requests. The Procedures Bylaw requires that Metro Vancouver refer the requested amendment to the Regional Plann in g Advisory Committee (previously ca lled the Technical Advisory Committee) for comment. The Regional Planning Advisory Committee comments w ill be considered by Metro Vancouver staff in preparing recommendations to the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and Board on the proposed amendment. I A Type 3 RGS amendment also includes the following notification by Metro Vancouver: • Provide written notice of the proposed amendment to all affected local governments and appropriate agencies, such as Port Metro Vancouver, w ith an opportunity to comment w ithin 30 days. j • Post the notification of the proposed amendment on the Metro Vancouver website. I Timeline Staff intend to follow the following process and timeline in processing the proposed RGS amendment (alternative possible schedu le shown in brackets): • March 22, 2013 - Report to Regional Planning Advisory Committee for consideration • March 22 - Receive comments from the Regional Planning Advisory Committee • April 5 - Regional Planning and Agricu lture Committee • April 12 - Metro Vancouver Board initiates the proposed RGS amendment process and refers it to affected local governments and agencies for comment w ithin 30 days. • May 16 - Deadline for comments from affected local governments and agencies. • June 7 - Regional Plannin g and Agriculture Comm ittee • June 14 - Board cons id ers Metro Vancouver staff report on amendment request, with comments from Regional Planning Advisory Committee, affected local governments, agencies and the public, and RGS Amendment Bylaw (a Type 3 amendment allows for all bylaw readings at once) .

RPA-12 - Request by the City of Port Moody for Three Additional Regional Growth Strategy Special Study Areas Regiona l Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: April 5, 2013 Page 4 of 4

ALTERNATIVES That the Board: 1. a) Initiate the process for a Type 3 amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy in accordance with section 857 of the Local Government Act for the amendment requested by the City of Port Moody to create three additional RGS Special Study Areas; and b) Direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed Type 3 amendment to all affected local governments and appropriate agencies; or 2) Provide alternative direction.

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The City of Port Moody ha s requested that the RGS be amended to add three new RGS Specia l Study Area overlays. Staff recommend Alternative 1 to initiate the RGS amendment process, proceed with notification, and return to the Board as soon as feasible with staff analysis informed by input from the Regional Planning Advisory Committee, affected local governments and appropriate agencies and a draft Bylaw.

Attachments: 1. Letter dated January 30, 2013, titled "Special Study Areas in Official Community Plan" from the City of Port Moody addressed to Paulette Vetleson, Corporate Secretary, Metro Vancouver (Doc. # 7031052). 2. City of Port Moody Official Community Plan - Overall Land Use Plan - Map 1 (Doc. # 7031343). 3. Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designation Map - Proposed Port Moody Special Study Areas (Doc. # 7034114).

7196811

RPA· 13· 5.1 Attachment 1

100 Newport Drive. p.o. Box 36. Po rt Moody. B.C" V3H 3E 1. Canada TeI 604.469.4S00 Fax 604.469.4550 www.portmoody.ca

January 30, 2013

File: 2660-08 I 6970-07

Paulette Vetleson Corporate Secretary Metro Vancouver 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC V5H 4G8

Dear Ms. Vetleson:

Re: Special Study Areas in Official Community Plan

On January 22, 2013, at a Regular meeting of Council, the Council of the City of Port Moody approved the adoption of the City of Port Moody Official Community Plan, 2010, No. 2849, Amendment Bylaw No.9, 2012, 2950 (see attached bylaw and associated Council report). This bylaw designates Special Study Areas in the Port Moody Official Community Plan.

On March 23, 2010 Port Moody Council had passed the following motion with respect to the Special Study Areas identified in Bylaw No. 2950: THA T Metro Vancouver include the Petro Canada refinery lands, the Mill and Timber site, and the Imperial Oil land as Special Study Areas in the RGS.

As this request was not reflected in the final RGS and with the recent adoption of Bylaw No. 2950, the City of Port Moody now requests that Metro Vancouver amend the Regional Growth Strategy to include the 3 Special Study Areas identified in Bylaw No. 2950 as Special Study Areas in the RGS Regional Land Use Designation map.

Yours truly,

Encl. cc: Kevin Ramsay, City Manager, City of Port Moody Heather McNeil, Regional Planning Division Manager, Metro Vancouver Mary De Paoli , Manager of Planning, City of Port Moody

RPA-14- Document: 216042 City of Port Moody Report/Recommendation to Council

Date: December 19, 2012 File No. 6970-07 / BL2950 Submitted by : Development Services - Planning Division Subject: OCP Amendment to Include Special Study Area Designations

Purpose To bring fOlWard an amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP) to designate the Mill and Timber site, the former Petro Canada (now Suncor) refinery lands, and the Imperial Oil lands as special study areas.

Background At the February 6, 2010 Committee of the Whole meeting, Council passed the following motion in relation to the draft OCP under review at that time:

THA T Draft Chapter 8 - Housing and Draft Chapter 15 - Neighbourhood Plan Areas be held in abeyance and that these chapters be replaced with the existing 2000 OCP chapters and housing and neighbourhood plan areas;

AND THA T the residential growth policies in the existing OCP remain unchanged;

AND THA T the special study area designations be removed in the draft OCP;

AND THA T staff prepare these changes and report back to Council.

I The current OCP (2011) reflects this direction and does not include any special study area land use designations. Special study area OCP designations had previously existed for the Mill and Timber site, the former Petro Canada (now Suncorp) refinery lands, the Imperial Oil lands, and the remaining undeveloped Section 286 lands on Heritage Mountain. The purpose of the OCP special study area designation is to identify those areas where more detailed land use plans will be required by way of an area plan or a site specific development plan.

In 2010, Metro Vancouver was in the process of developing a new Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) and consulting municipalities on their draft Strategy. In their review of the draft RGS at the March 23, 2010 Regular Council meeting, Council passed the following motion regarding the designation of special study areas in Port Moody:

THA T Metro Vancouver include the Petro Canada refinery lands, the Mill and Timber site, and the imperial Oil lands as Special Study Areas in the RGS.

The final version of the RGS which followed did not include any special study areas in Port Moody. At the March 15, 2011 Special Council meeting, Council provided clarification on the

#211689 RPA-15- Report/Recommendation to Council OCP Amendment to Include Special Study Area Designations December 19, 2012

motions related to ~Counci l 's consideration of acceptance of the Metro Vancouver RGS and passed the following motion:

TriA T Council refuses to accept the Metro Vancouver Regional growth Strategy entitled Metro Vancouver 2040 - Shaping Our Future (Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw No. 1136), specifically with regard to the following provisions: (5) The City of POIt Moody objects to Map 12 on the basis that the Petro Canada Refinery lands, Mill and Timber site and Imperial Oil lands should have been included as Special Study Areas as requested by resolution of Council on March . 23, 2010.

The Regional Growth Strategy that was adopted by the Metro Vancouver Board on July 29, 2011 does not include any special study area designations in Port Moody. The RGS refers to Special Study Areas as "locations where, prior to the adoption of the Regional Grow1h Strategy, a municipality has expressed an intention to alter the existing land use, and is anticipating a . future regional land use designation amendment." Although policy 6.12.4 of the RGS currently prevents any expansion of or addition of new Special Study Areas, this policy is not considered applicable to the Port Moody Special Study Area designations which were clearly identified to Metro Vancouver prior to the adoption of the RGS.

City Staff have been in discussion with Metro Vancouver staff recently regarding Council's previous motions related to the RGS and the identification of special study areas in Port Moody within the regional plan. It was suggested that these changes would ·most appropriately be addressed though an amendment to the current OCP, Metro Vancouver would consider these changes to be a Type 3 - Minor amendment to the RGS requiring 50% +1 Board vote and no regional public hearing.

At the November 13, 2012 Regular Council meeting, Council passed the following motion regarding the re-designation of these areas as special study areas in the OCP: , I I THA T staff be directed to prepare an amendment to the OCP to designate the Mill and Timber site, the Petro Canada refinery lands, and the Imperial Oil lands as special study areas.

Attachment 1 in cludes a map showing the three areas proposed to be deSignated as special study areas.

Process for Amendments to the Regional Grow1h Strategy Given that the Mill and Timber site, the former Petro Canada (now Suncor) refinery lands and the Imperial Oil lands are all located within the RGS's Urban Containment Boundary, amendments from their current regional Industrial designation to any other regional land use . designation would involve a Type 3 - Minor amendment to the RGS requiring 50% +1 Board vote and no regional public hearing. Should these lands be deSignated as Special Study Areas in the RGS, any future regional designation changes would also be considered Type 3 minor amendments subject to the same approval requirements. The identification of these areas as

RPA - 16- 2 ReporURecommendation to Council OCP Amendment to Include Special Study Area Designations December 19, 2012

Special Study Areas in the RGS would provide a clear indication to the Metro Vancouver Board that these areas have for some time been contemplated for redevelopment by the community at the time of any required future amendments.

Analysis Given the potential changes to the Mi ll and Tim ber site and the long term redevelopment potential of other larger sites, staff were considering including special study area designations for the Mi ll and Timber site, the former Petro Canada (now Suncorp) refinery lands, and the Imperial Oi l lands as part of the broader OCP update underway. In response to Council's direction on November 13, 2012, an immediate change separate from the broader OCP update underway is being brought forward at this time for consideration.

At the November 27,2012 Committee cif the Whole meeting, Council passed the following motion with respect to the proposed draft changes to the OCP:

THA T the old Barnet Hotel, Craftsman Collision, Fred Soofi property, the property between Clarke and Vintner border by Douglas on the east, and the Andres Wine property be identified as a Special Study Area.

The areas identified for designation as special study areas in this report, however, are limited to those specified in previous Council motions passed on March 23, 2010, March 15, 2011 and November 13, 2012. These motions were intended to re-establish these specific areas as special study areas and to have this designation reflected in the RGS according to Council's previous direction in 2011. New special study areas identified as part of the current OCP update process would be brought forward as part of more comprehensive revision to the OCP which would be considered for acceptance by Metro Vancouver at a later time.

The proposed OCP amendment was reviewed on December 4, 2012 by Land Use Committee and the following motion was passed:

THA T the proposed OCP amendment to designation the Mil! and Timber site, the former Petro Canada (now Suncor) refinery lands, and the Imperial Oil lands as Special Study Areas be supported.

Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Proposed Bylaw No. 2950

Communications Should the proposed OCP amendment to designate the Mill and Timber site, the former Petro Canada (now Suncorp) refinery lands, and the Imperial Oil lands as special study areas proceed to Public Hearing, notification and advertisements will occur in accordance with notification requirements set out in the City's Development Approval Procedures Bylaw and Section 892 of the Local Government Act. I

3 RPA - 17- Report/Recommendation to Council OCP Amendment to Include Specia l Study Area Designations December 19, 2012

Budgetary Impact There are no budgetary impacts anticipated as part of tile proposed OCP amendment.

Council Strategic Plan Objectives The proposed OCP amendment is consistent with the Planning for the Future goal of the 2012 Council Strategic Plan which includes medium and long term plan ni ng that anticipates changes in the community over time.

Sustainability Implications The purpose of the OCP special study area designation is to identify those areas where more detailed land use plans wi ll be requ ired by way of an area plan or a site specific development plan. It is anticipated that these plans wi ll address a number of sustainability concerns including environmental protection, efficient land use practices, infrastructure and transportation planning as wel l as opportunities to enhance cu ltural sustain ability.

Policy Implications Designating the Mi ll and Timber site, the fonner Petro Canada (now Suncor) refinery lands and the Imperial Oil lands as special study areas is consistent wi th previous Council motions passed March 23, 2010, March 15, 2011 and November 13, 2012. The proposed amendment includes policy changes to the OCP to correspond to the proposed new special study area land use designations.

Alternatives THAT Bylaw No. 2950 not be given first and second reading <;Ind not proceed to public hearing. ·1, I Recommendations THAT Bylaw No. 2950 be now read a first time.

THAT Bylaw No. 2950 be now read a secondtime.

AND THAT Bylaw No. 2950 be referred to a Public Hearin g to be held on January 22,2013 at City Hall, 100 Newport Drive, Port Moody.

4 RPA - 18 - ReporURecommendation to Council OCP Amendment to Include Special Study ~ rea Designations December 19, 2012

Prepared by: Apprt:iv~d for Submission to,Council: (' , i./ / ',/ ' ""7 ,' ., -- . -.- ~<. ../ ~-~~- /" . ~~~~-,===,',------,,---",,------/ , l. Mary De Paoli, MCIP Kevin Ramsay Manager of Planning City Manager

.[ , " , Approvals

Supervisor (initia/s): Department Head (initia/s): Tim Savoie, MCIP

1 ~-<: -; -' _. ' ..::., ., . , : Committee Review ,_ ! Corporate Review\,:, ;": ,:' : ,-,::,-.--:.:~.;~< ".,. ;'",-,' "., ' '<~;:'-_:" ~r>,--',~-:-:, ;' '. ;",: I~itials i Listte/evant committees :' ,.j Administration/Legislative Services/Human Resources/Mayor's Office 'I' .. I I· ... 'i Communi cations/Finance /IT Cu lture/EnvironmenUFacilities/Parks/Recreation I I i Engineering/Operations

Fire & Rescue I I I library I I [ Development/Building, Bylaw & licensing I I Police I I

:- ....' ,:, . . . -'.-.'. ( Cci uncii Agenda Information , - . . . Regular Councll Meeting Date: January 8, 2012

5 RPA ,19, -. ' ~" ' -' - ""'. ' -'-

IRIRA ~.:..r~" .. ...- .. / --~ -

S I!J RIP. A R i) . ::u j; ' .. ~ ~ ...... II';/!.. lET , tv ' .... --./ ...... !..... o '.., "'--- -.----~-- , , , , / -~ , , ./--.... '\ ( -- ...... _---.",. ....

SI!JRNAItlY

Proposed Special Study Areas: . , 1: Former Petro Canada (now Sun cor) Refinery lands I 2: Mill and Timber Sawmill Site 3: Imperial Oil Lands I ~ ,. =~ I II: CH'lHJ H iT' ii.. co. 'iii i M _, I --~ I PROPOSED SPECIAl. STUDY AREAS City of Port Moody

I City of Port Moody Official Community Plan, 2010, No. 2849, Amendment Bylaw No.9, 2012, 2950

A bylaw to designate Special Study Areas in the Official Community Plan.

The Council of the City of Port Moody enacts as follows:

1. Citation 1.1 This Bylaw may be cited as City of Port Moody Official Community Plan, 2010, No. 2849, Amendment Bylaw No.9, 2012, 2950.

2. Amendment The City of Port Moody Official Community Plan 2010, Bylaw No. 2849, is hereby amended as follows:

2.1 By designating as Special Study Areas the lands identified on the attached map marked "Certified True Copy of Map Referred to in Section 2 of Bylaw No. 2950";

2.2 By adding the following Section 4.2.12 to Chapter 4: Overall Land Use Strategy:

4.2.12 Special Study Area The Special Study Area designation applies to lands where more detailed planning is required by way of an area plan or a site specific development plan.

2.3 By adding the following policy to the Industrial Policies section of Chapter 9: Economic Development: " . ! ; 13. A local area or development plan should be prepared for each of the following lands in order to determine the most appropriate uses for these areas should they become available for redevelopment provided that adequate capacity for traffic and utility services can be provided and all environmental issues and other community impacts have been satisfactorily addressed:

(a) Former Petro Canada Lands (now Suncor) in the Glenayre Neighbourhood

Land uses may include residential, commercial, institutional and recreational uses, as we ll as clean industrial/business activities, provided that such development is compatible with adjacent uses. Green building technologies wi ll be encouraged.

(b) lOCO Lands

It is envisioned that a significant portion of this site will eventually be used for an innovative combination of uses including single family residential, multi-family

#2 11 726 RPA - 21 - residential of varying densities, and mixed use commercial/residential. It is intended that this plan include strategies for heritage conservation of the lOCO Townsite as well as consideration of potential employment generating activities such as businesses that reflect the area's heritage values.

Potential traffic impacts to loco Road would be addressed as part of this plan as wellas the possible western extension of David Avenue. Green building technologies will be encouraged. Additional policies related to the potential redevelopment of the lOCO Lands can be found in Chapter 15 - Neighbourhood Plan Areas.

(e) Mill and Timber Lands

The Mill and Timber Products Ltd. wood processing site shall be considered for redevelopment uses other than general industry if it ceases to be used for its current purpose. It is envisioned that a plan would be prepared for the site that provides for: the integration of multiple uses such as commercial, light industrial, recreational, andresidential in keeping with the concept of an urban village a strong emphasis being placed on public accessibility to the waterfront in the form of public open spaces and a continuation of the current walkway/bikeway from Rocky Point Park provided that environmental features are adequately enhanced and protected land uses that are compatible with adjacent land uses • preservation of N-S view corridors varying building heights up to 12 storeys stepped back from the waterfront residential land uses should be sited and organized to minimize conflict with adjacent industrial uses live/work and work/live opportunities an emphasis on creating intensive employment generating activities the consideration and mitigation of any heritage or environmental concerns for this site an emphasis on the creation of a complete community serving the needs of local residents as well as drawing visitors from elsewhere in the region consideration of eco-industrial networking to capitalize on synergies between compatible businesses integration of green building technologies e.g. district energy heating, waste and water recycling) and transit oriented development principles • an enhanced pedestrian and cycling oriented environment reducing reliance on vehicle use vehicle, pedestrian, and cyclist linkages over the CPR right of way connecting this site with the historic commercial area on Clarke Street, the Moody Centre commercial area and any future rapid transit station consideration of incorporating an artificial nesting area on the water to substitute for the log booms which currently provide roosting and nesting areas for wildlife

2.4 By adding the following text to the beginning of Policy 28 in Section 15.5.3 loco Area of Chapter 15: Neighbourhood Plan Areas:

"The lOCO area is designated as a Special Study Area subject to further analysis."

City of Port Moody Official Community Plan, 2010, No. 2849, Amendment Bylaw No.5, 2012, 2950 2 RPA - 22- 3. AUachm'ents and Schedules 3.1 Certified True Copy of Map referred to in Section 2 of Bylaw No. 2950 attached.

I, 4. Severability 4.1 If a portion of this bylaw is found invalid by a court, it will be severed and the remainder of the bylaw will remain in effect.

Read a first time the 8th day of January ,2013. Read a second time the 8th day of January , 2013. Public Hearing held the 22 nd day of January ,2013. Read a third time the 22 nd day of ·January ,2013. Adopted the 22nd day of January ,2013.

Mayor City Clerk

I hereby certify that the above is a true copy of Bylaw No. 2950 of the City of Port Moody.

Colleen Rohde City Clerk

City of Port Moody Official Community Plan , 2010, No. 2849, Amendment Bylaw No.5, 2012, 2950 3 RPA · 23 · CIt81"lf"'llEa T&NI: COPT 0# lUI" n:F..aDI TO .N KC"1lOfiII ~ or ,rru. NO.. 2tW

LOCATION MAP

ANMORE

BURNABY

Designate the following areos as Special Study Areas: G) F_r P.t- c ....4i1 tnew S-,.) RefinMy L.aMk (i) Mtil an4 r~ Sawmill Sib @ tm~rbI Oil LiUMIS

7031052

City of Port Moody Official Community Plan, 2010, No. 2849, Amendment Bylaw No.5, 20 12, 2950 4 RPA -24- "

~ :g s: .... :J> "' OFFICIAL """D "'t) 3:: -a ~ COMMUNITY PLAN o -< OVERALL LAND USE PLAN rn MAP 1 ,:J>= , , :J> = =V"1 rn ,-"""D :J>=

;0 ,." '"

Single Famlly Low Density Fonn Pubic and institutiOllai

Multl-family Residential Industrial Business High Density Mixed Use General Industrial U'1 Commercial I Re sidenlial . _ Commercial- Mixed Use ~Sedion286 ~ Agreement Alea ... Par1!s and Open Space - - - Municipal Boundary ..;!: III n '" :r §:'" Om #lS 750 1500 2 '"' SCALE 1;33,000 3 The City of Pan Moody m:>kc:s DO rcpr=mion '" "-=-my I'D .."prcs,.,c! I'M' impLicu with respect to me 3Ccur:IC)", ~ cwr ::l I r+ ~ ~pp:oprbWle ss of the info

Urban Containment Industrial Conservation RGS Special Study Area .,.,.' Metro Boundary Boundary and Recreation Mixed Employment ", General Urban • Agricultural "...... Municipal Boundaries 217 Mayor Council

From: Lynne Webb Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11 :36 AM To: Mayor & Council; Tanya Mitchner; Jeff Day Cc: Subject: FILE # LU006821 Attachments: letter sent 29_03-2013.htm; PETITION DEC_2012TMqME D.EVE~pdf ... rq:p~~~ .. . (2" 1:-:> ..... Hello, . 'II (dC,t¢\ . C C, '" ((,i,,; .vii v.f?t.::CiiJii--eci ~N/c,.. M'j I ~:3 I am writing to express my objections to this development proposal LU006811. 1 also object to the decision of the CPAC meeting which is based on the minutes distributed. ).-ref; AT'lllo\ll();L

Reasons for objections to the CPAC meeting decision and to File #LU006821 are as follows:

I sent a letter clearly outlining my objections to File # LU006821, the letter was dated March 28th and acknowledged by your municipality. I will attach a copy for your review.

The letter was sent to Lisa King, and Mayor and council. I also emailed Sylvia Bishop who in tum requested that my letter form part of the CPAC agenda. She requested this of the Municipal clerk. I received confirmation that this would be the case. and it was not.

Upon review of the CPAC minutes, my letter DID NOT form part of the agenda and therefore my objections were not noted. Other correspondence sent by interested parties was included.

Additionally, in the CPAC minutes, Mike Ruskowski, Senior Planner provided an overview of the current application. To quote from the minutes "A petition had been submitted with the previous application for the subject property. The petition noted objection to the form and the modem style of the three proposed townhouse units".

While the petition did object to the form and design of the prior proposal, it also clearly states an objection to the lack of green space between the curb and the sidewalk. Mr. Ruskowski did not reference the entire petition. This would lead the committee to believe that the only objection to this development was the form and design. This is incorrect. and therefore the decision of the CPAC committee is based on incorrect and missing information.

The objections to the lack of green space between the curb and the sidewalk still stands.

The new proposal has the same footprint, therefore the lack of green space between the curb and sidewalk has not been addressed. In fact, the developerlbuilder is trying to ignore this objection by requesting a variance to the setbacks required by the Ladner Area Plan.

I request this file be sent back to the CPAC committee for further review, and to take into consideration the full statement of the 100 person petitiou and to address the objections raised in my letter of March 28, 2013 as well as objections and concerns raised in the other correspondence submitted by Brian Webb, John Dean and Jocelyne Yahlomi.

While the agenda reflects correspondence received, the objections and concerns do not appear to have been addressed by the committee.

1 If my request to have this sent back to the CPAC committee is denied, then I request this email and all other correspondence (including objections and concerns) is forwarded to the next committee to review this file.

I find the fact that this developer has come backto the table with the same footprint but a prettier design absolutely appalling.

His original design was denied for more reasons than just form and design. There is insufficient parking for the church and for the townhomes, he is not complying with required setbacks and there is an insufficient amount of greenspace. There is also an issue of the powerpole which has not been addressed.

He is trying to squeeze a three unit townhouse development onto a small space and to do so requires variances to bylaws and zoning set out in the Ladner Area Plan. The LAP was put in place for a reason, and this developer seems to think he can get past it as he restored the Baptist Church.

Attached is the original petition as well as my emailllletter dated March 27th, 2013.

I would like confirmation of receipt of my email and a response.

Thank you,

Lynne Webb The writer's March 27, 2013 correspondence was received by Council 301-4988 47 A Avenue at their April 15, 2013 meeting. This correspondence was not Ladner, BC V4K ITS forwarded to the Community Planning Advisory Committee (CPAC); however, the April 8, 2013 correspondence from Lynne and Bryan Webb was forwarded to the April 11, 2013 Community Planning Sent from: Advisory Meeting. A copy of the petition submitted in December 2012 for the previous application on the subject property was also Lynne Webb available at the Committee meeting. Although only summarized in the minutes, staff read the entire heading of the petition to the Committee members for their information. CPAC reviewed the application and provided a recommendation for Council. Comments from the public and Committees of Council will be summarized in a report to Council when the application is forwarded for consideration. CPAC is an advisory committee to Council and does not usually receive public correspondence. Staff recently sent the writer a letter to confirm that Ms. Webb's comments have been received by Mayor & Council and staff, noted in the file and conveyed to the applicant.

2 ······················--1

I December, 2012

In the matter of File No LU006602, we are opposed to the form, character and building height of the proposed 3 townhouses. It is too modern and square looking. Preferable would be a Heritage design with a peaked roof, HardiePlank lap siding, more green space between the curb and the building and not more than 3 stories including a rooftop patio so it harmonizes with the Ladner Village OCP. We are concerned that it is too unrelated and out of step with the character of the existing Neighbourhood and will negatively affect the ambiance and market values of our properties, some of which are adjacent.

14 15 " 16 17 18 -y 19

Address 24 25 26

32 33 34 35

38 39

42 43 44

47 48 49 December, 2012

In the matter of File No LU006602, we are opposed to the form, character end building height of the proposed 3 towntlouses, It is too modern end square looking, Preferable would be a Heritage design with a peaked roof, HardiePlank lap siding, more green space between the curb and the building and not more than 3 stories including a rooftop palio so it tlarmonizes with ttle Ladner Village OCp, We are concerned ttlat it is too unrelated and out of step with the character of the existing Neighbourhood and will negatively affect ttle ambiance and market values of our properties, some of which are adjacent

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Address \ f December, 2012

17 18 19 20 December, 2012

In the matter of File No LU006602, we are opposed to the form, character and building height of the proposed 3 townhouses. It is too modern and square looking. Preferable would be a Heritage design with a peaked roof, HardiePlank lap siding, more green space between the ·curb and the building and not more than 3 stories including a rooftop patio so it harmonizes with the Ladner Village OCP. We are concerned that it is too unrelated and out of step with the character of the existing Neighbourhood and will negatively affect the ambiance and market values of our properties, some of which are adjacent.

Name (Print) Address Signal re"

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 December, 2012

Name (Print) Address Signature 1 -riAJi')- ~k,k;ot,.j Hft) £"f7"tt-- Ike L,.j.; v' c:i;;~~t;> ,7,\ ...... ~ 2 VIiI f}IrC / tX)iJIJA NELL/!; <; 4$' F/9 A L ffr:7lc /.-0 I 3 i . \\0\"\'i' \.\ 1"- H()~jt SO~ I o~ jN _Y t i WvU'MJ..Jl." .;/ JlriV,,tlM'I'?F ~'"' 4 ILl '"k', Ii I."," J/} .:l).Jf7;::::, .... ~ '7';"'"'nJ,AJI..J' ~/t1 .. ;lIt) ; I() l 4 lit ilz,ll;t" .. ! ',,;?!i,. 5 I 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 i ~ 14 15 16 17

I 18 19 20 21 22 23 -----"""-"------j

PROPOSED DESIGN

------~--"------

w > « • w~ I- '" "' '"-' TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT 50D84>"AAvi2:. Deil" Be

CONCEPTUAL STREETSCAPE

((H"\ WEST STREETSCAPE

\ « ) SCALE ):~!"', )·,0'-- "~..-_.J UJ \ = \ ~

~ gelld~1 1~!{3ocb- ;.,. Mayor _Council r7 \ flLE #. Ltl ootf:, f3~1 n From: Lynne Webb Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 20131:53 PM To: Lisa King; Mayor & Council Cc: Jocelyne And John Subject: File # LU006821

Hello,

Weare writing pertaining to File #. LU 006821 with regards to the Proposed Rezoning, Development Variance Permit, Development Permit and Subdivision at 5008 47Aave, Delta (Ladner) BC.

The proposed footprint for the three lots and town homes does not appear to be any different thaI). the original proposed footprint (File #LU6602). Concerns and Objections were raised on File #LU6602 t.; last year regarding the setback of the townhomes from Delta St.; the lack of a sidewalk with H greenspace between the road and the townhomes, the density as well as the proposed form and design " of the townhomes.

Also in contention was the height of the proposed townhomes and the location (relocation?) of the power pole on the corner of Delta Street and.the lane. Mayor and Council agreed and the development was sent back to the drawing board. As per the December 17,2012 Council Meeting Highlights, Council requested that the architect revise the design to incorporate a heritage look so it complements the surrounding Ladner Village area.

With respect to the new proposal (the setbacks, lot sizes, as well as a sidewalk with greenspace) there does not appear to be much of a difference, if any, therefore all previous objections stand. We can easily provide you with correspondence and photos that were submitted on file LU6602 that began in July 2012 up until and including the Public Hearing on December 17, 2012 that pertain to our concerns and objections on these issues.

We would like to see a visual rendering of the proposal in order to be able to provide any concerns on the form and character of the proposed townhomes. .,,i :; . We have noticed that the floor area of the townhomes has been reduced in all three lots, but without a visual it mal

Staff will advise the writers that their comments have been received and will respond to their questions relating to parking, opportunities to view the proposed elevations and the review process. '_J

To reiterate, we would like to see.a sidewalk and greenspace (between the townhomes and Delta 8t), so that it matches the neighbouring property to the south on Delta Street, and would like to see a heritage style building, no higher than three stories; in muted/earth tones, so that it will harmonize with the Heritage look of the Village and all recent developments on the block.

Recently, people who work in the Village have been restricted to where they park while at work. Some are now parking outside the Village which includes along Delta Street. The Heritage building (the former Ladner Baptist Church) to our knowledge has no designated parking. If the new zoning was to allow non~retail commercial uses and/ or residential uses in the heritage building, where will these workers/residents park?

For residential use, are not 2 parking spaces required per unit?

In the letter mailed to residents, it mentions a review process. What does a review process entail, and . when will the 1st reading take place?

We would appreciate a response and would be willing to meet with Staff and Council if that would enable a development for all of us to be proud of.

Thankyou..

Sent from:

Lynne and Brian Webb

301- 4988 47AAvenue

LadnerBC

Jocelyne Yaiomi " , 4ilitl A. 2il1l@ ....~Oo A D/?(.,A- ''2t. Ladner,BC

Sent from: .

Lynne Webb