That the Mayor, on behalf of Council, provide a letter of support to Petroglyph Development Group for their proposed cabin project on Saysutchun Island.
in provincial parks and the requirement for consultation with the general public. I'm not sure that that's even a staff question, but it's something. That surfaced for me. We're essentially supporting changes. To a provincial park with this letter, and I'm not sure that I don't. Feel well enough informed Community consultation wasn't discussed with staff, so if I'm hearing correctly, This is a letter of support. We'll get them into the application process. We don't. Know what the application process brings. It could include community consultation. It could not. feeling. Some discomfort supporting this just because. Fully supports Nanaimo First Nation. Developing the park that they co manage into a vision that they hold. However. I'm just acknowledging some discomfort because. I'm not sure that. How the province will consult with residents of the City of Nanaimo about changes to that park. I'd love some more discussion because I'm
you go. It should work. Thank you. Yeah. Councilor Armstrong, I see this exactly the same. As you. I don't know that I feel confident. Saying, as a city, we support this without having heard from residents on this. This is a beloved park in the downtown of Nanaimo. I'm genuinely conflicted on this one. Thank you. motion. Well, I'm hearing two separate motions. Two separate motions. I'm going to support the first motion with a blind leap of faith that BC parks will do public consultation. I don't know that we need a motion to say please do. Public consultation. This is their process. But I do want to flag that. If there is no public consultation, this won't go over well. Yeah. Thank you. All
And I seconded the recommendation, but I certainly understand. The hesitation of Councilor Hemmons. And I guess I share her concerns about uncertainty, about what the process looks like. And I also note, as I think Councilor Brown pointed out, that. The request comes from the Petroglyph development group, not specifically from SFN council. So I'm wondering if it's possible. To consider deferring this until we can get more information regarding the process and what our responsibilities are and what the picture would look like in terms of public consultation with our residents, because I think that would be important for any changes to the island. So perhaps I could. Look to staff to ask if that would be. A worship that as a path forward that I would support.
I just want to show you that PDG is actively engaging with BC park, so they're. Already having the conversations with BC parks. This is just a letter saying that we support them. And then the BC park stuff will go. There's also, I believe, a reconciliation agreement starting to be in place with this, which will make this all mute. But all they're asking. For is, do we support the idea of having cab. Cabins there. That's how I read it. And it reads right in there that you're. Actively engaging with BC parks and the first step is to get city saying yes, it's. A great project or. No, it's not. And then the next process goes, and then. BC Parks would start their consultation. That's how I read it. And it's also pulled in the principles of the 2007 collaborative management agreement. So I don't see any issue with supporting this today because. If the BC parks wants to go to public consultation, they'll go to public
Question through to staff. I just note, like the. So we have the arrangement with Sonimo in the province to meet but the application is with petroglyph. I'm just curious on that interface and. How that's navigated. Just in the sense of. Who's actually making the application. Like, what is the entity? That is.
worship. The best way to describe this is. The co management agreement that we've had between the province and SFN and the city. Dates back many, many years before petroglyph ever existed. And I'll be honest. That group has not met regularly. Twice in its history. Miss Osborne's giving me the two symbol twice. Ever. Has that group? Actually met. So it's not been an active and ongoing group. And I would say especially since, SFN has taken over management of the park through their subsidiary petroglyph. The application is from petroglyph, is there? The managing partner. But back to the process. I'm not familiar with what the provincial process is for any amendment to a provincial park, whether they proposed ad facilities and whether or not they engage with the community, so I just can't speak to that. So I guess just to follow up, are we just a co manager? By name, but not in. Practice. I think that the partnership of the co management. Is more what the city does, both on the land based side. On the water side to support the overall park, but we do not have a strong say in the actual operation of the property itself. And I would say that's probably even diminished since SFN has actually taken on operation of the park. We certainly work together as partners, but we do not have a role in approving any of the