Council gave the first three readings to the 2022-2026 Financial Plan last Tuesday night. Bottom line where it counts: Sooke residents with an average assessed property can expect a municipal increase of about $100 when the bill arrives late next spring. Drop by the Municipal Hall this Wednesday from 3 to 7 PM for the open house info session featuring staff and council representatives. 

Start right here with this year's excellent video explainer, a smartly assembled production featuring District staff step-by-stepping it through the budget . It's complemented by an in-depth budget page on the Let's Talk Sooke website. (Aside: This is pinch-me wonderful, exceptionally timely communications from a local government that not many years ago was sharing little but formal budget documents and a double-sided flyer included with our tax bills. Sooke five-year plans were also typically finalized in the spring not long before the legislated May 15 deadline, not at this super-efficient early date as has been the case in recent years.) 

Quotes from Mayor Tait, Director of Finance Raechel Gray and CAO Norm McInnis all capture the rationale for council's unanimous vote in favour of the provisional budget. For my part,  Sooke News Mirror editor Kevin Laird wrote me last week asking for emailed quotes on the budget and its climate-action component.  I responded as follows ...  

Budget: "We're asking more from Sooke taxpayers this year and yet the hike is in service to what council rates as truly essential needs -- new firefighter and RCMP recruits, a Climate Action Coordinator, new hires in the planning and operations departments and, perhaps above all, the fast-tracked implementation of Sooke's Transportation Master Plan with its primary focus on the long-overdue Phillips-to-Grant Road W. bypass.   

All credit to Director of Operations Jeff Carter and the District's leadership team for a strategy that ensures current projects are completed on schedule and that we have the necessary reserve funds to bid for future grants. As they and council recognize, it's vital that we complete the bypass ASAP. It will dramatically improve our road and stormwater infrastructure while also lessening traffic congestion in the town centre and providing safe passage for pedestrians and cyclists. Wins all around, but it's true they come at a price."  

Climate action: "The 2022 budget marks the first time the District has invested significant funds in direct climate action. The volunteer Climate Action Committee has worked astoundingly hard and smart this year to develop a 7% annual GHG reduction strategy along with a companion citizen engagement campaign. Relatively modest ($109k) funding is now secure to launch these initiatives as well as hire Sooke's first Climate Action Coordinator to work with the community, the CRD and the Province's CleanBC team as we chase the daunting goal of 50% carbon cuts by 2030." 

For my own future reference, I'll share a few highlights here that you'll either find through District sources or in  Tuesday's night's special council budget agenda: 

* 2022 property tax increase: 6.09% (approx. $100 or $8.33 per month on an average 2021 assessment) 

* Tax hikes over the last decade total 21.32% prior to this latest increase ... 

2021 ~ 3.31%
2020 ~ 0.00%
2019 ~ 7.18%
2018 ~ 2.79%
2017 ~ 5.58%
2016 ~ 0.85%
2015 ~ 0.00%
2014 ~ 0.02%
2013 ~ 1.59%
2012 ~ 0.00%

Perspective on Taxes

Paraphrasing local government consultant Tracey Lorenson, one of the speakers at the 2019 Local Government Leadership Academy workshops in Parksville ... 

- A zero percent tax increase effectively reduces municipal funds by 2 to 3 percent given average annual inflation.  Generally speaking, there is under-investment by local governments in essential infrastructure. Future taxpayers will shoulder the bill sooner or later to replace failing road networks, sewers, etc. 
 
- Residents get what they pay for with their taxes. Whether a community receives gold, silver or platinum service is a direct reflection of tax rates. Less cannot deliver more. 

Budget 2022 Highlights 

- Ongoing funding for District of Sooke operations as delivered by (as of now) 51 employees + 13 RCMP officers + 28 paid-on-call firefighter volunteers. And what do these folks do precisely, you ask? See the 2021 Service Review report starting on page 72 of this Oct. 18 Committee of the Whole agenda. In an appreciative word: Plenty. 

- The District's share ($276k) to complete the $3.2m Church Road roundabout at Throup adjacent to the new Wadams Farm development + final shovel-(and grant)-ready designs for the Church, Throup, Charters, and Philips stretches of the connector-route bypass. 

- DOS contribution ($75k) to an otherwise Ministry of Transportation-funded design of the multi-use trail/sidewalk on the West Coast Road as far as Whiffin Spit Rd. 

- Year four of the Five-Year Road Program ($700k) to repave secondary streets at an as-required pace (likely an everafter annual expense in lesser amounts beyond five years, of course)  + a "patch-and-pave" budget for unexpected potholes and problems not covered by the District's maintenance deal with Victoria Contracting + District share of repaves of Connie and Manzer pending negotiations with MOTI. 

- Hiring of a new IAFF Local 4841 firefighter by the Sooke Fire Rescue Service + introduction of the third and final phase of the paid on-call program for Sooke's volunteer firefighters, thereby boosting us to provincial norms for composite union/volunteer forces of our kind. 

- Addition of a 14th District-funded officer to the Sooke RCMP detachment (two more are needed in the coming years, as Staff Sgt. Sinden told council in answer to my questions on Monday night.) 

- New Manager of Operations (aka an essential right-hand associate to Director of Operations Jeff Carter, whose plate is beyond full with current/incoming road projects and the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant, among other to-do priorities.) 

- New Manager of Planning & Community Economic Development to work with Director of Planning Matthew Pawlow. This hybrid position incorporates the CED Officer role held this year by Sue Welke (who regrettably has now left the District to care for family back in Alberta, yet leaves a fine legacy including the Sooke CED Strategy & Action Plan.) Certainly makes good sense to blend the CED worldview into planning in the wake of a new OCP and with new town-centre commercial/residential applications pending. 

- Consultant funding ($20k) for an Employment Lands Strategy to augment seed money from the Province and the federal Community Investments (CECI) program. Action item 1.1 of the CED Strategy states: "Using the new draft OCP and the climate action/Low Carbon Resilience lens, encourage new investment on Employment Lands and in the Town Centre." Jumpstarting activity on our modest inventory of commercial and /industrial zones is a short-term priority of the DOS Economic Analysis (2019).  

- Salary for a permanent Climate Action Coordinator (to begin in August at the end of a nine-month grant for the intern coordinator position made possible through funding sourced by the aforementioned Ms. Welke and filled a fortnight ago by Maia Carolsfeld, a gifted young East Sooke woman newly graduated with a master's degree in carbon management from the University of Edinburgh). 

- A budget ($45k) to launch the Climate Action Committee's social mobilization campaign with lift-off planned for Earth Day 2022. Along with a climate-smart OCP and DOS commitments to lead by example through the Low Carbon Resilience model (see Oct. 2021 handbook),  citizen involvement is vital in the drive to reduce local carbon emissions by 7% annually through 2030 -- primarily through heat-pump and EV uptake (if 250 of us in each category do so each year, we're on course for our target 50% cut in conventionally measured emissions.) 

- Additional contract, seasonal parks labourers to assist the current team in managing, maintaining and improving Sooke's growing network of 80 parks, 50km of trails, boulevards, trees and washrooms. 

- Continued community support through the Community Grants ($65k) program + annual service agreements with the Sooke Food Bank, SRCHN, the Sooke Community Association, Sooke Region Tourism Association, Sooke Region Chamber of Commerce, the Visitor Information Centre and, new for 2022/23, the Sooke Family Resource Centre ($30k to top-up other grants funding SFRS's youth navigator and adult counselling programs.) 

- Much else!

Longer-Term Outlook

Borrowing (2022 payments on outstanding debts)
- Sewer plant ($3.3m, matures 2026)
- Fire Dept. water tender ($230k, matures 2024)
- Fire Dept. Engine 1 ($735k, matures 2025)
- Fire Dept. ladder truck ($258k, matures 2027)

Future borrowing guidelines
- District revenue in 2020 was $13.7m
- Municipal Finance Authority sets an interest-repayment limit of 25% of local government annual revenue (i.e. $3.4m) 
- Given current loans, we have an extra $2.4m available for yearly interest payments; this sum is currently earmarked for use as District contributions to any future successful grant applications for transportation, parks and sewer priorities. 

 Big ticket Items identified in future years of the Five-Year Plan 
(As anyone who has followed these plans over time will know, capital spending line items in years two to five are entirely subject to change based on many factors, but they do provide a rough guide to where your local government and this council is heading.)  Here's what you'll find pencilled in for future years: 
 
2023
- Charter Corridor North (Phase 1) ($1.5m) 
- Charters Throup stream culvert ($900k) 
- West Coast Road sidewalks ($2.5m) 
- DeMamiel Creek bridge crossing ($1m)
- Municipal Hall building repairs ($1.5m) 
- Fire Engine 204 ($900k) 
 
2024
- Charters/Throup Rds. ($15.6m; an aspirational sum heavily dependent on successful grant applications)
- Final phase of DeMamiel Creek bridge crossing ($1m)
 
2025
- Charters at Hwy 14 intersection ($1.2m)
- Charters corridor south ($1.5m)
- Town Centre Plaza ($1.2m)
 
2026
- Complete Streets Pedestrian buildout as per Transportation Master Plan ($3.6m)
 

Essential Reading

The District of Sooke Financial Services page 

Iterative updates to this page in recent years by Director of Finance Gray has generated an All You Wanted to Know About Taxes But Were Too Overwhelmed To Ask one-stop. Included is a pie-chart of how your total tax bill is divvied up among other parties (i.e., CRD, BC Transit, VIRL, SD #62); a chart (see below) showing Sooke taxes relative to other South Island municipalities; separate pages dedicated to the District's budget and property taxes; and a personalized property tax calculator that identifies what precisely your municipal contributions fund (to be updated in the New Year once this latest plan is adopted.) 


Earlier budget summaries from this blog: 
- 2019
- 2020/21
- CRD (2019) 

Image: From the District's Property Taxes website page, a chart titled "Putting Sooke Residential Taxes in Perspective" and based on annual data (in this case 2020) compiled by the Province of BC. 

Here's my respectful, largely appreciative critique of Sooke's draft Official Community Plan (minus the copy editing suggestions). Biggest issue for me, like most, are the imponderables of future growth and how the OCP needs to better ponder them given the realities of Hwy #14 and the developing Sooke crawl, let alone the climate emergency.  Items I failed to address keep arising in my mind (I should have revisited here before submitting). Yet I'm satisfied with this for now and look forward to submerging into what I trust is a rich collection of public feedback to be shared by the planning team. I would like to see the OCP branded with "Sooke Smart Growth" terminology given that it captures exactly that.  And the one minor typo I would love to see slip through is "seal-level rise." What a charming accidental reframe of an otherwise serious future impact. 

October, 2021 
Official Community Plan Feedback 
Jeff Bateman, District of Sooke Councillor 
7083 Briarwood Place, Sooke, BC V9Z 0T2 
 
I appreciate this opportunity to submit feedback on the draft Official Community Plan. I've also contributed my thoughts via collective, multiple-author submissions from the Sooke Age-Friendly Committee and the Climate Action Committee. Here I will reiterate some of my contributions to those documents along with additional thoughts. 
 
First, sincere respect and thanks to all involved -- DIALOG consultants, DOS planners, the OCP Advisory Committee and everyone in the community who contributed such meaningful input. An OCP is no small feat, and this one is, by and large, excellent according to my understanding of the requirements and intent of such plans. I'm sure it will effectively guide staff, the community, developers, and this and future councils in realistically, patiently and strategically building a smart-growth, climate-smart complete community as dictated by the CRD Regional Growth Strategy. 
 
There are many reasons to applaud this OCP, and i'll cite some at the outset:
 
- The flow of content in understandable and logical -- eventually, with patience and repeat reads, it's true, but that's the nature of beasts this size. (This said, I agree with the OCP-AC that the document requires a "rosetta stone" infographic as a navigational tool more effective than that on pg. 33.)
 
- The vision, scope, incisiveness and inclusiveness of the 15 Goals for Sooke as distilled from a wealth of public engagement. Needed: Compelling, well-written, inspirational, visually oriented supplementary content to elaborate on the goals while also conjuring optimism, hope and enthusiasm for our shared future. 
 
- Respectful recognition of government-to-government relations with the T'Sou-ke and a commitment to UNDRIP implementation through the Sooke/T'Sou-ke MOU working group. 
 
- The dedication to developing an equitable community and ensuring all voices are heard at various levels of District engagement -- including applying a "justice, equity, diversity and inclusion" lens whenever possible and explicitly seeking participation on District committees from youth, elders, renters, BIPOC, low income, and unhoused individuals (in addition to current committee TOR requests for representatives from the T'Sou-ke and, first and foremost of course, specific fields of expertise). 
 
- Adherence to the public's preferred (largely) Scenario B growth model in reaffirming the prime directive of earlier OCPs and the RGS -- i.e., density for our aspirational "complete community" is centred in the town centre with minimal slippage and sprawl outside of it apart from a potential Kaltasin/Billings Spit Neighbourhood Area Plan predicated on sewer expansion east across the river.    
 
- New land-use categories that distinguish between Town Centre north, waterfront and transitional areas. The concomitant intention to update the Town Centre Plan (2010) as a short-term action is welcome. 
 
- The contemporary best-practice Development Permit Area requirements combined with the detailed general and specific land-use summaries (pg. 42-57) are precise, minimal and effective (at least to my untrained eye). They are the crystal-clear foundation for collaboration between staff and the development community, and the development of a new Zoning Bylaw. 
 
- The new designation of "employment lands" in Sooke's relatively minimal commercial and industrial zones. This paired with action item #1: "Initiate a Neighbourhood Area Plan process for the Billings/Kaltasin area in partnership with the T'Sou-ke First Nation." In addition to ensuring environmental health of the harbour and basin as well as somewhat stemming the tide of commuters through local job creation, this transitional area between Sooke/T'Sou-ke would allow us to deeply explore our aspiration to be a "model reconciliation community" in close consultation with all area residents, SD #62, industrial/commercial/ALR landowners and the community at large. 
 
- Generally speaking, a suite of policies and actions that address Sooke's top challenges through the lens of other updated District plans: affordable/attainable new and infill housing (owner and rental); community economic development (social, environmental, economic); climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies led by 7% Solution building energy reductions (i.e, an accelerated Step Code timetable) and improved transit service and facilities; plans to address town-centre and residential parking; best-practice tree and urban forest management; signage and wayfinding (physical and electronic); waste management(including compost and yard-waste facilities); and  advocacy for partnership with and funding from other orders of government. 
 
Much else besides, but I'll bring this opening section to a close for now so as to turn to the rest of this appreciative critique: 
 
1. OCP Objectives Analyzed
2. Miscellaneous Comments
3. Line item suggestions
 
SECTION I
OCP Objectives Analyzed 
 
There is a danger (and I know this from personal experience) to expect an OCP to be a big, beautiful summation of our community's hopes and dreams. It can be that to a degree, but as I've learned it is properly viewed as a functional planning and land use guide. In that light, I'll look at the draft OCP via the seven objectives stated in the Request for Proposals that secured the services of DIALOG.  (see pg. 10 of the April 7, 2020 RFP).
 
 1. "Develop an OCP with high degree of community input and that will be endorsed by the community"
 - CHECK in spite of the COVID-19 pandemic; all credit to the OCP team, staff and the District's Communications Coordinator in soliciting public input, which has been greater (considerably so, I understand) on a per capita basis than other BC communities undertaking their own OCP reviews these last 18 months. The current final stage of OCP development is critical in ensuring endorsement by as large a sector of the community as possible.  
 
 2. "Develop an OCP that provides clear and consistent guidance and direction for Council, staff and the development community"
 - CHECK in terms of clarity and direction in the policies, the Implementation Plan's 109 actions and the Development Permit guidelines. I recommend that the Implementation Plan's 47 short-term actions be prioritized in recommended order of action. One action logically follows the next in a cascading pattern of impacts. (This is also the issue with short-term actions in the Transportation and Parks & Trails Master Plans; while it's up to staff at council's strategic direction to execute masterplan recommendations, it would be helpful for decision-makers to know what our consultants and their DOS staff partners believe is the most practical, effective sequence in so doing.) 
 
3. "Establish a user-friendly OCP that is easily understood by the public, decision makers and staff"
 - CHECK to a considerable degree for decision-makers (recommended priority sequencing aside) and staff, but the plan could be better framed for general public consumption.  
 
- An Executive Summary, as recommended by the OCP-AC, is essential. 
 
- In an era of short-attention spans and visual learning, graphic support is needed. A glaring omission is an at-a-glance infographic that captures The Goals of Sooke (pg. 32), which are at this point presented as text only. The visual summary with "3 Big Goals" and "12 Key Directions" produced by District planning staff during the initial round of OCP public engagement in 2015/16 is a beautiful example.
 
- As I recommended at the Aug. 30 special council meeting, additional explanatory content based on Jennifer Fix's presentation that night should be added as sub-text for the 15 Goals for Sooke. This will better clarify how each goal is addressed in the OCP. (The introductory goals/objectives text for each of the policy areas is excellent; can it be distilled into content for this section as well?) 

- To repeat, more graphic interest and content generally required in Part 2 - The Vision for Sooke. One reason I voted in favour of DIALOG for this contract was its work on the award-winning Abbotsford OCP (aka "Abbotsforward"). That plan's short Vision section includes an extra few pages of a kind that could be used in our OCP, i.e. the sub-heads, graphics and short paragraphs in the section titled "the following aspirations paint a more detailed picture of our vision." 

- The Age-Friendly Committee has recommended the addition of terms that will allow sectors of Sooke residents to identify themselves in the OCP, i.e. "people of different abilities," "young families," "isolated seniors," "marginalized youth," and "expectant parents." This will further demonstrate that Sooke is indeed "a small town with a big heart." The fact that in 2019 Sooke became the 103rd community world-wide to be recognized as a "Compassionate City" by Charter for Compassion International could be mentioned. 
 
- On pg. 25 under "Shared Community Vision" there is a reference to the Picture Sooke microsite, which I assume will continue in perpetuity and feature the public engagement reports, the Background Research Report and related materials. Inclusion of thumbnail images of these documents with links would be useful for OCP depth-divers. Here would also be the place to state that the electronic version of the OCP will include direct links to all the District plans and reports cited in the new plan. 
 
4. "Achieve an OCP that defines and enhances the unique character of Sooke"
 - UNCHECKED. The Mayor's letter and a recommended Executive Summary will ideally address this missing link, but apart from the photos there is something rather chilly and generic about the draft OCP. While effective as an elevator pitch, the 28-word vision statement needs to be unpacked. As the OCP-AC recommends, representative comments from the public feedback process could be included (in the Community Context section, not cherry-picked and scattered to multiple pages as is now the case). 
                  Storytelling and narrative are increasingly recognized as powerful tools for municipal planners, and our OCP currently lacks this element beyond the vision statement. Both the 2001 and 2010 OCPs have more substantial, multi-paragraph text re: Sooke's aspirational character, and I would like to know in some detail about what this community might be like in 2030, 2050, or even four generations from now at the dawn of the next century. Have we been absorbed into a westshore megalopolis? Or have we found ways to build a complete Sooke Smart Growth community while retaining our Wild By Nature character? Imagine it, and we might act accordingly to get there. 
 
 5. "Improve development guidelines to achieve desirable form and character of future development" 
 - STRONG CHECK. This is the practical, working heart of the OCP. Five stars.  
 
6. "Provide a professional, aesthetically pleasing and legislatively correct OCP" 
 - CHECK in terms of "professional" and "legislatively correct." As stated earlier, I'm not so sure about the draft's aesthetic pleasures. No question the layout and text is clean, direct and on point. 
 
7. "Build organizational and community capacity to continuously improve and implement OCP goals."
 - UNCHECKED. The 2010 OCP "suggested" (rather than recommended) an OCP Implementation and Monitoring Committee that "may involve interested, dedicated citizens in local government decision-making."  While it is the job of staff at the direction of this and future councils to implement the OCP, oversight from an Implementation and Monitoring Committee might have ensured that more than 18 of the 2010's many action points were enacted over the current plan's lifespan. It would be logical to include representation from one or more current OCP-AC members on this committee. 
 
 
Section II
Miscellaneous Comments 
 
Timing of OCP Release
As the OCP Advisory Committee noted in its feedback, the new OCP "needs newer numbers." Population and dwelling count results from the July 17, 2020 census will be released on February 9, 2022. As I'm sure is already the plan, I suggest that these numbers be incorporated into the final OCP. (Release dates for further census information here.) 
 
Context with previous Sooke OCPs, CRD Area Plans and current plans/reports
This OCP is the latest in a line of planning documents. The DOS has previously adopted OCPs on Aug. 12, 2001 (Bylaw #86) and May 17, 2010 (Bylaw #400). Both should be mentioned along with reference to earlier CRD plans of our area (five of these Village Area and Settlement plans starting with the CRD's 1976 Sooke Area Settlement Plan are listed on pg. 7 of the 2001 OCP). This context could be added under 1.1 Purpose of the Plan. 
       A visual display of some of these plans could be presented along with several paragraphs of text explaining how the new OCP echoes their main themes -- namely environmental protection, prevention of urban sprawl through focused density in the village core, waterfront public access, and a dedication to preserving rural areas within and outside the urban growth area (as it was known in the 2001 OCP). 
       Primarily, the reader needs reassurance that Sooke's previous OCPs, created at considerable expense and with broad-based public input, have been closely consulted, referenced and respected in the creation of our new plan. 
       I also suggest that a page be created to list the District plans and reports that align with this OCP. Short descriptions of each would be helpful.  
 
Population Growth through 2050
Like others, I am concerned that the OPC does not establish guardrails for community growth over time apart from decade-by-decade estimated housing starts. I value the smart-growth vision of town centre density, but how do projections match up against the very real limits to Sooke's continued, effectively unchecked, growth?
 
Wrote the consultants in their Aug. 12 report to the OCP-AC: "The OCP is agnostic to whether population growth should be seen as positive, negative or neutral; it neither creates population growth targets nor creates policies to explicitly encourage or prevent the population from expanding."
 
I recognize that official Regional Growth Strategy projections (as approved every five years by CRD municipalities) must be used as the foundation for OCP planning. This said, I would like the OCP to also explicitly state that the District of Sooke and its elected councils have the ability to challenge, reject and re-envision these numbers. 
 
The CRD's Emily Sinclair and Kevin Lorette state the following in their "CRD Fact Check on RGS Population Projections" (June 18, 2021): "Projections provide planners with a possible scenario of the future size and demographic cohorts of the population. The scenario is based on factors including future migration levels, births and deaths to be considered against government policy, economic development, land use and zoning." 

Calculating (as it logically must) using CRD and Colliers projections, the OCP pinpoints (pg. 20) the need for 1813 new residential units by 2030 if we're to accommodate this so-far unchallenged anticipated growth (this includes the minimum 1200+ approved units that are legally approved for development in the District.). 
 
A further 1,567 units are anticipated during the 2030s and another 1,658 in the decade of the 2040s. That's 5,038 additional units in total over the next 30 years, double our current inventory.   
 
The CRD's 2019-2038 Population, Dwelling Units and Employment Projection Report (April 2019) anticipates a ratio of 2.3 people per Sooke dwelling unit in 2038 (compared with 2.41 today). On that basis, an additional 11,587 individuals will be added to Sooke's population roll by 2050. (i.e., 1,500 or so more than the OCP currently predicts for that year.) 
 
The critical question for future community discussion is whether Sooke can accommodate this level of growth given the challenges we currently face. To repeat: The District is not beholden to CRD projections and this license to determine our own future should be noted in our OCP. 
 
 
Highway 14
Seemingly the most significant challenge we face, as the OCP-AC noted in its submission, is vehicular congestion, the #1 concern in public engagement. It will only become worse with the projected population growth. A nightmare scenario is routine rush-hour near-gridlock driving on #14 -- at best case free-flowing bumper-to-bumper traffic; and, at worst, a Sooke crawl or full stop whenever there are minor hold-ups and extended stoppages on accident days. 
 
Personal evidence tells us how weekend traffic in both directions has also grown exponentially in recent years. Build-out of the TMP's connector road bypass will help in time, however additional stoplights on the Sooke Road at Charters and perhaps also Idlemore will create further Sooke Rd. congestion. 
 
As much as the OCP is admirably dedicated to transportation mode shift and smart-growth planning to encourage 10-minute walk/roll-ability in the town centre, we can nonetheless anticipate a growing tide of vehicles based on the OCP's projections (over 9,000 more cars by 2050 based on current vehicle ownership levels in Sooke; there were approx. 1.9 cars per local household according to the latest 2017 data from the CRD.) (Edit add: The 7% Solution, BC Transit's Sooke Area Transit Plan implementation and local job creation will take cars off the road, but we are likely to remain a Motor City given the convenience & personal freedoms cars provide paired with their need in our penturban setting .) 
 
The lack of reference to Highway #14 in the draft OCP is somewhat understandable given that it is the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. However, the fact that #14 is already at or near capacity (even with the addition of the four-lane stretch) must surely be mentioned in the OCP as the prime consideration for District staff and councils in growth planning.  
 
Neither is there a mention of the need (likely as a mid-to-long-term action) for a second bridge crossing of the Sooke River nor the importance of continuing to explore alternate routes out of Sooke in the event of emergency. 
 
Highway 14 is referenced substantially from what I can see in just a single two-paragraph section on pg. 44 of the Transportation Master Plan. It concludes by noting the "importance of collaboration between the two organizations (DOS and MOTI) in addressing local transportation challenges." Continuing advocacy and consultation with MOTI needs to be added as an ongoing action in the Transportation section. (Alongside actions #4 and #5 focused on BC Transit.) 
 
 
Bigger Picture Framework
There are a number of holistic frameworks that guide community ambitions in BC and elsewhere. Two such approaches now adopted by the District are those of the Canadian Community Economic Development Network and the ACT Team at Simon Fraser University (Low Carbon Resilience co-benefits).
 
It was a missed opportunity, I believe, that our own OCP is not rooted in, nor makes reference to, any of the other available options. To do so may have arguably been an example of scope creep, but perhaps a short list of these celebrated frameworks could be cited in the OCP so as to inspire their use in future community planning.
 
Examples:
- DIALOG's "Community Wellbeing Framework" - described as "an evidenced-based methodology to design for community wellbeing." (This is another reason I was excited about the prospect of DIALOG as our OCP consultant, and I'm surprised there is no reference to it in the draft.)   
 
- The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (as utilized in the Victoria Foundation's annual Vital Signs report) 
 
- Kate Raworth's Donought Economics (as adopted by the City of Nanaimo) 
 
 
GHG Reduction Target 
At the Aug. 30 presentation of the draft, council reiterated that it wanted to see a 50% reduction target by 2030 as it endorsed earlier on April 26, 2021 (excerpt from minutes.) This aspirational target is consistent with numerous other timetables -- the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the BC Municipal Climate Leadership Council included. 
 
APRIL 26, 2021 
2021-158
MOVED by Councillor Tony St-Pierre, seconded by Councillor Jeff Bateman: THAT Council receive the following recommendation: 
• THAT the Committee of the Whole recommend to Council that Sooke’s emissions reduction target be set as follows: a 50% cut from 2018 GHG emission levels, by 2030 or 7% per year. This target should be in effect until supplanted by an equivalent or stronger target in the OCP. 
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY In Favour: Mayor Maja Tait, Councillor Jeff Bateman, Councillor Al Beddows, Councillor Dana Lajeunesse, Councillor Ebony Logins, Councillor Megan McMath, and Councillor Tony St-Pierre 
 
"Tertiary Employment Market" 
Given the "employment lands strategy" and the possible future sewer servicing of industrial & commercial land east of the Sooke River, I'm surprised to see the statement (pg. 19) that "Sooke is expected to continue being a tertiary employment market consisting primarily of locally serving industries." "Secondary" (i.e., light manufacturing) and even "primary" (value-added raw materials) businesses could be established in a serviced Sooke business park and other appropriately zoned areas in the District. Citing the cooperative model as a desired outcome for some businesses might help inspire new Sooke-owned start-ups while also aligning with Community Economic Development and Low Carbon Resilience co-benefit aspirations.  
 
New Development in the Town Centre
The pace of town centre development is accelerating. I'm delighted to see Action #64 (4.7.5.7) calling for coordinated High Street urban design. In the critical case of Brownsey Blvd., to cite the first of what will be other examples, developers on both sides of the road must be encouraged to collaborate with District planners in creating a streetscape that is synergistic, complimentary, functional and appealing on multiple levels for residents, businesses and the general public.  
 
Longer-Term Perspective 
There are just four long-term (10-year plus) items among the Implementation Plan's 109 actions. Considering the brevity of the vision statement, the OCP is left without a sense of what we might reasonably expect for Sooke in the decades ahead. Mention of more distant actions identified in the TMP, PTMP and other plans would help us all picture Sooke as it might one day become. One potential action for inclusion: A long-term (not OCP-length) community planning exercise in collaboration with the T'Sou-ke. 
 

Section III
Line Item Details 
(some substantial, but primarily copy editing nit-picking) 
 
- Pg. 12: Thank you for informing readers about the Te'mexw Treaty lands of intent. I'm sure the e-version of the OCP will have a link to the Te'mexw website. I found the map somewhat confusing, however, and perhaps it could be swapped with this one from the BC Treaty Commission or this one from Te'mexw. 
 
- Pg. 13: Out of respect, and in service to promoting greater understanding of our neighbouring local government, I suggest that reference be made, with permission, to the T'Sou-ke's own Comprehensive Community Plan (2015) and its vision statement presented in that document in the shape of a tree:  "Our vision is for a safe and healthy community. We see ourselves as self-governing, accountable stewards of our lands developing a sustainable and resilient community with economic development generating a respect and understanding for our people's culture and heritage. United ... Educated ... In sobriety ... to provide opportunities for all generations to come."
 
- Pg. 16: The use of "Time Immemorial" is respectful and right. It is cited for a first time on pg. 13 and twice more on pg. 16 (including the pull quote) and several more times as the OCP unfolds. For the sake of some potential variety, however, please note that the provincial government's Welcome BC website states that First Nations have inhabited the west coast for "more than 10,000 years." The oldest archeological evidence of first peoples (on Calvert Island 100km north of Port Hardy) dates back 14,000 years. 
 
- Pg. 17: According to my written notes from the T'Sou-ke presentation at the National Energy Board Kinder Morgan pipeline hearings in Victoria in late 2015, Chief Planes stated that T'Sou-ke fish traps in the Sooke Harbour were first taken down and replaced by settler traps circa 1850. (The current text notes the formal federal ban in 1902).  He also said that the T'Sou-ke inhabited 10 traditional village sites in the area  circa 1850. I have been unable to find an NEB transcript to verify my notes. 
 
- Pg. 18: Population and Demographics: i) the 2016 census set Sooke's population at 13,001 (not 13,060 as has been cited consistently in OCP preliminary documents to date.) The District's website home page has the correct number. ii) In the second paragraph, the use of "substantial" is unnecessarily vague -- the OCP Background report (pg. 24) projects that the over-65 demo will represent 34% of Sooke by 2050 (compared to 17% today.) Yes, that is "substantial" but precision matters. 
 
- Pg. 19: Given the town centre's rapid (still potential pending issuance of DPs) growth, I wonder if the 80 new jobs per year prediction is low. 
 
- Pg. 20: What is the source of the Sooke Housing Demand Projections? (Likely Colliers, but please say so.) Additionally, a source for "Future Residential Demand" is required. (PS In answer to my question at the Oct. 13 council meeting, the Urban Systems rep presenting the Development Cost Charge revision said that his population growth projections to 2040 were "a conservative estimate" -- i.e., 1,173 new residential units by 2030, and a 20-year total of 2,345 by 2040. That is a difference of 1,035 units between his calculations and the 3,380 units projected in the OCP.)  
 
- Pg. 21: i) As per the OCP-AC recommendation, the Climate Change and "Journey to Net Zero" (no hyphen) pages need to be rewritten to better reflect Sooke's declaration of a climate emergency and the promise to meet climate change boldly and "head-on." ii)  The stated 1.55C median increase in temperature differs from the "average annual warming of about 3C in our region by the 2050s" as stated on pg. 2 of the CRD's Climate Projections for the Capital Region (2017). I'd rather we used official local statistics in this critical matter. iii) Perhaps it's just me, but i have trouble interpreting the chart from the Climate Atlas of Canada. 
 
- Pg. 22: i) In the third paragraph, it should be noted that GPC Basic + accounting focuses primarily on transportation and building heating/cooling. It does not capture emissions from other sources that are not yet formally tabulated by the province (food, travel and tourism, embodied carbon, etc.) 
 
- Pg. 23: Revise the targets for a 50% reduction by 2030. Opportunity here to explain and list the specific "policies, actions and guidelines required to achieve these targets (that) are integrated throughout this OCP." 
 
- Pg. 25: Mention where the Picture Sooke engagements took place -- i.e., John Muir Elementary School, local coffeshops, Whiffin Spit, etc. (identifying local places will give the OCP more Sooke personality)
 
- Pg. 26: Nearly exact replication of text from pg. 14. Instead, you could expand here on the CRD's Regional Growth Strategy(which logically should be the title of this page) and list some of the taxpayer-supported services the CRD supplies to Sooke (i.e., SEAPARC, Animal Care Services, Sooke Region Museum, Stormwater Quality Management, Regional Parks, Parks Land Acquisition, Traffic Safety Commission, Fire Dispatch,  etc.) 
 
- Pg. 30: "Hundreds of residents" is understating the volume of input. "More than a thousand" is more accurate, I understand. 
 
- Pg. 31: "Eclectic" remains in the vision statement re: arts & culture scene. I believe this was challenged by the Sooke SPA committee. I see that "dynamic arts & culture scene" is used in the goal statements. 
 
- Pg. 36: The 2010 OCP cited "Sooke Smart Growth." Why not use this locally meaningful term here and elsewhere? 
 
- Pg. 37:  "Future Neighbourhood Planning" -- add at end of sentence "in association with the T'Sou-ke First Nation, Sooke School District #62, residents, landowners and the community." 
 
- Pg. 61: Revise GHG target. Mention of 7% Solution's mode-shift ambitions? 
 
- Pg. 68:  i) Action 4.1.5.1. Consider adding "Saseenos" (longer-term) to the CRD planning guide's list of recommended EV charger locations in the DOS. The guide also generally notes that municipalities can determine their own "opportunity sites," which are defined as "locations that are typically under municipal control including public parks, libraries, recreation centres, parkades, park and rides, on- street (i.e., curbside locations), etc." (pg. 27).  (This year's Dunsky EV Infrastructure Roadmap prepared for the CRD states (pg. 7) of Sooke: " The 2020 Transportation Master Plan indicates that the District has pending plans for 6 additional Level 2 charging stations, but there is no installation timeline. The Plan also suggests EV-Ready requirements for new residential and commercial buildings."
ii) Action 4.1.5.4. Remove "the" from fourth line, i.e. "what risks and mitigation exist" + program is formally known as "Active Transportation Pilot Projects." 
 
- Pg. 73: Second paragraph, second line. Suggested add: "Local governments term this work Natural Asset Management."
 
- Pg. 79: i) Action 4.2.4.10 ... "sea-level rise" (not seal-level, as much as i adore that phrase); ii)  As I read on, I find I'm having trouble with the random, space-filling inclusion of pull quotes from the 80,000+ words in the engagement materials. As much as I like the one on this page myself, these quotes present singular opinions in what must be a document for the entire community. 
 
- Pg. 82: i) I don't understand what the "common trees-in-a-field approach" means. Please provide examples of these post euro-colonial design languages. ii) REQUIRE not "promote" the planting of native species; iii) last line of page: "to figures associated with colonialism, racism ..." 
 
- Pg. 85: Further on the use of pull quotes, how about citing Sooke facts & figures in these spaces instead? i.e., total acreage of Sooke parks, types of trees in our parks, linear kilometers of trails, etc. 
 
- Pg. 92: i) Action 4.5.1.2 Add examples of "green infrastructure interventions" (failing this, the digital OCP might include a link to a certified and legitimate source for these examples; i.e., a BC or Canadian version of this.) 
 
- Pg. 94: i) Given the repeated use of "holistic" in this document, a definition is needed for this term early in the OCP. In fact, a glossary of frequently used terms would be ideal
 
- Pg. 99: Action 4.6.2.4. Remove "consider" -- "Create a food and agricultural advisory body" (a top recommendation of Sooke Food CHI, the 2021 Sooke Region Food Security Report and Sooke's 2012 Agricultural Plan). Creation of a Food Policy Council should be a short-term action, not mid-term.  
 
- Pg. 101: Policy 4.6.4.2. Thank you for referring to this best-practice guide. Many other provincial, UBCM, LGLA, LGMA and other BC guides to key OCP topic areas exist and could/should also be referenced throughout the document. 
 
- Pg. 106: Action 4.7.1.3. Might this action (or a stand-alone additional action) prioritize pursuit of the Municipal and Regional District Tax (MRDT) and the subsequent launch of destination marketing for Sooke? 
 
- Pg. 112: Action 4.8.1.2. This, i believe, and the pg 130 reference to the Accessibility plan are the only actions dedicated to updating particular District plans. Why these two only? Why not also Agricultural Plan, the Age-Friendly Action Plan, the Town Centre Plan, the Liquid Waste Management Plan, etc. as stated without actions on pg. 205 of the Implementation Plan? 
 
- Pg. 113: Action 4.8.3.5. reference to a "colonial audit model" confuses me. Please explain for your readers. (Google's one  reference is to a City of Vancouver Parks Board meeting.) 
 
- Pg. 116: Action 4.9.1.2. Mayor Tait has noted that the fed and provincial governments should be referred to as "other orders of government" not "senior government."
 
- Pg. 117/118/120: Pull quotes again as space fillers. How about some highlight data from the Housing Needs Assessment? Generally, however, BRAVO! for these housing policies & actions. 
 
- Pg. 129: I appreciate the regular mention of the T'Sou-ke, however you might also want to note the long-standing Sooke desire to "leave no citizen in our community behind." 
 
- Pg. 130: i) "Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada reports" (correct title + lower case 'r'); ii) Action 4.11.2.4, full title is An Accessibility & Inclusiveness Study for the District of Sooke; iii) Action 4.11.2.5, proper title is TogetherBC: British Columbia's Poverty Reduction Strategy.  iv) Might JEDI training also be available to community groups and individuals as per the intention of Action 4.11.2.9? 
 
- Pg. 145: Pausing to say these DPAs rock ... or, rather, they heavy timber, rammed earth and hempcrete. Exceptionally well done to all responsible!  
 
- Pg. 157: Appreciation for this: "and the proponent has taken all opportunities available to avoid the SPEA by varying other setbacks or requirements without seriously compromising site use or neighbourhood character."
​
- Pg. 171/180/: "Provide electrical vehicle charging connections." Question: Is this intended for every residential unit, parking stall and commercial business stall, or is this at the developers' discretion? I ask because, increasingly, the new municipal normal in Canada is to require 100% EV Ready standards for new multi-family and commercial buildings. (See Dunsky, pg. 7, for south island examples)  
 
- Pg. 193: No reference to electric vehicle charging connections in 6.10, 6.11 and 6.12  that I can see. Charging connections will be in garages at Wadams Farm, I believe, thus ensuring that garages will be utilized as such and alleviate parking issues. 
 
- Pg. 199: "Minimize opportunity for hiding places to support safety and security" ... I don't believe that Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles been mentioned in the OCP? These were used in design of the library. Should this be recommended for all DPAs? 
 
- Pg. 200: General Planting - should there be a prohibition on use of artificial grass to minimize Langfordization? 
 
- Pg. 205: Implementation Plan. 
i) The second paragraph states that "the following neighbourhood and other plans do not exist and would further support the vision, policies and regulations of the OCP." No list of recommended plans follows. 
ii) As strongly recommended by the Climate Action Committee, a Climate Action Plan is an early-adoptive must for this list. 
iii) Also meriting inclusion are the PTMP-recommended master plans for John Phillips Memorial Park and Whiffin Spit, among TBD others. 
 
- Pg. 205: Plans to Update. 
i) I wonder if these plans are listed in priority order? Sooke's Zoning Bylaw is an immediate legislative requirement following any new OCP, so it belongs where it is at the top of the list. 
ii) I agree with the OCP-AC that it should be followed quickly by a revised Town Centre Plan. 
iii) Should a review of the Liquid Waste Management Plan be on this list? 
iv) The submission from the Sooke Age-Friendly Committee calls for inclusion on this list of the Sooke Age-Friendly Action Plan(2015). 
 
- Pg. 207: Action Item #4 (4.1.3.2). The "Island Highway" is the four-lane route along Vancouver Island's east coast. Replace with "Highway 14" or "Sooke Road." 
 
Finally, a credit page with generous appreciation to all involved - Sooke engagement participants, the OCP-AC, Cllr. Beddows, District staff and DIALOG and its team. Thank you all, job almost done. :-) 
 
respectfully,  
Jeff 
 
Also from this blog: 
~ OCP Update (Sept. 2021) 
~ Masterplanning Sooke's Smart Growth (Dec. 2019) 
~ Team OCP (Aug. 2020) 

Image: Main goals and themes from the first wave of public engagement last year, all addressed in their various technical ways in the draft OCP as well as the related (many newly updated) plans and reports that it aligns with. 

Preparing myself for tomorrow's first round of the Sooke Homelessness Coalition's invite-only planning/brainstorming session in developing a strategic plan to address homelessness in the region -- visible, invisible (couch-surfers, car/van dwellers)  and potentially a hopefully very small percentage of those among us who are vulnerable, living cheque-to-cheque, challenged to find affordable housing and in danger of being unhoused with a sudden downturn in their lives or incomes. 


As a respondent named Jade says in Sooke's Amidst the Paradise report: "It humbles  you how easily life can change and throw you in a loop that you don't expect, that could throw you into a downward spiral towards homelessness."  The stark realities mixed with the gratitude and appreciation  expressed for front-line workers makes Gemma Martin's document a truly eye-and-heart opening read. She recommends that you focus on these "lived and living experience" observations (starting on pg. 40) before reading anything else.  

​Local References
- Sooke Homelessness Coalition (SHC) mandate (attached below) 
- Greater Victoria Coalition to End Homelessness Community Plan to End Homelessness (2019-2024) 
- Sooke Region Communities Health Network's Amidst the Paradise (2021) 
- SRCHN's Sooke Region Food Security Report (2021) 
- Sooke Multi-Belief Initiative Compassionate Action Plan (2020 update) 
- Greater Victoria Point In Time Homeless Count and Housing Needs Survey (2020; Sooke screenshot below) 
- Province of BC Income Assistance Rate Table (updated Oct. 2021) + Support & Shelter page 
- SD #62 Healthy Schools, Healthy People infographic on youth issues (2019) 

Housing 
- Hope Centre Transitional and Emergency Shelter with wrap-around support services 
- Capital Region Housing Corporation 
- BC Housing - Subsidized housing 
- M'akola Housing Society (will manage Sooke's two new BC Housing projects) 

Regional and National
- Capital Regional District Reaching Home program + FAQ 
- City of Victoria's Breaking The Cycle of Mental Illness, Addictions and Homelessness report (2007)
- Medicine Hat, Alta. Plan to End Homelessness (2009; year nine progress report here). 
- Government of Canada Reaching Home: Canada's Homelessness Strategy + backgrounder 
- BC Ministry of Mental Health & Addictions' A Pathway to Hope (roadmap to 2030) 
- BC Ministry of Social Development & Policy Reduction + reports page  

Agencies + Front-line locals
- Sooke Shelter Society (Sherry Thompson, Melanie Cunningham, Carla Simicich, Mark Ziegler) 
- Sooke Food Bank Society (Kim Kaldel and team)
- Sooke Community Paramedic (Janna Lamontagne, BC Emergency Health Services) 
- AVI Health & Community Services + westshore clinic (Olivander Day) 
- West Coast Family Medical Clinic (Dr. Jeff Pocock) 
- Sooke Family Resource Society (Nicky Logins and team) 
- Sooke Place Housing Society (Lorna Clark, Lions Godfrey and Maxine Medhurst) 
- Sooke Transition House Society 
- Rev. Al Tysick (Sooke resident, newly retired from The Victoria Dandelion Society after 35 years) 
- Sooke School District #62 - Healthy Schools, Healthy People program (Cindy Andrew) 
- Mayor Maja Tait (founding co-chair of the Sooke Homelessness Coalition with Melanie Cunningham) 
- District of Sooke (CAO Norm McInnis, Bylaw Officers Medea Mills and Scott Cullum, Communications Coordinator Christina Moog) 
- Sooke RCMP (Staff Sgt. Brett Sinden) 
- Vancouver Island Regional Library Sooke (Manager Peter McGuire and staff) 

Other Related Organizations & Resources
- BC Toward the Heart harm reduction program 
​- Backpack Project  
- Doctors of the World Mobile Health Clinic 

Media Coverage 2018/2021 
- "Homeless In Sooke for Safety" - CBC (March 20, 2018) 
- "Sooke Delivers on Helping the Homeless" - News Mirror (Jul. 13, 2020) 
- "Sooke Mayor Pleads for Help with Homeless" - Times Colonist (Oct. 8, 2020) 
- "Affordable Housing Projects Planned for Sooke Badly Needed" - Times Colonist (Feb. 17, 2021) 
- "Sooke Homelessness Report Highlights Lack of Services" - News Mirror (March 11, 2021) 
- "How A Sooke Family Fell Through the Cracks into Homelessness" - Capital Daily (June 15, 2021)
​- "Sooke Receives Over $400k to Improve Homelessness Services" - Victoria Buzz (Aug. 23, 2021) 


Sooke Homelessness Coalition 
The Sooke Homelessness Coalition (SHC) is a junior but still empowered partner in a collaborative (rather than hierarchical) relationship with the Greater Victoria Coalition to End Homelessness. The latter is also the mothership for coalitions in Sidney and on Salt Spring Island, both of which have and are developing their own localized strategic plans. 

Established in 2018 at Mayor Tait's initiation, regular stakeholder meetings were coordinated by the Sooke Shelter Society and  SRCHN's Christine Bossi. The SHC is now meeting six times a year via Zoom. It's co-chaired by the Sooke Shelter Society (Melanie Cunningham) and the District of Sooke (originally Mayor Tait and, since the spring, yours truly). The coalition brings together the SSS, SRCHN, the T'Sou-ke First Nation (represented by Cllr. Rose Dumont), service agencies, BC Housing, provincial government ministries, Island Health, District of Sooke bylaw officers, Sooke RCMP and much-appreciated others. 

The SHC's goal is to gather "local housing, health and social service providers, businesses, people with lived or living experiences of homelessness, and concerned citizens" in a collaborative mission "to develop and drive solutions to end homelessness." 

Developing a Sooke Strategic Plan 
Tomorrow's session at the Baptist Church is the first day of a two-parter continuing on Nov. 20. The Greater Victoria Coalition's inspirational Executive Director (and East Sooke resident) Kelly Roth will facilitate both sessions, and she'll be joined by her colleague Janine Theobald for the second gathering. Both women have been integral over the last six months in planning the sessions. They're past masters at this kind of collaborative work, and yet they have (in their friendly, non-hierarchal, awesomely inclusive way) allowed the Sooke team leeway to design the process. 

The day will begin tomorrow with a blessing by T'Sou-ke elder Shirley Alphonse and will include brief opening words from T'Sou-ke Cllr. Dumont, Deputy Mayor Beddows (standing in for Mayor Tait, who will join us on Nov. 20), consultant Gemma Martin, the SMBI's Mark Ziegler (architect of the Sooke Compassionate Action Plan) and the Sooke Shelter Society's Carla Simicich.

Carla is manager of the Hope Centre, and she'll be sharing lived-experience insights and stories from shelter residents. Her contributions will trigger a group discussion about how what we've heard challenges, confirms or rewrites our own ideas about living rough and/or in a shelter environment. (From the perspective of my life-long privilege, and likely much as you would, I imagine the worst: desperate, cold, wet, hungry, lonely ~ sheer hell and despair alleviated to a temporary degree as I connect and reconnect with support services.) 

Those attending (masked and with vaccine passports duly checked at the door) will then form break-out groups at five tables based on the Greater Victoria Coalition's "Five Key Community-Based Outcomes" that emerged from its own Community Planning Day two years ago. 

i) Support Services 
ii) Housing
iii) Advocacy and Awareness
iv) Prevention Support 
v) Collaboration and Leadership 

We'll all rotate from one table to the next, conversing and capturing light-bulb thoughts on the fly. By day's end, we'll all have had a chance to share our best, birthed-in-Sooke ideas about how we can address each of these areas.

The job on Nov. 20 will be to identify working groups that can realistically tackle a limited set of primary objectives -- all in service to aiding and abetting as best we can the solid, essential work of the Sooke Shelter Society and its allies.  


Inspiration from Sooke's Beyond the Paradise 
The seven recommendations beginning on pg. 66 of Gemma Martin's Beyond the Paradise: Homelessness in the Sooke Region all resonate with the GVCEH's community-based outcomes.  

1. Housing First With Wrap-Around Support - roof over head for the chronically homeless + on-site mental health and addiction services as championed elsewhere, including the City of Victoria's Breaking The Cycle of Mental Illness, Addictions and Homelessness report, related housing-first case studies in the region and the Medicine Hat, Alta. Plan to End Homelessness. 

2. Transitional Housing - now available locally following many years of lobbying with BC Housing's purchase of the Hope Centre this February with its 33 shelter-rate rental rooms and community kitchen. This followed a surge in attention to and care for the homeless during COVID (i.e., the temporary shelters at SEAPARC, Ed Mcgregor Park and the former - now truly so after this week's fire - Mulligans/Speed Source building at the edge of John Phillips Memorial Park.) 

3. Hub Service Model - One-stop access for vulnerable populations to case workers, support services and information about available services,  including healthcare, housing support, washing facilities, food, employment, training opportunities. The ground floor of the Hope Centre (former St. Vincent de Paul store) is slated to become this hub with full-time staff, six shelter beds for temporary visitors, programming space and a commercial kitchen/dining space where upstairs residents will have communal meals. 

4. Meaningful Alliances with First Nations in the Sooke Region

5. Education & Communication - Outreach to the community to explain the problem and how its being addressed, "using in part the voices of people with lived experience." (Misunderstanding abounds, of course. A Winnipeg Free Press article, for instance, quotes Carolann Barr, executive director at Toronto-based non-profit Raising the Roof, as saying that "people who are homeless are more often victims than criminals. The general public might think that people who face homelessness are actually perpetrators of crime, but most research and most statistics available indicate that people who are homeless are at greater risk of violence and attack, obviously because they don’t have a safe place to go home to.'") 

6. Access to Affordable Housing - Martin quotes one of her lived-experience survey subjects as saying "it's getting to the point (in Sooke) that it's feeling like a lottery to get a viewing even at an apartment, let alone being selected."  Rent Smart service ... BC Non-Profit Housing Association

7. Investment in Localized Specialized Services  


Identifying Ongoing Needs
- A positive of a sort for Sooke is that our homeless population (and our capacity to manage it) is relatively limited and therefore manageable.  There will be 33 rooms at the Hope Centre, and a near matching number of shelter-rate units at the two incoming BC Housing projects on the east side of the Town Centre. (Victoria Cllr. Andrew recently offered gritty insights into the much-larger scale of the issue in our urban neighbour.) 

- A necessarily downsized Sooke version of the Greater Victoria Street Survival Guide, now being developed by the Sooke Shelter Society.  We lack many of the services and amenities available in the core communities, but a Sooke pocket guide could feature key emergency contacts along with info on the Sooke Food Bank, the SFRS Thrift Store, meal services like the Anglican Church's Vital Vittles Friday lunch program and the Baptist Church's Big House Breakfasts on Monday and Wednesday mornings. 

-  The Sooke Multi-Belief Initiative's Compassionate Action Plan, developed in 2018/19 by some 50 individuals affiliated with a dozen local organizations, is also a significant puzzle piece. One of its five priorities is homelessness.  [From the report: "Estimates of the number of homeless people in Sooke range from about 35 to more than 100. They are a nearly invisible part of our community. They spend much of each day trying to satisfy basic needs for food, safe shelter and hygiene. Social contact with the larger community is often avoided by these individuals, just as more fortunate residents tend to avoid contact with them. Many homeless people contend with mental illnesses aggravated by addictions to alcohol and street drugs. These challenges become more difficult during our winter months, especially during periods of extreme weather. Some working poor are also homeless due to the lack of affordable housing in Sooke. They may inhabit vehicles and moored boats."]  Its top recommendations (safe areas for the homeless, a full-time shelter) are now addressed to a significant degree at the Hope Centre. 

- Continued support from the District of Sooke in the following ways ...  

i) Sooke's draft OCP reaffirms the District's commitment to "partner with non-profit agencies to enhance the support services for the homeless population." (Action #79, 4.9.1.3) This partnership has ramped up considerably since Mayor Tait convened a stakeholders meeting in early 2018 and passed the reigns to the Sooke Region Communities Health Network (via its DOS service agreement) to work on the issue. (Enter in earnest the Sooke Shelter Society, founded just a year earlier, and then, in 2020, the SHC.)

ii) Limited, as-needed assistance from DOS Communications, i.e. as when the District coordinated messaging about the 2020/21 temporary shelters. <clip from July, 2020> "It’s unfortunate that some choose to draw a direct link between homelessness and lawlessness. The District, along with its partners, will manage any, and all, situations at the new (Mulligans) shelter in the same way it did at SEAPARC and Ed Macgregor Park. Both situations served the basic needs of our homeless population without major incident. The District sees the provision of the basic necessities of life as a hallmark of a compassionate community and we are happy to do our part. Housing our community’s most vulnerable will benefit everyone in our community. This is an interim and temporary fix to the problem of homelessness in Sooke that existed long before the pandemic. And it’s why Sooke has been working closely with BC Housing and the Province to build affordable housing including shelter rate accommodation." 

iii) Grant hosting: Earlier this year, the District applied for and secured $413k in UBCM Strengthening Communities funding on behalf of the Sooke Shelter Society that will operationalize its activities this year and next.  (Long-term, stable, permanent funding from other orders of government will be the most prominent and necessary of the Strat Plan objectives, I'm sure.) 

iv) Advocate, advocate, advocate!! with the province for more support services in Sooke. The Mayor and I did exactly that in a telephone meeting with Minister of Mental Health Sheila Malcolmson  prior to the UBCM conference in September. After expressing sincere gratitude for BC Housing's purchase of the Hope Centre, we cited the need for further support from agencies beyond the caring presence of AVI case workers in Sooke, i.e. via Island Health's Managed Alcohol Program (currently not budgeted to provide service in Sooke despite the demonstrated need); HOPS (Housing Overdose Prevention Site) with its peer-to-peer consulting; and SOLID Harm Reduction (which provides Victoria-only at the moment health education and support services to reduce impacts of drug use). 

The Minister acknowledged the huge and accelerating scale of the problem, especially when the opioid crisis is factored in, but said that steady progress is being made on her mandate letter's direction to "invest more in community-based mental health and social services so there are more trained front-line workers to help people in crisis and to free up police to focus on more serious crimes." We must keep the respectful pressure on. 

v) Potential bylaw and policy revisions: "Van life," as profiled in Nomadland, is a new reality for growing numbers of low-income Canadians. Municipalities including Squamish, Nanaimo and the City of Vancouver may well be forced to rethink their bylaws and find solutions. Sooke, which has its seemingly small share of RV residents on private land, must watch and learn from trendsetting local governments. As for housing, the DOS must find ways to allow and actively encourage small and tiny home footprints within the District to ensure an attainable supply of owned and rental units.  

vi) On that latter note, It will be worthwhile to revisit the work of the District's Affordable Housing Committee (click to explore the wealth of related links that committee member Britt Santowski compiled for her Sooke PocketNews). It convened in 2017 with a mandate to update the District's 2007 Affordable and Social Housing Policy. One of its outcomes was the 2019 Housing Needs Report, which looked at four key areas:  "Limited availability of housing that is affordable to residents of the community; concerns related to housing adequacy, suitability and accessibility; limited supply of low-income housing in the community; and limited housing diversity across the housing continuum." Much good material to mine from committee minutes and reports in addition to the housing policies/actions in the new OCP. 

Closing Preliminary Thought  
All this said, I was raised middle class and have blessedly no experience with the lower rungs of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. But I am aware of the reasons we as a society need to be empathetic and proactive.  Compassion = Empathy In Action, definitely a Sooke trademark given the dedicated work of our non-profit organizations, churches, volunteers and the unofficial, in the moment, generosity typified by the caring folks on the Sooke Embrace Facebook page.

It's for good reason that, two years back, Sooke became the 103rd community worldwide to be officially recognized as a Compassionate City by Charter for Compassion International. Let's continue to up our game where it counts and keep it so.  

I sent the following email last week to some 75 contacts of mine + a range of BC post-secondary institutions with environmental studies/climate change programs.  I'll post it here in case you dear anonymous readers know of any suitable candidates. The application deadline is this coming Monday, and I understand  submissions are arriving through the e-door of DOS HR Director Constance MacDonald (who, of course, has posted it widely herself).

It's another encouraging (early and initial, to be clear) step forward in Sooke's multi-year commitment to addressing the declared climate emergency in association with other orders of government, non-profits and as many community partners (groups and individuals) as possible. 

"Hello all in the bcc line, 
 
Writing to let you know that the District of Sooke has secured funding for a nine-month Climate Action Coordinator Intern CUPE position.  Application deadline is Monday, Oct. 18, and the term runs from Nov. 8 to Aug. 5, 2022.  
 
If you are aware of anyone under the age of 30 who might be interested and would qualify, please forward to them … or to others in your circles who might know of someone. 
 
Click here for the job description 
(please note that the grant through the Career Launcher program's Clean Tech stream is now confirmed and the position is funded pending approval of the District's pick by the Career Launcher team)

Earlier this year Sooke hired its first Community Economic Development Officer with a strong mandate for climate action. We also adopted the Low Carbon Resilience co-benefits model developed by the Action on Climate Change Team at SFU for application in all decision-making. 
 
We are just now in the home stretch of our next Official Community Plan, which has a primary objective of a “green and Net Zero” Sooke by 2050. 
 
This new position is a significant one as we begin the multi-year process of implementing our Climate Action Committee’s “7% Solution” strategy (developed by data group lead Anna Russell; see pp. 23-64 of this July 19, 2021 agenda). It focuses on building emissions and transportation mode shift in pursuing a 50% cut by 2030 in Sooke's GPC Basic + emissions.  
 
The 7% strategy is to be paired with a citizen engagement campaign developed by a Climate Action Committee working group led by Beth Lange (see pp. 11-22) with direction from consultant Denise Withers.  
 
As the job description notes, the Climate Action Coordinator Intern will work alongside and be mentored by District staff — CAO Norm McInnis (a board director with the Local Government Management Association of BC) and Communicators Coordinator Christina Moog included. 
 
In other words, this is an exciting time at the District of Sooke. I’m sure the right candidate will find this an excellent foot-in-local-government-door opportunity as they help define and shape climate action initiatives in a still small (15k) but smart-growth evolving community. (A remarkably beautiful one on Canada's far west coast, of course, but I won't get into the sales pitch further.) 

Thanks for any help you can offer in finding the right her/him/they for this position.
 
sincerely, 
Jeff 

Jeff Bateman
Councillor, District of Sooke
Liaison to Climate Action Committee 
PICTURE SOOKE during the Official Community Plan review  
Visit my Facebook page and website 

Learn more about the District of Sooke at sooke.ca
I gratefully acknowledge that I live and work on the traditional shared territories of the T'Sou-ke and Scia'new First Nations 

Image: From the Career Launcher website. Prince William likely would have some thoughts about it. 

Council received the second draft of Sooke's next Official Community Plan last Monday night. We gratefully acknowledged the heavy lifting done to date by staff, consultants and the volunteer OCP Advisory Committee. And we approved it for a last round of public feedback knowing that it will continue to be refined, tweaked and expertly massaged prior to delivery of a final OCP late this year or early next.

​Read the draft in full here.  

The District's OCP website page has been updated with details on how you can provide constructive criticism over the next six weeks -- online, at community pop-ups, via written submission, and at two "broad public engagements," notably the Sept. 18 Celebrate Sooke gathering in John Phillips Memorial Park. As on so many other levels of COVID-era life, it's been tricky for all involved to develop an OCP without citizen facetime, so please take this rare opportunity to meet in still necessarily distanced person with OCP-AC members and representatives from the OCP staff/consultant team. 

The draft OCP aligns as it must with the CRD's Regional Growth Strategy. It's consistent in its streamlined way with two earlier Sooke OCPs and the various CRD area plans before them that prioritize managed, smart growth densification of the Town Centre and protection of rural areas. It also reflects substantial public input skillfully gathered during the pandemic.

At risk of dramatically oversimplifying a complex document, the OCP highlight reel focuses future residential and commercial growth in a tight-knit, walkable, waterfront-oriented town centre; accommodates in-fill in existing neighbourhoods; sets the stage for sewer expansion east to Kaltasin Rd. to service First Nation, school, residential and future employment (industrial) land; and provides tightened regulations and guidelines governing incoming development as we set the supremely challenging course for a Net Zero Sooke, province and planet by 2050.

Navigation Guide

* Purpose of this Plan - pg. 10 "At its heart, an OCP is about managing land use and physical growth of the community ... It provides guidance for council and staff, who consider and apply OCP directions and policies to a wide range of municipal decisions."  Rather than repeating the minutiae of existing District master plans and reports, the OCP ideally captures their chief recommendations and points to them for further reference/detail/action. 

* Net Zero & GHG Reduction Targets - pp. 22/23. Council asked on Monday night that the OCP adhere to the 50% drawdown by 2030 we approved in late April rather than the more sluggish provincial schedule (40%) cited in the draft and established long before record temperatures, heat domes and wildfires were facts of 2021 life. This is in keeping with the accelerated climate action recommended from many quarters, including the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its recent Code Red assessment as well as the BC Municipal Climate Leadership Council, led by Kamloops Mayor and former UBCM President Arjun Singh. Sooke is developing the 7% Solution strategy in a let's-give-it-our-best-shot effort to cut terrestrial GHG emissions (i.e., conventional measurements, not "hidden emissions" from agriculture, tourism, etc.) in half by 2030 by focusing on transportation and building heating/cooling, our two biggest local carbon sources. The province, meanwhile, will this fall release a "Roadmap to 2030" update to its CleanBC climate action plan -- an essential next step according to representatives from environmental NGOs and the CleanBC advisors at the Climate Solutions Council.  

* Regional Context Statement - pg. 26. A must for every CRD municipality as dictated by the Local Government Act. An updated version of Sooke's current statement will be included in the final document. 

* The Goals for Sooke - pg. 32 (screenshot below; divided into 15 sub-categories under the three themes of "Green and Net Zero," "Enjoyable and Distinct" and "Equitable and Respectful.") 

* Land Use, Map & General Land Use Policies - pg. 38-57 (featuring 11 revised land use designations covering all of the District. These will be the basis for next year's new Sooke Zoning Bylaw. Notably the Town Centre is split again into waterfront and north-of-Sooke-Road categories, and a new Town Centre Transitional Residential area runs east to the incoming BC Housing project on Drennan.) 

* Policies & Actions - pp. 59-131 (practical steps to achieve the goals - Transportation; Natural Environment; Parks & Trails; Green Building; Infrastructure; Agriculture & Food Systems; Community Economic Development; Arts and Culture; Housing; Recreation & Community Services; and Equitable Community)

* Development Permit Areas - pp. 137-201 (precise regulations and guidelines that developers must follow in securing permission to build in Sooke; includes energy & water conservation, GHG reduction + environmental protection policies for the Sooke foreshore, riparian areas, steep slopes, the Town Centre, waterfront, intensive residential, neighbourhood commercial and employment lands.)  

* Implementation Plan - pp. 203-219 (a compendium of the 109 recommended actions -- divided into ongoing, short, medium and long-term priorities and complete with a list of who's responsible for tackling them individually or in combination -- largely the District of Sooke, the CRD and the province, but also in case-specific situations the
T'Sou-ke, BC Transit, BC Hydro, the Chamber, the South Island Prosperity Project and local associations and non-profits.) 

Important to note again that the OCP is the umbrella document that brings into alignment all the other deeply detailed District plans and reports -- among them Transportation (2020), Parks & Trails (2020), Housing Needs (2019), Childcare Needs (2019) and Economic Analysis (2019). The draft calls immediately for a makeover of Sooke's 2013 Zoning Bylaw (legislatively required after any new OCP). And it seeks updates in the years ahead to the Town Centre Plan (2009; the OCP Advisory Committee cites this as an immediate priority), the Wildfire Protection Plan (2011), the Community Energy & Emissions Plan (2013; a top priority for those of us on the Climate Action Committee as we draft the framework for a Climate Action Plan), the Agricultural Plan (2012), the Emergency Response & Business Continuity Plan (2013), and the Sooke Region Cultural Plan (2011).  

At the Aug. 30 council meeting, DIALOG's lead consultant Jennifer Fix delivered a thorough overview of the journey to date, focusing extensively on the plan's 15 goals crafted so carefully from public feedback. She also itemized some of the policies and recommended actions that flow from these goals. Her talk begins at the meeting replay's 25-minute mark following opening comments by OCP Advisory Committee chair Helen Ritts (18:00) and the District's Director of Planning Matthew Pawlow. 

Last week's supplemental agenda includes excellent constructive criticism on the draft from the Advisory Committee, which has been meeting monthly for nearly a year now. The nine public appointees delivered substantial input on the first draft early this summer, and they've again come through on relatively short notice with a respectful critique and further suggested revisions.  

The planning team's response is published directly in the Aug. 30 supplemental agenda; dive into the District's info portal to see the committee's comments in full. They did a particularly good job, I think, in summing up key public concerns (see below for a screenshot from their six-page volley of well-written/reasoned feedback.)  They want the next iteration to better reflect in plain language these concerns and the various pathways the OCP proposes to address/resolve them. They'd also like the OCP to have more of a Sooke colour and flavour that celebrates where we've been and what's been achieved to date (an executive summary is the place to do this effectively; integrating more elements, graphics and maps from the Background Research Report would be helpful for casual readers.)  

Overall, as Mayor Tait and council said on Monday night in our various ways, BRAVO! and now back to Sooke at large -- citizens, public committees, community stakeholders and developers very much included -- to weigh in with further refinements as the schedule moves forward to delivery of a final OCP (at which point the clock is reset and immediately starts ticking towards the next one a decade hence.) 

Context Documents 
* 2010 Official Community Plan
* Proposal from DIALOG (part of the June 8, 2020 Special Council agenda) 
* OCP Advisory Committee Terms of Reference 

* District's April, 2020 OCP Request for Proposals
4.4.1 Objectives (pg. 10) 
The OCP represents the community’s vision for the future and provides a policy framework to guide growth and decision-making about the use and management of land in the District of Sooke. The following objectives will be achieved with this OCP Review:

1. Develop an OCP with a high degree of community input, balancing local and technical expertise, producing a document that is endorsed by the community.
2. Develop an OCP that provides clear and consistent guidance and direction for Council, staff and the development community.
3. Establish a user friendly OCP that is easily understood by the public, decision makers and staff.
4. Achieve an OCP that defines and enhances the unique character of Sooke.
5. Improve development guidelines to achieve a desirable form and character of future development in Sooke.
6. Provide a professional, aesthetically pleasing, and legislatively correct OCP.
7. Build organizational and community capacity to continuously improve and implement OCP goals.

Also from this blog: 
~ Masterplanning Sooke's Smart Growth (Dec. 2019) 
~ Team OCP (Aug. 2020) 

Random thoughts:
- The 2010 OCP "suggested" creation of an OCP Implementation and Monitoring Committee rather than leaving responsibility exclusively to staff and successive councils along with the committees they form. Lack of this consistent, big-picture oversight explains to a degree why only 18 of 140 action items in the current OCP were executed. (The more committees and task forces the better, I say again; staff time is required to support these groups, and given that it's tight at the moment, then the District needs to consider hiring another corporate services clerk.) 

- Updating stats: Population and dwelling numbers from the 2020 Census will be released on February 9, 2022. (My guesstimate: 15,500 approx. vs. the 2016 count of 13,001 residents) 

- Agreed with the OCP-AC comment that the climate section needs a rewrite/rethink; and very happy to read in staff feedback that "there are some ideas about emphasizing our high-level climate action/policy in the document" and that there is recognition that a "Climate Action Strategy" is underway.  In the revised policies and actions, I want to see items related to the 7% Solution (heat-pump incentive programs, for instance, not just the e-bike rebates now proposed). We also need rigorous and routine carbon accounting to track our progress. 
  
- Does Sooke wish to remain a "tertiary employment market consisting primarily of locally serving industries" (pg. 19)? Expansion of the sewer system to industrial/commercial lands would surely invite a more ambitious approach.
 
- No mentions that I can see of Sooke's potential as an Age-Friendly Community that wishes to continue attracting new retirees who will invest in the community and won't contribute to the weekday commute. 

- Much is covered under Development Permit Areas, but "Green Building" policies and actions lack the 2010 OCP recommendation for a user-friendly Sustainability/Green Energy Infrastructure development checklist 

- Replace"recommended" language in the policy sections with"required" as much as realistically possible. 

- Include infographics, an executive summary and Picture Sooke branding in the final OCP; add section that compares how this OCP echoes major recommendations of previous OCPs 

- Homework for self: 
i) Browse the 2010 OCP to see which of its suggested actions have and haven't made the cut this time around; 
ii) Revisit the Abbotsford ("Abbotsforward") OCP for an example of DIALOG's work at its award-winning best and to see if our own has ticked all the same boxes. 

Still more
Issue #1 for me and many is population growth and Sooke's carrying capacity given the seemingly already overwhelmed realities of Highway 14. The growth projections (pg. 18) follow the CRD predictions of annual 2.9% increases leading to 22k by 2040 and nearly 26k by 2050. Cue our worst quasi-gridlock nightmares and/or best-case free-flowing near bumper-to-bumper (tailgaters, please back off) traffic as we currently experience during rush hours.

Four lanes straight through to Langford is a $1 billion minimum proposition, states the Ministry of Transportation, and that's not in anyone's plans unless they envision rapid growth sprawling our way. (And I know some do despite all the #LetSookebeSooke feedback. Our best strategies in reducing the commuter tsunami: i) Local job creation; ii) Advocate with BC Transit for continued service improvements to encourage ridership; iii) Exploit the promising  telecommuting trend by creating dedicated teleworking office space in the town centre's mini-building boom that's on the horizon.)  

Wrote the consultants in their Aug. 12 report to the OCP-AC: "The OCP is agnostic to whether population growth should be seen as positive, negative or neutral; it neither creates population growth targets nor creates policies to explicitly encourage or prevent the population from expanding." Some 1200+ new housing units are legally on the books for development over the next decade or so. The OCP pinpoints the need for 1813 new homes by 2030 if we're to accommodate anticipated growth. And GHG-reduction realists understand that every new home boosts our carbon loads and and makes the 50% target an even longer shot than is already the case.

Oh, the quandaries and conundrums of these times! I may need to revisit Pema Chodron's When Things Fall Apart or Jon Kabbat-Zinn's Full Catastrophe Living to regain perspective ... or simply dive into this "best descent-into-madness books" list. (No, not a laughing matter; there's a reason the BC Ministry of Health has just launched its Wellbeing resource and support website.) 

Footnote
The inevitable gap between recommendations in municipal planning documents and subsequent action or lack thereof is addressed in this Policy Options article co-written by a former Ottawa councillor.  

<clip> "Acknowledging these five major causes of planning failure — influence, inertia, illiteracy, inconsistency and interference — is an essential step toward achieving sustainable growth and better planning outcomes." 

My own takeaway amongst others in this article is the following: "The public service adage 'Courageous advice, loyal implementation' applies well to how the planning function ought to interact with the political level. Political interference in planning recommendations can seriously compromise the quality and impartiality of professional advice being provided to council and the public. When it occurs, it becomes essential for senior management to protect the independence of staff, while elected officials need to respect the professional role of planners in word and deed." Message heard and understood. I think this kind of respect has been a consistent hallmark of the current council. That said, we do have our views and opinions just like you ... so please share them again in the weeks ahead. 

As with our car washes and Tim Hortons outlets, dog parks are another example that services and amenities demanded by certain segments of our population may take years to manifest but, when they do arrive, they tend to do so in pairs. 

A few weeks after we approved the Development Permit for the Wadams Farm subdivision that will include a small public dog park (see pg. 14) upon its completion in (guesstimate) 2024, council will tonight determine whether we're going ahead immediately with a staff recommendation for another fenced dog mecca -- this one double the size (90 x 25 sq. meters, which is approx. one-and-a-half hockey rinks long, one rink wide) in the Ponds Park corridor a short leash-tugging stroll west of Church Road (where a dozen angled parking spaces will be added). 

Talk of a fenced dog park or run locally dates back at least to the John Phillips Memorial Park study of 2006 (see pg. 7 to 23; the recommendation was for a meadow dog run on the slope leading to Wadams Way, which might conceivably remain possible even given the Sooke Lions Centre proposal.)

Since then, committees have called for formal public consultation, councils have discussed options and, in 2013, a dog-owner lobby group gathered 457 signatures in favour of a fenced area in Ponds Park or JPMP itself (the latter ruled out by council of the day because of seasonal groundwater problems well known to golfers and off-trail walkers). (Details on the back-story below.) 

The current council included item 2.3.5 in our 2018-2022 Strategic Plan ~ “Identify location(s) and establishment of dog park(s).”  The how, why and where of it was to be investigated in the larger context of the updated Parks & Trails Master Plan, adopted in October, 2020. (All its dog management references are neatly captured in this press release.) 

Parks Master Plan action item 6.19 (pg. 55) states: "Establish dog off-leash areas within a 15-minute walk of all residents: i) Establish two larger dog off-leash areas, one north of the highway and one south, eg. in the Ponds Park corridor and at a future beach access; ii) incorporate smaller dog off-leash areas within existing and proposed community and neighbourhood parks per the spacing above; and iii) Designate trails where dogs are allowed off-leash." 

Previous discussions had always recommended further public consultation. With our long-awaited Communications Coordinator in place, it happened during a COVID year when in-person hearings were impossible.  The consultation was predicated on certain assumptions: Ponds Park had been identified as the best possible location for the north-of-Sooke-Road dog park; and alternate options in JPMP were challenging and costly due to drainage issues. We as a community were being asked to identify amenities (and recognize their pricetags) with the end goal of ensuring a best-possible experience for owners, their furry companions and the neighbouring community. 

Read the results yourself on the District's Let's Talk Sooke website, in particular this summary document presented at the July 19 Committee of the Whole. The 48 (of 100) survey respondents who took the time to write comments shared pro/con sentiments about the location:  "40% (19/48) express strong support for a fenced dog park at Pond’s Park Corridor; 15% (7/48) express opposition for a fenced dog park at Pond’s Park Corridor; 13% (6/48) ask for enforcement of hours of operation and dog behaviour."  

Not unexpectedly, opposition has come from many near neighbours (if by no means all; I chatted with two in-favour couples on Saturday who live within 100 meters) who fear the worst -- barking dogs, traffic issues in Acreman Place, negative impacts to home values and the loss of relative peace and quiet. (An early June petition netted 68 signatures against from 46 area households. One irony: the manufactured home park due south of Ponds Park does not allow dogs.  You'll find several letters against in tonight's council agenda -- pp. 205-207 -- as well as this recent Sooke PocketNews letter.)  

At last week's COW meeting, six of us voted in favour of "authorizing construction of a fenced dog park at 2276 Church Road." I voted against on the grounds that this kind of impactful, rather controversial decision would best be decided when council chambers are again fully open to the public -- likely starting with our meeting of Sept. 20.  I imagine one of those exciting (to me, at least) full-house occasions when the tides of passion run strong and everyone has the right and opportunity to bark as loudly as they like (2 minutes maximum) in favour or against.  E-feedback is fantastically useful, of course, but not everyone is wired for the 21st century and there is that truth about body language and vocal tone representing 85% of communication.

I'll likely say exactly this tonight and ask that we postpone the decision until we can invite the public back into chambers. It would give opponents the right to share their concerns in person. And it would allow proponents from elsewhere in Sooke to rally and express their support.  (One missing link in the discussion so far has been the widely recognized best-practice dog-park partnership of local governments with a community group-- a 'Friends of the Dog Park' pet-owning collective of some kind that would take its share of responsibility for managing, cleaning, operating and raising funds for future phased development of park amenities such as a separate fenced area for small dogs.)  

A pause (still my favourite word in a world that is spinning way too fast by my increasingly antiquated standards) would give us all time to further chew over this already mangled but clearly still flavourful bone. There are remarkably few fenced dog parks in the CRD, but how are other municipalities managing those they do operate? The City of Victoria's Paws In Parks program shows the way. As for the tricky business of siting future dog parks, we could learn from Saanich, which this summer is experimenting with "pop-up dog parks" in five locations to allow residents a chance to experience them in real time before any final decisions are made.

What do existing best-practice documents have to offer such as this one from the US Trust for Public Land or this guide to designing and managing dog parks via the National Recreation and Park Association?  Dog owners also have their share of reasons to enjoy and equally be wary of dog parks (as documented here and in this New York Times article shared by one of our recent thumbs-down correspondents.) 

Personally speaking, we Batemans are cat people and have not been around dogs regularly since our childhoods (long-haired dachshunds Rufus, Remus & Nicki + a Yorkshire terrier named Kimbo for me; shelties Raider and Dawn for Carolyn). But we appreciate them as wonderful sentient beings and engage in as much interspecies communication on the Spit and elsewhere as their owners allow.

We also embarked on a delightful visit two weekends ago to the Vic West Dog Park. We lingered at the edge of this small, gravel-based park and watched the romparound antics by the assembled pack -- perhaps a dozen dogs of all sizes, including a Burmese mountain dog and her puppy, several lean hounds at full sprint (running in looped circles around and across a big exposed rock) and one nervous but game rescue dog who'd been relocated from a Texas kill shelter and become the beloved companion of a man living in nearby Dockside Green. When dogs pooped, watchful and responsible owners promptly scooped. Apart from a couple of yelps and a few barks of hello, it was an idyllic and happy scene -- dogs and owners alike enjoying the socialization time.

Whatever unfolds, here's the no-matter-what guarantee: Every dog will have its day. 

Bonus extras ... 

i) Except from the Wadams Farm development permit 
"Public Dog Park: A 1086 m2 public park is proposed at the corner of Wadams Way and Church Road. As detailed in sections L1.05, L3.05 and L5.01 on the landscape plans, the features of the dog park include salvaged cedar or rot-resistant logs for dog play and slope retention, center located concrete stairs with center located handrails to facilitate access to sloped areas and enable pet clean-up, pedestrian bollard solar lighting along the public pathway , bicycle racks, one standard parking space designated for park maintenance vehicle with signage, park signage and "petiquette" signs, water service with water fountain (dog/human/bottle filler), two benches along the public pathway and three benches within the dog park, bear-resistant waste bins and dog bag dispensers. A black chain link fence will surround the dog park with a double gate for dog park safety and a second access gate is provided for service maintenance. Cedar split rail fencing will surround all rain garden areas and wetland habitat." 

ii) View Pointe Estates
A tiny chunk of land (2,100 sq. feet) for a suggested dog park was donated to the District by View Pointe Estates in 2017. It is a miniscule portion (perhaps better suited as a viewpoint) of the 32% of this sprawling 137-home development dedicated for parkland, a trail system and easy legal access for us all to the gob-smackingly spectacular panoramas. 

iii) Excerpt from Guidelines for Successful Off-Leash Dog Areas by the University of California's Centre for Animals In Society

"If asked about the three things that influence how well an off-leash dog park works, one could answer maintenance, maintenance, and maintenance. This is a factor that proved to significantly correlate with ranking of park success, regardless of park size or whether dog-exclusive or multiple-use. The bottom line is that before establishing on an off-leash park, the community must plan ahead and commit resources for maintenance. The monetary costs and time for maintenance should be budgeted and taken into consideration prior to approval of the park. The factors that are part of maintenance include, but are not limited to, are: frequency of emptying refuse cans; re-supplying disposable plastic pick up bags; replacing or fixing broken, bent, or weathered signs displaying rules; filling holes dug by dogs; irrigation and maintenance of vegetation and turf; repairing fencing. Maintenance also includes cleaning restrooms and other park user amenities, such as benches. One perspective is that, as in reducing the occurrence of graffiti in urban areas by promptly removing graffiti, promptly removing fecal droppings encourages people to follow the rules about cleanliness.  The following are our recommendations:

1. Plan and budget for appropriate maintenance and a cleaning schedule, which includes adequate sanitation procedures, filling of holes that are dug by dogs, proper maintenance of the substrate, and proper maintenance of fencing and amenities.

2. It is suggested that an active dog park club help advise the municipality as to the needed resources to maintain the park, and to help monitor their condition. However, do not rely on the club to handle the required maintenance. 

iv)  My Facebook post from July 12, 2020
"Sharing this amusing Portlandia sketch while preparing for tomorrow night’s latest in a nearly 15-year series of discussions of an off-leash dog park in John Phillips Memorial Park.

I’ve done a little homework: In Sept. 2012, the District’s Land Use and Environment Committee of the day recommended a public consultation take place for a JPMP dog park (as originally identified in the park’s 2006 masterplan). The committee also noted its concerns about drainage issues on the old golf course and potential conflicts with other park users.

After It’s Over Rover’s Jacklyn Orza rounded up 457 signatures in favour of a dog park in early 2013, council asked staff to look at the feasibility of the nearby Ponds Park corridor. A basic fenced area along the corridor near Church (I believe) would have cost $14k; seemingly essential amenities like lighting, a water supply for thirsty dogs and benches for their owners added another $11k. For reasons I’m not clear about, this scheme died on the books.

In Oct., 2016, the then-extant Parks & Trails Advisory Committee recommended that council “develop a public consultation plan for an off-leash dog park.” At its meeting a month later, the committee heard from one speaker that JPMP and an area near Sunriver Nature Trail Park were the best candidates for a dog park or two. Another resident quoted in the minutes wanted to see a park in the heart of the town centre (mentioning the Horne/Goodmere Rd. area, and perhaps meaning the underutilized Lions Park on Murray Rd.).

Conflicting views were also expressed about Whiffin Spit, which to this day is designated dogs off-leash/under effective control. One speaker noted that off-leash here was essential given the lack of a dog park in town. Another conversely noted the Spit should be on-leash exclusively to curb conflicts with dog-shy walkers and to protect the eel grass habitat (aka migratory bird stopover refuges).

As in 2012, however, I don’t believe a public consultation plan was ever initiated.

Fast forward to 2019, and the new Council’s Strategic Plan included item 2.3.5 ~ “Identify location(s) and establishment of dog park(s).”

The draft 2020 Parks & Trails Masterplan released last month identified (pg. 52) that dogs are as increasingly popular with boomers and millennials in Sooke as they are across North America. The tail count in town now tops 2500 loyal, adorable, beloved canines of all shapes and sizes. Their needs for romp-around socialization opportunities in an enclosed space must sooner rather than later be addressed here as in so many other communities.

The PTMP states that Sooke requires the following:

1. “An on-leash bylaw to prevent dog issues throughout the District.”
2. “Designated dog off-leash areas.”
3. “Dog management is needed on Whiffin Spit in particular.”
4. “More bylaw control of dogs and consideration of dog
waste management within sold waste management planning.”
5. “Designated off-leash and on-leash trails.”

Now a group from the Sooke Community Association has approached the District with an offer to build and maintain a fenced dog park in JPMP. On the map in our agenda package, the proposed location appears to be due east of the duck pond where two trails converge. As I recall from winter rambles, this portion of the old golf course gets pretty swampy, so it may not be the best location.

As Mayor Milne was quoted as saying in 2013, the park needs to be fairly central and in a “high and dry location” – hence the preference for the Ponds Park corridor back then. The 2006 JPMP masterplan (created by a citizen's committee after the golf course covenant was controversially shredded and the land split into two while creating our town's beautiful central park and a still undeveloped parcel for housing) suggests a "meadow dog run" be located on the hillside leading up to Waddams Way.

Anyway, it’s good the issue has arisen again. As a preview, a gorgeous Newfoundlander named Eve, owned by a military family newly relocated to Sooke, romped over at the end of yoga in the park this morning and greeted us all one by one. Most of us were delighted by this sweet, gentle giant of a dog. One of our number might well have been wary due to possible past experience with less friendly dogs, however, and this theoretical person also has rights to the quiet, safe enjoyment of the park as much as the rest of us.

So it’s a complicated matter (what isn’t?), and I look forward to seeing how the council pack addresses it tomorrow night -- likely by agreeing to the staff recommendation that a public engagement plan and funding options be developed for further consideration." 

Pictured: My late mum and dad's beloved and final daschund, Tessa D'Iberville. 

Oct. 31 Update: The process continues as per Mayor Tait's October letter to the community, which includes this telling line: "At this time, no decision has been made on the future of John Phillips Memorial Park." (And yet I keep hearing, from a persistent few, that it's a done deal. Not so, and never has been. District staff have told us they'll report back early in 2022 on council's request for "lease details, the Development Permit process and options for further public engagement." In the case of the latter, this will likely result in recommendations for town halls and open houses  sessions where more information can be shared and everyone heard.) 

Council received the results of the Alternate Approval Process at its Sept. 20 meeting (see pp. 213-214). As of the deadline five days earlier, 1,026 response forms had been received, a slim 97 short of the necessary number to officially initiate a referendum. All of us on council recognized that this was a significant figure and that it reflects community concern.

Bona fide questions have been raised:  

* How, through the Development Permit process, will the park's environmental values to be protected on a site not far from Nott Brook Pond?
* How will the building meet requirements of our new OCP and embody Sooke's Net-Zero future? 
* Where precisely are the building and parking footprints? 
* Will the parking area be permeable or paved?
* Reaffirm and further clarify how the proposal will serve the community rather than being a "private clubhouse" as it has been false-flagged. (From the get-go, the Lions have stated the following: reception and convention space with 300-person capacity, commercial kitchen, offices, an outdoor stage and a concession stand + childcare facilities and emergency reception.)
* How does the proposal dovetail with the evolution of JPMP as a community park? 
* Relative importance of public acquisition of a dedicated park on Murray Road (aka Lions Park)? 
* Have alternative locations for the Lions Centre been exhausted? 

Here's the official distillation of council's discussion on Sept. 20 ... 

Minutes for the Regular Council Meeting of the District of Sooke - September 20, 2021

13.1. Alternate Approval Process Results - John Phillips Memorial Park (Councillor Beddows declared a conflict of interest as he is a member of the Sooke Lions Club and left the meeting at 9:03 p.m.)

The Mayor advised that this is not a District project. The District is the landholder and received a proposal from the Sooke Lions Club for the development. Staff followed the legislative requirements for the process and provided the required information. She advised there are historical plans for the enhancement of this community park, which were considered in this request.

The Director of Corporate Services provided an overview of the written staff report, outlining the Alternative Approval Process (APP), availability of electoral response forms, elector approval responses and provided options for consideration related to the next steps.

Council Discussion:

Council provided the direction and authority to conduct an assessment of the community's perspective through the APP.

• This amenity would increase park function greatly and be better utilized.
• John Phillips Memorial Park is an accessible location, through the active transportation trail network, and would offer a quality location for future events.
• Communication on this proposal went above the legislative requirements, adocument was prepared by staff, the content was curated for the website, and staff undertook many hours of face-to-face, email and phone conversations to provide information to those using the park.
• The reason for the lack of design drawings was due to the Sooke Lions not wanting to expend excess funds in advance of the community vote.

​​
2021-338
MOVED by Councillor Tony St-Pierre, seconded by Councillor Dana Lajeunesse: THAT this report pertaining to the Certification of Results regarding the Alternative Approval Process conducted to seek approval of the electors to lease a portion of John Phillips Memorial Park to the Sooke Lions be received for information.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY In Favour: Mayor Maja Tait, Councillor Jeff Bateman, Councillor Dana Lajeunesse and Councillor Tony St-Pierre. Absent: Councillor Al Beddows, Councillor Ebony Logins, and Councillor Megan McMath

2021-339
MOVED by Councillor Jeff Bateman, seconded by Councillor Tony St-Pierre: THAT Council direct staff to bring back a report containing the lease details, the Development Permit process and options for further engagement.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY In Favour: Mayor Maja Tait, Councillor Jeff Bateman, Councillor Dana Lajeunesse,and Councillor Tony St-Pierre. Absent: Councillor Al Beddows, Councillor Ebony Logins, and Councillor Megan McMath

And here's the full text of Mayor Tait's October commentary, which she read into the record at the Oct. 12 council meeting: 

"Specific to the Lions’ Club Proposal at John Phillips Memorial Park, Council has directed staff to bring back a report forward containing the lease details, the Development Permit process, and options for further engagement. 

I recognize there was confusion with the alternative approval process (AAP) and concerns about why this path was identified. The park has considerable history and has been the focus of several community conversations over the years. John Phillips Memorial Park has been identified as a community park with purposes that include 1) a destination park that serves residents and visitors, 2) forms the visual, physical and social focus of our community and 3) offers natural feature and/or built facilities.

The Lions’ proposal presented an option to advance community amenities for consideration. To determine viability of this option, the AAP took place.  With future development in the area including new housing and a significant transit corridor, while also being connected by safe bike and pedestrian access – this is an opportunity to action smart growth and ensure our community has universally accessible amenities to meet our growing needs. 

At this time, no decision has been made on the future of John Phillips Memorial Park." 


August 18 update: The Alternative Approval Process opened last week and ends on Sept. 15. Further information on the project from the District here and at an AAP explainer page that includes the elector response form you'll need to sign and submit if you're opposed. Should 1,122 others join you, then a referendum it shall be. 

If you have doubts about the democratic fairness of the AAP, formally known as a "counter petition" or the more attention-grabbing "negative vote," here's an editorial/rationale from the Cowichan Valley Citizen newspaper related to an AAP in its area held last year. <clip> "If we sent everything to referendum we’d have a completely unwieldy system of government where nothing ever got done ... Though imperfect, as any system is, it actually manages to be a decent middle ground between council making a decision and a full-scale referendum. It does allow the public to have a voice beyond the usual consultations, or sending in letters of protest. It can also be decent at gauging just how much opposition there may be in the community to a particular idea, though sometimes it can lead to a loud minority carrying the day." 

Interesting to see how this unfolds. Lots of support vs. rumblings against, especially in the wake of last week's Sooke News Mirror article, a letter this week and the promise of further pushback by well spoken somebody/somebodies who've labelled him/her/themselves "Sookeonfire Taxpayers." 

As noted below, Sooke last went to an AAP in spring 2020 when locking in our ability to borrow funds to pair with the $4.6 million federal/provincial grant we recently received to expand the wastewater treatment plant.  

While I don't speak for my council colleagues (and certainly not Cllr. Beddows, who as a Lion himself has always and ever recused himself from any in-camera or public council discussions on the matter), I think it's fair to say the six others of us opted for the AAP approach vs. referendum for these reasons:  i) The consensus public vision for JPMP since its acquisition by the District 15 years ago was that it evolve into a popular, well-utilized central park, not a sanctuary/refuge for the relative few (as per the conclusions of the JPMP Trust Committee and two Parks & Trails Master Plans); ii) The chosen site (once considered for the new library and covering approx. 10% of the total parkland) is nicely positioned in the rarely utilized meadow area, leaving its finest natural features untouched (i.e., the pond, the poplars, the northern hillside loop trail); iii) The Lions have developed a multi-faceted vision that will fill gaps and serve community needs -- including day care, an emergency reception centre and a concert stage, all within steps of the town centre. Plus it's a fluid, developing proposal, the Lions welcome community ideas and input, and (most importantly) they have the will, appetite and enthusiasm to make it happen.  

                                                  ********************************************************

​The Sooke Lions Club has stepped up boldly (as is its nature) with a plan for a multi-purpose community gathering place in the southwest corner of John Phillips Memorial Park. See pp. 179-188 of Monday night's council agenda for a map, a rationale statement by the applicant (both attached below), the business plan and the pair of options available to council and the District in securing elector approval for the required long-term lease of public land. 

The proposal -- labelled as a "Community Hall" on the map but known formally as the "Sooke Lions Centre" -- calls for a 21st Century companion and counterpart to our wonderfui 1937 heritage hall on Eustace. The business plan highlights parkside reception and convention space with 300-person capacity (suitable for meetings, weddings, family parties and public events) + commercial kitchen, offices, an outdoor stage and a concession stand. 

A much-needed daycare centre is part of the vision. Facilities would be available for multi-generational programming. And the two-storey building would double as a reception centre in the event of a large-scale emergency.  All within the five-to-ten minute walkability zone that our evolving Official Community Plan has identified as critical in unlocking the potential of a compact town centre in which the majority of our population resides. 

The tentative deal on the table would see the Lions sell its Murray Road pocket park behind Pizzability to the District at a fair-market price; the Lions would plough the proceeds back into the new build and the District will retain the Murray Road green space as P1-zoned (public recreation use) parkland.  They'd also secure the long-term lease of 1.9 acres of the park at the foot of the southwest slope leading up to Wadams Way. (Back in 2016, I believe the same approximate spot was mulled by council of the day as a site for the new Sooke library prior to their savvy decision to purchase Lot A.) 

Given that JPMP is owned by the District (i.e., all of us), the Community Charter requires that any sale or, in this case, lease of public park land receive "approval of the electors," to quote Monday's staff report. "There are two processes through which this can be achieved: Assent Voting and the Alternative Approval Process (AAP)."  

The first option would involve a referendum (likely to be held during the Oct. 2022 municipal election). The AAP, on the other hand, requires at least 10% of eligible Sooke voters (i.e., 1,123 precisely) to formally express their opposition and thus trigger a referendum with a 50% + 1 vote majority deciding the question. (AAPs are relatively commonplace in BC when councils determine that a subject isn't divisive enough to require a referendum; for mostly recent examples, see Nanaimo, Esquimalt, North Cedar, Courtenay, Pemberton, Port Alberni, the Peace River district, and our own Capital Regional District). 

Council will determine on Monday night whether to accept the staff recommendation that we proceed with the AAP process this year. [This council's one experience with an AAP was in the first quarter of 2020 re: Sewer Loan Authorization Bylaw No. 776 (pp. 153-159), which will allow the District to borrow up to $2.2 million to pay our share of a $6.8 million expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. The remainder would be covered by the federal/provincial Investing In Canada Infrastructure Program. There was no public opposition, and we now eagerly await word on a $4.6 million grant that would increase the plant's currently challenged capacity by 50%, thus accommodating incoming growth through at least 2040 -- population 22k by then, state the CRD projections -- and ensuring the environmental health of the harbour and basin.]

Variations on the Lions Centre idea have been percolating for more than a decade as the Sooke clubs sought a long-term lease on centrally located public land. Smack in the heart of our smart-growth town centre, the park is the wholly logical spot. JPMP has been envisioned as a well-utilized central park ever since the District acquired the eastern half of the old golf course in 2005 (following the controversial covenant-shred documented in the minutes from this 2004 public hearing; see pp. 5-10).  

​That civic-park vision was captured after full public input by the JPMP Trust Committee chaired by Neil Flynn. It delivered its findings in late 2006. (See pp. 7 to 23 of this agenda for the final report.)  And it's been reaffirmed in two successive Parks & Trails Masterplans, most recently the 2020 version where it's identified as a "community park" and defined as "a destination park that services residents and visitors; helps to form the visual, physical and social focus of the community; offers natural features and/or built facilities, cultural features and other opportunities; and supports diverse activities - picnics, special events, sports, play areas, recreation." (see pg. 26-44.) 

If successful, the Sooke Lions Centre proposal would substantially launch the JPMP committee's vision of a vibrant community green space -- specifically, to quote the 2006 report, an "active, well-used park" that "caters to the general public rather than individual or small-group ownerships," "provides a meeting place, a central gathering area, for family and neighbourhood groups, festivals, community markets, etc." and "serves a wide range of community needs, including those of seniors, families, youth, children and tourists."

All while maintaining the park's natural assets, especially the pond, the trails, grassy expanses and the shady places. No question that extra careful, environmentally sensitive development of the site will be required, as the Lions are fully aware.  

Over the last 15 years, loop walking trails have been embedded in the naturescape and it was determined that a Sooke bike park, as recommended in the report, would be (and is) a better fit next to Stan Jones Field at SEAPARC. Yet aside from a handful of summer events, JPMP has remained a serene green space populated by relatively small numbers of walkers, dog owners, fitness groups and Nott Pond's armada of ducks and red-winged blackbirds. 

Since 2019, however, aspects of the vision have picked up momentum along with so much else in our rapidly maturing town core. Washrooms, a water fountain and signage for the Stickleback Urban Trail have been added. The relocated Sooke Country Market has drawn great numbers on Saturday mornings this summer and last just south of the Municipal Hall.  A long-overdue public parking lot in the current site of the market was negotiated earlier this year as part of the deal the District struck with the developer of a pair of mixed-use commercial/residential rental buildings (see pp. 7-122) at the former Mulligans/Speed Source. And just last night the Sooke Program of the Arts Committee passed a motion (pp. 7-15) asking council to hire professionals to blueprint a design for festival and event infrastructure (an amphitheatre, for instance) in the park. 

Now enter this ambitious possibility, one with a far-bigger scope and community purpose than the traditional "Lions Dens" established as home bases by and for Lions Clubs world-wide. As the map shows, the area in question is a 1.9 acre slice at the edge of a scoop of private land (not actual parkland as so many of us assume) owned by Aragon Properties. (Aragon is the widely respected Kitsilano-based boutique developer of the now-approved Wadams Farm housing project and also owners of the property on the western half of the former golf course destined for the future Nott Brook development of 127 single-family homes.)

This private land (zoned R3 - Small Lot Residential) on the east side of Otter Point Rd. will ideally be part of the future roundabout that will access the Lions project while also servicing traffic flows from Wadams Way, Otter Point and a new stretch of Wadams linking up with Grant Road (possibly via another roundabout at Gatewood, a right-of-way that logically would be opened up for through traffic from Eustace.) 

Personally, I'm excited. LIke so many in Sooke, I respect and value the long-standing community contributions of the Lions, the Sooke Lionesses and the Sooke Harbourside Lions (as conveyed to me in person over the years by the  members I've befriended over coffee at the Stick -- Pat Forrest, John Patterson, Randy Welters and Maxine & Godfrey Medhurst -- as well as my former across-the-street neighbours, Jeanette & Larry Umbach.  The Lions Clubs International purpose and ethics shared by 1.4 million members  world-wide says it all. Like so many in Sooke, it's clear to me that these folks and their colleagues have Sooke's very best interests at heart and that this proposal smartly addresses local needs.)

Whether Sooke at large agrees or not is the next question. Some people will likely and understandably not be in favour of losing this portion of the park's lightly populated, peaceful character that has been the norm since the cries of fore from golfers were silenced. If we do indeed agree to okay the Alternative Approval Process, then opponents will need to organize and find support from those 1,122 others in Sooke needed to spark a referendum. (The required AAP forms are included in Monday's agenda linked at the outset above.) 

Disappointing to learn at last week's council meeting that BC Housing had recently (and apparently reluctantly given the quality of the proposal ) denied a funding request for 79 affordable seniors' rental units in the future Sooke Region Elder's Complex slated for the northeast corner of our town centre Lot A.

The long-sought dream of a purpose-built seniors/youth gathering place in Sooke (details below) remains very much alive, however, as word is patiently awaited on other grant applications -- notably a $2+ million Investing In Canada Infrastructure proposal that, if secured, would kickstart work on the ground-floor Sooke Seniors Drop-In Centre with its promise of multi-generational programming and the involvement of multiple agencies, including the Sooke Volunteer Centre. That decision from Ottawa is due in the fall. A successful bid would trigger other fundraising initiatives and would allow the centre to proceed with the housing component to follow in time. 

BC Housing recently told the Sooke Region Communities Health Network's Age-Friendly Committee team led by Mary Dunn, Rick Robinson, Carol Pinalski, Andrew Moore and Don Brown that they had produced a first-rate proposal in association with consultant Kaeley Wiseman, Victoria-based CitySpaces and the CRD's Capital Region Housing Corporation. 

Yet meeting affordable housing needs across BC requires geographically rationed, Solomon-like decisions that invariably can't please everyone. And when the chips landed last month, Sooke wasn't on the list for any of the 2400 new units to win funding in the second round of the province's Community Housing program. (The June 4 announcement cites 47 indigenous and non-indigenous projects across the province; Van Isle recipients are in Comox, Courtenay, Qualicum Beach, Port Alberni, Tofino and Duncan.) 

The third-round application window will likely open in 2023 for applications to the $1.9 billion, 10-year lifeline that developed from Premier Horgan's 2018 Homes For BC plan (which followed decades of inaction on the social-housing front from the provincial and federal governments).

And you can be sure SRCHN will get an updated but otherwise largely copy-and-pasted application in the door immediately. (Working group reps are meeting with BC Housing soon to learn how best to refine the pitch and improve the odds next time.) 

Along with the downbeat news, it's fair to assume BC Housing advised patience while noting that Sooke has received its share of public funding and favourable housing decisions in recent years: 

* Drennan and Sooke Road's 169 units of affordable housing due to open in fall 2023 (June 11, 2021 update here). Total project budget is $46m, with funds from Ottawa augmented by $10.2 million from BC Housing.  <clip> "A five-storey apartment building with a mix of studio, one-, two- and three-bedroom homes. The project will provide housing for indigenous peoples, people with low to moderate income, and people with disabilities."  (Full details, site plan and drawings in the Nov. 23, 2020 Council agenda, pp. 9-54). 

* Charters and Throup Rd's 75-unit, $21 million affordable rental complex expected to be ready for occupancy in fall 2022. BC Housing purchased the land, and the CRD's Regional Housing Trust is contributing $4.5 million of the bill. See Council agenda of Nov. 9, 2020, pp. 7-47).   

* BC Housing's $8.5 million purchase of the Hope Centre this last February for transitional housing to be operated by the Sooke Shelter Society.  An annual $820k in operating funds is also included. This atop a $1.5 million investment by the province last summer to carve eight new rental units from what was previously commercial space (my beloved quasi-second home, Sooke Yoga & Wellness included) on the building's second floor.  

* Funding for the 42-unit Knox Centre on Church Road. It opened in 2019 after nearly a decade of patient, strategic advocacy and hard work by the team led by Knox Presbyterian's former Reverend Gordon Kouwenberg. 

* Ongoing BC Housing operational funding support for the Diamond Jubilee Housing Society's apartment building next door to the Legion on Eustace.

For more about housing in Sooke, affordable and otherwise, take a depth dive into Sooke's 2019 Housing Needs Assessment. 

The 75-Year (and Counting) Drive for a Seniors' Centre in Sooke 

Looking back through this blog, I'm surprised to learn I'd not addressed the long-haul, wonderfully relentless (thanks to stalwarts led by Ms. Pinalski) campaign for a purpose-built senior centre in Sooke. Here's an updated timeline I first prepared when chairing the District's Northeast Quadrant Lot A Task Force in summer 2019 and which is based on Google research + details I found in some of the reports cited here: 

1945: Establishment of the Sooke Over '60s Club, percursor to Old Age Pensioners Branch #88 (which was responsible in part for setting up the Sooke Elderly Citizens Society, the Contact Community Assistance Society loan cupboard and Contact drivers service. 

1980s: Formation of the New Horizons Activity Society, which evolved into the Sooke Seniors Activity Society (SASS by name and nature).

2003: Sooke Senior Drop-In Centre established, first in the Community Hall, then at what was to become Chris Bryant's dental clinic on Sooke Road

August, 2008: Release of An Accessibility and Inclusiveness Study for the District of Sooke, prepared by the Social Planning and Research Council of BC (SPARC)

October, 2008: Sooke Economic Development Commission and Sooke Harbour Chamber of Commerce's An Age-Friendly Sooke: What Can We Do? summary of a day-long dialogue at the Community Hall involving 88 Sooke residents, business owners and service providers chaired by Councillor Rick Kasper.  
 
2010: Seniors' Drop-In Centre relocates to the Sooke Volunteer Firefighters Lounge at the Municipal Hall

March 21, 2013: Seniors' Drop-In Centre Society's Visioning for the Future report prepared by the Society's Pinalski, Gerry Quiring, Martin Quiring and David Bennett in association with Vicki Bennett, Susan Winter & Irene Healey and with support from Nicky Logins (Mayor’s Advisory Panel on Community Health & Social Initiatives) and Marlene Barry (Sooke Region Volunteer Centre). 
 
Fall, 2013: Seniors' Drop-In Centre relocates to downstairs at the Sooke Community Hall (2 days per week) 

September, 2014: SRCHN's Getting It Built: Community Centre Report (see pp. 78-11) helmed by Marlene Barry and Ebony Logins. 

November, 2014: Municipal plebiscite question: "Would you support the District of Sooke working with the community to develop multi-use community centre facilities?" YES responded 82.9 percent of a 41.5 percent voter turnout. (3072 votes in favour vs. 631 against) 

January 2015: Managing At Home: A Study of Sooke Seniors Planning to Remain At Home, prepared by SRCHN's Linda Nehra and Anna Moore in association with West Coast Medical Clinic's Dr. Ellen Anderson and Island Health's  Mary Dunn and Emma Isaac. (25% of the respondents noted that social isolation was a critical issue for them, triggering sadness and depression. A central social and activity gathering place was identified as one needed solution.) 

​Spring 2015: District of Sooke Age-Friendly Action Plan released by SRCHN's official Age-Friendly Committee and endorsed by council. (Powerpoint presentation to Council here). 

April 27, 2015: Council motion to create the Sooke Community Centre Advisory Committee chaired by Lee Boyko and featuring reps from the Sooke Community Association, Sooke Fall Fair, SRCHN, Sooke Rotary Club, SEAPARC and Transition Sooke (i.e., yours truly), Ten meetings over 18 months through October 2016.  

May 2016: Community Centre Advisory Committee recommendations presented at the May 16 Committee of the Whole meeting. The following reference the recently purchased "new lands" (aka Lot A) in the town centre ... 
 
~ Recommendation #7 (a) "That, along with supporting a new library, Council plan for multi-use community spaces for the residents of Sooke at the newly acquired Wadams Way location. Spaces may include insides areas for a variety of users and an outside 'community square' gathering space." 
 
~ Recommendation #7 (c) "That council direct staff to support Phase 2 of this committee Terms of References that would 'begin a preliminary concept design for use in developing a business case for the multi-use community centre." 
 
~ Recommendation #7 (d) "That council direct staff to explore the feasbility of mixed housing development in conjunction with the community centre use as a means to fund development of a centre; and that council direct District staff to engage with locally successful funded housing project leaders like M'akola Housing to see funding and project planning support." 

Nov. 27, 2017: Council delegation by Carol Pinalski representing coalition of Sooke Seniors Drop in Center, Age Friendly Committee and Sooke Region Communities Health Network. Seeking Approval in Principal for 4000 to 5000 sq. ft. activity centre on Lot A. 
 
January 15, 2018: Meeting Pinalski's request, Council began process to authorize the use of a portion of Lot A for a Senior's Drop in Centre, in principle (finalized on May 28). Council discussed (as per minutes): 

• A variety of mixed-use including housing on the upper floors and activity space on the bottom, is preferred for the proposed building. 
• There is no future commitment if funds are not raised, the District's support provides the opportunity to apply for grants with a potential locale for the facility. 
• There was a concern with authorizing facilities or buildings on the property with the absence of a concept plan. 
• Council requested a staff report containing an overall vision for Lot A, permitted uses, housing and development plan. 

May 18, 2018: Aging With Grace summit meeting at the Prestige 

July 23, 2018: Council passed Bylaw No. 717 ~  “The Senior/Youth Centre Reserve Fund will be credited with the 2017 closing balance of $202,578 from the Seniors/Youth Centre Reserve and any monies already approved for 2018 transfer into the Seniors/Youth Centre Reserve.” (i.e., $254k in total)

December 2018: Lot A Charrette at the Municipal Hall involving multiple Sooke stakeholder groups, several of us councillors included. Among the uses identified for the portion of the 5-acre property apart from the library: 

"* A home for uses either missing in Sooke or in need of a new home such as affordable seniors housing, senior/youth drop-in centre, health services, office and small retail among others.

* Landscaping and incorporation of existing mature trees and natural drainage channels

* Public plaza for gathering and market space; more permanent home for the Sooke Farmers Market

* How office, commercial, and public space would complement each other to aid current and future residents in Sooke." 


May 27, 2019: Final version of Lot A Charrette Concept Plan presented by Keycorp.  Endorsed by council unanimously with direction to staff to begin Lot A preparatory work: 

i) review Barlett Arborist Report and determine tree retention
ii) Riparian and biological assessment of property
iii) Civil engineer review of property
iv) Rainwater Management Plan for property 
v) Rezoning of site (Recommended: P2 on western half; CD Zone for eastern half) 
 
June 24, 2019: Creation of the Northeast Quadrant Lot A Task Force to explore options to develop this section of the property.  

Oct. 21, 2019: Committee of the Whole presentation of the business case proposals from the Lot A Task Force. (See minutes, pp. 3-5) 

September, 2020: Council approves Elder's Complex proposal. 

(Note: This entry is a work in progress) 

Today's Capital Daily feature about a Sooke couple in crisis is a reality check for those of us who rarely  think twice about the fact that our basic needs are routinely met (and far beyond in many of our fortunate cases.)

It's also a context setter for Thursday's working group meeting of the Sooke Homelessness Coalition (SHC), which is now collaborating with the Greater Victoria Coalition to End Homelessness in the development of a strategic plan to address Sooke region homelessness -- visible and especially invisible with the growing number of couch surfers and those camping of necessity in vehicles (i.e., hardcore "van life," the kind that is causing municipalities like Squamish and Vancouver to rethink their bylaws.)  The SHC's goal is to gather "local housing, health and social service providers, businesses, people with lived or living experiences of homelessness and concerned citizens" in a collaborative mission "to develop and drive solutions to end homelessness."

Given all her other responsibilities, Mayor Tait has stepped back from her founding role with the SHC and asked me to co-chair it alongside Sooke Shelter Society president Melanie Cunningham. Along with many others, I've attended a number of past meetings of it and the preliminary groups leading to its formation, including the Mayor's inaugural Homelessness Forum in early September, 2018 at which the Sooke Region Communities Health Network was asked to address this multi-faceted issue.

A few months earlier, the District's Affordable Housing Committee (click to explore the wealth of related links Britt Santowski compiled) had convened for the first time with a mandate to update the District's 2007 Affordable and Social Housing Policy. One of its outcomes was the 2019 Housing Needs Report, which looked at four key areas:  "Limited availability of housing that is affordable to residents of the community; concerns related to housing adequacy, suitability and accessibility; limited supply of low-income housing in the community; and limited housing diversity across the housing continuum." 

I'm also a co-founder of the Sooke Multi-Belief Initiative, a Transition Sooke working group that emerged from the Mayor's May, 2016 Sooke Health Summit.  Along with reps from a dozen local groups, I was among the 50 locals who brainstormed and developed ideas for the SMBI's Compassionate Action Plan. One of its five priorities is homelessness.  [From the report: "Estimates of the number of homeless people in Sooke range from about 35 to more than 100. They are a nearly invisible part of our community. They spend much of each day trying to satisfy basic needs for food, safe shelter and hygiene. Social contact with the larger community is often avoided by these individuals, just as more fortunate residents tend to avoid contact with them. Many homeless people contend with mental illnesses aggravated by addictions to alcohol and street drugs. These challenges become more difficult during our winter months, especially during periods of extreme weather. Some working poor are also homeless due to the lack of affordable housing in Sooke. They may inhabit vehicles and moored boats."]

All this said, I was raised middle class and have blessedly no experience with the lower rungs of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. But I am aware of the reasons we as a society need to be empathetic and proactive.  Compassion = Empathy In Action, definitely a Sooke trademark given the dedicated work of our non-profit organizations, churches, volunteers and the unofficial, in the moment, generosity typified by the caring folks on the Sooke Embrace Facebook page. In 2019, Sooke became the 103rd community worldwide to be officially recognized as a Compassionate City by Charter of Compassion International. 

The Sooke Homelessness Coalition's strength lies in the involvement of individuals and organizations who, unlike me, have direct frontline experience. They include Melanie and her Sooke Shelter Society colleague Sherry Thompson, Sooke Region Communities Health Network (SRCHN) director Mary Dunn, Hope Centre coordinator Carla Simich and the Greater Victoria Coalition's Kelly Roth and Janine Theobald.  Coalition meetings also typically include representatives from the District of Sooke, the T'Sou-ke Nation, the Sooke RCMP, BC Housing, Our Place Society, the BC Ministry of Social Services & Poverty Reduction, and AVI Harm Reduction Services. 

Plans are now underway for a community strategic planning sessions in the fall. A starting point are the recommendations beginning on pg. 66 of this spring's Beyond the Paradise: Homelessness in the Sooke Region report, a must-read prepared for SRCHN by Gemma Martin. All resonate with the "five key community-based outcome areas" in the Greater Victoria Homeless Coalition's Community Plan to End Homelessness in the Capital Region (2019). 

1. "Housing First With Wrap-Around Support" - roof over head for the chronically homeless + on-site mental health and addiction services as championed elsewhere, including the City of Victoria's Breaking The Cycle of Mental Illness, Addictions and Homelessness report, related housing-first case studies in the region and the Medicine Hat, Alta. Plan to End Homelessness (2009; year nine progress report here). 

2. Transitional Housing - now available locally following many years of lobbying with BC Housing's purchase of the Hope Centre this February with its 33 shelter-rate rental rooms and community kitchen. This followed a surge in attention to and care for the homeless during COVID (i.e., the temporary shelters at SEAPARC, Ed Mcgregor Park and the former Mulligans/Speed Source building at John Phillips Memorial Park.) 

3. Hub Service Model: One-stop access for vulnerable populations to information about available services,  including healthcare, housing support, washing facilities, food, employment, training opportunities. The ground floor of the Hope Centre (former St. Vincent de Paul store) is slated to become this hub with full-time staff, six shelter beds for temporary visitors, programming space and a commercial kitchen/dining space where upstairs residents will have communal meals. 

4. "Meaningful Alliances with First Nations in the Sooke Region" 

5. Education & Communication: Outreach to the community to explain the problem and how its being addressed, "using in part the voices of people with lived experience." (Misunderstanding abounds, of course. A Winnipeg Free Press article, for instance, quotes Carolann Barr, executive director at Toronto-based non-profit Raising the Roof, as saying that "people who are homeless are more often victims than criminals. The general public might think that people who face homelessness are actually perpetrators of crime, but most research and most statistics available indicate that people who are homeless are at greater risk of violence and attack, obviously because they don’t have a safe place to go home to.'") 

6. Access to Affordable Housing - Martin quotes one of her lived-experience survey subjects as saying "it's getting to the point (in Sooke) that it's feeling like a lottery to get a viewing even at an apartment, let alone being selected."  Rent Smart service ... BC Non-Profit Housing Association

7. "Investment in Localized Specialized Services" - 

The Hope Centre can position itself as transitional housing given the incoming BC Housing complexes slated for the east side of the town centre (Drennan/Sooke Rd. and Charters/Throup). Under the Building BC program, affordable housing projects offer a mix of options that address various low income thresholds. In Sooke's case, 244 units of affordable housing will be available — 194 units at near-market or affordable rental rates and 49 at the provincial shelter (aka income assistance) rate of $385 per month per person.

In recent years, the Greater Victoria Point In Time count has identified approximately 50 unhoused individuals in Sooke (while not capturing statistics on the tide of couch surfers.) 

Food Security & Poverty Reduction

Related is the final version of the Sooke Region Food Security Report, presented to council last night by its author, SRCHN's Christine Bossi, who worked in association with farmer and Otter Point food security expert Martin Bissig, a board member with Sooke Region Food CHI. 

The pair have documented the issue of food security and poverty reduction in considerable detail. Like Martin, they've identified the realities and gaps in an earnest but overwhelmed system that strives, increasingly so in recent years, as best it can to leave nobody behind.  

The report also documents the range of valiant non-profits doing such essential work locally. And, in its concluding pages, it revives, renews and advances substantial recommendations to guide compassionate community planning ~ namely the need for a Sooke Food Policy Council to spark action; and a local Food Hub with commercial kitchen where "independent entrepreneurs, agricultural, artisanal and others" can prepare all manner of locally sourced food for retail sale.

On these two points, there's already some promising developments: 

i) The District recently agreed to host a grant application that would fund a regional Food Policy Council under the auspices of the Capital Region Food and Agricultural Initiatives Roundtable.

ii) The BC Ministry of Agriculture is committed to creating food hubs across the province where producers can book commercial kitchens to prepare value-added delights and also learn about how to market and sell them profitably. Victoria, the Cowichan Valley, Port Alberni and Bowser south of Courtenay are already in service, and there's no question one belongs on the west shore, suggests Ms. Bossi. (It helps that she is also the chair of the Sooke Community Economic Development Committee, which is dedicated to aligning social, economic and environmental factors in the recommendations it brings to council. (We, too, will make our decisions by weighing the co-benefits identified by Simon Fraser University's ACT team and its Low Carbon Resilience framework.) 

A few not-so-fun facts from the report that capture the scale of the challenge:

* "Around 15% of the households in Sooke and the Sooke Region in general are of low-income, many of which consist of children and seniors. The necessary household income to manage with the cost of living in a BC community of a population under 30,000 is $42,408.00."

* "The lack of availability to food, including fresh produce, was not seen as an issue, but firstly the lack of disposable income and secondly transportation. Once the main bills were paid, of which housing was the main expense, food was the variable in a low-income household"

* "The groups who are most vulnerable to food insecurity are: female-headed single families, indigenous peoples, marginally housed and homeless, and new immigrants.

* "12.4 % of British Columbians were food insecure in 2018 (marginal 3.7%, moderate 5.5% and severe 3.2%)."

* "44% of Canadians say it would be difficult to meet their obligations if their pay was delayed by one week."

____________________________________________________________________________________

Footnotes:

* The federal government's Reaching Home: Canada's Homelessness Strategy provides the national perspective

* From the archive (and as an example of what public education about the issue can look like) ... Excerpts from a FAQ prepared by the District of Sooke in July 2020 to inform residents about local homelessness during COVID: 

Q: Where is this money coming from for this shelter? Is there a cost of this to the District of Sooke? When will we see a breakdown of the costs that will be incurred to ensure this is a responsible financial decision?

- BC Housing will assume all renovation and operations costs.
- The District’s role, through the EOC, was to find a suitable location. This has been done.

Q: How will you keep the surrounding neighbourhood and residents safe?

- As was the case at SEAPARC, and the camp at the park, the RCMP will be assisting with maintaining ongoing safety at the new temporary shelter and the surrounding community.

Q: Will the members of the community have a say in the operation of the shelter?

- The Sooke Region Communities Health Network will provide on-site operations. As well, multiple resource agencies - including the Sooke Shelter Society, AVI Health and Community Services, as well as Island Health will provide wrap-around services to residents.

- The RCMP is also a key member of the community that will be keeping residents at the shelter, as well as the surrounding community, safe.

- It is in everyone’s best interests to ensure Sooke remains a caring, inclusive and safe place to call home.

Q: What other services are you providing to the community to ensure our safety and that crime rates stay low?

- The District knows safety was maintained at both SEAPARC and Ed MacGregor Park and we fully expect the same will hold true at the new site. For more details, please reach out to the RCMP.

Q: If the shelter becomes a problem (I.e. an increased rate in crime, the community feels unsafe, or other negative consequences), what actions will the district take to ensure that the problems are handled efficiently and the occupants will be evicted and moved to a more suitable location?

- It’s unfortunate that some choose to draw a direct link between homelessness and lawlessness.

- The District, along with its partners, will manage any, and all, situations at the new shelter in the same way it did at SEAPARC and Ed MacGregor Park. Both situations served the basic needs of our homeless population without major incident.

- The District sees the provision of the basic necessities of life as a hallmark of a compassionate community and we are happy to do our part. Housing our community’s most vulnerable will benefit everyone in our community.

- This is an interim and temporary fix to the problem of homelessness in Sooke that existed long before the pandemic. And it’s why Sooke has been working closely with BC Housing and the Province to build affordable housing including shelter rate accommodation.

- A number of projects are on the go including development of two adjacent properties located at Drennan Street and Sooke Road as well as an additional property located at Charters . The projects offer stable (shelter rate) housing for those experiencing homelessness, and able to live independently. Some of the Charters housing units are expected to be ready in 2021.

Q: Does the district have a plan? Or is it something that the district will attempt to navigate as you go?

- The District does have a plan and sees this interim shelter as a bridge to our long-term homelessness and supportive housing efforts. For example, announced in December 2018, the District of Sooke and the CRD Board, in partnership with the BC government, recommended land acquisition and development of two adjacent properties located at Drennan Street and Sooke Road as well as an additional property located at Charters. The projects offer stable (shelter-rate housing for those experiencing homelessness, and able to live independently)."


​

If you're interested in a partial glimpse into the hearts and minds of Sooke youth these days, check out tonight's Committee of the Whole agenda. Beginning on page 5 is the Sooke Region Communities Health Network's 2020 Youth Program Feasibility and Sustainability Study.  It was conducted last fall via local youth focus groups + an online survey that reached 224 young people aged 10 to 18 + interviews with a range of Sooke youth service providers ~ SEAPARC, the Sooke Family Resource Society, the T'Sou-ke Nation Youth Centre, the Rotary Club of Sooke, Junior Youth Spiritual Empowerment Program, Westshore Centre for Learning and Training, the Sooke Transition House Society, Sooke School District #62, Journey Middle School and Edward Milne Community School included.

The report pairs well with the revealing statistics found in this 2019 infographic produced by Sooke School District's Healthy Schools, Healthy People program. 

The new study is intended to determine what youth services might be considered for the still entirely conditional, grant-dependent Elders' Complex/seniors rental co-housing combo planned for the newly rezoned northeast quadrant of our town centre Lot A. [This project has its roots, it need be repeated, in the long-term dream/drive of the Sooke Seniors Drop-In Centre Society to find a permanent home. SRCHN's 2014 Getting It Built report captured community needs and wishes. The objective was ratified in the 2014 plebiscite that found 3,072 Sooke voters favourably inclined (vs. 631 against) to the question: “Would you support the District of Sooke working with the community to develop multi-use community centre facilities?” The Sooke Community Centre Advisory Committee (2016/17) moved things along nicely, and a prime spot on public land next to the new library was formalized in the Lot A Report (2019).] 

In brief, as the Executive Summary in the new report states:

"● Youth and youth service providers are inspired by, and willing to engage with, youth programming in the new facility.
● Healthy, artistic, and entertaining youth programming is needed in Sooke.
● Youth have an abundance of ideas for creating an inclusive space, art, life skills, health, recreation, and intergenerational programming.
● Youth have an understanding of the barriers which would prevent youth from coming to a program and how to manage solutions.
● Youth Service Providers are interested in helping with staffing and organizational support.
● Youth Service Providers do not support a dedicated youth space.
● There is a need for more mental health services for youth in Sooke."

Statistics Canada reports in the 2016 census that there are 3,085 residents under the age of 19 in Sooke ~ 775 of them aged 10-14 and 760 aged 15-19.  Boys outnumber girls marginally (as is the case nationally and internationally for sound evolutionary reasons.)  

In a perfect world, a young, full-time "Youth Navigator" would be hired to work with his/her/their near-peers. That would include establishing the ideal hang-out space the surveyed teenagers desire: a comfortable, safe clubhouse which they've helped conceptualize and would have a significant hand in managing ... a space with free Wi-Fi, snacks, couches, board games, recreation, art supplies, movie nights, health/sexual/LGBTQ education, and workshops on cooking, coding, graphic design, car maintenance, and the basics of "adulting" ( i.e., job skills, finances, first aid). Also to include a surely beloved and pampered resident animal/therapy dog/pet or three. 

Yet this is a rather imperfect world, needless to say. The respondents' "most common answer, when asked about issues in Sooke, is that it is boring, or there is nothing to do." They report that "they feel disconnected and unrepresented." (I felt the same way eons ago as a teenager in fringe-suburban Ottawa, an hour's bus ride from downtown. I don't recall anyone asking my opinion and that's one huge change for the better between then and now.)

More worryingly, the service providers note the growing, only partially COVID-related tide of anxiety and isolation; that youth are not connecting with "heathy role model mentors"; and they lack help in accessing mental health and addictions support. "Suicide is not openly discussed as an issue."

Until funding does eventually one likely distant day become available for a dedicated youth navigator of the sort you'll find in larger communities, the encouraging news is that reps from the aforementioned service providers are prepared to volunteer their own necessarily limited time to work further with Sooke youth, including providing part-time staffing during youth hours and programming at the Elder's Complex.

Better still, there is keen interest in intergenerational mentoring that would find elders (or "olders"; see this The Atlantic article "What's The Best Term for Referring to Old People")  spending quality time one-on-one with young people, each side of the age divide gifting the other with their skills and wisdom in mutually beneficial, evolving relationships. Some of the focus group youth were already doing this pre-COVID at Ayre Manor, and they were energized by the experience -- hearing life stories, sharing their own and trading lessons on computer/cel phone skills and arts/crafts. (No prizes for guessing which demo taught what to who, says the relic who still struggles with text messaging.)  

SRCHN's Age-Friendly Committee, to which I'm council's appointee, is mandated to explore the needs of all generations in Sooke. It was founded in 2014 after Sooke attained Age-Friendly Community status with the Province, and follows up on local efforts that date at least back to the Sooke Over-60s Club formed just after WWII. 

At a recent meeting, SEAPARC recreation coordinator Megan McKeigan shared insights into the facility's own youth centre, which opened in 1994 and ran until approx. 2002. She attended it as a youth and, post-graduation, became its youth leader. It was open on a limited evening basis within SEAPARC itself before relocating to a portable. A $2 movie was screened regularly, and pool, foozball and air hockey tables were popular.  Friday nights would attract 20 youth on average, she said, about a third of the number that attended the skate in the rink. When the pool opened in the early 2000s, it became SEAPARC's biggest drawing card. The program was transitioned to a multi-purpose space that lacked fixtures and personality (or, as termed in the latest survey, "vibes," about which respondents are "obsessed -- lighting is (a) huge" issue to them.)  

I'm not a parent, so I've no first-hand knowledge of today's (or yesterday's) teens.  I have been involved with the EMCS Society since 2013, however, and have learned about the caring, inclusive, empowering nature of modern schools from board regulars like Principals Pat Swinburnson and Laura Fulton, the Society's Anne Bell and its former co-coordinator Ebony Logins, trustees Bob Phillips, Margot Swinburnson, Neil Poirier and Allison Watson, and various board members with direct educational experience. This, plus a "no kid left behind" policy in keeping the disadvantaged engaged and fed (via the "Munch Card" program, for instance, that provides free breakfasts and lunches in the cafe to the approx. 10% of students who leave home hungry). And the fact that every student is given every opportunity to identify and blaze their own academic paths forward.  

(I'm particularly taken with the BC Ministry of Education's Core Competencies K-12 curriculum that ensures children and youth acquire essential social, interpersonal, mental and communication skills. Staggering to think of how many hard lessons could have been avoided had this been available to my generation. Training in mindfulness, as is now increasingly practised in the school system, would have helped too.) 

All well and good for my own adult education, but the only clue I really have about being a teenager was that I qualified as such once upon a rather long time ago. This was an epoch when TV was the lone screen option and my collection of books and LPs were a prime pastime once I'd arrived home from tag football in the park and tennis matches with my pals. (All a secondary focus to homework, naturally -- i still see the kind but firm look in my late father's eyes as i rose from the dinner table each night and headed back to my cave, there to either rock out or crack the textbooks, a feat that could be managed simultaneously, I'd argue.) 

I will testify that navigating those years wasn't easy for me for a bunch of reasons. A drop-in community youth centre would have been welcome, I'm sure, if I'd found the courage to overcome my shyness and participate. There may have been one in downtown Ottawa, but certainly not in my end of Nepean. I'd have also appreciated a mentor outside my immediate family. Or, for that matter, a guidance councillor as savvy, connected and purposeful as those at EMCS. 

Anyway, I'll close, once again, with a whispered prayer to the grant god(esse)s at BC Housing and the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program. We'll hear the application results, I'm told, by summer for the housing component and later this year for the provincial/federal grant to partially fund the Elders' Complex. 

Related Links 
​
- Youth Centres Canada + list of 75+ Canadian youth centres with website links (some broken)   
​(Insta-analysis: SEAPARC, its bike skills park and the skate park fill many of the recreational and programming functions of other centres) 

​- EMCS Society Programs - Youth For Sooke website page + Facebook 

- The Youth Engagement Project: A Youth Perspective on Developing a Youth-Friendly Sooke (2013, file attached below) 

- Human Early Learning Partnership EDI Wave 7 Sooke School District #62 Report - "an overview of patterns and trends in early child development for Wave 7 (2016-2019) and explores change over time from Wave 2 (2004-2007)" + PDF

​- Sooke School District #62
- Edward Milne Community School
- Journey Middle School
- Sooke Elementary School
- John Muir Elementary School
- Ecole Poirier Elementary
​- Saseenos Elementary 

- SD #62: Strategic Plan: 2018-21 
- SD #62: Long-Range Facilities Plan (2018)
- SD #62: New Schools (current focus on Langford due to rapid population growth; within Sooke itself, the promised Sunriver Elementary is on the books for 2027 or hopefully earlier; seismic upgrades (or ideally a new build) are pending for Sooke Elementary, the oldest school in the province; and there are question marks over the future of Saseenos Elementary, home of the extremely popular Nature Kindergarden program, one of the first of its kind in Canada when introduced in 2012) 
 
 
- SD #62 Healthy Schools, Healthy People program + sample newsletter 
- SD #62 Mental Health resources 
- Sooke Schools International Students Program 

​- Safe Paths to Schools: Sooke Report (2016) 

- Sooke Soccer Youth Programs + other local sports leagues 

​- Sooke PocketNews Youth Archive 

- BC Ministry of Children and Family Services ~ Child and Family Services Offices for Sooke
​
~ Sooke Region Volunteer Centre Children & Youth website page 

- Sooke Families: A Site For Parents In Sooke by Parents in Sooke (not updated since 2013, but useful) 

​- University of Victoria Centre for Youth & Society's Community Resource Hub: Sooke page 

- EMCS Society 2015 Community Grant Application (see pp. 41 onwards; includes 2012/2013 Sooke Youth Council Annual Report, the 2013 Youth Friendly Business Project and the 2014 Sooke Youth Engagement Report)

- Sooke Youth Council Seeking Members (Sooke News Mirror, 2012) 

Age-Friendly Sooke & Elsewhere 
- District of Sooke Age-Friendly Action Plan (2015)
​- District of Sooke Community Health website page 
- Sooke Region Communities Health Network Strategic Plan, 2019-2022
- Sooke Community Health Care Services Planning Report (2018) 
- Open House Community Feedback + Poster boards  (June 16, 2018) 
- Sooke Community Health Summit 2016 Report  

- Managing At Home: A Study of Sooke Seniors Planning To Remain In Their Own Homes (2015) 
- Sooke Age-Friendly Dialogue Report (2008)
- Sooke: An Age-Friendly Community: What Can We Do? (Sooke EDC & Sooke Harbour Chamber of Commerce, 2008) 
​- An Accessibility & Inclusiveness Study For the District of Sooke (2008)  
- Sooke Region Community Health Report (2006) ​

- University of Victoria Institute on Aging and Lifelong Health
​- Province of BC: Age-Friendly Communities 
- BC Healthy Communities: Age-Friendly Capacity Building
- World Health Organization: Global Age-Friendly Cities - A Guide + Age-Friendly Cities Checklist 
​
Youth Engagement 
- UBCM Best Practices + Youth Engagement Toolkit Guide (2012) 
- FCM Municipal Youth Engagement Handbook
- UVic/Province of BC Toolkit 
- Ontario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental Heath - Youth Engagement 
- Pan-Canadian Joint Symposium for School Health - Youth Engagement Toolkit 
- 100 To Zero: Age-Friendly Planning (Plassurban, Victoria) 
- Maple Ridge Youth Development Wheel 
- BC Chamber of Commerce: A Focus On Youth Entrepreneurship (2020) 
- A Seat At The Table: A Review of Youth Engagement in Vancouver (McCreay Centre Society, 2009) ​
​- National League of Cities (US): Promoting Youth Participation 

​- Local Government Awareness Week (last half of May annually) 
- City of Calgary Mayor's Youth Council 
- City of Victoria Youth Council
- City of Duncan Junior Council + Terms of Reference + Article + sample minutes 
- Squamish Youth Strategy 

Miscellaneous
- Screen Time and Activity Among Canadian Youth (Stats Can, 2017) 
​- Exercise and Screen Time During the COVID-19 Pandemic (Stats Can, 2020) 
- Family Influence: The ParticipACTION Report Card For Children and Youth (2020) 
- Better With Age: The ParticipACTION Report Card for Adults (2019) 

- Canada's Youth Policy (2020) + Young Canadians resource page
- UN International Youth Day (annually on Aug. 12 since 2000) 
- UN Youth 2030: Youth Strategy 

- A Pathway To Hope: A Roadmap For Mental Health and Addictions Care (Province of BC) 
- Mental Health Commission of Canada: Mental Health Strategy for Youth (2016) 
- BC Children's Hospital Kelty Mental Health Centre: Youth and Young Adults 
​- CMHA BC: Youth Helping Youth (Peer Support)