Tuesday, March 11, 2008 - Minutes

Place:

Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall
6911 No. 3 Road

Present:

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie
Councillor Linda Barnes (except March 17, 18, and 19, 2008)
Councillor Cynthia Chen

Councillor Derek Dang
Councillor Evelina Halsey-Brandt
Councillor Sue Halsey-Brandt (except March 13, 17, 18, and 19, 2008)
Councillor Rob Howard
Councillor Bill McNulty
Councillor Harold Steves

Gail Johnson, Acting Corporate Officer

Call to Order:

Mayor Malcolm Brodie opened the proceedings at 7:00 p.m. on March 11, 2008.

1.

Garden City Lands – Agricultural Land Reserve Exclusion Application

Applicant’s Comments:

The General Manager, Planning & Development, Joe Erceg, accompanied by Senior Coordinator, Major Projects and Development Applications, Cecilia Achiam reviewed the subject report and advised that:

§        

the purpose of the Public Hearing was to hear the public’s view with regard to the proposal to seek exclusion of the properties known as the “Garden City Lands” (the Lands) from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR).  The final decision on whether the Lands would be removed from the ALR was the responsibility of the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC);

§        

the ALR exclusion request to the ALC, if approved, would be based on the  Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and the Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA), between the City of Richmond, the Musqueam Indian Band (Musqueam), and the Canada Lands Company (CLC); 

§        

the MOU and PSA are consistent with direction from the Treasury Board of Canada regarding the development of the Garden City Lands;

§        

the City of Richmond does not have legal entitlement to the Lands, however, under this agreement, the City could own up to 50%, but only if the Lands were removed from the ALR;

§        

Council has approved the following uses for the City’s portion of the Garden City Lands: (i) Community Wellness and Enabling Healthy Lifestyles, (ii) Urban Agriculture, and (iii) Showcasing Environmental Sustainability;

§        

Legal Counsel for the City believe that if the MOU was unsuccessful, the City faced a greater risk than if it were a success;

§        

the Treasury Board of Canada has indicated that the Garden City Lands would not automatically revert back to the Federal Government if the Agreement does not proceed; and

§        

a memo containing comments about the proposal from the Richmond Agricultural Advisory Committee, the Advisory Committee on the Environment, and the Richmond Economic Advisory Committee was circulated (in the Supplementary Correspondence Package).

Staff’s presentation was followed by Chief Ernie Campbell, Musqueam Indian Band, who provided history associated with Musqueam tradition, and territory, and spoke about the survival of the Musqueam’s rich history and culture.

The Chief also spoke about the benefits of negotiation rather than litigation, and expressed concern with the social and economic problems within the Musqueam community, including housing and land issues. He indicated that the success of the MOU would enhance the lives of the Musqueam  community, and urged cooperation and living together in harmony.  A copy of Chief Campbell’s submission forms part of these minutes and is attached as Schedule 1.

Larry Grant, a Musqueam Elder, spoke about the significance of the Garden City Lands to the Musqueam. He provided history associated with his ancestry, the treaty process, and First Nations land acquisition matters other than the Garden City Lands. Mr. Grant spoke about using and sharing territories, and working together. 

Jim Reynolds, General Counsel for the Musqueam Indian Band, spoke about the serious implications associated with the Garden City Lands and litigation, stating that the issue was not about land claim, but rather legal entitlement to the land.

Mr. Reynolds also advised that:

§        

if the agreement was successful, all parties involved in the MOU would abide by the City of Richmond’s land use control bylaws;

§        

CLC is the registered owner of the Lands and holds the Lands in trust for the Musqueam under fee simple. The present law does not provide for a First Nations Indian Band to be registered on legal title of land;

§        

if the conditions of the MOU and PSA were not met, ownership of the Lands would not revert back to the Federal Government;

§        

Richmond does not have any method of acquiring the Lands outside of the MOU and PSA process; and

§        

if the agreement was unsuccessful, and the Musqueam was successful in establishing Aboriginal title to the Lands, neither the Agricultural Land Commission, the Provincial Government, nor the City of Richmond would have jurisdiction over the Lands.

In answer to questions about the feasibility of the Musqueam selling the Garden City Lands directly to the City of Richmond, Chief Campbell advised that given the time and effort that has been put into negotiating the present agreement, the preferred course of action was to complete the agreement process. He also advised that the Musqueam community needed the ongoing financial benefits that development of the Lands would provide.

Representing the Canada Lands Company were Randy Fasan, Director of Urban Design, and Gordon McIver, Vice President. Mr. McIver emphasized the CLC’s role and commitment to sustainable development, and provided examples of several sustainable Canadian development projects overseen by the CLC. He also shared history related to the Garden City Lands, and the development of the MOU, the partnership between the CLC, Musqueam, and City of Richmond.

Mr. McIver made reference to the Treasury Board of Canada’s statement related to the absence of policy or provisions for the Lands to be reverted back to the Crown, and advised that the Crown would have a difficult time trying to re-claim the lands unless new federal programming requirements were disclosed.  A copy of Mr. McIver’s submission forms part of these minutes and is attached as Schedule 2.

Further information was provided by the CLC representatives as noted:

§        

selling the Garden City Lands was not under consideration by the CLC and the Musqueam;

§        

the Federal Government is the CLC’s shareholder, however the CLC is an arms-length corporate organization, which does not take direction from the government; and

§        

the CLC and the Musqueam were interested in pursuing the current “Block Application”, and other options had not been contemplated.

Dan Schroeter, President, Dan Schroeter Consulting Inc, and author of the Agricultural Assessment report related to the Lands, advised that his report focused on the following four major parts:

(i)

Assessment of Agricultural Capability – based on the known factors related to the soil.

(ii)

Agricultural Suitability – determined by six factors: (i) position of the lands; (ii) setting of the subject lands; (iii) access to/from the property; (iv) irrigation and drainage constraints; (v) present condition of the subject property; and (vi) unusual overlying tenure. 

(iii)

Food Security Considerations -  related to the possible losses due to the removal of this site from the ALR.

(iv)

Viability of Farming in Richmond – based on current and near-term economics.

Mr. Schroeter stated that in his opinion, no other site in Richmond is so unsuitable for agricultural capability as the Garden City Lands, other than for growing cranberries, blueberries, or vegetables.  Cables are buried in the ground and it was at one time used as a rifle range. He also provided a brief history associated with vegetable production in the region, noting that very little land is required to reach the region’s vegetable consumption needs and there is no shortage of cranberries and blueberries. He also spoke about the higher cost of farming in Richmond in comparison to its surrounding areas. A copy of Mr. Schroeter’s submission forms part of these minutes and is attached as Schedule 3.

Larry Sandrin, Bull, Housser and Tupper LLP, provided legal background information related to the Garden City Lands agreements. He indicated there is no certainty that any agreement can be reached if the MOU is not upheld.  All partners will be better served by having the MOU in place.  A copy of Mr. Sandrin’s submission forms part of these minutes, and is attached as Schedule 4.

Mr. Fasan, in closing the CLC’s presentation, indicated that the “Block Application” addressed Musqueam and Richmond community needs, and he urged members of Council to support the Agreement and send the application forward to the ALC.  A copy of Mr. Fasan’s submission forms part of these minutes and is attached as Schedule 5.

Phyllis Carlyle, General Manager, Law and Community Safety, accompanied by Keith Clarke, Lang Mitchener LLP, provided advice about the uncertainties related to the future of the Garden City Lands if Council decided not to proceed with the MOU. Ms. Carlyle spoke about potential litigation, and expressed her opinion that the current MOU was a good deal for the City, and given the time that had been invested, a better deal could not have been negotiated.

Mr. Clarke indicated that the current agreement provided a degree of certainty and control, and the proposed project provided an economic benefit.

In addition, Mr. Clarke advised that:   

§        

the outlook with regard to Aboriginal Title was completely unknown. To date, there were no precedents that could provide clarity;

§        

there were uncertainties related to jurisdiction over Aboriginal land holding interests, however it was certain that the City would have less jurisdiction without the agreement;

§        

it was not certain that the Musqueam would end up with any legal interest if the matter was to go to court, however the CLC has confirmed that the Musqueam maintain a 50% interest in the lands, which are currently being held in trust by the CLC;

§        

it was not clear if an opportunity as attractive as this would be presented to the City of Richmond again;

§        

if the agreement was successful, City zoning bylaws would prevail over the property; and

§        

Council should not base a major part of its decision on Aboriginal issues, rather,  the decision should be based on the best interests of the people of Richmond.

Written Submissions:

The Acting Corporate Officer provided a summary of correspondence received to date in connection with the Garden City Lands, which had been circulated to Council and form part of these minutes as Schedule 6.

It was noted that the most common reason cited by those in favour of the application was that the Garden City Lands were needed to accommodate future public amenities, green space, parkland, playing fields, urban agriculture, social housing and a new downtown community with mixed use residential development.

Those opposed to the application commented that the lands provided potential for food security which was more valuable than housing;  the city’s policies should complement sustainability not erode it; traffic and services were already under strain, more housing would add to this problem; and additional development would provide a negative impact on the lives of Richmond residents.

All correspondence had been circulated to members of Council and was available for viewing on the City’s website.

Submissions from the floor:

Wendy Holm-Piag, Bowen Island BC, Agrologist, expressed concern that the Garden City Lands Agricultural Assessment report does  not recognize the viability of urban agriculture as a commercial agricultural enterprise in an urban small setting.

Ms. Holm-Piag spoke about inexpensive farming methods used  in areas of the world that she believed were well ahead of Richmond in high quality food production for city residents. She also expressed her disagreement with information found in the Agricultural Assessment report that regarded cranberries, blueberries and vegetables as the most appropriate crops for the Lands. Ms. Holm-Piag justified the use of the Lands for urban agriculture and stated that Richmond should support the availability of fresh organic produce within the City.

Ian Lai, #11 – 3711 Robson Court, referenced his role in educating children about  the origin of food. Mr. Lai was accompanied by James Thompson Elementary School students, Brett Downing and Alex Kennedy. The students thanked those responsible for providing the Terra Nova School Yard Society Garden as an educational centre.  They shared the view that their peers, families and community should learn more about the vital concept of food security, and defined food security as a variety of safe,  healthy, and locally grown foods, available to everyone at reasonable prices.

The students also stated that they saw Richmond as a model for sustainable food and health, and expressed a desire to see more food security education in schools as part of the curriculum, school cafeterias serve fresh and local foods in order to promote healthy eating and provide health benefits, and City Parks become educational centres to promote healthy land use.

Keith Tsukishima, 1930 Eureka Ave, Port Coquitlam, Chair Richmond Economic Advisory Committee, spoke in favour of the application, expressing his belief that the City could not negotiate a better deal. He noted that the Richmond Economic Advisory Committee supported the exclusion of the Garden City Lands from the ALR.

Bob Laurie, 11060 Kingfisher Drive, spoke in favour of the proposal, believing the Lands should be used for extensive open space and public amenities; urban agriculture; community wellness; sustainability; and a Trade and Exhibition Center.  He also expressed support for the $10 million dollar endowment fund, which would be used exclusively for urban agriculture.

PH08/3-1

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be recessed, and be reconvened on Wednesday, March 12^th, 2008, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, at Richmond City Hall.

CARRIED

RECESSED – 11:00 p.m..