Meeting Summary
Peachland Council dealt with a relatively broad municipal agenda at this meeting, including adoption of amendments arising from the Official Community Plan review, changes related to small-scale multi-unit housing, 2027 permissive tax exemptions, development-approval grant funding, wildfire prevention, water planning and several issues raised during public question period.
Council adopted the OCP review amendments following discussion about future land-use policy in the Lower Princeton and Beach Avenue areas. Councillor Terry Ingram raised concerns about density, building height and mixed-use designations, while Councillor Keith Brophy questioned how future downtown planning policies could affect existing residential property owners. Staff clarified that the OCP itself is a policy document and does not change the existing zoning of those properties.
Council also advanced amendments concerning small-scale multi-unit housing. Staff indicated that a more comprehensive review could be undertaken as part of upcoming work supported by $200,000 in Local Government Development Approvals Program grant funding. Council nevertheless proceeded with first, second and third readings of the proposed subdivision and development servicing bylaw amendment.
A proposed $78,561 in municipal permissive tax exemptions for 2027 also received first, second and third readings. Staff estimated this represents approximately 0.92 percent of 2026 budgeted general municipal tax revenue, or about $24.44 per average residential property. Council questioned the exemption associated with Nature Trust of BC property on Drought Road, including what restrictions apply to the land.
Wildfire prevention and water security also emerged during the meeting. Council discussed wildfire mitigation ahead of meetings with provincial officials, while members of the public questioned Council about previous mitigation efforts and preparedness for another potentially difficult water year. Administration indicated that additional information concerning Peachland’s long-term water planning was expected at the September 8 Council meeting.
Public question period produced several exchanges concerning South Peachland development and road access, wildfire mitigation, water supply and District grant-writing activity. In more than one instance, Council or administration indicated that additional information would have to be researched and provided later.
Key Decisions
- Official Community Plan: Council adopted the amendments arising from the minor OCP review project.
- Small-scale multi-unit housing: Council gave first, second and third readings to Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 2395 Amendment Bylaw No. 2479.
- Signing authority: Council adopted the amendment to the District’s signing authority bylaw.
- 2027 permissive tax exemptions: Council gave first, second and third readings to Bylaw No. 2480. Staff estimated the municipal portion of the proposed exemptions at approximately $78,561.
- Development approvals funding: Council approved the 2026 budget amendment associated with the Local Government Development Approvals Program grant.
- Peachland Elementary recreation: Councillor Brophy gave notice of a motion directing staff to explore improvements to the Peachland Elementary playing field and possible after-hours community access to the school gymnasium. Because this was a notice of motion, Council did not decide the matter at this meeting.
- Provincial library funding: Council supported sending a letter to the Province concerning proposed changes to public-library funding and Peachland’s classification for funding purposes.
Meeting Transcript
Good afternoon everyone and welcome to the regular council meeting of Tuesday August 25th. It’s at 3 p. m.
Can I have confirmation of the agenda please? Councillor Colton, Councillor Ingram. All in favor? Not a post. Then the confirmation of the minutes of July 7th. Councillor Collins, Councillor Badi-Sadr.
All in favor? Not a post. We have no presentations or delegations today. And I go direct to council committee reports.
Anybody has a council committee report? One, one, one, twice. No. Councillor Ingram. Just to say that the Climate Action Task Force is going to be present at the fall fair of people have any questions about the climate action plan.
Thank you. Then we go to bylaws and first one is 6. 1 planning related bylaws 6. 1 minor official community plan, OCP review project that is for adoption, so request for decision.
Look at my Councillors. This is the fourth reading so anything to add? No, they have a mover. Oh, okay. Councillor Ingram.
Thank you. Just like to acknowledge that the amount of work that’s going on to get this official community plan update together and appreciate all the work and the clarifications, but wanted to point out that part of the process as well as the official things that were brought on by the provincial government bills enforcing us was concerns that I had brought up early in our term and brought up repeatedly about needing to make updates relative to the lower Princeton area for combination of height and density issues to make things be consistent as we had brought forward multiple RM4 rezonings all with different height and density restrictions and as well as concerns about the the beach avenue neighborhood being all mixed use and that This update was supposed to address all of those concerns. I Don’t think it’s addressed all of them. It certainly has made a start I’ve in conversations with our planner director of planning the lower Princeton the medium density res residential having been redefined Means that before anybody can have a new RM4 rezoning work has to be done to update that zoning and I Believe that that would also be an opportunity to make sure that if necessary some additional OCP amendments happened at that time So I think that one is also is taken care of the beach avenue redefining of where mixed use should be the There’s a little bit less mixed use than I thought we were going to have but it’s there’s some more medium density residential so again, I think hopefully when the RM4 Working gets done over this next year if necessary we may have to add an additional OCP amendment at that time as well I just wanted to make sure that it’s on the record.
Thank you Councilor Brophy Calling up on Council Ingram said about this up last meeting with respect to the downtown core where from I believe it’s first to third on page 62 They’re saying on Beach Avenue can first and third commercial uses are required on the ground floor an option above the first story The next line says on Beach Avenue in 36. It’s not required on the first story again We will have to go back to this again. What happens? There are a number of homes as we all know just north of the gas dose on third and on fourth that are 70 years old there will be people there selling them downsizing What this is doing is making sure that they can’t sell them and have them be bought by somebody who wants to put who wants to create a residential at home there That’s not fair to them and I don’t want to be late for it But I don’t like that and I will oppose that that’s not fair to these people who spent their life blood Getting a home and I think there’s a better way if we examine whether Municipalities and districts are doing to make this so it’s not so your source to people who just want to sell and have their home price Not sterilized by a policy we made Can you clarify which area talking about please sure the homes between the gas house on third and Fourth there’s about ten of them. They’re all about 70 years old their single family homes under this proposed policy the people there can’t sell them Unless the person buying the home agrees to have a commercial property on the ground floor So that really sterilized and you can you clarify that first please Thank you, Mr.
Mayor the official community plan land use designation doesn’t regulate land use It’s simply a policy document that would inform potential future rezoning. So I can confirm that Nothing in this OCP amendment would affect a person’s ability to to build or reconstruct under the existing zoning Can I ask follow-up then since Darren’s up there so an OCP becomes well in effect and that in turn generates bylaws and bylaws usually correspond to the OCP it will the bylaws restrict that then For 30 mr. Mayor If there were a future zoning amendment for example out of the downtown revitalization implementation strategy Strategy project there was one of the the big moves the next steps for implementation would be consideration for pre-zoning areas of downtown That that would be a separate process and one that would certainly come before council So there’d be opportunity for input as part of that process But at this stage with this official community plan review, there would be no impact It would be at that future stage where our zoning bylaw for downtown were being constructed. So Considered so back on I’m sure that my time comes this doesn’t apply to me by the way people always say well Prophy you live on beach blah blah blah.
We have a fairly new home here. We’ve got no intention to move This doesn’t affect us and in fact in terms of taxes because we look there for 10 years You can be zoned at anything you want 10 years for a grandfather. We paid residential I do have a community of interest though the people I represent who live down there who basically may and probably will want to Want to sell their home to downsides and I don’t want them sterilized. That’s it.
That’s all for me Thank you for bringing it up council both and I do agree with you So what I think our intent was always for the first tree blocks And then the people have their home there a little bit further if they want to sell it to someone else who wants to build a Resential on it or or us keep it residential. I don’t see any problems with that. So yeah Anybody else on the way in so um, do you have a mover? Councillor engram do you have a seconder? Councillor condon any more discussion Seeing none all in favor Not a post.
Thank you Item 6 1 2 small-scale motor unit housing next steps project phase 2 first second and third reading And I think that’s something that we as council brought forward correct to change and those changes are made Is there any comments on these? Because we as a we told them to to do this so i’m saying room I just had a couple of questions for our planner in that The the recommendation is there that it may be Better to do a more comprehensive review of drive driveway regulations as part of the The next stage of sma as well So i’m my question is is there any particular development that we’re aware of that is looking for this um advancement right now and would not be impacted by the uh the recommendation to not not Make a new bylaw now, but to make it be a Um part of the larger subdivision and development servicing bylaw Mr. Mayor there is um one development a subdivision that’s recently received final registration that has zoning that well All single family what formerly used to be single family zoning now all allows, uh doplex dwellings by virtue of the provincial legislation So with this subdivision and maybe one other that’s nearing subdivision Final subdivision registration They could be looking at building permits obtaining building permits within a more recent time frame that I mean could be dealt with through through variances um You want to one of the positions that or considerations that that staff have is that when council provided the direction It was early march and and staff were were at that time unaware of some of the opportunities that Would present themselves through the local government development approvals program. So you know spoiler alert We received $200,000 of grant funding from from that program to help advance some of the work to implement bill 44 So now we can expedite that process. So In the past when you know in early spring this year, we didn’t know when we get a chance to make these changes now that We’ve already started the project to make these changes There’s the alternate motion that’s been provided to give council an opportunity to let our our technical review like our engineering and operations team Be involved in the bylaw review process, which hasn’t happened today.
So that’s sort of why that alternate motion was was Included in the report the staff report. So is it still your feeling that it would be Better to do it as part of the larger process as opposed to adopting the motion today I I’ll always defer to a more comprehensive review because there’s that concern about you know You don’t know what you don’t know and I always want to Take a time some time to analyze things more deeply and consider with that said we have committed to you know, we have policy in place that supports prioritizing subdivision applications and trying to get new housing units on the market so I could go either way on this and um It’s a it’s a very tough one Yeah, I would but I would defer to the comprehensive review knowing that it has been next but I did with the grant funding So I guess that’s my indirect answer Councillor Gohne Thank you, mr. Mayor Given that there’s no pressing immediate need for this Change I would support the idea that we give our staff the opportunity to do a more comprehensive examination and bring us back so I would support option too Thank you, Councillor Gohne’s I think you’re overthinking this death and What we looked at was simply best practices from neighboring municipalities and bringing that here to peach land and It works and it makes sense. So You can opt to do it, but I think you’ve got enough work on your plate and to me this is it’s it’s it’s not that complicated Um, I think a lot more effort our arm for is warranted than then duplex driveways Which is a reflection of what the industry needs and wants and what everybody else is doing around us So I think it’s good to go myself Also a menu setter Thank you mr.
Mayor This is um happening elsewhere. It is something that’s the direction of foremost um Similar projects are going I’m I would be in favor of just Moving on with this. I think I agree with Councillor Collins. We’re all been thinking this.
Thank you. Thank you Seeing none, so I will read the original recommendation and I will see what happens and then we go on okay That council give first second and third readings to subdivision and development servicing bylaw number two three nine five Amendment bylaw number two four seven nine to have a mover Councillor coven second the council of benny setter all in favor A post council cannot a post So it’s passes Next thing six to one by all number two four seven five signing authority bylaw amendment bylaw for adoption That’s an easy one So I will read recommendation that council give first second and third reading to the 2027 permissive tax exemption No That council oh the other one. I’m on the wrong one.
Yeah, sorry Let’s also adopt signing authority by on number one seven seven four 2005 amendment bylaw number two four seven five two zero two six Do you have a mover with the recommendation? Councillor conan Councillor brophy any discussion Seeing none, I call the question all in favor None opposed. Thank you Now we move on to the 2027 permissive tax exemption bylaw And we have kd here with us today and she’s new. She’s our new deputy director of finance. Welcome And this your first time.
So you have the floor Good afternoon mr. mary council. I’m going to be presenting the 2027 permissive tax exemption bylaw number two four eight zero for first second and third reading Pursuant to the community charter section two two four local governments have the authority to exempt eligible properties from taxation Council must adopt Permissive tax exemption bylaw by october 31st of each year in order to grant exemptions to organization that further counsels objectives and align with community focused services The district’s permissive tax exemption policy FIN 165 identifies organization that benefit the community as prevent providing recreational cultural or edgina Educational programs to the public facilities and programs for youth seniors or other special needs groups and preserving heritage or environmentally significant areas Well organizations may qualify to apply for permissive tax exemptions Under the community charter and in the existing policy is at the council’s discretion How or if the exemptions are granted During the 2027 permissive tax exemption intake applications for 13 properties were received One property has been added for the 2027 tax year, which is 1898 Brandon Lane, which is occupied by the Peach line little schoolhouse society This property is owned by the district and currently has no assessed value with BC assessment We are proceeding with the application to ensure that should circumstances change in the future. The property will maintain his exempt status There’s also been one folio added maple springs bible camp had a piece of land donated to them that is being included in their application For the 2027 tax year all properties are being considered for a one-year exemption Three properties are shared by non-profit organizations who have submitted applications for their share of the properties respectively As per previous years all three are eligible for 100 exemptions The three properties and the occupied spaces are 447 5/4th street, which is the same as last year In which 62.
5 is occupied by the wellness center and 37. 5 for the food bank 56. 84 beach ab the historic schoolhouse is also the same as last year in which 44 is occupied by the okanagan boys and girls club And the remaining 56 percent is being used by the art gallery and our space, which is the school for peach land arts culture and ecology 56. 72 beach ab the Peach line district retirement society currently occupies approximately 95 of the floor space and the peach line community police office occupies approximately 5 percent The following properties are identified as eligible for only a partial exemption the peach line legion It is the same as last year with 78 percent of the land and 66 of the building areas Designated as non-for-profit use for promotion of charitable and fundraising events that ineligible area includes the bar Which is considered business use and cannot be permissively exempted the permissive exemption legislation does not allow exemptions for commercial activities that compete with non-profit services The peach line riding club also the same as last year with 25 of the total land area and 100 of the buildings Occupied by the club as non-for-profit forced riding facility and eligible for pernuse of tax exemption The remaining 75 percent of the land area is municipal park subject to a statutory exemption Maple spring Bible camps.
There’s no changes as 99 percent is designated as non-profit use Well in 1 percent of the land and improvements are eligible are not eligible as they pertain to the residential building and garage The regional open ag and regional library, which is the same as last year with an estimated 6 percent that is eligible for exemption Based on the values assigned annually by bc assessment The peach line chamber of comments is based on the least space at 58 78 beach f That is used for promoting economic development and community events 56 56 percent of the total area, which is consistent with prior years BC assessment uses an income approach to determine the exempted value as rental rates differ The exempted value will vary year to year as the percentage of exempted value is not a percentage of assessed value BC assessment assigned 865,000 as the exempted value for 2026 Using the income approach or 45 percent of the total assessed value The estimated $78,561 of the 2027 permissive tax exemption, which is calculated using the 2026 assessment values The 2026 property tax rates with a general 5 increase Would represent 0. 92 percent of the 2026 Total budgeted general municipal tax revenue or $24 and 44 cents per average residential property In comparison, $74,820 was exempted in 2026 Based on the actual assessments and this year’s tax rate, which is 0. 88 percent of the budget or $23 and 27 cents per average property These numbers differ slightly from last year’s by-law as the by-law was presented using calculated estimates The property tax amounts reflected in this report and disclosed in schedule A of the proposed by-law are the municipal tax portion only Including policing and transit Permissive tax exemptions grant the applicants exemption from the other taxing authority as well Such as school taxes and regional districts General municipal taxes represent approximately 60 percent of the total property taxes payable and peach land Therefore, the proposed exemption represents an estimated 60 percent of the total tax savings these organizations would receive Permissive tax exemptions do not reduce revenues directly, but it does shift the tax burden to other taxpayers Council may grant permissive tax exemptions to eligible organizations that provide a benefit to the community and must must balance that decision to shift the tax burden For this report, staff recommends supporting the applications for the 2027 permissive tax exemptions as supported by the permissive tax exemption policy fin 165 and schedule A attached A listing of the applicants will be advertised to the public and after approval And the final reading which must be done by october 31st The permissive tax exemptions for 2027 will be submitted to bc assessment to be included in the 2027 property tax assessment rule With that the stack rec staff recommendation is that council give first second and third reading To the 2027 permissive tax exemption by law 2480 a by-law granting permissive tax exemptions as listed in schedule a for the 2027 tax year Thank you katie I will do information, but thank you Your move seconder council covens and then second you can uh question thank you Ah Um, just a question because i’m not quite familiar with tax exemption for nature trust of bc On that 3410 drought road that’s an 11 acre parcel And I just want to know for them to get that tax exemption What restrictions are placed on the use of that land any idea in terms of Building on it or using it or anything else like that Um as far as I know they have to um, continue to be non-for-profit Can’t have any commercial uses on the land and then it says here it’s it’s a For the protection of land and to conserve biodiversity diversity and it’s land only So they actually have no, um, assessment on improvements right now. So there’s no buildings Well, there is an assessment on it and where there’s they’re saving an 11,000 plus in tax I just wanted to know does that placement in the land trust or nature trust of bc Basically say no, you can’t use this for anything else.
You can’t build on it It’s just kind of a new one the rest of everything and here are more Non-profits and charities and churches this one to me is kind of new And I just wanted to know what the regulations were around Placement in a trust that gets them an 11 and a thousand dollar Four goings of property taxes. Does anyone know? So, uh, Karen is looking for the answer. Okay. There you go.
Yep. Anybody else who had a question Oh, Karen, do you have an answer? Did you get airy on the way? Yep So we will wait till we have our she of all like Very it’s online so but the screen’s on if you want this to Yeah, so gary, did you hear the question? Where’s gary? Can you bring him up? Then turn off his white pen is Oh, there it’s coming down. Hey, there you go. Hi.
Hi. Hi gary. Uh, did you hear the question? I did mr.
Mayor. Okay. Thank you. I give you a course I uh, I don’t know the answer to that.
I’m quite Um, I think there’s some restrictions on it, but I don’t have that Answer at the tip of my tongue. I’d have to look into it and I can get back to you with that Okay. Uh, thanks for that.
I just I wanted to know the basis of how and why they’re included for a tax exemption and um What that does to that piece of land because it is surrounded by residences on both sides Thanks So stop it when I look at this and then my next time when we have to approve it Then we will have their answer and can still make a change Um, we don’t need to It’s just a second and third. I’m sorry. It’s not really only a deferment George Darren might be able to speak to it in general terms.
Okay. Go ahead, Aaron Um Historically and in other municipalities nature conservances are typically addressed through uh, covenants registered on title I don’t I’ve not seen this specific Covenant, but that’s how they’re typically addressed so there’s there’s no built There would be no building and it would be strict and adherence to various natural principles I’d also note that this particular property does not have any frontage and would not qualify for any development because it is inaccessible other than by boat That’s right Thank you for the answer Any other questions from council item mover and seconder, so i’m going to call the question all in favor non-opposed So no unfinished business today Items for administration 8. 1 2026 budget amendment for local government development approvals program grants request for decision um Are there any questions about this one? They’re giving us money.
I know So do you have a mover? Councillor ingraham, Councillor conan, so i’ll see you another time any more discussion So this is basically giving Darren permission to spend the money that he told us he was wanting to spend Yep, it’s a good idea. That is correct. Yes.
So seeing no more all in favor non-opposed Is there any urgent business? None then we go to mayor and council business and first mayor and council reports any mayor of council reports Seeing none we move on to questions between council members and council statements anybody Then i have one for administration And it’s about the k2 wind project that’s 30 kilometers north west of pichand And about 7 kilometers south of the panasc lake Just for information for the council, it’s not a pichand municipal project It’s province project with main shareholders wf and an an a company So it’s it’s away from our boundaries, but i just wanted to ask our cao if we have anything that dealing with with them Mr mayor We are aware of the the application of the province And they’ve extended an engagement part of their engagement process out to us as well as A number of other stakeholders in the area. It’s not in our jurisdiction, but They are working to get more information to our director of engineering as they decide on the exact site within their Quite large area of influence that they’re looking at and as it progresses. They’ve committed to staying in touch with our staff Thank you.
Any questions from our council council Collins i was going to say two things since You have a ministerial meeting coming up with forest and also we have a team Going to ubcm. I hope there’s discussion about spending more money on wildfire prevention Rather than the hundreds of millions we spend on fighting wildfires And in that mix is a very uncomfortable conversation about how to prevent human caused wildfires Which happened quite frequently about 50 percent of the fires are human caused and so are some of the recent ones for various reasons Um, and there’s been discussion online about how to help the homeless and are they contributing to wildfire risk because they’re living up in in the woods and whatnot And it’s something as a society and a government that we’ve been unable or unwilling to tackle And at ubcm it has to be a point of discussion about what are we going to do about this We just can’t do the status quo every year and just have tons of fires started in the bush all around us We’ve been lucky for like the fourth or fifth time though So, you know, knock on wood, but those are really important discussions to have for you guys at ubcm My two cents Thank you and that’s already on our notes. So and i’m meeting this week with the minister farmer So, uh, we’re going to see him this week and that’s on our program And also dealing with uh future funding to you know, uh, risk proof our environment or not around us.
So it’s it’s all on the agenda Uh, anybody else Seeing none that we can move on We have one noise of motion and I will let uh contour brophy read his nose of motion I Said forgot put my mic on Basically peach and elementary has an unplayable field. I know that we’re up there twice a week with soccer We’ve had so you can just read it. There’s no debate You have to read your not emotional motion No motion is that council direct staff to work with school district 23 and peach and elementary school to explore Opportunity to upgrade the peach and elementary school playing field To better accommodate field sports including baseball softball and soccer and to explore opportunities for after hours community access to the school gymnasium indoor soccer With the goal of having enhanced recreational opportunities available in conjunction with the open of the red haven 89 unit rental development and child care center in 2027. Thank you counselor.
That will be on the agenda then for next thank you meeting So Do we need to accept? No motion. No, okay Question period. So if anybody wants to ask a question It’s now is a time If you come up, please state your name your address and it’s only questions So no nothing else. Just a question.
Thank you Hi, my name is girl, mansil Anyone has this one Yes, girl, mansil and I live at 460 Princeton Avenue Beach Channel. Do you need the postcode? No, okay So my question is I’ve just been listening and this is the first council meeting that I’ve come to And you’re going to a meeting at ubco And I want to know how many times you’ve addressed in the past over the last four years when you’ve been sitting fire mitigation And wired for prevention. So that is my question nice and simple because there’s been lots of fires over the last four years And three four five that I know within each land area And obviously some land West Carolina.
So that’s it. That’s my question. Nice and simple Thank you for the question and I can answer the question every single time we meet the ministers.
We bring it up every single time and I know our fire chief is not here today, but in the past two three years We have done quite a bit of fire mitigation around beachant One of the Arizona thing is Sanderson that we did. We did one of the parks on the kid in park We did around Ponderosa All the way up where the trail starts the pink vision trail. So that’s been done There was some work done or going to be done at the Ponderosa golf course.
It’s not the golf there. So it’s all there’s a lot of work already being done But each time we go and speak with ministers will bring it up and we ask for funding And that’s since four years. So we met ministers every single time and I think concert Cohens was also there.
Yeah, just to add to that. Thank mr. Mayor also Fire mitigation around our water treatment plant So as you can tell a lot of this falls on municipal government But you’ve got to keep vlogging the horse to get what funds you can and obviously we have our fires mark program For your house and everyone else’s as well But but yeah, um, there’s way more we can do and you you know the provincial governments like turning the Titanic That’s why you keep asking Year after year and always making the most logical case you can on how you use those funds That’s I think we’ve done all right with that So I am meeting with the minister this week and it’s on our agenda to discuss And again, see if they’re funding available.
I think what would happen this year again and then look at some land I’m expecting a very productive meeting. So the ones that meeting is done. I will let everybody know how it went Anybody else for a question And thank you for your question My name is my re goodman and my address is 6550 sherburn road in The south part peach hunter.
I just want to give you a little bit of background before you give me my question Okay, I’ll just give you my question. Yeah, we need a question. Okay. I I believe that you deceived The residents of peach land by accusing the residents that live up there in the south part of peach land Blocking the access road that could be developed Well, I asked you but you could be background, but you didn’t want it I can answer that.
I did not do that. Thank you. Oh, I can actually clarify it for you It was on june i in the meeting the committee of the whole and um, I can tell you what you said So I have to look it up and we’ll get back to you But I think what we meant is that the developer who was there who said i’m going to do that Stewart connection Yeah, the whole the neighborhood was against it because I was there when the neighbor said we don’t want it So was I part of that neighborhood because I actually live there I do not remember if you were there or not. No, but there were a lot of people there that didn’t want it So how will I expect a response from you then? Because you said you’d look it up.
Yeah, so how will I expect a response? I will look at back at the committee of the whole meeting and I will back up my notes. I took and get back to you And by email or no, I will call you Yeah, if you give me a number, we’ll call you. Oh, absolutely.
Yeah. Okay. Thank you But I just what I want is I want to have the record clear. I don’t want the residents to look like they actually um, did something wrong And they didn’t no I never said that the residents believe in wrong.
So it’s your interpretation. You can look up that. Yeah, me. Thank you Thank you Any other questions Good afternoon, everybody Uh, I’m Alex Morrison.
I’m here for the uh Peach Land Watershed Protection Alliance Pardon me address six 206 Bonnie Lane Um First of all, I just want to say thank you to council for um all the exploring you’re doing to expand our water capacity in in peach land Uh, I know it’s an onerous task and pwpa and our members are um Very grateful that that is on the books as a as a project for you um, one of the questions or the question I would like to ask today is um given that uh We’re looking looking like we’re walking into um, and a super El Nino this year uh, the drought persists and um We’re still kind of dealing with water issues and capacity issues. Um Is the district planning anything for next year? Um Presuming that let’s say the worst case scenario happens and the snowpack is very limited as it has been for the past couple of years If that continues over the winter, we’re going to be you know, um Basically, I think in dire straits Um, uh in the springtime if there is no foreshat like there was this year So is the district got any contingency plans? Um, now you could share with the Uh, you know Sorry my fault Yeah, thank you. That’s my question. Mm-hmm.
So it’s a great question. It’s one that’s top of everyone’s mind and Um, we will be coming forward next uh council meeting by the way on a fire smart report as well as a report on our long-term water master plan So, um Rest assured that the staff working in the water department as well as myself are keeping a very close eye On the water level and uh, we’re not doing it on a week-by-week basis. It’s something that we’re looking at Um over the term of many months and going into next year So the precautions we’re taking this year part of the water Restrictions are forward looking in the sense of making sure that we can still have water to drink coming out of the tap And uh, we’ll be providing a lot more information on september the 8th. Thank you Anybody else I Don’t remember only questions.
This is a question If the road was blocked As you say from responding to the neighborhood concerns Then why a year and a half later Or a year later. Did you Put a 31 unit subdivision or approve it first through third reading You you just said the reason the road was blocked was that it was such an outcry from the neighbors But it was a year later when you if that was the reason then why did you pass a 31 unit subdivision if you already said you blocked the road for the neighbors or I do not understand your question See anybody understand the question I’ll rephrase it You just told a previous questioner that that Road through the Stuart crescent you had a huge outcry from the neighborhood and that’s why it’s not there But it was over a year after that outcry That you actually approved 31 units So the reason you’ve given isn’t actually accurate or true Okay administration informs me that we’ll get back to you Pardon me. They will get back to you the administration regarding I don’t understand. That’s a pretty simple question now.
No, it’s not This In history just gone back from you To the planning back to here back to planning back to council back to here We will look it up and get back to you And it lasts the council members to please dig into that a little bit. Thank you Anybody else Hi four-mansell four six six zero Princeton Avenue I have a question about your grant writer stroke community Person four parts to it. How many grants has that person written since they’ve been employed two How many grants were successful three how much money did the district receive from the successful grants and four Has there been any grants written by any members of staff or outside agencies in that period uh with a successful or not and how much uh Did you pay the outside agencies old business to do those grants? Thank you very valid questions and develop them up for you and get back to you, you know going around soon now I’ll give me answer. Okay.
Thank you Oh, how are you gonna get back to me Uh if you provide us with your name and phone number uh care and over here We’ll take that if if you don’t mind giving that turn we’ll get back to you with that information and Any other questions Thank you We move on to correspondence or do show board highlights july 16, 2026 for information the remover Councillor condon seconder Councillor england or favor And then the next one we’re going to do separate the provincial funding for public libraries We’re going to write a question or write a letter And gonsor gonden do you have anything to add to this? Well, I can give you some background if you like mr. Mayor um at um, I am the Council representative on the library board and in early july They received notification of shift in the funding algorithms that was provided Not only did it reduce the amount that was being given to libraries. It also Placed peach land specifically into a different category.
We were previously a rural Location and funding was based on us being a small community we then learned from a letter from the ministry that the Shift had been made to an urban center which puts us on the par with Vernon and summerland and west calona and The result was that we We get we get get substantially less in the way of funding And there’s no rationale for that So I undertook with the library board to bring this to council to see if we could get council to authorized Sending a response to the minister that says First of all, you shouldn’t be taking money away from libraries in the first place And specifically for peach land. We are still the 6500 resident community and we should not be compared to places like Vernon and west calona So we are here today with a sample of a letter that has been provided and I would ask for council Authority to Send this to the minister with copies to the okanagan regional library in support of retaining the funding What subsequently happened was that the ministry obviously saw the error of their ways and canceled the whole program For the balance for this year It doesn’t mean to say that they’re not going to think more about what they were doing And bring in some funding cuts or redistribution at a later date for 2027 So I think it’s still important that we let it be known that we First of all don’t like the idea that they cut funding to libraries in the first place And secondly, we don’t like the idea that Our funding should be on the same Basis as that of Vernon and west calona and other urban communities Thank you counselor and everybody read the letter so we’ll agreement with this. So do I have a mover Councillor condon Also a penny setter all in favor Thank you.
I will sign the letter today and then we will send it off So this was the last thing that are our agenda. So only think rest of me is adjournment all in favor meeting adjourned
Gazette Analysis
The meeting illustrates why the record needs more than minutes
On paper, this could appear to have been a fairly routine Council meeting. Several bylaws advanced, a budget amendment was approved, tax exemptions moved forward and Council dealt with correspondence and notices of motion.
The discussion, however, reveals considerably more.
One example is the Official Community Plan. A simple record that Council adopted the OCP amendments would miss concerns raised about Lower Princeton, density and building heights, as well as Councillor Brophy’s concern about the future of existing residential properties near Beach Avenue.
Staff provided an important distinction during that discussion: the OCP establishes policy direction but does not itself rezone those properties. Any future zoning changes would require another process that would return to Council.
That distinction matters. It demonstrates why residents should follow not only final Council votes but also the sequence of decisions that may eventually produce a regulatory change.
A $78,561 tax decision deserves context
The permissive tax exemption discussion is another example.
The proposed exemptions represent approximately $78,561 in municipal property taxes for 2027. Staff was also explicit that permissive exemptions do not simply eliminate taxation. The tax burden is effectively shifted to other taxpayers.
At the same time, the organizations receiving exemptions provide community services, recreational opportunities, cultural activities and other public benefits. The relevant question therefore is not simply whether $78,561 is being exempted. It is whether the community benefit produced by those exemptions justifies the resulting redistribution of the tax burden.
Council’s discussion concerning the Nature Trust property illustrates the value of asking that next question. Councillors wanted to understand what restrictions actually attach to the property in return for its tax-exempt treatment. Staff did not initially have a definitive answer and indicated that further information would be obtained.
That is not necessarily evidence of a problem. It is an example of an unanswered question entering the public record and therefore something that can be followed.
Several questions now have a future answer attached to them
An interesting pattern emerged during public question period.
Questions concerning South Peachland road and development history resulted in commitments to review previous records. A resident asking about District grant-writing activity was told that information would be assembled. Water planning was linked to information expected at the September 8 meeting.
These are useful commitments to preserve.
A question answered with “we’ll get back to you” should not disappear when the meeting adjourns. It creates a natural follow-up point for both residents and the Gazette.
This is one area where maintaining a searchable Council record could become particularly valuable. Future meetings can be checked against previous commitments rather than treating every Council meeting as an isolated event.
Wildfire prevention remains a recurring issue
Wildfire mitigation appeared both during Council discussion and public question period.
Councillor Collins argued that governments need to devote greater attention to wildfire prevention rather than continually spending enormous resources fighting fires after they begin. He also raised the difficult issue of human-caused fires and the need for that subject to form part of discussions with senior governments.
The mayor said wildfire prevention was already on the agenda for discussions with provincial officials and described previous mitigation work undertaken around Peachland.
A resident subsequently asked how consistently Council had raised wildfire prevention during its term. The mayor responded that the issue had been raised whenever Council met with the relevant ministers and pointed to mitigation work already undertaken around the community.
For a community surrounded by forest and repeatedly exposed to wildfire risk, this is an issue worth following beyond a single Council meeting. The measurable questions are ultimately straightforward: What mitigation work has been completed, what remains to be done, how much funding has been obtained, and what additional work is planned?
The record is more useful when it creates the next question
Perhaps the most important lesson from this meeting is that municipal accountability does not require assuming wrongdoing.
It requires maintaining enough of the record to know what Council decided, understanding the reasoning presented at the time, identifying questions that were left unresolved and returning later to determine what happened.
That is the purpose of this Council record.
The Gazette will continue following the matters arising from this meeting, particularly the promised follow-up information, future downtown zoning work, wildfire mitigation discussions, water planning and the questions surrounding permissive tax exemptions.
A Council meeting should not disappear when the chamber empties. Its decisions, questions and commitments remain part of Peachland’s public record.