One of the speakers at the September 8 zoning bylaw meeting at Mansons Hall was Maureen Williams of Cortes Island’s Climate Action Network. While she welcomed the decision to increase the number of lots at Rainbow Ridge up to a maximum of 35, Williams said the proposed zoning update does little to address affordability, environmental protection, or increase Cortes Island’s sense of community. The three-minute speaking limit at the meeting left little room for her to expand on these points, so Cortes Currents spoke with her afterwards.

Can’t take any more information

At the meeting, Regional Director Mark Vonesch informed everyone, “Any written materials received after the closing of the hearing cannot and will not be reviewed by the SRD Board of Directors … After we finish this hearing, you’re not allowed to come up to me and give me more information. This is part of the process that I’m supposed to be listening to, what everybody’s sharing here, and gathering the information for the SRD Board. If I were to start talking to lots of folks in the community, I would have additional information that the board wouldn’t have.”

That said, Williams has assured Cortes Currents that her group has already informed the SRD what you are about to read and the only thing new is that it is now being shared with a wider audience.  

What’s good, what’s not

“I think there are some good things in the proposed draft,” she explained. “It’s really great that they took the Housing Society’s recommendation and increased the number of dwelling units they can build on their property. There are other things that I think are good, but I think it’s a shame that it could have reached this point and still not meet the needs of the community. It’s also a shame that it didn’t get the consultation it deserved early on, and get shaped in a way that would’ve been more acceptable.”

Williams was particularly troubled by the format of the public meeting.

“I was really surprised to arrive and find that we weren’t allowed to ask questions,” she said. “It seemed like a missing piece, all along, has been an opportunity for the community to discuss the proposed bylaw together, to be able to listen to each other, to be able to hear the SRD and Mark Vonesh talk about the changes they were proposing, and to have a conversation. That hasn’t happened.”

Williams noted that while officials point to earlier consultations, those took place before the bylaw was drafted.

Confusion about the Bylaw

“They talk about community consultation having happened, but it happened before the draft bylaw was written,” she explained. “I think we deserved an opportunity to learn about what’s in the draft and to understand it. You could hear at the meeting that people were confused about certain things that had been changed, but they weren’t allowed to ask questions and get clarification. I think it’s a mistake that they didn’t allow for that kind of conversation much earlier, before the bylaw had already been through so many layers of approval. It should never have gotten to this point without a community conversation.”

The SRD held a Zoning Bylaw Open House at Mansons Hall on December 11, 2023. There have been a number of meetings and articles since then.   

Consultation needed AFTER Bylaw written

What was missing, Williams believes, was a public educational meeting after the draft had been written.

“It’s a very basic tenet of good listening to reflect back what you hear, to be sure you’ve heard it correctly. That was the missing piece. They listened in theory, they listened early on, and they said they drafted their proposed new bylaw on what they heard. But they never checked with us to say, ‘Does this match what you wanted? Now that you can see it, does it still make sense to you?’”

Incorporated Suggestions

Williams pointed out that her group had offered constructive suggestions, including expanding the use of existing zoning categories.

“One of the things our Climate Action Network recommended was a broader, easier use of some of the zones that already exist, like the Multiple Residence zone,” she said. “That’s a zone where you can have up to six units in one building, like a small apartment building. That could have been used well if they’d been willing to make it easier for people who wanted to create that kind of housing on their land.

“There are also community land stewardship and forest land stewardship zones, which are creative ways of clustering houses on big pieces of property. Those are responsible ways of developing the land and making it easier for people to rezone the land. Encouraging people to think about rezoning in those ways would’ve been great. Another possibility would have been creating a new residential zone which would have allowed for more density, tied to a covenant that ensures the housing is used full-time and not as short-term rentals.”

Williams does not know whether it would still be possible to make covenants on private dwellings.

“Most of the covenants I am aware of are on land, not houses, but I don’t know. I’m not the one who should be figuring out how to make that happen necessarily.”

She said, “Zoning is a limited tool, but it should at least make sure we’re not doing harm with it.”

Potential negative Impacts of the Bylaw

Asked about the likely negative impact if the bylaw goes forward, Williams said, “The first thing that will happen is the value of every residential property on the island will increase because there’ll be more development potential on every residential lot,” she said. “Increasing property values is not going to increase affordability, it’s just going to make things even farther out of reach for local people. The other thing that I think will happen is we’ll see more short-term rentals being built on residential property. Some development will provide full-time housing, but the risk of more short-term rentals is really high, and it comes at the cost of affordability.”

She compared the situation to Victoria, where she lived fifteen years ago: “There were a lot of illegal basement suites being rented out, and then there were houses with legal suites that had all the right permits. Those legal suites made the houses much more expensive. Any house with a legal suite was more valuable than one without, and sellers advertised that. It was definitely a selling point.”

Need a wide variety of Views

Williams stressed the idea that the SRD should have been listening to a wide variety of views.

“I don’t think they should just listen to us,” she said. “They should have listened to everyone. Every sector on the island, every individual, should have had an opportunity to learn about the proposed bylaw and to ask questions.”

“ I know everybody was invited to provide their input by email, and I think that probably happened to some degree, but I think for a lot of people the zoning bylaw is not easy reading. It’s not easy to understand, and I think a lot of people will just set it aside and not think about it.”  

“People care a lot—you could see that from the turnout at the meeting. They deserve to be informed and to have their questions answered.”

In a discussion format, people learn from each other

“ One thing that happens in a discussion format, where there’s questions and answers, is people can listen to each other and they can hear one another’s concerns. I would’ve liked to have heard from other sectors on the island and hear what their thoughts were or their concerns were. That can certainly help us develop our opinions and help us think about whether we support or don’t support the proposed bylaw.”

Some things the Climate Action Network did

The Climate Action Network held a couple of conversation events after the bylaw was written ‘and talked about concerns. Thirty to forty people attended one of them.

“It was really productive,” Williams said. “Somebody from the SRD came, and there was a lot of question-and-answer at that event. Unfortunately not everyone was there to participate. As a result of our meetings, we did draft a letter and send it to the SRD and Mark Vonesch. We had intended to send it to the APC (Advisory Planning Commission), but we weren’t aware of when they were meeting. So our letter never got to them, but we did submit our thoughts, concerns and recommendations to the SRD and Mark last Fall and again in I think it was March or April of this year.”

Cortes Island is our home

“I definitely understand that zoning is not the tool for everything,” Williams said. “It doesn’t have a huge amount of influence on climate change, but this is our little piece to take care of. Cortes Island is our home. If there’s anything we can do here to make things better—or certainly to prevent making things worse—then we should do everything we can.  One little thing we can do is try to encourage the kind of building and development on Cortes that’s going to create less of a climate impact and more community for the people who live here. Also we can try to avoid making things worse by encouraging more second homes, which brings  more international people coming here with their money, making it less of our community and more of a summer playground.”

Links of Interest:

• Unedited audio from Sep 8, 2025, Zoning bylaw meeting in Mansons Hall – Cortes Currents
• Proposed Cortes Zoning Bylaw – SRD
• Residential Upzone Proposal for Cortes Island – Carrie Saxifrage/ Climate Action Network
• Considerations for Monday’s Bylaw Update Meeting at Mansons Hall (interviews with Regional Director Mark Vonesch and Sadhu Johnston from the Cortes Housing Society)- Cortes Currents
• Articles about, or mentioning, Cortes Island’s proposed zoning bylaw
• Articles about, or mentioning, the Cortes Housing Society
• Articles about, or mentioning, the Climate Action Network

Top image credit: People at the September 8, 2025 Zoning Bylaw meeting – Roy L Hales photo

Sign-up for Cortes Currents email-out:

To receive an emailed catalogue of articles on Cortes Currents, send a (blank) email to subscribe to your desired frequency:

• Daily, (articles posted during the last 24 hours) – [email protected]
• Weekly Digest cortescurrents – [email protected]