The Strathcona Regional District (SRD) wants a list of School District 72’s properties on Cortes Island and in Area C. As Regional Director Robyn Mawhinney pointed out, in a letter to the other rural Directors, some of them ‘may be a good fit for a housing project.’ Mawhinney proposed that the SRD ask for a list.  

At the Board’s August 21 meeting, Campbell River Director Susan Sinnott made an amendment to Mawhinney’s motion: 

“I’m going to say that a letter be sent to School District 72, inquiring whether or not there are lands available for either  the school district to develop for housing, or over which they have an interest, that they own or have a license of occupation or right of access that they’d be interested in disposing to the Regional District.”

Mayor Michael Lott, of Gold River, seconded the amended motion. 

Director Sinnott: “I had a meeting yesterday with respect to daycare. The school district was there, and they’re very eager, I think, to assist. I don’t know if they’re so eager to dispose, and I think we should always look at that potential. They might create their own workforce housing, which would leave pressures in the area. So add that as an additional option so it doesn’t come off as just ‘will you just dispose it to us?’” 

Chief Administrative Officer  (CAO) David Leitch replied, “I think we’re fine with that. Director Mawhinney’s goal is just to find out the inventory that the school has because they have a variety of different holdings of properties and upon returning them, if for lack of a better word, a variety of different awards. Sometimes they can sell it. Sometimes it just gets returned to the province. Therefore, their incentives are different.” 

“I think the motion reads to identifying what those different properties are and what those holdings are.  I think they have the mentality of, ‘if it doesn’t cost us anything, why should we bother doing anything?’ That can inhibit the greater good of usage of that. Our intent here was just to  find out  their holdings of the property and what the disposition would be.  Then we’re better able to approach them and say, ‘Hey, this one here, we may have an interest in it.’” 

Director Sinnott explained that her motion, “was just to add that we also inquire whether they’d be interested in developing housing on land that they’re holding in the same thing, so that they could add to the housing stock for their own self. Like for their employees and workforce housing, which would relieve the burden in the area. I was talking with Associate Superintendent Philip Cizmic, and they’re very eager to assist.  I think it’s sometimes faster and easier for them to think that way. Just opening another option to discuss.”  

Cortes Island Director Mark Vonesch responded, “My concern, Director Sinnott, is that we  leave it with the school district as to whether they’re interested in potentially doing housing there, rather than saying, hey, what properties do you have? We can look at the properties and then have a discussion with them.  I think it’s a bit of a mystery actually what properties they do own and have access to. This is the first step of starting a conversation. Rather than being like, ‘what do you want to do housing on?’” 

Campbell River DIrector Ron Kerr observed, “I don’t think either alternative is going to be a fast process.  We’re dealing with a school board here, and you’re not going to get your answers fast. The process is not going to be fast. Both of them are going to be dragged out. So pick your poison.”

Director Sinnott: “A letter is not a lot of work for staff. I just think that the school district tends to hold on to things because once they release it to the province, there’s a chance that those properties can never be recovered, and they’re going to be subject to all sorts of other legislative requirements, whatever it is at the time for First Nations consultation, land claim issues, things like that. So  I’m not optimistic that this is the right way to get land for housing unless you actually ask for it. The school district seemed eager to solve problems.  Perhaps we have a meeting, a liaison committee with the school district in the city? Maybe it’s just really a staff meeting between staff to figure this out.” 

CAO Leitch: “We have a school liaison committee meeting in October. So let us do a little bit of research before that meeting and then have a discussion with the district and say, ‘Hey, what’s the deal on this one? What’s the deal on this one? Is there a housing opportunity for either one of us?’ Again, I think the motion adds to opportunities and I don’t think it inhibits what we’re looking to do.”  

Regional Director Gerald Whalley from Area A, said, “In Sayward there’s a large acreage that was owned by the school.  They had a big gym on it, and school buildings. They built a new school in the village and had no problem at all selling that other property to a private person who’s now turned it into a farm.” 

CAO Leitch: “Under that scenario, though, they can benefit from the sale. There are properties that they don’t own, they only have right of title. There is no benefit if they return them.” 

Chair Mark Baker called a vote: “Okay, so call the question … and the motion. All in favor? …  Opposed? … Seeing none, the motion is carried.”

The SRD will be asking School District 72 for a list of properties that they either wish to develop housing on, or they would be interested in giving to the SRD for development.

Top image credit: vacant lot – Photo by Giorgio Trovato on Unsplash

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) – cortescurrents-daily+subscribe@cortes.groups.io
• Weekly Digest cortescurrents – cortescurrents-weekly+subscribe@cortes.groups.io