The committee met at 8:09 a.m.

[Paul Choi in the chair.]

Paul Choi (Chair): Good morning, everyone. My name is Paul Choi. I’m the MLA for Burnaby South–Metrotown and the Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services.

I’d like to acknowledge that we are meeting today in Terrace, which is located in traditional territories of Tsimshian peoples.

I would like to also welcome everyone who is listening to and participating in today’s meeting. Our committee is currently conducting an annual consultation with British Columbians on their priorities for the next provincial budget.

[8:10 a.m.]

British Columbians who are not presenting to the committee can still share their views by making written comments. The details on how to provide submissions are available on our website at bcleg.ca/consultations.

I will now ask for the members of the committee to introduce themselves, starting with the Deputy Chair.

Elenore Sturko (Deputy Chair): Good morning. My name is Elenore Sturko. I’m the MLA for Surrey-Cloverdale. I’m the critic for Public Safety and Solicitor General. Happy to be here in Terrace. Thank you very much.

Steve Morissette: Good morning. I’m Steve Morissette, the MLA for Kootenay-Monashee and Parliamentary Secretary for Rural Development.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Good morning. I’m Jennifer Blatherwick. I’m the MLA for Coquitlam-Maillardville and the Parliamentary Secretary for Gender Equity.

Bryan Tepper: Hello. I am Bryan Tepper, MLA for Surrey-Panorama and critic for Community Safety and Integrated Services.

Sunita Dhir: Good morning. My name is Sunita Dhir. I am the MLA for Vancouver-Langara and Parliamentary Secretary for International Credentials.

Claire Rattée: Claire Rattée, MLA for Skeena, here — happy to be home — and I’m the critic for mental health and addictions.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you very much. Assisting the committee today are Darryl Hol and Kayla Wilson from the Parliamentary Committees Office, and Simon DeLaat and Amanda Heffelfinger from Hansard Services. Thank you for joining us today.

We’re now going to hear from a number of organizations and individuals about their priorities for the next provincial budget. Each participant will have five minutes to speak, followed by up to five minutes for questions from committee members.

First up I would like to call Mr. Shawn Zettler from Kitimat Airshed Group to come to the front and join us, please.

Thank you very much for coming and presenting to the committee. As stated, you have five minutes for presentation and five minutes for questions. You can begin whenever you’re ready to go.

Budget Consultation Presentations

Kitimat Airshed Group

Shawn Zettler: Thank you very much. I am Shawn Zettler. I’m representing the Kitimat Airshed Group. I sit on the board of directors as the Rio Tinto representative, and I’m also the group’s secretary-treasurer.

I’m here this morning to discuss the value of community airshed groups to provide recommendations for the 2026 provincial budget in relationship to the funding of airshed groups.

Before I begin, I’d first like to give a bit of a definition in terms of what an airshed is. An airshed is a geographical area that is confined. It is where emissions from industries and community activities collect and affect the air quality, which can then affect human health and the environment. It’s very important that we work together towards protecting the airsheds.

I would also first like to acknowledge and thank the Province of British Columbia, the Ministry of Environment and Parks, for the support in helping form the Kitimat Airshed Group. The ministry has been very instrumental in helping us come together, bringing a wide variety of different groups’ interests together to form a collaborative association. We also thank the province for their financial support over the past five years.

Airshed groups and round tables in British Columbia support the growth in sustainable, healthy communities, specifically for the tourists of Kitimat valley. The Kitimat Airshed Group serves this purpose.

The Kitimat Airshed Group, or KAG, is a collaboration of governments. We have the Ministry of Environment, municipal governments. We also have First Nations; major industries — Rio Tinto, LNG Canada; and NGOs and various community members who come together and work on improving and protecting the airshed in the Kitimat valley.

We have a united vision to ensure the protection of both the community health and environment through the lenses of cumulative air effects and climate change. Our mission is to turn data into understanding and concern into collective action for healthier and more informed communities.

The Kitimat Terrace valley is a centre of major industrial development in northern British Columbia, as you know. We have two large LNG projects, LNG Canada and the Cedar LNG projects that are now in construction, one going into commissioning. We also have the ongoing operations of the Rio Tinto aluminum smelter.

The KAG serves as a coordination point between the emissions permits issued by the B.C. government and members of the communities who have concerns over air quality, health impacts and also cumulative effects.

[8:15 a.m.]

The airshed groups in general foster public awareness. We assist with stakeholder concerns, collaboration. We provide information, we share…. Airshed groups also provide recommendations for strategies for continuous improvements of the airsheds, air quality and mitigation of impacts — a function that is important and especially important when we consider the desire to develop and grow the provincial economy while also protecting community health and environment.

The airshed groups serve as a very important link between those priorities and bringing people together, industries together and issues together for the protection of all. While airshed groups play an important role, funding opportunities and grants available for airshed planning and activities are limited.

To address these concerns, we recommend for consideration in the 2026 budget, first, that there be increased support for airshed groups’ activities that facilitate airshed planning and management, specifically around funding for airshed groups’ administration and activities being made available.

Second, in regions where there’s promotion of industrial development and economic diversification such as in Kitimat, that additional funds be made available to airshed groups for participating in managing cumulative air emission effects.

Lastly, our third recommendation is to provide increased grant opportunities for air quality initiatives programs, such as the community wood smoke reduction program. These programs have a direct, tangible benefit from action that can be taken.

In closing, we believe that these recommendations provide support of the objectives for economic growth while providing protection of healthy communities and environments. On behalf of the Kitimat Airshed Group, we thank you for listening to us today and for considering our recommendations.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thanks so much for the presentation.

Now we’ll turn to members for questions.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Good morning. Thank you for your presentation, and thank you for your advocacy.

I’m hoping, because this is not an area in which I have a lot of experience, that you could differentiate for me between recommendations 2 and 3. I think I got a little….

Shawn Zettler: They are a little bit related. Recommendation 2 is about where there are diverse industries that are being developed, grown — such as in Kitimat, where we have the two LNG projects, to pick on Kitimat as an example. We have the aluminum smelter, and so we have a variety of different air emissions that can cause cumulative effects.

This recommendation is about providing additional funding for those specific contexts for airshed groups to participate.

The third recommendation is to be able to provide increased support for grant initiatives in which airshed groups can help facilitate the delivery of programs.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Okay, so maybe if I could just explain it back to you a little bit. Recommendation 2 is on studying and determining the cumulative effects of long-term exposure?

Shawn Zettler: It’s about looking forward as a collective — community groups, industries. How do we work together, come together, to be able to manage the cumulative effects?

Jennifer Blatherwick: The funding you’re looking for is to have group convening.

Shawn Zettler: That’s correct.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Okay, thank you.

The third one is, then, for implementing actual programs that would improve air quality.

Shawn Zettler: Possible, but yes.

Paul Choi (Chair): Any other questions?

Seeing none, thank you so much for your time and your presentation.

Okay, we’re going to call up the next presenter. If I can have Mr. David Try from Kitselas First Nation Treaty Information Source come forward, please.

Thank you for joining us today. So five minutes for presentation, five minutes for questions, and you may begin whenever you’re ready to go.

Kitselas First Nation
Treaty Information Source

David Try: Thank you. Kitselas First Nation is having their chief and council elections today, actually, so our Chief is unavailable to participate, himself, directly.

Kitselas has the same concerns that other communities would have said about homeless and health and routine things. I’ll just bring to your attention two files that probably nobody else would mention to you that we have some interest in.

[8:20 a.m.]

One is under B.C.’s Bill 14, Renewable Energy Projects (Streamlined Permitting) Act, designed to speed development of infrastructure and resource projects, including mines and energy. As you may well know, Canada has just tabled similar legislation last Friday.

In our opinion, the general principle is that speed takes money. To go fast takes additional resources. We feel that any northern projects that are going to come across northern B.C. have a moderately high probability of crossing Kitselas treaty settlement lands or Kitselas traditional territory lands, so we feel that there are probable impacts for any pipeline projects or mines in northern B.C.

As such, we want to be on the record as saying accelerated consultations with First Nations, and especially treaty First Nations — I don’t believe that anybody is suggesting that these accelerated permitting regimes would not include First Nations consultations, so that’s not an issue — is simply going to be more expensive for us.

As they contemplate…. The devil’s in the details, and we don’t have the details. And we don’t even have the projects that might be considered under either legislation. So we’re just trying to get a placeholder on there saying that as these things roll out, we would expect to see additional funding made available for us to conduct our consultation and to be able to provide meaningful feedback on any concerns that Kitselas has. That’s one.

Two: education. Kitselas supports education at all levels as a key element of reconciliation and economic integration. So we encourage B.C. to strengthen their financial support for northern primary and secondary education, where data does show that lower education outcomes are achieved compared to other students in southern B.C., frankly, as well as lower Aboriginal student outcomes. Here, locally, we have good, hard data to prove that, while we note significant improvements over our lifetimes.

As well, B.C. needs to step up support for the local post-secondary education institutions in managing the fallout from reduced international students. We believe that allowing Coast Mountain College, for example, to run deficits this year is simply punting the problem forward. B.C. education has systemically encouraged colleges and universities to rely on revenue from international students and decreased their funding levels.

I worked in post-secondary education in the ’80s and the ’90s for Canada. I speak with knowledge. This has been going on for a long time, and now that that tap has suddenly been turned off, saying to the college — and I think to the university as well; I was there last week, the week before— “You are allowed to run deficits,” does not seem to be providing the funding necessary for our children to get a solid education.

You know that educating people in the North — hopefully they’ll stay in the North for jobs; nurses and everybody else — is a strong predicator for success. Keeping kids close to home has worked very well for us, and for all Canadians.

With treaty, separately, Kitselas children living on one of our current Indian reserves will no longer be excluded from B.C.’s primary education funding to school district 82 here. Fun and games, eh? Up to now, B.C. has successfully lobbed that onto the Canadian government for Canada to fund these students. After treaty, which is admittedly three years — we did ratify our treaty on April 10, 2025 — they will simply be B.C. students.

Obviously, since nothing’s going to change till 2028, there are no immediate funding concerns. I just wanted to get that little placeholder on your agenda broadly. Kitselas expects B.C. to fund these students fairly and fully in treaty.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thanks so much for that presentation. We’ll turn to questions by members.

Steve Morissette: Yeah, I’m just not fully aware of that. So currently they’re funded by the federal government and in three years can be funded provincially?

David Try: That’s correct.

Steve Morissette: And roughly how many students? Do you have an idea?

David Try: Around 100, just under 100. I think it’s 85, but I wouldn’t quote that number broadly. Just under 100.

Jennifer Blatherwick: You had something…. I was a school trustee before this, and the underfunding of students on reserve was always a huge concern, because the comparative amount that they receive for funding is so much less under the federal scheme than it was under the provincial one.

I’m not aware of the exact details. Is the province going to be making up the funding shortfall, or is it going to just be taking over the education and funding of the students entirely?

[8:25 a.m.]

David Try: I’m the senior treaty negotiator — that’s my day job — and we have got government of Canada on the hook of saying no programs would be cancelled in treaty, including their education funding.

At the same time, we’ve said to B.C. educators, to the Deputy Minister, in January, that we expect funding to be provided for our students in three years, as for any other B.C. student.

They are partially funded through taxes and also through intergovernmental transfer agreements between Canada and B.C. Like I said, I worked in education, for Canada, a long time ago, but I don’t think the system has fundamentally changed. That’s how we see that.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Yeah, it’ll be interesting to find out how that works out between the three, the tripartite there.

And congratulations on the successful negotiation of that treaty.

David Try: The most interesting thing is we have yet to get a clear answer from B.C.’s system on what will happen. We seem to be breaking new ground, too. Otherwise, I would think, they’d say: “Oh, this is what’s going to happen.” I’ve been asking the same question for a couple of years, but it’s not been a priority. Ratifying the treaty has been my priority. So it falls into a crack, and then eventually, six months later: “I never heard back.”

Jennifer Blatherwick: We send you our best wishes.

David Try: Thank you.

Paul Choi (Chair): Any other questions by members?

Thank you so much for your time and your presentation.

David Try: Good luck in your deliberations.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you very much.

We’ll move on to the next presenter. I’d like to call Nicholas Gascon from ZED Kyshan Homes Ltd. to come forward, please.

You have five minutes for your presentation and five minutes for questions. You can begin whenever you’re ready to go.

ZED Kyshan Homes

Nicholas Gascon: Perfect. Thank you for you guys’ time. My name is Nick Gascon. I’m the president of business development for ZED Kyshan Homes. We are a 51 percent Indigenous-owned company, and our company is based in northwest B.C. on Kitsumkalum land.

We’re having trouble right now with the housing crisis. Everyone can feel this. The biggest problem that we’re seeing is there’s a lack of housing. More importantly, there’s a bottleneck that is being issued currently in the North and across B.C.

When you see an elderly person living in a 2,000-square-foot home by themselves, they’re not doing that purposely. They’re doing that because there’s nowhere to go. So we need to focus on building a system where they have somewhere to go.

Currently in Terrace, there’s a five-year wait-list if you want to be in a senior living centre. In order to allow a project to move forward, there’s quite the red tape involved with the CMHC and MLI select standing program.

When you do create a program where someone can actually move into a senior living centre, it opens the way for more houses. A 2,000-square-foot home becomes available for a young family, and that young family can move in, which allows more options for rental, and it just creates a chain effect. It creates openings all across Canada, especially B.C.

At ZED Kyshan Homes, we build advanced-technology construction with some of the top global manufacturers in Canada, and we are classified as a pre-manufactured home company. We build and construct purpose-built homes that respond directly to what the community needs. It’s not something that a developer thinks about building and just hopes that it is selling. It is built exactly for what we are given based on community and public response. This program enables a home to be built exactly for the homeowner that’s chosen.

The house itself is a net-zero home. It meets the net-zero-home climate standards for 2030 targets. It’s light steel construction, it’s non-combustible, and it has, importantly, the most reduced utility costs that you can imagine. Our net-zero homes’ utilities are zero, based off solar panel integration. We use the latest and greatest technology that you can build into a home today.

The problem that we have is that a pre-manufactured home does not meet typical conventional mortgages. There are requirements that the banks do not understand. With CMHC MLI select programs, it’s also more complicated, with there being a long wait time in order to be able to access funds to build these projects to make affordable housing.

What I’m committing to, and requesting, is a direct Indigenous-focused line of credit to enable companies like ours and others to build homes before buyers are secured. What the community actually needs is homes that work for this sort of program. Once construction is complete, a homeowner can assume a conventional mortgage at this time, and the line of credit that we use to make this project happen gets moved onto the next one.

[8:30 a.m.]

It’s a simple and scalable project, and it allows Indigenous homebuilders to move with urgency and without the red tape of bureaucracy. It would finally align funding tools with housing needs of the North.

We are already working with First Nations, Indigenous Services Canada and other partners to bring shovel-ready projects forward, including this fall and in the springtime. We would like to unlock this chain of problems, and it starts with the bottleneck issue with allowing accessible funding so we can build as we need to for our community members. ZED Kyshan Homes is ready, and we want to work with the province to make incredible projects across Canada.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you very much for the presentation. We’ll move on to questions by members.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Hello. Okay, that is very innovative. So you want a transferable LOC, right?

Nicholas Gascon: Yes, please.

Jennifer Blatherwick: And what would it be secured to?

Nicholas Gascon: It would be secured to the land and acquisition. The challenge right now is that a pre-manufactured home needs initial funding to get the project manufactured and sent over. However, the way a conventional mortgage provides funding, they provide it at foundation and land acquisition. But most importantly, where we need it the most is at lockup and drywall.

Well, most of the house is built ahead of time, except they expect you to build it in small spaces along. So we need a little bit more of the funding ahead of time so that we can get it manufactured. Once it arrives in Canada, a standard home takes two to three weeks to build, not nine to 12 months.

Jennifer Blatherwick: So you’re building it not locally? You’re building it….

Nicholas Gascon: It’s not built locally. It’s built in an advanced technology manufacturing facility that builds to absolute precision, and then it gets shipped over by container. Then it’s actually craned into place — wall, ceiling and floor components. A homeowner has 45 days to have their foundation prepped while this is being manufactured. It gets manufactured and shipped in that timeline. Then a crew puts it together in two or three weeks. And that’s done, complete, ready to move in.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Okay, thank you.

Elenore Sturko (Deputy Chair): Sorry, did you mention where they get manufactured?

Nicholas Gascon: Our manufacturing is in Tianjin. One of our top-rated manufacturers is at Gold Mantis as an example. We have many manufacturers, and they’re rated leading number one global manufacturer for all different industries — home, residential, industrial, construction.

Elenore Sturko (Deputy Chair): Are there any other companies in British Columbia using this housing provider?

Nicholas Gascon: This particular housing provider works in other areas of the globe.

Elenore Sturko (Deputy Chair): In Canada do they work?

Nicholas Gascon: They don’t, but there are other companies and manufacturers that we work with that do. There’s Dissan, Henifin. There are other manufacturers that do Vancouver- and Calgary-based projects. They are a small integration in…. But what’s happening here is this lack of ability to provide to Canada because of this funding bottleneck.

Elenore Sturko (Deputy Chair): Are they an independent company or are they a state-owned company?

Nicholas Gascon: They are an independent company.

Elenore Sturko (Deputy Chair): Okay, thank you.

Claire Rattée: This is kind of cheating because we’ve spoken about this before, but I was wondering if you could touch a little bit more on some of the materials that are used in the building process, specifically around the non-combustion, how much more durable they are, things like that, and the benefits of that sort of thing, and about the issues with being able to actually ship the containers here and some of the logistics around that.

Nicholas Gascon: No problem. I actually have a sample of what we’d use instead of drywall. This is called crystal board. I’ll let you pass it around, but it’s extremely strong.

Our homes are designed with 200-plus-year design. Imagine a 2-by-6 light steel construction wall, fibreglass or mineral in the interior, and four to six inches of exterior insulation, so essentially putting a parka on your home. If it’s airtight, very well insulated, your heating element actually drops about 80 percent. It’s a joke, but you could heat your house with a blow-dryer. It’s so well designed.

Instead of using heavy mechanical systems, you’d use an integrated in-floor heating system that’s sound-controlled. So you have an HRV-integrated in-floor heating, standard electric tank, and the home’s utilities are zero. The solar panels that come default with our homes actually offset all the electrical consumption.

When it comes to logistics, they come by container. So the product actually comes in wall panel assemblies in containers, and they get craned into place to build the building. So it actually takes two or three days to go to lockup, and that includes drywall. In a conventional mortgage, you’d get two different funds at the same time, as soon as basically the product arrives.

Paul Choi (Chair): Any other questions?

[8:35 a.m.]

Jennifer Blatherwick: Just to follow up a little bit on MLA Sturko’s question. You could be using this manufacturing method within British Columbia or within Canada. The challenge isn’t the manufacturing method; it’s the way that mortgages are designed to be linked to more traditional construction methods.

Nicholas Gascon: Correct. They would like to see more pieces being built as they go to hand over the funds, but we’re having most of it being manufactured early, and we need those funds directly to pay our manufacturers.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Especially because you’re a very young company, right? This is very new. So you don’t have billions of dollars of built-up capital or investment funds to….

Nicholas Gascon: Exactly, yes.

Paul Choi (Chair): Any other questions by members?

I actually have a question. Because I was a real estate lawyer, I dealt with mortgages, as well, from the legal side. My understanding is that when they give funding, for the most part — especially when it’s construction mortgages like this — they secure more on the value of the land as they’re being built. Is there…? I can see the concern the bank might have when it’s prefab, and it’s coming over. There is a potential that it may not be delivered and built right at that land but somewhere else.

Is there some sort of guarantee or assurance that you would give to the bank that once the prefab for the most funding has been given, actual homes will be constructed at that land that is supposed to be built to?

Nicholas Gascon: The homeowner will be registered on title of that land. The manufacturing and destination is to our Kitsumkalum IR 1 land. That will be destined right to the home that it would be practised. It would be a building permit required, address on file, homeowner secured on title, the manufacturing direct — everything will be going directly to there. As far as a guarantee goes, it would be a legal challenge to put it somewhere differently.

Paul Choi (Chair): Is there another province in Canada that has a funding model that works for prefab?

Nicholas Gascon: Not that I’ve seen.

Paul Choi (Chair): Not that you’ve seen. Are you aware of any other countries that have it?

Nicholas Gascon: Australia has a big component of prefab. They’re doing quite a bit over there. They’ve been doing especially light steel construction, but you see a lot of timber frame construction here. Light steel is the more common way of doing things. They’re very happy with the way things are being done because the precision is done. Their crews can be moving from site to site quite quickly.

Paul Choi (Chair): Okay. That’s good to know because most banks are international. So there should be major banks that are also operating in Australia that hopefully we can get some modelling from and see if we can implement it here.

Ron Bartlett: Perfect.

Paul Choi (Chair): Awesome. Thanks so much for your time and your presentation.

Okay, I will call up the next presenter. I’d like to call Ron Bartlett from Dr. R.E.M. Lee Hospital Foundation to come forward, please.

Thank you very much. You have five minutes for presentation, five minutes for questions. You can begin whenever you’re ready to go.

Dr. R.E.M. Lee Hospital Foundation

Ron Bartlett: Thank you. Just before, though, to acknowledge that we’re on Kitsumkalum land. We’re very shortly, like our sister community Kitselas, becoming a treaty First Nation as well.

Paul Choi (Chair): Amazing. Thank you so much.

Ron Bartlett: That’s where I’m an Elder in….

I’d like to present on seniors and housing in northwest B.C. The recommendations I have, just a summary, and I’ll repeat them after, is to build or expand the Terraceview long-term-care health facility, prepare adequate home and community care services and ensure the availability and affordability for seniors housing.

The context and current conditions in northwest British Columbia in the regional health service district of Terrace includes 25 First Nations communities, with numerous Indigenous people living in the cities. We have the highest concentration of Indigenous people in Canada living in northwest B.C. One out of two people living in the region is Indigenous.

From there, there are close to 50,000 band members in those 25 communities. We present a significant amount of the population. We’re suffering from some severe economic expansion.

[8:40 a.m.]

I say suffering because the expansion brings taxes to the province, but there’s no back pay for the people here that are impacted by all of the combined impacts that raise our rent up to Vancouver levels — $2,500 for a two-bedroom. We’re seniors with a pension of $1,700 a month. We’ve now got seniors on food bank lines, homeless seniors — people that built the country.

The province benefits from all of the economic activity, and the people that are living here, especially the Indigenous people, have no option. We’re not going anywhere. This is more than home. Because of that, our elders can’t afford to live here — period. Our students can’t afford to go to school here — period. You know, there’s really got to be some payback.

The long-term-care facility, Terraceview, has done a good job. They’re an excellent facility, and as a hospital foundation, we’ve supported them in every effort. We were instrumental in pushing for the new hospital, and now we’re focusing a lot on seniors needs.

But the seniors needs are so inadequate right now. Again, it’s an excellent facility and their long-term care…. They have recreational opportunities and others for seniors, but there are only 99 beds. In the northwest service hospital district, the one that developed the plan for the new hospital, they counted 100,000 people from Burns Lake, Haida Gwaii, Telegraph Creek to Kitimat. So 99 beds. Right now we’ve got the baby boomers coming into that need level.

Out of those 99 beds, 90 are designated long term, so it’s not even 99. Three are palliative care and hospice. Six are short stay for respite or convalescence.

The facility was built 41 years ago. It’s done a good job. Fifteen years ago they expanded it to having two more wings, which brought it up to 99. But that was 15 years ago, before the huge expansion of industry in the northwest. I could tell you who’s expanding, where they are, but 100 billion is a conservative figure. We’ve got three LNG facilities in progress — one built, the second phase coming. Each one of those…. The one in Kitimat was 50 billion, the Niska project is 40 billion, and so on. You know, very conservative, 100 billion. The increase of population is a major expansion of population in the region.

This is really, really cruel what we’re doing to seniors. The average wait time to get into Terraceview is 203 days, extending up to 549 days. My stepfather spent a year and a half in Mills Hospital waiting for Terraceview. Through diabetes, he had his legs amputated. The hospital is excellent for helping sick people, but they would put him in the day room in front of a TV, with a diaper, in a wheelchair, and at the end of the day, take him back, change his diaper, put him to bed. Today there is no day room in the new hospital. Basically, you stay in your room. It’s isolation, solitary confinement.

I spent a term on Northern Health’s board, as well, and understand today that it’s over $2,000 a day to keep a person in the hospital — $2,000 a day, much less in long-term. So the numbers don’t add up. Up to 50 percent of those beds can be occupied with seniors. The baby boom generation hasn’t even reached that need level.

I’m sorry. I’m running out of time, but this is so important.

The need level is so critical. When the baby boomers do get there, the hospital won’t have any room for sick people. It’ll be full of seniors being warehoused. That’s what they’re calling it: warehoused, in solitary confinement.

From there, we need help, and the urgency is now. These are the people that built the country, that paid the taxes, and what are we doing to them? Not kindness.

There’s a call to action that we really want to see. This standing committee…. The responsibility to the people that voted you in, that support you, is to expand and modernize the long-term-care facilities such as Terraceview, enhance home and community care options and reduce institutional pressure, and invest in affordable housing dedicated to seniors to meet rising costs and urgent needs.

In conclusion, we need a respectful and accessible, culturally safe seniors care centre in northwest B.C. The need is immediate and escalating, and we must act now to ensure that those who contributed so much to our society receive the care and housing they deserve.

Thank you.

[8:45 a.m.]

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you so much for the presentation.

We’ll go to questions.

Claire Rattée: It’s good to see you, Ron. Thank you for all the work that you’re doing and the advocacy. This is so important for our communities. We know that we are severely lacking when it comes to, especially, health care supports and supports for seniors housing. All of that is a huge issue.

At the end there, you kind of just touched really quickly on the home care piece, and that’s something that we have been hearing extensively throughout this consultation process from many other presenters — about the cost of home care, the barriers that are there with home care options. Because we know long-term care takes time to build out, I was wondering if you could touch a bit more about some of the barriers that we face specifically up north here.

Ron Bartlett: Certainly. Two things. Home care is dreadfully inadequate. We have a 97-year-old, my mother-in-law, living still independently. She qualified long ago for Terraceview. But in order to get there, she’d have to go to Ksyen Hospital. We refused to do that. So we’re paying $500 a day for 24-hour care — our family is — to keep her where she is. Home care would come in an hour or two a week maybe, a different worker every time.

I just came from Denmark where they have proper care for their seniors. They can put proper adequate time for each person. At 80, there’s a room reserved for them in an extended care home if they want it. Our country — we used to lead. We are in the basement right now as far as what we’re doing, and it’s cruel to our seniors.

I’ve had so many on the seniors society and others say that they’ve been offered MAiD, if you can imagine. They’re not sick. They’re just seniors, but offering to kill them — that’s terrible. If you don’t know about it, you should really look into it. It’s not a way to get rid of a negative budget item. You don’t kill them; you help them.

We’re a caring country, a country we should be proud of, and we’re not proud of that. When we resort to those extreme measures, that’s just terrible.

Claire, I’m sorry. The second part of your question?

Claire Rattée: That’s okay. I was just talking about, in general, because I know five minutes is a short period of time, the lack of accessibility to home care options and the barriers that that presents.

Ron Bartlett: That would be an option, but at some point, long-term care is not something you can do in the home. If somebody has mobility issues, if they’re dementia, whatever, they need long-term care.

I was visiting our office the other day, and I heard talk around the hospital that there was a dementia care patient in there who was wandering a bit. So now he’s strapped to his bed, screaming in his room, and that’s not…. It’s cruel. We wouldn’t do that to an animal. If we did, the SPCA would be after you and taking you to court. But we’re doing it to our seniors.

It isn’t just a bump. I think maybe somebody in the accounting process is thinking that the baby boomers are going to go through the system. But here, the Indigenous baby boom — 50 percent of the population comes ten years later. So it’s not a blip. It’s going to be here, and you’ve got to plan for it.

Just in our little community, out of 850 people, we’ve got 250 people over the age of 60 in our little community, and we’re just part of the greater 25 First Nations around. It’s not going to go away. It’s just going to get worse. When the baby boomers come in to that need level, it’s just going to be an explosion of need, and that new hospital that we paid $600 million for that costs us $2,000 a day to keep a patient will be full of seniors warehoused. That’s what they’re calling it — warehousing.

You folks probably aren’t too far behind me. If that’s where you want to spend your last days without dignity, and then it’s taken away totally…. Again, we wouldn’t do that to our pets, and it’s sad we’re doing it to seniors.

I hate to be negative like this, but there are options. I’m really pleased to hear Mr. Gascon’s proposals and others — that we can help alleviate the housing crisis. But again, critical care, that last part of life, is severely lacking, and we really need an infusion of cash. We need to build right now with solutions that can be put in place right away.

Elenore Sturko (Deputy Chair): I don’t have a question. I just want to make a comment. I don’t think you’re being negative. I think that you’re being honest about the reality. I think you painted quite a disturbing and sad picture about the reality for some seniors in your community, and I just wanted to thank you for that.

Paul Choi (Chair): Any other questions? No.

[8:50 a.m.]

I also just want to say that my mother is going through care and things like that as well. So we are intimately aware of the challenge that poses. Thanks so much for your insight given to the committee today.

We will move on to the next presenter. I’d like to call Ms. Denise Gagnon, from Skeena Heartbeat Society, to come forward, please.

Thanks for joining us today.

Denise Gagnon: Thank you for having me.

Paul Choi (Chair): You have five minutes for the presentation and five minutes for the questions.

Skeena Heartbeat Society

Denise Gagnon: Hi, I’m Denise Gagnon. I’m representing Skeena Heartbeat Society. We’re a grassroots society working on filling the gaps in our community. Just as you heard Ron speak about the seniors and the struggles in our community, we’re looking at it from a different lens as well. We’re looking at building neighbourhoods back up and with resiliency.

One of the assets that we have, our recommendation, is community-led food security infrastructure in rural and northern B.C. We’ve done a pilot project over the last three years of doing garden consultations for free in community and reducing any challenges for people to grow their own food in their front lawns.

The reason why we’re promoting front lawns is to have social inclusion so that we can see and have eyes on who’s struggling, maybe, in the community, such as the seniors. We do know that home care is a struggle in our community and that people are left alone. This is a way that we can be in community and gently be in community.

Our desire is to also have mentorship, always looking for that mentorship between generations. We come from a generation that has grown their food and that has a lot of knowledge. We want to invite them to come out of their houses and have younger children come and be inspired in curiosity, to come away from technology.

For instance, last year, the number one thing that parents expressed to us was that they were worried about the expense of feeding their kids fruit. Also, what came out of that is understanding that for two of the nurseries that we had, one-third of what they brought in was fruit trees. Then the new ownership with Canadian Tire also just went on with the last year’s. We wouldn’t even have had the supply for the demand that we had. Those are things that we’re really learning, because we’re having intimate conversations with homeowners and families.

What we’re asking for is a $3 million community resilience fund. Those would provide us with microgrants to the neighbourhoods that want to get going — that was expressed to us — and that have come forward to us and want to lead their own neighbourhoods. That’s what we’re really working towards is having people have their own areas to be self-run, so that we would provide overall garden expertise or soil testing, etc.

Why I got into food security was that in 2007 we had a fatal mudslide. I watched our community dissolve within three days of not having the food trucks come in. That’s when I started going to agriculture meetings. That’s when I started to ask questions. We went to the region, and we started a northwest regional food action network, talking to all of the regions and asking. We all had the same challenges.

It’s a big number, but the reason is that we have no food coordinator that is full-time in our community. That becomes a challenge; the challenge is to keep going and to really create some food infrastructure.

We are also asking for $1.5 million to fund peer support and community connector roles. That is key. We have a trained, skilled outreach worker that is ready to teach — and a team to go out. Typically in Terrace, what we have right now is bylaw officers who move people around the community and actually move them to the Highway of Tears.

[8:55 a.m.]

We have a critical need in this community. We have watched our community members, friends and family just degrade because we don’t really have any supports. Going to Prince George — it’s just the wait time. You hear about this all around the province.

We do have some really key people in our community that want to mentor as well, and that’s what our whole philosophy is based on: mentorship. If people leave or move away or something happens, we have somebody else to step in. We’re basing our model on a lot of different models that are around the world, not just our perception of it, and it’s a 12-strong leadership model. We’re constantly mentoring everybody to also step into that role, which is really key.

I can see I’m going to run out of time, too.

The third one, which is really effective, is capacity-building — a $2 million capacity-building fund for all of the organizations. This is one thing where, again, the mentorship is really key. For training up here, it’s very difficult to get away. We’re thankful for Zoom, thankful for online, which has really helped a lot. That has been exceptional. But we need to be able to distribute grants to other organizations to do capacity-building, project management and succession. The reason is just that we need these stronger partnerships.

We’re looking at a model in Cowichan Valley that is very successful. I have talked to Cindy numerous times to see how we can duplicate that. They also do a mentorship program too. They would be actually mentoring and overseeing us, which would be significant in seeing that as well.

I’m going to wrap this up and just say that we’re very hungry for systemic change. I think that with investments in rural communities, you see the ripple changes. We’re interconnected. There’s such a small population that, with well-placed investments…. We’re ready to measure everything. We track outcomes; we’re ready. We want to see this because this is all of the well-being of our community.

We’re directly supporting other goals of the province as well. We’re looking at B.C. poverty reduction. We’re always checking in to see how we’re measuring up to them and how we can also be at that level of care and standard. Thank you for my time.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you so much for your presentation. Questions by members.

Claire Rattée: Thank you, Denise. I appreciate so much all of the work that you do in our community. I know that you guys are taking on a lot to try and bring a lot of the different pieces of non-profit work in the community together, and there is so much need. I don’t necessarily have a question. I just really wanted to say thank you; I know you touched on a lot of different things there.

I really appreciate you bringing forward the food security piece. As you know, that’s something that’s really important to me. I think it’s helpful to put it in context for everybody else on this committee — just how important that is. We only have one road in and one road out. We’ve been in far too many dangerous situations already where we have been at extreme risk of not having food up here. We don’t have the agricultural development. We need it. We need food security up here.

Steve Morissette: Thank you for your presentation and for the work you’re doing here. I, too, am from a rural area in the south. We have the same challenges. We have passes on both sides of us. In the wintertime, oftentimes, we’re cut off.

I’m just curious about your food security piece. You’re looking to grow in people’s front yards, particularly for seniors — or is it only for seniors? — to grow food there for them or for the community. I’m not clear.

Denise Gagnon: We do a pilot project Food Out Front where anybody in the community can fill out a form, and we go there and then assess any of the challenges or barriers that they have to growing food. The model is based on a business model, but because we see rising food costs so much, we’re just doing this for volunteers, which is again, one of the burnouts, right? Even the gas; we had to stop last year because we couldn’t afford to keep going out in the community.

[9:00 a.m.]

What we’re hoping to do is identify a need in the community, such as a senior or a family or somebody that’s in need and then plant around them. We really want to make sure that we’re supporting the person in need — but no shame, no identification, just really supporting them. Then, that way, we’re building stronger families and stronger seniors and, hopefully, then building stronger neighbourhoods from the neighbourhood up, from one family at a time.

We know the struggles. Ron talked about the seniors and home care. We see it, and we know that seniors are alone in their housing. We know that home care is very inefficient in our community, and the supports that are for helping seniors aren’t meeting the needs.

It’s devastating. This is one way of us just trying to look at it differently and say: “How do we help?” By just getting into the neighbourhoods. Then so-and-so can say: “Oh, Mr. Jones. We haven’t seen him for a while.” Right? So somebody can go knock on his door, in a very gentle way.

Then, also, the kids need to come out. It’s a way of just being gentle into the neighbourhoods without an inspiration.

We were excited, too, because we had a science…. One of my friends is a science geek and stuff. I was saying: “How great would it be to go through the neighbourhoods and do a beneficial insect class during the summers?” So we’re also supporting the parents that are at work and stuff like that. We’re really mindful that there are a lot of stresses on families right now, whatever age group. We’re just trying to be gentle in that — but really specific on getting nutritious food into people.

We know mental health is directly linked to what people are. But again, no shame. We have that a lot in our world, shaming people into different choices and stuff like that. We just want to present it as a normal option moving forward.

Steve Morissette: Great work. Thank you.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Thank you so much for your presentation. This was lovely.

In Cowichan Valley, were you talking about Cindy Daniels?

Denise Gagnon: Yeah.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Okay. Yeah.

I was just wondering: $3 million is obviously to be spread over many initiatives in different communities?

One of the challenges, of course — in my community, as well, even though it’s much milder weather — is that we have a lot of food security growing programs, but preserving the food, because winter is the hardest part…. You’re at the beginning of your project, so you’re interested in having front-yard gardens. I was wondering: is there any thought to also having food preservation education?

Denise Gagnon: Absolutely.

We work in partnership with all of the existing organizations. We really love — I love — collaboration. It is really the key to success in any community.

‘Ksan garden place also does preservation, and their coordinator is only part-time. So that is something that we’re looking at. How do we go to…. Also in Kitsumkalum, Dakota is doing amazing work as well. So we’re also looking at who’s working at initiatives in our community that aren’t fully supported yet. How do we support them and bring more people to them and be ambassadors?

When we’re constantly out in neighbourhoods, we’re the ambassadors. We’re figuring out resources for people. We have soil challenges. Fruit preservation is number one, but also a root cellar — looking at root cellars. We’re also talking to RDKS, the agricultural land. How do we get into there?

There’s the cricket association, as well as the Terrace Totem Saddle Club. They’re ready and willing to accept us in there, as well, and to help us with any of the challenges that we may have with delivery — like, you know, watering the berry bushes.

It’s really neat to be able to work together with people and really bring people together at the table and go: what do you hear? What are your solutions? And then really work together on those, so that everyone feels like their voice is heard.

That is something that I find. Sometimes with our community, it’s a challenge, because communication doesn’t seem to be the key driving…. Yeah. With this, by working with organizations but also working with families and neighbourhoods and schools, we’ll be able to communicate back to the community exactly what they’re saying — not what we want to hear, but exactly what is being said.

[9:05 a.m.]

Definitely, a root cellar and even a walipini greenhouse…. We’re looking at that as well so that we can extend our growing periods.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Sorry. That took us way over the time.

Denise Gagnon: Sorry.

Jennifer Blatherwick: But thank you. You and I should talk about gardening for, like, an hour.

Denise Gagnon: Okay. Yes.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you so much for that — and your presentation.

We will move on and have Mr. Ron Bartlett come back, this time to present to us regarding the Skeena Valley Seniors Society.

Skeena Valley Seniors Society

Ron Bartlett: Thank you. Diana Penner, who is head of the Skeena Valley Seniors Society, is in Vancouver and is unable to be here and just texted and asked me if I would read the presentation, as we can’t submit it in written form. So if you can bear with me?

Terrace’s seniors society, Skeena Valley, has 2,500 members. They’re very active. They’ve been advocating to almost a social action to try and stop the province from taking down modern buildings that could be repurposed for seniors.

Just to go on from there, the main thrust is to keep rights and dignity for seniors. The first point is that they’d like to see an appointment of a provincial minister, federal and provincial, for older persons, seniors, to advocate for seniors’ issues. They’d also like that person to be able to have enough budget to travel to all regions of the province to hear and advocate for seniors — not just the Lower Mainland, not just where you live, but all the province. We are not going anywhere in this area. We age in the area, and we need services.

To enact a national aging strategy grounded on human rights that hears and responds to seniors’ issues.

To invest in age-friendly policies across all sectors supporting aging seniors.

Support the UN Convention on the Rights of Older Persons.

For financial security, they’re asking to implement and increase the guaranteed income supplement, the GIS, that matches the annual cost of living, and increase the Canada Pension Plan and the survivor’s benefit by 25 percent. Maintain the average retirement age of 65 and begin GIS and CPP payments.

Allow working seniors to earn up to $34,000 tax-free, $10,000 more than now. Incidentally, I did notice that the living wage now is poverty line, $36,000 a year or so. That’s not a big ask.

Extend mandatory age withdrawals of the RIF from 71 to 73. Put an end to the RIF mandatory withdrawals age restrictions.

No clawback of the OAS benefits for seniors who meet financial limits, regardless of RRSP or RIF withdrawals.

Do not support current government plans to impose new taxes on housing equity or capital gains on the sale of primary residences for seniors.

To provide entitlement to the estates of all residents in Canada for full pension plan. And housing and long-term care. They are asking for consideration in that, then also for adequate medical, where prescriptions and eye care and dental care are funded. Again, when you’re trying to live on $1,700 a month…. Most seniors can’t afford the rates for dentists and prescriptions and eye care and all of that.

Again, providing age-appropriate housing. We’ve had some excellent opportunities here to listen of what options may be there, but we really need it. We need age-appropriate housing and for our seniors to be treated properly.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you so much for the presentation and for being willing to step in as well.

We will go to questions. I completely understand if you may not be able to answer all of them.

Ron Bartlett: I’m a member of the society, and I may be able to help. I will if I can.

Paul Choi (Chair): Okay, amazing.

Questions?

Steve Morissette: Thank you for your presentation. You asked for a provincial ministry specifically for seniors. I’m just curious. Do you see the seniors advocate here at all? There is a….

[9:10 a.m.]

Ron Bartlett: I don’t know who that is. Who would that be?

Steve Morissette: Honestly, it’s a new one. There was a woman up until last year.

Ron Bartlett: I think that you need a ministry. It’s such a wide-ranging need. Again, the largest population is the baby boomers, and right now they’re in that level. They voted this last provincial election. So who was there…? A majority of them…. They’re part of society and the largest demographic, so they really need some help. It is a time of need for them, so that’s the recommendation.

Steve Morissette: Yeah. No, I understand that. I’m surprised, being involved with seniors, that you don’t know, haven’t heard of or met the seniors advocate, because their job is to travel the province and bring forward recommendations and….

Ron Bartlett: Well, I’m out there a lot, and I don’t travel in the same circles, obviously. But I think we need, probably, more than an advocate. We need some money behind it, where that person has a sufficient budget to get out there and meet people.

You know, we’re in the far end of the province. But the resources are extracted here. We fuel the province for taxes, and we’re the ones that are actually suffering for it now because of the combined impacts of all the developments, the different people from industry building homes here.

We’re not in the resource industry income level. We’re at the bottom of the barrel, but yet we’re made to compete with them for housing and for everything else. I think it’s fine and dandy…. We want to see jobs for our children, but we also want to see fairness for the people that built the country.

Steve Morissette: Sure. You make great points.

Paul Choi (Chair): Okay, any other questions?

Claire Rattée: I’ll just quickly…. If there are no questions, I’ll just kind of answer that question.

It’s been a few years since the seniors advocate came up here. Diana, who was going to present here, has requested quite a few times that he come up here, and we haven’t gotten anywhere with that yet. I think that’s part of why her ask around this is around making sure that people travel the entire province when they’re going to be advocating on behalf of seniors, because it’s….

Again, I know you guys are all sick and tired of me saying this when we’re travelling on that plane together, but people really don’t pay attention to this area, and we struggle with getting those representatives up here to actually see firsthand what those issues are.

Ron Bartlett: Yeah, those are the first and second recommendations — to appoint a provincial minister for seniors, older persons, and to enable that person to have a sufficient budget to do their job, to serve the province and not just the people in Vancouver. And that’s what…. Our alienation seems to happen.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation once again.

We’ll call up our next presenter, Coun. Michelle Martins from the district of Kitimat. Thank you so much for joining us today.

You have five minutes for the presentation, five minutes for the questions, and you can begin whenever you’re ready to go.

District of Kitimat

Michelle Martins: Thank you. Good morning. My name is Michelle Martins. I’m a councillor with the district of Kitimat, and I’m here today to speak to you about the urgent need to fund a year-round shelter in Kitimat as part of the 2026 budget.

Currently in Kitimat, there is a transition house that has been operating since 1996 that women and children can access, but it’s only been in the past decade that shelter services have been created for men to access. I want to note that both operations are run by Tamitik Status of Women, and they have been experiencing at or over capacity for the last ten years with both operations.

Currently, the Kitimat cold weather shelter operates from November 1 to March 31 annually. This shelter serves a critical lifeline during extreme weather, but also the need for safe, warm shelter exists year-round. Weather unpredictability is increasing due to climate change. Sudden drops in temperature, wind chills and extended raining periods put unsheltered people at constant risk, even outside of traditional winter months.

In spring through fall, those who are familiar with the area know that we have predatory animals as well, which do pose a significant risk, because in Kitimat, what we are finding is that our homelessness is hidden. People are often going into the bush or camping at riverbanks to seek shelter through their own means.

People who experience homelessness often have chronic health conditions that are worsened by exposure, regardless of the season, including asthma, diabetes, heart conditions and, of course, mental health.

[9:15 a.m.]

It’s my understanding that people who are chronically unhoused have half the life expectancy of those of us who have access to shelter throughout our lives.

Shelters also provide more than just warmth. They are a gateway to services — housing supports, health care and addiction recovery — that are harder to access when these facilities are closed for half the year. When Kitimat’s shelter closes, often our homeless population is not stagnant. It doesn’t just disappear. Often it migrates to Terrace and exacerbates the social issues that Terrace is experiencing.

Preventing a crisis is always more cost effective than responding to it. At my time with Tamitik Status of Women, we noted that it cost us about 1/10 to house somebody overnight than it would if they had accessed a medical facility — 1/10 of the cost.

For local context, from November to April this year, Kitimat saw 481 total stays at our cold weather shelter, largely driven by adult men. Then, just to reiterate, when the shelter closes, there is nowhere where homeless men can access in Kitimat.

While our local shelter statistics end in April, the need, of course, persists. Many days in May this year saw temperatures at or below 5 degrees, and our coastal location means both wind chills and a lot of precipitation, regardless of the month. On May 27 this year, our town recorded a substantial 47.6 mm of rain.

Again, I urge the budget committee to commit funding to operate cold weather shelter services on a year-round basis, with consistent staffing and service provision, strong partnerships with outreach and housing workers and built-in flexibility to scale during severe weather. Health emergencies can be lessened.

This is not just about shelter. It’s about creating a continuum of care that moves people from survival mode into a place of stability and hopefully a place where they are able to not only meet their needs but also achieve goals that they have for themselves.

All of the homeless people that I have worked with have aspirations. It’s just that they can’t get their footing. They don’t know where to start. That process is overwhelming, especially if they have lived a lifetime of instability and abuse. I have yet to meet a person who is unhoused who hasn’t had that experience.

In closing, homelessness is a year-round reality. Our response should be as consistent as the need. Let’s not wait for another crisis, another cold snap or a preventable death, to act. Some of you may be aware that many homeless people have died in this area throughout the years, and even recently. With strategic investment in a year-round weather shelter, we can improve lives, reduce pressures on emergency medical systems and build a more humane and resilient community.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you so much for your presentation.

Going to questions by members.

Claire Rattée: Thank you, Michelle, for coming and advocating for this. You know I’m a huge supporter of this.

I was just going to say that during budget estimates, I did ask the Housing Minister about this, and I was given a pretty clear response that if there was a need in Kitimat and we had a facility that yes, of course, they would fund it. Nothing has come from that yet, but I will follow up on it. Hopefully, this is something that’ll make it into the budget recommendations, and hopefully we will see that in Kitimat, because there is a huge need there.

I think you and I and a few others have definitely been, for over a decade now, saying there’s homelessness going on in Kitimat. It might be hidden compared to what you see in Terrace, but there is a significant need there.

I was wondering. Do you by any chance have the statistics right now on how many people using the emergency weather shelter are men? I know anecdotally that back when I used to volunteer there, it was primarily men, and there was just one woman in particular that was frequently there. But I think just to kind of paint that picture of how much of a need there is for men to be able to have something that they can access and something that’s maybe a little bit even lower barrier….

[9:20 p.m.]

For some of the women that we know have a bit more struggles, going to the women’s shelter is not really the right fit for them — so something that’s a bit lower barrier that is available all the time when they feel the need.

Michelle Martins: Totally, yes. I want to say that you have a sense of knowledge of both the shelter needs and services in Kitimat.

Yes, the statistics I have from this last shelter season, so November 2024 to April 2025…. There were a total of 470 stays. I believe that there are four beds for men and four beds for women in two separate rooms at the shelter. So 470 stays for men and 11 for adult females.

And yes, as you mentioned, MLA Rattée, we’re seeing the need with men, because there is a transition house for women and children, but communal living isn’t for everybody, and to be at the transition house, you do need to already have some level of stability. You do need to have some level of emotional regulation. You need to exhibit safety around children. So there are women, as well, who are not good fits for the transition house, even though they technically are women and could go there.

Claire Rattée: Sorry, can I follow up really quick on that? Just to put a finer point on that, because that number may sound low, we have a population of 8,000. That is an incredibly high number of people to be accessing a shelter with a population of 8,000, right?

To put a finer point on the need there, or another finer point on the weather. We’re in the middle of June, and it rained last night. So it’s not like you can just not operate a shelter in certain months of the year and expect people to be able to sleep outside comfortably.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Thank you so much for your presentation. Let me clarify. You’re a councillor, as in city councillor for the district of Kitimat?

Michelle Martins: Yes.

Jennifer Blatherwick: Okay. Because you’re saying you worked at the…?

Michelle Martins: Yes.

Jennifer Blatherwick: So you’ve gone to the Ministry of Housing, and you said: “The district of Kitimat has land; we have a building; just give us money.”

Michelle Martins: Yes. Currently, the shelter operates out of a B.C. Housing–owned building. So they have the space.

There was even…. My first year on council, our council voted to fund that operation during the spring and summer months. I think we were willing to commit over $100,000, but on the contingency that we needed permission from B.C. Housing for that operation to continue. Tamitik Status of Women was also able. They had the capacity to keep running it but, for whatever reason, B.C. Housing refused to let that operation continue for that year.

Jennifer Blatherwick: So you’ve already got land for expansion?

Michelle Martins: Not for expansion.

It’s actually kind of weird the way it’s set up. It is run out of Douglas Place, which is an affordable housing complex for individuals that B.C. Housing runs. And then there are two rooms out of that complex — they’re upstairs, so they’re not accessible. If you’re somebody who’s homeless with mobility issues, it’s not a fit for you. You’d be forced to go to Terrace or elsewhere. So those two rooms — one is for men and one is for women, out of, I think, 23 rooms that they have total there.

Claire Rattée: It’s there, but it’s not being utilized. That’s the most frustrating….

Michelle Martins: Yeah. So for two-thirds of the year, those two rooms sit empty.

Jennifer Blatherwick: So you’re just asking for funding to operate space that already exists?

Michelle Martins: Yes. There is a building and capacity, but funding for that.

Claire Rattée: It’s not going to cost much.

Michelle Martins: Those warmer months.

Paul Choi (Chair): Okay, if there are no other questions, thank you so much for your presentation.

The committee will take a quick, five-minute recess at this time.

I also want to say thank you so much for all the presenters and all those that are sticking around to listen to other presenters. I can definitely see that there’s so much passion and genuine desire and advocacy that exists in the northwest. And I can say that we really appreciate your insight and your voice today. Thank you.

The committee recessed from 9:23 a.m. to 9:36 a.m.

[Paul Choi in the chair.]

Paul Choi (Chair): Welcome back. We will call the committee back to order, and we’ll go to our next presenter. We have Mayor Sean Bujtas from the city of Terrace presenting to us.

Thank you so much for joining us. You have five minutes for the presentation, five minutes for questions. You can begin whenever you’re ready to go.

City of Terrace

Sean Bujtas: Magic. Thank you. Appreciate you all being here. I apologize, but I have not come prepared at all. I am just going to go and talk to you about things that are dear to what I feel the community is being impacted by.

I will maybe preface…. You know, the municipality of Terrace is very grateful for the province and the Northwest Resource Benefits Alliance and the funding model that came through with that. But what I would like to talk about here is impacts of industry in northwest B.C. and what it’s doing to Terrace.

In northern communities, we all understand that we’re resource communities. The reality is that without resources, I wouldn’t exist as a human and most of us wouldn’t because this is why our parents moved to these communities. What we’re seeing now is fast growth, which is great, but it’s coming on the shoulders of Terrace taxpayers, and it is completely unjust and unfair.

We see all these megaprojects coming through. LNG Canada came into Kitimat. We saw the transmission lines built 12 years ago. We see Brucejack; we see Red Chris; we see the Port of Prince Rupert. Trigon just announced that they’re going ahead. We see Ksi Lisims coming in the Nisga’a Nation. We’ve got Cedar coming in Kitimat. For some reason, it’s okay that that costs the taxpayers of Terrace money, and I, for the life of me, don’t understand how.

How do we get to a point that it’s not costing taxpayers money in Terrace? We can support these projects. It does benefit the northwest, it benefits the province, but it needs to also benefit Terrace.

To put that into perspective, LNG Canada FID in 2018…. The city of Terrace has raised taxes over 40 percent since FID. I can’t do it again. I cannot. We need to continue to move these projects forward, but the communities like Terrace need that support.

You look at…. With LNG Canada coming in, Kitimat has now got LNG Canada. They’ve got Rio Tinto. Cedar looks like it’s coming. They’re collecting $34 million a year in industrial taxation, a town two-thirds my size. I get all the social impacts from this project. My entire budget is $31 million. It’s not sustainable.

When we talked to the Premier about road projects, I joked about how Terrace is on a 212-year plan because I cannot afford…. If I pave a road today…. I’m rebuilding 400 metres of road a year right now, exclusive RBA because that money is going into roads. We have 85 kilometres of road. That means at that rate, if I rebuild a road today, I’m not rebuilding it for 212 years.

The burden continues to be on the commercial and the residential in Terrace, so we need to find a way to support these folks. We need to make sure that these projects are not costing our taxpayers money. I’m not saying these projects shouldn’t go through. I want these projects to go through. We need to create jobs. We need to create wealth for the province. We need to create wealth for the provincial government, but it cannot be at the expense of Terrace taxpayers.

There needs to be support to the municipality, not just in an RBA to support infrastructure. We also need to support day-to-day business inside the municipality. It’s unreasonable. We watch all of these funding agreements come to First Nations, which is great. They sign these impact agreements, and so they should, but what is coming for the municipality that’s impacted? Just more cost to the taxpayer. Really, what I’m here to say is that we need to find a way to support communities that are impacted drastically.

I know my MLA has talked about some of the hardships in Terrace in the House, and I’m sure some of you have heard these facts, but the reality is it’s getting worse. You know, I heard it the other day, taking some of the numbers I talk about. The greater Vancouver area has 2.643 million people. The 2023 homeless count was 4,821. One in every 548 people is homeless in the greater Vancouver area. In Terrace, there are 12,500 people and 156 homeless. That means one in 83, eight times the rate of the Lower Mainland.

To put that into perspective, as my MLA put this in the House, to make that the same per capita homelessness in Vancouver, you would have to make the entire city of Langley homeless tomorrow. I am confident the provincial government would declare a state of emergency if you had that much homeless in the greater Vancouver area.

[9:40 a.m.]

These are the impacts of these major projects. If this keeps growing, the supports aren’t there, and we need help.

Paul Choi (Chair): Thank you so much for the presentation, mayor.

We’ll go to questions by members.

Jennifer Blatherwick: I am from the Lower Mainland, and so other than my experiences here, a little bit of literature and Claire’s advocacy, my knowledge is not firsthand.

What we’ve heard today is that a lot of the struggle around housing is the knock-on effect of having more people come in, and then it raises the rents. But it sounded to me like you were talking about that there were more ancillary effects of having the increased development, and I’m hoping you can just take a little bit more time to talk about that.

Sean Bujtas: Well, you see with any resource project, crime goes up. Drug use goes up. Terrace has got the second-highest overdose rate next to the Downtown Eastside. All of these things have just been going up and up, and there’s not been the supports in place to fix those.

LNG Canada comes in. The province didn’t come in and say, “Well, we need to support Terrace because it’s going to be impacted by this,” and add four members. We’ve already got an overextended RCMP. Because we’re such a poor town, we don’t have enough members as it is. Then the supports aren’t there to help those folks. We’re seeing it all over.

The big problem is because we’re this hub, nobody else has those resources either. Everybody is coming to Terrace. When the rapid response to housing came out in 2017, we were one of the first to get it. It made a ton of sense. We put 50 units in. I had 70 homeless people at the time. I’m no mathematician, but that sounds like I’m going to have 20 homeless people pretty soon. Well, the next year I still had 70, and that whole building was full.

It’s because you build the resources, and people come. The people that say that “if you build it, they’ll come” is false…. It’s not. It’s true. You still need to build the resources for people, but if you’re only centralizing them in this one location, it’s all going to just keep coming in.

Jennifer Blatherwick: So what you’re asking for is a larger share of the benefits that are coming to the region, but a financial support that can be like some kind of fund…?

Sean Bujtas: Yeah, the municipality needs funding for operations so that extra operation cost is not being shouldered by the taxpayer.

A $32 million budget — I’m spending almost $1 million mitigating homelessness. Why am I mitigating that? That’s the province’s responsibility, but I’m spending that money. Quite frankly, it’s garbage. It’s just unacceptable.

If I didn’t have to do that, I could lower taxes by 5 percent tomorrow. Instead, I’m increasing them 7, 10, 11, and it’s just going and going. It is not fair to my residents that this continues to happen.

Paul Choi (Chair): Any other questions?

Claire Rattée: Thank you for all the advocacy that you do for Terrace, and we’re very fortunate to have you as the mayor here.

I was hoping maybe you could talk a little bit more about some of the effects of crime in the area — those kinds of effects that are happening because we have such a sharp increase in unhoused populations, people with substance use disorders and all of these kind of impacts where we’ve seen such an increase in crime in the area.

For example, I know that all of the dealerships now, if you have to take your vehicle in to get service, they tell you, you can either leave your windows rolled down, or you can expect them to be smashed while they’re staying here. Then you’re going to have to run it through insurance. That’s just expected.

I’m wondering if you could just talk a little bit more about some of those really negative impacts that we’ve seen. I know you talked about the need for more members for the RCMP but why that’s so necessary and all of the problems that we’re seeing in the community as a result.

[9:45 a.m.]

Sean Bujtas: Yeah, it’s tough, all this additional crime. You have store owners that have baseball bats behind their counters because they’re fearful that somebody is going to come in there. You’ve got small businesses that are being hit, windows being smashed two, three times a month. The problem is a small business can’t afford that, and they’re going to hit a point where they’re just going to collapse, and we’re going to lose business. And if we lose a business, that’s a taxpayer we’re losing, creating this trickle effect.

But I am appreciative that the ReVOII program is in Terrace, and it’s working. I think it needs to be expanded. It needs more resources. I think we have to also reconsider what a repeat offender is, because right now you can only go into ReVOII if you’re a repeat offender. Well, if I’ve committed a crime five times, and I haven’t gone to court yet, I’m not a repeat offender. It doesn’t make any sense.

So those are the kind of things that I think need to be looked at, but I do appreciate that program. It has brought things down or stabilized things, I’ll say, but it’s not got us to where we need to be, and it’s tough.

Paul Choi (Chair): Okay, well, thank you so much for your presentation today.

I will call…. If there is any other business from the committee…. No? Okay. Thank you, everyone who presented.

That concludes our meeting today here. Our committee will be in Courtenay this afternoon for our next public hearing.

I will seek a motion to adjourn.

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 9:47 a.m.