The high cost and lack of availability of housing on Salt Spring make it difficult for many people, including workers, to continue to live here. Without a diverse community, Salt Spring will struggle to meet the challenges of climate change and other worsening issues. According to the Salt Spring Island Foundation's 2025 Living Wage Report, the average Salt Spring family spends more than 40% of their income on housing. 

Do you support the creation of more affordable housing on Salt Spring within sustainable population limits? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Gary Holman: YES I will support rezoning proposals offering affordable housing (ie, consistent with the current OCP definition), which ensures priority for local residents and affordability over time by means of housing agreements. Increasing SSI's supply of affordable housing disconnected from market forces is the only way a diverse community can be sustained given our very limited water and infrastructure. Such proposals could include multi-family rentals, co-op and co-housing, worker housing and land trust initiatives. I will propose a designated Trust housing planner and work with other agencies at the local, regional and senior government levels to coordinate actions and help secure funding. I will also support inclusion of SSI in the Provincial Speculation and Vacancy Tax (SVT) and collaborate with the Province to clarify and enforce Short Term Rental Vacation (STVR) bylaws and regulations.  

Robin Jenkinson: YES I want my children—and the many children I’ve taught in Salt Spring school gardens and on environmental field trips—to have the opportunity to live here as adults. I would use site-specific rezonings and housing agreements to secure permanent affordability, especially favouring resident-controlled co-ops and non-profit models of affordable housing in Ganges, including artist live/work housing inspired by Vancouver’s Core Artists Co-op. Employer-supported affordable housing models used in Whistler and Banff, where local businesses help address workforce housing needs, might also work, while remaining within water, infrastructure, climate and ecological limits. Working with CHF BC, housing groups, First Nations, the CRD, water districts, employers and community investors, I would support development of a grant-ready pipeline of projects. 

Eric March: YES Support for not just housing but actual homes is a central part of my platform. We need diverse housing options for our diverse community, from tiny house villages and home shares to small apartments and even single family homes. Our workforce and seniors deserve room to grow and thrive in our community. Many other jurisdictions have used creative zoning options to limit housing to locals and workers to ensure it is not open to the wider market, Salt Spring should be doing the same. I’d also like to see the Trust and other local governance work together to build a housing authority, something else that has been successful in other jurisdictions.

Ethan Wilding: YES Yes to more affordable homes within demonstrated ecological and servicing limits. I would not commit to a fixed island-wide population or housing cap before seeing the evidence. Where and how we build matters. I would advance amendments to Land Use Bylaw 355 for modest apartments and townhouses near services, support non-profit housing, and give existing homes a practical path to safe, lawful use (ADUs). Where added density is granted for affordable housing, the agreement should specify who the homes serve, what they cost, how long affordability lasts, and who checks compliance. Water and habitat protection must be part of that work. I would also begin exploring whether desalination could contribute to our long-term water supply, considering its cost, energy use, and effects on marine life.

Bryan Young: YES Our rules say ‘yes’ to the wrong housing and ‘no’ to the right housing: a large seasonal home proceeds as a right, while non-profit projects face costly, uncertain processes and unfair opposition. As trustee I will propose: -Pre-zoning serviced land in Ganges for affordable and rental housing through the OCP/LUB update, so proponents are clear on the process and aren't starting from scratch. -Working with my fellow trustee, the CRD, LCC, and water and sewer providers to move projects like King's Lane and the CRD’s Drake Road property forward. -Exploring expansion of secondary suites throughout Ganges, with allowance for one serviced unattached cottage. Homes for islanders, not visitors. That's how we respect sustainable limits: homes for the nurses, ferry crews and teachers who keep this island running, not bigger homes for fewer people.

Over 80% of housing on Salt Spring consists of single-family detached homes—double the regional average. This type of housing contributes to sprawl. Increasing housing density into already serviced villages cuts the driving, land clearing and ecosystem impacts, and infrastructure sprawl that add to Salt Spring's carbon footprint, taxes and climate risk exposure, while also creating more affordable housing options. 

Will you ensure the revised Salt Spring Official Community Plan (OCP) directs most new residential zoning capacity into Ganges and other existing serviced villages, rather than continuing to expand into rural and forested areas? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Robin Jenkinson: YES Village living is great! Our choice to live in Ganges allows me and my children to walk and cycle to schools and services. More affordable housing, restored natural areas and access, and an improved village square would make it even better. I support directing most new residential zoning capacity to Ganges and, where water, infrastructure and ecological capacity allow, Fulford and Vesuvius. This doesn't eliminate existing build-out rights on approximately 1,600 vacant lots. Site-specific rezonings and density transfers could support village projects, reducing build-out in rural areas. Importantly, any OCP review must honestly assess unauthorized rural dwellings. Good intentions and their associated income cannot replace fair rules, safe construction, adequate water and wastewater, or ecological limits. I support a fair compliance pathway for suitable units, with tenant protections.

Eric March: YES Shifting our existing land use planning from the luxury rural sprawl we are currently allowing to attainable workforce density in and around villages and amenities is going to be essential for our community’s survival. I believe we need to build housing near services, amenities, places of employment, shops, and transit routes in order to promote sustainable lifestyles and sustainable land use.

Ethan Wilding: YES I support directing most new residential zoning capacity into Ganges and other existing village areas where water, wastewater, and safe access can support it. I would advance that direction through amendments to OCP Bylaw 434 and Land Use Bylaw 355, prioritizing suitable, already-cleared land near services. Village locations still need assessment for flooding, shoreline hazards, and sensitive habitat. Compact apartments, townhouses, and smaller accessible homes can give people more choices while reducing pressure on forests and farmland. I also support suites and cottages outside villages where properties can safely accommodate them. Concentrating most new capacity and making better use of existing homes can work together.

Bryan Young: YES The Trust inherited rural zoning that allows sprawl to continue unchecked. As trustee I propose to: -Make our village-focused growth policy real: allow an added serviced dwelling on suitable village lots, and permit apartments above shops without rezoning in Ganges.-Keep village growth out of Ganges sea-level-rise risk areas. -Redirect subdivision to the LTC instead of to the Province, and requiring lot by lot rezoning. -Better use density transfers to shift rural density into villages, and downzoning high-risk or ecologically critical land. -Allow additional storeys as was done for the Drake Road housing project to take up less land. -Conserve more natural areas by requiring residential structures to be located closer to the road, allowing easier access to first responders. Curtailing development outside of serviced areas makes it easier to protect our forests.

Gary Holman: YES I will retain current OCP policies and make land use decisions that direct new housing development in or near villages or public transit routes. In considering development proposals, I will prioritize our very limited water and sewage treatment capacity for affordable housing. It is equally important to direct any new development away from, and strengthen protection for sensitive ecosystems and drinking water resources (eg, from clearcutting and wildfire) with regulatory tools such as Development Permit Areas (DPAs) enforced with ticketing penalties. As also supported by our current OCP, I will approve rezoning proposals that protect (eg, with conservation covenants) and transfer housing density from more remote areas to 'receiving areas' in or near villages and transit routes.

Smaller homes use less energy to build and heat, let people live closer to where they work, and can often be more affordable - all of which cut commuting emissions, protect ecosystems and create more housing options. 

Will you support zoning bylaws that allow smaller housing forms such as garden suites, cottages, and tiny homes (aka: accessory dwelling units) as permitted uses for year-round housing in more places? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Eric March: WITH QUALIFICATIONS Gentle density in smaller housing forms is a great way to create attainable housing for our community, I am very much in favour. However it is important not to build an over-reliance on these types of housing. We need to ensure we have housing for all family types and stages of life. Suites, tiny homes, and cottages are vital, but so are modest apartments and, in limited quantity, single-family homes.

Ethan Wilding: YES I would support amendments to Land Use Bylaw 355 that permit more suites, cottages, garden suites, and tiny homes for year-round living where water, wastewater, fire access, and environmental conditions can support them. The rules should be clear enough that people know what is possible before paying for designs and reports. Existing homes should have a practical path to safe, lawful use wherever a safe solution is possible. Smaller homes can help young people stay, let seniors downsize, and make room for caregivers and farm workers. Permission alone does not guarantee affordability, so I would also work with housing providers on lasting affordability and seek clear, proportionate approval requirements that keep avoidable costs down.

Bryan Young: YES Small homes are the lowest-impact housing we can add, and many islanders already live in unpermitted ones. A legal path makes them safer and more secure. As trustee I will propose: -Permitting garden suites, cottages and code-compliant tiny homes or manufactured homes as long-term residential uses in serviced areas, and with proven water supply. Gabriola's work shows a path for Salt Spring. -Year-round rental housing only through housing agreements with the owner. No short-term rentals. -Simple and lower cost permitting for small homes, with water standards encouraging rainwater catchment. -Lowering maximum house size to 3000 sq ft from 5000 across the island. -Allow one separate service-connected unit to be built on existing developed properties in serviced areas starting with Ganges. It's simple: more people housed in smaller, water conserving spaces, less forest cleared.

Gary Holman: WITH QUALIFICATIONS. There are already hundreds of properties (including ALR lands) that allow suites and cottages. Only a very small proportion of these property owners have taken advantage of this zoning. I believe incentivizing owners to create affordable ADUs on already zoned properties would be the most effective strategy, and I will advocate for continuation and expansion of incentives such as currently provided by the CRD Rural Housing Program. While smaller housing forms are more energy efficient, most homes on SSI heat with electricity, and the CRD building bylaw now requires electricity as the primary heating source. The location of ADUs is a more important climate factor if automobile dependency and vulnerability to extreme weather events are to be reduced. I will support additional ADUs in Fulford, a service centre and transportation hub, subject to Fulford Water District approval.

Robin Jenkinson: WITH QUALIFICATIONS Salt Spring has explored accessory dwelling initiatives (530 and Bylaw 537). I support cottages, garden suites, tiny homes, home-sharing and co-housing as year-round housing in serviced villages and on already-disturbed footprints where water, wastewater, wildfire safety and ecological capacity allow—not blanket up-zoning of every rural parcel. Moreover, existing dwellings need a fair route to become safe and compliant. Where new permissions add density or land value, housing agreements should secure affordability. Additionally, Salt Spring should pursue inclusion in provincial principal-residence rules for short-term rentals, while respecting legitimate hosted accommodation and lawful tourism uses.

Indigenous knowledge of this land's fire, water, food and ecological history is vast, and land use decisions made without them risk missing information that matters for adapting to a changing climate, while also repeating a pattern of consultation after decisions are already made.

Will you support a policy requiring early engagement with local First Nations governments before land use decisions affecting their territories move to a vote, even where that adds time to the approval process? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Ethan Wilding: YES First Nations should help shape land-use decisions from the outset, as governments and rights holders. I would bring forward an early-engagement policy in my first year, developed with affected Nations on their own terms. That means agreeing on when and how engagement happens, identifying resources for participation, protecting sensitive cultural information, and showing how the input informs a decision. It applies especially to the community plan, watershed protection, and shoreline policy, where decisions have lasting consequences. I accept that meaningful engagement can take time. We should plan for it at the beginning and explain the timetable to applicants and residents. Sending a referral after the important choices have been made is not meaningful participation.

Bryan Young: YES Early engagement doesn't slow good decisions down; late consultation does. As trustee I will propose: -A reconciliation section in the OCP, developed with Nations and grounded in reciprocity: what we offer, not only what we ask, including stewardship roles in fire, forests and deer management. -Seeking capacity funding from the Province so Nations can respond and there are sufficient dedicated Trust staff resources. Referrals without resources shift the burden onto stretched Nation staff. -Protocol agreements setting out which decisions each Nation wants a say in, and how, rather than us deciding for them. -Referring relevant development applications and policies affecting First Nations territories to them at the start, with time built into schedules up front. Relationships built early are what make good decisions possible later.

Gary Holman: YES Local governments are already obligated by law to consult meaningfully with First Nations. I will support amendments to Trust Policy and the SSI Official Community Plan, both under review, that will require early consultation and strengthen collaboration with First Nations. The Trust has a dedicated staff position to liaise with First Nations, and I understand that Memoranda of Understanding with a number of First Nations in the Trust area are being developed and concluded. I will support continued efforts to build relationships and partnerships with First Nations on an ongoing basis, not just for specific rezoning proposals, including on issues such as housing, marine protection, and co-management of Crown lands and public protected areas. I support, and will oppose any weakening of Provincial UNDRIp and DRIPA legislation.  

Robin Jenkinson: YES Through clam-garden and plant projects with Indigenous Knowledge Keepers, and certificates in co-management (UBC) and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (UNBC), I have learned that engagement requires time, humility, listening and reciprocity. Statutory notice should be a minimum, not the standard for relationships; relevant Indigenous concerns should not disappear when an application changes procedural routes. One example is developing guidance for shoreline proposals, where Indigenous Knowledge about cumulative effects on harvesting, habitat and cultural heritage should shape design alternatives. I would learn from Nation-led initiatives such as Stqeeye’ Learning Society and Tsawout’s development plans, while supporting other Nations’ priorities. Some decisions should take longer to prevent harm and build trust-based government-to-government and community relationships.

Eric March: YES First Nations governments should always be engaged with early and often, and that engagement should be baked into the process. It’s essential to build good relationships with First Nations governments so that we are all operating from a position of trust. It is much faster to have an engagement plan based on trust and mutual respect rather than try to rebuild trust late in the process.

As wildfire, flood, and drought risks grow, decisions made without current and locally specific hazard and vulnerability data lock in policies that are difficult to reverse later.

Will you support a requirement that current climate hazard data (wildfire, flood, sea level rise, drought, food and freshwater availability) be a mandatory part of reviewing rezoning and subdivision applications? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Bryan Young: YES Past conditions no longer predict future risk and lock in climate risk liabilities for everyone, including the Trust. As trustee I will propose: -A climate risk assessment built from existing work with gap-filling as needed: wildfire, flood, sea-level rise, drought, groundwater and farmland data, kept current and public. -Proof of water updated to move from past performance to forecasted availability based on climate modelling. -A Climate Risk Development Permit Area to minimize climate change-induced freshwater flooding, sea level rise, and wildfire risks. -Climate hazards review for rezonings or subdivision applications. -Requirements scaled to risk: small affordable projects don't get buried in studies while larger proposals get properly tested. -Climate risk and adaptation indicators and targets in the revised OCP/LUB, reported annually so the public can track performance.

Gary Holman: WITH QUALIFICATIONS Some of these data and assessments are already required as part of rezoning applications (e.g., proof of adequate drinking water supply and quality), and are also addressed by development permit regulations stipulating buffers and assessments in riparian areas and on ocean front. As noted above, I will support strengthened development permit regulation and enforcement, including for clear cut logging and wildfire prevention in drinking watersheds. The CRD has developed mapping identifying areas subject to sea level rise, and for any rezoning in such areas I will consider measures to mitigate long term flooding risks. One caveat regarding additional data requirements is regarding affordable housing, which already faces a fairly complex set of regulations. Locating affordable housing in or near Ganges village should in itself reduce conflicts with environmental values.

Robin Jenkinson: WITH QUALIFICATIONS Local data on wildfire, flooding, sea-level rise, drought, groundwater, food-producing land and ecological vulnerability should inform applications, with analysis proportional to scale and location. I would also advocate for provincial requirements in subdivision review. Decisions should use public baseline mapping, not only applicant-funded reports. My Geographic Information System (GIS) work—from fisheries mapping in Alaska’s Tongass National Forest to Rhône floodplains and local land-management plans—has taught me the value of combining datasets. Wildfire assessment must fit our ecosystems. Rather than relying on generic FireSmart checklists, it should consider Coastal Douglas-fir moisture retention, understory diversity and mature trees, alongside structure protection. Where evidence is incomplete and potential harm serious, precaution should guide decisions.

Eric March: YES Fact-based decision making needs to be the way the Trust operates.Climate hazard data needs to be a part of that, but also watershed health, shoreline erosion, and other factors. If we do not know and understand the environment we live in, how can we accurately govern within that environment.

Ethan Wilding: YES I support requiring current climate hazard and vulnerability evidence in the Trust's review of rezonings and subdivision referrals, through the OCP Bylaw 434 update. A clear checklist should cover wildfire, flooding, sea level rise, drought, freshwater, and food security, with requirements stated early and costs proportionate to the risks. I would like to apply polycrisis models on Salt Spring to understand how pressures on climate, water, food, housing, and infrastructure interact and amplify one another. That requires bringing together qualified specialists, First Nations knowledge holders, and local organizations to develop and present evidence that trustees and residents can understand and use. Shared mapping and site-specific studies should support practical decisions about where to build, what to protect, and how to adapt.

Forests, wetlands, and shorelines absorb floodwater, buffer wildfire, and store carbon, so weakening their protection removes exactly the natural systems that help the island cope with climate extremes and protect biodiversity. 

Will you support the strengthening of Development Permit Area (DPAs) guidelines for forests, wetlands, and shoreline habitat, even where that adds cost or process time for applicants? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Gary Holman: WITH QUALIFICATIONS I have already commented on my support for such measures in previous questions. My top priority would be to strengthen DPAs in drinking watersheds with respect to clear cut logging and wildfire prevention. Equally important would be to make enforcement of such regulations more effective by implementing ticketing for DPAs, since the only recourse now is to take violations to court after the fact. My understanding is that ticketing for DPAs can be implemented with appropriate amendments to the Land Use bylaw. It should be noted that DPA regulation has been very controversial on SSI, so broad public support is essential. I believe public support is strongest with respect to protection of our precious drinking water resources. I will also be supporting voluntary conservation measures by means of such tools such as amenity zoning and promotion of the Trust's NAPTEP property tax incentive.

Robin Jenkinson: YES Forests, wetlands and shorelines depend on buffers, water flows, connectivity, mature trees and habitat structures—from hollow logs to standing snags. The Islands Trust’s 2026 species-at-risk report identifies critical-habitat gaps and recommends stronger development permit areas, monitoring and updated mapping. Its Conservation Strategy shows that DPAs should work with covenants, acquisition, incentives and partnerships to protect priority lands. I support strong natural-environment DPA standards, critical-habitat mapping and independent Trust-selected review where warranted. Requirements should be predictable and proportionate, with streamlined review for restoration, maintenance and low-impact work. Guidance and incentives should help landowners protect habitat without making beneficial work overly difficult.

Eric March: WITH QUALIFICATIONS DPA guidelines are a great way to protect natural systems. I support strengthening them, however we must build systems that strengthen protections like DPAs without adding an extreme burden onto our residents. This is an area where balancing needs is essential.

Ethan Wilding: YES I support stronger protection where evidence shows a gap in the existing rules. I would review the DPA provisions of OCP Bylaw 434 and Land Use Bylaw 355 for wetlands, sensitive forests, and shorelines, using current mapping and clear ecological objectives. Necessary studies, independent review, or restoration requirements can justify additional cost and time. Requirements should be stated early, proportionate to the risk, and applied consistently. We also need workable provisions for ecological restoration and professionally guided wildfire risk reduction. I would judge changes by what they achieve for habitat, water, and biodiversity, and publish those results. A longer or more expensive process is not, by itself, evidence of better protection.

Bryan Young: YES Healthy habitats are a less expensive way to manage climate risk than dealing with damage later. As trustee I will propose: -A Wildfire DPA where fuel management and habitat protection work together. -An Ecosystem Contiguity DPA, to reduce fragmentation of ecosystems caused by lot-by-lot development. -Updated shoreline guidelines accounting for sea-level rise, with stronger wetland and riparian protection keyed to climate forecasts. -Clear, objective guidelines and staff approval of simple permits to limit cost, plus resources for enforcement. -A renewed and expanded mapping and monitoring to track threats and progress. Some island foresters practice sustainable forest practices and gain livelihoods from the sale of forest products. We need to encourage these practices in collaboration with willing island partners. 

With droughts becoming more frequent and severe, approving growth without confirming water supply sustainability sets up shortages that can hit every household. Water is also a linchpin issue in ecosystem wellbeing and climate risk reduction. 

Will you make watershed health and freshwater sustainability a key priority if elected? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Robin Jenkinson: YES Watershed health would be central to my decisions. Wells, streams, wetlands, forests and aquifers are most often interconnected. OCP density and zoning should be evaluated at the scale of watersheds and groundwater-recharge areas, using climate-adjusted water budgets and cumulative-effects analysis. Drawing on my Oregon Watershed Council experience, I would support collaborative planning tables involving First Nations, residents, nature representatives, farmers, water providers and agencies. I would incorporate well-flow, recharge and citizen-science streamflow data into planning; update outdated stream and wetland mapping; protect recharge areas; and make the evidence public. New density should require credible proof of water—not a single well test—while leaving enough water for fish, wetlands and other species.

Eric March: YES Maintaining watershed health is essential and part of why we need to reduce luxury rural sprawl in favour of density in and around the villages. We also need better data on what water we have, where it is going, and where we can dramatically reduce our use.

Ethan Wilding: YES Water comes first. I would not support additional density without credible evidence that it can be served safely while protecting existing users and ecosystems. In my first six months, I would seek a coordinated water and land-use policy with water providers and the CRD, including transparent capacity information and priorities for scarce supply. I would support watershed and aquifer protection, groundwater monitoring, conservation, rainwater storage, and clear guidance on safe greywater reuse. I would also explore desalination’s feasibility, including its cost, energy use, and marine impacts. We need to distinguish ecological limits from infrastructure problems we can responsibly solve, then seek funding for practical improvements. A trustee cannot run the water districts, but can align land-use decisions with the evidence and help the responsible bodies work together.

Bryan Young: YES Water is the limit that shapes every decision here. As trustee I will propose:

-Requiring rezonings to show a sustainable water supply, based on projected water availability not historic averages or current flow rates. -Treating on-island water supply as a hard ceiling in the OCP's growth projections. -A Groundwater Recharge DPA to protect lands that refill our aquifers. -A standing watershed forum to fill the gap left by SSIWPA's wind-up, bringing together the CRD, LCC, North Salt Spring Waterworks, CRD utilities, private providers and the Province.-Rainwater catchment and water-wise design as standard in all new builds, including constructed ponds and wetlands. -Pressing the Province, which licenses groundwater, for better monitoring.  -Advocating to Island Health and the Province for more streamlined rules on potable water from rainwater catchment, and greywater reuse.

Gary Holman: YES See comments above regarding drinking watershed protection by strengthening DPAs and their enforcement. I will also support such measures applied to identified groundwater supply and recharge areas. An important water issue on SSI is the NSSWD moratorium on new water supply connections, now being partially relaxed in the Maxwell Lake service area. I will prioritize scarce drinking water for affordable housing and invest in Geographic Information System capacity to better understand existing development potential in all water utility service areas to ensure that existing development potential does not already outstrip water supply. I will reconvene SSI Water Protection Alliance to implement and refine its new strategic plan and continue important sustainability assessments of drinking water sources such as Weston Lake, Cusheon Lake, and the Cedar Lane groundwater aquifer.

Local food production is one of the clearest ways to reduce emissions from transporting food from off-island and strengthen our resilience when supply chains are disrupted by climate, political and economic events. Farming is also notoriously hard to sustain, with farmers saying they need to be supported to allow for agri-tourism accommodations, worker housing, and on-farm sales.

Will you prioritize food security and the preservation of farmland and farming as a viable livelihood within the ALR, and outside of it, on Salt Spring? (YES, NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS)

Eric March: WITH QUALIFICATIONS Maintaining food security by preserving and protecting farms and farmland is a central part of my platform and I strongly support making farming easier on Salt Spring. However, I oppose the creation of farmworker housing. We need to build housing for all workers, and when we have more workers we will have more farm workers. Farms and farmers should be able to focus on farming and let someone else do the landlording. We also should not be building housing on productive farmland. However I support the current housing allowed on ALR land, and would not be interested in restricting it.

Ethan Wilding: YES Protecting farmland also means making it possible for people to keep farming it. I would support OCP and Land Use Bylaw 355 amendments that protect agricultural land inside and outside the ALR, allow appropriate farm-worker housing, and support farm-gate sales and facilities for processing and storing local food. I would work with farmers, the Farmland Trust, and First Nations to identify the rules and servicing problems that get in the way. I would assess agri-tourism proposals on whether they support an active farm while protecting productive land, water, and habitat. Farm-worker housing should serve farming, and tourism should not displace it. Housing, water security, and a viable farm livelihood belong in the same conversation.

Bryan Young: YES Local food buffers us from supply chain shocks, and farmers create local livelihoods. As trustee I will propose: -Protecting farms, inside and outside the ALR, from conversion to other uses. -Broadening protection for farm income streams including on-farm sales, food processing and agri-tourism – including limited accommodation – tied to active farming. -Opening farmworker housing to working farms outside the Agriculture zones, and use housing agreements so those homes stay with farmworkers, not vacation renters. -Helping farms store rain for summer use, with simple, low-cost rules for ponds and catchment. -Sending every bylaw that affects farming to the Agricultural Alliance and the Agricultural -Advisory Planning Commission, and build the Area Farm Plan into the OCP, so rules align with farmer needs.

Gary Holman: YES Probably the most important role of the Trust will be to implement land use recommendations of SSI's Area Farm Plan that is being updated by the SSI Agricultural Alliance. I will not support any net loss of ALR land on SSI and will support land use changes that allow for greater on-farm processing and composting on larger parcels in active production, as well as sale of local produce and other local farm products in appropriate locations. I will support the land use changes necessary to allow the Burgoyne Bay composting facility to sell product off site. As noted above, I will advocate for financial incentives for affordable ADUs on ALR land in active production. I will support zoning changes necessary to establish a year round local food market on the Ganges fire hall property, if deemed feasible by the CRD.

Robin Jenkinson: YES During COVID, I delivered burlap sacks of soil, seed potatoes and worksheets to elementary students’ driveways so we could keep growing together, even outside of our school gardens and poultry programs. As trustee, I would advance the Farm Plan’s call for no net loss of ALR or productive farmland outside it, while helping farmers earn a living. I support farmworker housing tied to demonstrated need, land matching and succession for new farmers, on-farm sales and scaled agritourism. I would support The Root and processing, storage and composting infrastructure. Food production must protect water, soils, pollinators and habitat. I would work with partners to align regulations, remove needless barriers and support regenerative practices, water storage and locally adapted seed. Indigenous-led approaches to deer stewardship could contribute to local food and ecosystem recovery.  

What do you believe are the main climate risks to Salt Spring Island’s citizens, infrastructure, economy, and ecosystems? What specific actions do you think the community should take now to adapt to these risks and prepare for the growing challenges, and how will you help advance these efforts?

Ethan Wilding: The main risks on Salt Spring are drought and water shortages, wildfire and smoke, extreme heat, heavier rainfall and flooding, and sea level rise. They affect homes, farms, forests, shorelines, roads, and essential services. Interruptions to power, transport, and food supplies can compound those pressures, especially for people with limited mobility or resources. We should act now on watershed protection, water conservation and storage, FireSmart work, habitat restoration, and emergency readiness. Land-use planning should account for safe evacuation and emergency access, and direct housing toward suitable locations near services. The community also needs accessible places for relief from heat and smoke, stronger local food production, and practical support for people who cannot prepare alone. As trustee, I would pursue climate-informed amendments to OCP Bylaw 434 and Land Use Bylaw 355, make responsible adaptation work easier to navigate, and work with First Nations, the CRD, the fire district, water providers, and community groups on a shared list of actions, responsibilities, and funding needs. I would report quarterly on my own commitments. Doing nothing is not preserving and protecting.

Bryan Young: The main risks: wildfire in drying forests; drought and falling groundwater levels; extreme heat; sea-level rise and storm surge in Ganges, at terminals and on low-lying roads; increasing atmospheric-river flooding, leading to increasing road failures and property damage, and ferry and supply-chain disruptions. Drought stressed ecosystems, with Western red cedar and Coastal Douglas-fir die back, deer overbrowsing further drying soils. Behind it all sits economic risks: insurers retreating and costs landing on us all. As a lead author of Salt Spring's Climate Action Plan, I'll push for: -A climate risk assessment built into bylaws: no new development where risk is high, and for already-built hazard areas, a plan to protect, adapt or retreat. New rules using updated  sea level rise science. -Wildfire, forest and groundwater recharge DPAs, plus advocacy for additional FireSmart support for neighbourhoods. -Water sustainability tests based on forecasts for any new density, and a standing inter-agency watershed protection forum. -Farmland and local food production treated as critical resilience infrastructure. -Resilience hubs and stronger evacuation planning with the CRD, LCC and SSI Fire Rescue. As trustee, my job is to pull the agencies together. No single body owns climate risk, and the gaps between them are where people, our ecosystems, and other creatures get hurt.

Gary Holman: The most imminent risks are: 1) drought-induced wildfires in interface areas and drinking watersheds, 2) road washouts, wind and snow storms that cut power and strand residents living in more remote areas, 3) drinking water shortages, particularly for groundwater sources, and 4) more frequent algal blooms in our drinking water lakes. From a land use perspective, the most important actions that I will be supporting are to retain existing OCP policies directing new development in or near villages and transit routes; strengthen DPA land and fire protection and enforcement; and promote broader forest land protection (eg, using the Trust NAPTEP program, density transfer, and amenity zoning tools), particularly for our drinking water sources. On SSI, water management is an inter-agency matter. I will be reconvening the SSI Water Protection Alliance, and inter-agency group supported by a Trust special requisition on SSI to further and refine its strategic plan that includes recommended actions for various agencies. Note that drinking water utilities are responsible for treating water affected by algal blooms (eg, with DAF plants) and conserving water with metering and progressive rate structures.   

Robin Jenkinson: Salt Spring’s climate risks are interconnected: hotter, drier summers reduce drinking water, streamflow and farm productivity while increasing extreme heat, wildfire and smoke. Intense winter rain and wind bring flooding, erosion, road closures and power failures. Sea-level rise and storm surge threaten Ganges and Fulford. These changes stress forests, wetlands, farms and marine ecosystems, disrupt ferries and supply chains, and fall hardest on people with fewer resources. My ecological work has shown me that healthy forests, wetlands, soils and shorelines are essential infrastructure. We should complete watershed-scale water budgets and hazard mapping; protect recharge areas, mature forests and ecological corridors; restore wetlands and stream buffers; expand rainwater storage; support local food; and direct development away from high-risk areas. We also need ecologically informed wildfire planning, natural shoreline protection, emergency routes, cooling spaces and neighbourhood preparedness. As trustee, I would embed climate data and cumulative-effects analysis in OCP, zoning and application review; strengthen DPAs; and coordinate with First Nations, the CRD, fire and water districts, farmers, scientists and community groups. The Trust can use its regional voice to secure action and funding.

Eric March: The biggest climate risk on Salt Spring Island is lack of affordable, safe, and secure housing.  Salt Spring Island is at risk to many climate threats such as sea level rise and more extreme weather events. Many of these risks are amplified by not having stable housing. A heat dome is bad, but it’s worse for someone who doesn't have a place to cool off. A polar vortex is bad, but it is worse for someone who lives in an uninsulated Airstream. An atmospheric river is bad, but it is worse for someone who has an aging roof they can’t afford to repair.

We need to move from our current planning mode of luxury rural sprawl to attainable workforce density. This new density needs to be zoned in and around services, amenities, places of employment, shops, and transit to encourage sustainable lifestyles. Following the models of other jurisdictions zoning needs to focus this density on folks already living on Salt Spring and folks working on Salt Spring. We need to find out just how many illicit and potentially unsafe ADUs exist on Salt Spring, incentivize landlords to bring them up to code and house those whose landlords are unwilling or unable to do so.

If elected, what will your top priorities be in the coming term, and what specific actions will you take to address those priorities?

Bryan Young: In my first months, I'll sit down with my fellow LTC members, CRD Director and LCC to agree on a shared work program. -Reset trust between the community and the Trust. Adopt new engagement standards and use a citizens' assembly for the OCP review. -Finish the OCP/LUB update, with climate risks mitigation built in. -Housing for people who live and work here: fee waivers for affordable housing, pre-zoned serviced land, legal small dwellings, and a lower maximum house size. -Regular coordination with the CRD, LCC, fire and water providers. -A government-relations strategy that gets results from the Province on key Trust challenges. Salt Spring can be a conversation surrounded by water, and I know that change moves quickly when there’s trust. I intend to earn your trust, and help us untie the knots holding us back.

Gary Holman: My top priorities are: - Upzoning to increase the stock of diverse affordable housing, including worker, co-op and co-housing, land trust initiatives, primarily in or near villages and transit, and incentivizing suites and cottages on already zoned properties, and suites in Fulford village - Strengthening protection of our natural environment, including precious water resources with tools such as DPAs, density transfer, and amenity zoning - Supporting recommendations in SSI's updated Area Farm Plan, rezoning the Burgoyne composter to allow off-site sales, and zoning supporting on-farm processing - Reconciling with First Nations, including rezoning to help support Land Back initiatives, advocacy for co-management of our Provincial and Regional Parks - revitalizing Ganges, including more affordable housing and re-purposing of the Ganges fire hall.

Robin Jenkinson: 1. Ecological stewardship: protect watersheds, recharge areas, forests, wetlands, shorelines and biodiversity through updated mapping, stronger DPAs, cumulative-effects analysis, conservation and restoration. I will seek appointment to the Islands Trust Conservancy Board. 2. Thoughtful planning: complete an evidence-based OCP review at watershed and groundwater-region scales; direct appropriate housing to serviced villages; and engage First Nations early, respectfully and with resources for participation. I will publish plain-language progress updates with measurable objectives. 3. Practical solutions: prepare grant-ready co-operative and non-market housing projects; enable appropriate smaller homes; advance safer walking, cycling and transit; protect farmland; support farmworker housing, local processing and viable livelihoods; and improve cooperation among the Trust, LCC, CRD, water and fire districts, and community groups. 4. Archipelago-wide collaboration: use the Islands Trust’s regional role to share mapping, policy tools and successful projects across islands, and advocate collectively on freshwater, housing, ferries, climate adaptation and marine protection. Our islands are connected through the wider Salish Sea estuary. We can learn from our neighbours and share solutions. 

Eric March: My top priorities are making the Trust more accessible to working Salt Springers and finding ways to increase workforce housing while maintaining the Preserve and Protect mandate. The Trust is failing in its duty to a significant portion of Salt Spring’s population by being an almost impossible organization to interact with, and by prioritizing single family homes over housing working folks can actually afford. Improvements on housing will involve shifting land use planning from the luxury rural sprawl we are currently allowing to attainable workforce density in and around villages and amenities. During our OCP/LUB review we must make sure workforce housing is prioritised rather than an added density. The Trust needs to use special zoning, as has been done elsewhere, to ensure that housing is not just affordable but reserved for long-time Salt Springers and new workers alike. At the same time we must ensure that these densities are added in places that make sense so that wildspaces further outside of the villages can remain wild. The first steps towards transparency meeting times that ensure the public can engage at times that work for them, easier to read agendas shared with the wider community, and regular reports from either Trustees or staff on where we are at with major projects. We can continue this by ensuring the OCP/LUB is updated with plain language.

Ethan Wilding: My priorities are secure homes people can afford, healthy watersheds and ecosystems, and a Trust that makes clear decisions and follows through. Protecting Salt Spring and keeping it livable are the same job. Through the OCP and Land Use Bylaw 355 review, I would pursue compact housing near services, smaller homes, lasting affordability, and clear protections for watersheds, farmland, forests, and shorelines. I would work with water providers and the CRD to align housing plans with water capacity and practical infrastructure improvements. I would seek clear application requirements, realistic timelines, written reasons, and a public application tracker. First Nations should be involved early, and a representative citizens’ assembly should help shape the community plan. I would regularly report on progress, obstacles, and next steps so residents can hold me accountable.