Letter to the Editor
Is the Advisory Planning Commission a Trojan Horse?
The following are excerpts from an Islands Trust staff report dated January 9, 2017 obtained by FOIA.
The subject of the report was “Vacation Home Rentals Policy Review, Draft Project Charter”
The recommendations were
1. That the LTC endorse the draft Project Charter for the Vacation Home Rental Review Project.
2. That the Hornby Island Local Trust Committee pursue targeted recruitment for up to three additional members for the Advisory Planning Commission in support of the Vacation Home Rental Review Project.
According to the background section:
“Throughout 2016, the LTC discussed emerging issues on the subject of home vacation rentals on Hornby Island, and identified the need for a review process in 2017/2018 to assess the effectiveness of policies, regulations, and enforcement regarding vacation home rentals on Hornby Island.”
The five year review of home sharing was held in a LTC meeting on December 4, 2017. There were more staff than the public there. I thought the meeting was “the” review and had no idea about the extent of the “project”. At that meeting, questions were asked of the Trustees and staff if there were any problems or complaints regarding home-shares over the last five years and the answer was that no complaints had been received or issues identified. The consensus was that the important Hornby practice was doing fine and needed no revisions or actions. The planner was asked to remove language from her report indicating that strict enforcement of the regulations should be introduced as there were no underlying issues requiring such harsh language with respect to enforcement. Surely, the Trust has better ways to devote their time and budgets than invent issues around activities that had no problems or complaints in the five years preceding? What exactly were the “emerging” issues referred to by the LTC throughout 2016 that they did not report on in that meeting?
The January 9 staff report outlined the “overarching milestones and timeline for the Vacation Home Rentals (VHR) Policy Review:” as follows:
– A community survey, to be administered by Staff with input from the APC;
– Staff analysis of emerging trends and issues on the topic of VHR:
– A community consultation process facilitated by the APC to further explore the topics raised through
the survey and identified by staff;
– Referral to the APC of specific policy areas for in-depth discussion and recommendations;
– Possible improvements to VHR policies and guidelines.
I would like to see the results of the above 5 “overarching milestones” that were supposed to have been achieved. Were they even done? The results were never included in the March 29, 2022 APC report. Why not?
Recommendations to the LTC regarding the APC are as follows:
“Because the APC is to have a substantial role in the community review of VHR policies, the LTC has expressed a desire to have an APC that represents the diversity of the Hornby Island community in regards to this topic. Considering this specific intention, Staff recommends that the LTC identify desired communities of interest it looks to engage in order to provide direction for targeted recruitment of future APC members.”
I responded to the ad looking for members to serve on the APC on January 23, 2017. The deadline was January 26. I was not selected. It was reported that no one responded to the ad when in fact I had. I have applied 4 times over the years and have never been selected. My family home-shares. My family also provides long term, low-cost homes to approximately 15 working Hornby Islanders; homes that are subsidized by our home-sharing practice. Would that not make me a reasonable candidate for the APC? I have served on ISLA, HICEEC, The Farmland Trust, Hornby Denman Growers and Producers, Emergency Preparedness and countless other committees over 32 years. I am a passionate advocate for the working class of Hornby Island and a small business owner. I guess I don’t belong to a “desired community of interest”.
If the LTC desired to have an APC that represents the diversity of the community, why did it only choose members that were publicly outspoken against home-sharing. Is that in the best interests of the community at large? Is the APC a Trojan horse that can be utilized to over-ride a fair and democratic process whenever elected officials have agendas? The Trustees at the time (one still in office) have repeatedly stated in public and on social media that they find summers on Hornby too busy and would prefer to have the Island to themselves.
The loss of home-sharing may reduce summer traffic by a few percent and will unlikely increase low cost housing. It will almost certainly increase home insecurity. Unfortunately, hundreds of working individuals including business owners, service folks, retirees and home owners will have their livelihoods damaged beyond repair by a “desired community of interest”. I can only assume that something else is going on because none of this makes any sense at all.
Respectfully submitted
Helen Grond
