About

Q: How many years have you lived in Squamish?
A: 8

Q: Which neighbourhood do you live in?
A: Brackendale

Learn more: Squamish Chief's Q&A

Proposed industrial projects

The next elected council will have decision-making authority over several aspects of proposed industrial projects. All of these projects will have social, environmental, and climate impacts. What is your position on:

FortisBC pipeline: opposed

Why: The FortisBC pipeline is a means to an end of delivering natural gas to the Woodfibre site. Like WLNG, this project is wholly out of line with where we need to be going to meet our GHG emissions reduction targets. That said, the FortisBC Pipeline has also been approved by the Province and Squamish Nation. As such, we need to work with the proponent to ensure we are minimizing the impact of this project on our community. This includes ensuring that the numerous management plans that they are required to deliver as per their Environmental Certificate (e.g. the community services and infrastructure management plan and the traffic management plan) are fulsome, informed by community consultation, and set a standard for good corporate citizenship in our community.

FortisBC workcamp: neutral

Why: I am not supportive of the FortisBC project taking up local housing stock and hotel rooms to house their temporary workers, which is why I am neutral on this topic. I am frustrated that their environmental assessment application stated that they would not need housing for workers because they would hire locally; but, here we are in a labour shortage with a 0.4% vacancy rate and FortisBC has no plan to house their incoming 600 workers and they want to start work in spring 2024! I still think that a legacy housing project for our community would be the best option for all. If FortisBC chooses to continue to pursue the workcamp option then it would need to come to Council for a Temporary Use Permits (TUP) and I would look forward to hearing community feedback on the proposal.

Woodfibre LNG: opposed

Why: Generally speaking, I am not supportive of Woodfibre LNG as the project is wholly out of step with our local, provincial, federal and global targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That said, I am a pragmatist and recognize that this project has been approved by the Provincial Government and the Squamish Nation and, as such, the District has little authority over the project. As this project is set to go ahead, I am committed to ensuring that our community gets the most benefit possible up-front through the possibility of a negotiated tax agreement as well as pursuing public water access at Darrell Bay.

Woodfibre LNG's "floatel": neutral

Why: While I am not supportive of the Woodfibre LNG project, if it does go ahead they need somewhere to house their workers that is not in our local hotels or our local housing market. Affordable housing is already too big of an issue to lose some 600+ units to this large-scale industrial project. WLNG should have built legacy housing for our community, but here we are with an approved project that is stated to be starting construction next year and no housing on hand. As such, I see the proposed “floatel” as a functional proposal. There are still details needed about what access workers would have to Squamish and how that access would be managed. There are potential economic benefits to having workers in town, but also risks and I believe that discussion and decision should be informed by our community.

Proposed development projects

The next elected council will determine whether these development projects proceed or not. All of these projects will have social, environmental, and climate impacts. What is your position on:

Cheema Lands: neutral

Why: The fact that the Cheema Lands are outside of the growth management boundary is one of the most defining characteristics of this proposal. I am supportive of the growth management boundary established in the OCP. This helps us focus future growth within our existing footprint - allowing us to better protect and preserve surrounding greenspace and trails, make efficient use of our existing critical (and expensive) infrastructure, and promote complete, compact, walkable communities. The Cheema Lands are, however, identified as "future residential" in the OCP and will be developed one day. The OCP outlines a number of policies and suggests that these should be met before considering an expansion of the growth management boundary. I think it's important that we as a District get our house in order before tackling a proposal of this magnitude outside of our growth management boundary. Only then would we actually be able to have a fulsome and informed discussion as a community about the benefits and drawbacks of this proposal.

Garibaldi at Squamish: opposed

Why: This proposal has been around since the ‘60s and has had many evolutions, so I’m actually not familiar with what the current proposal looks like. The proposed project is outside of Squamish’s municipal boundary. If this was something that Squamish did want to take on we would need to extend our municipal boundary out to Brohm Ridge, which would go against many of the core policies in the Official Community Plan and could have significant financial implications and risk. It is for these reasons that I am not supportive of this proposal.

North Crumpit: neutral

Why: The North Crumpit lands are within the growth management boundary and are zoned for development. The proponent is currently completing a neighbourhood planning process to work with the community to identify the goals, objectives, vision and values of what a complete, walkable community might look like on these lands. I look forward to a draft neighbourhood plan proposal that balances the significant environmental and recreational values in this area, with the opportunity to deliver more diverse housing forms and tenure types for our community, as well as some level of commercial space.

Climate Action commitments = 15/16

• Invest in active transportation networks to make biking and walking safer and more accessible?
• Support higher density infill development along existing and proposed transit networks to promote walkable and livable communities?
• Advocate for regional public transit and invest in local public transit?
• Implement policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in buildings, for example, incentivize fuel switching from gas furnaces to electric heat pumps through rebates for homeowners?
• Advocate for the Provincial Government to enable local governments to ban new gas hookups in buildings?
• Support Neighbourhood Planning to collaborate with citizens, not developers, in the future development of their neighbourhood?
• Make land use decisions that protect and restore natural areas, ensure habitat connectivity, and avoid urban sprawl?
• Protect natural assets (forests, wetlands, shrublands, grasslands, estuary, aquifers, ponds, lakes, creeks, and rivers) identified in the 2022 Natural Asset Management Strategy, which provide ecosystem services valued at more than $1.6 billion?
• Support efforts to implement a Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and use this to inform development guidelines and neighbourhood planning?
• Increase local food security by supporting local agriculture and community gardens?
• Implement zero waste bylaws to divert organic waste from the landfill and support the development of a circular economy as part of a zero waste strategy?
• Review the deconstruction bylaw to ensure it is meeting its goal to eliminate waste from renovation and demolition projects?
• Support further study on local distributed energy systems powered by 100% renewable energy to build community resilience over time?
• Adopt the Doughnut Economic Model as a guiding principle for all District initiatives and planning? (see Nanaimo example)
• Endorse the fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty?
• Join the campaign to Sue Big Oil and set aside $1 per person to file a class-action lawsuit to recover a fair share of our climate costs?

Transparency and Accountability

Q: Are there any particular issues where you would have to declare a perceived conflict of interest or recuse yourself from Council discussion on an issue? Please list:
A: No.

List of current donors

Jenna Stoner ($300)
Laura Dupont ($100)
Laurie Spear ($250)
Sarah Reid ($140)
Brent McMurtry ($150)
Claire Andrews ($100)
Chris Murrell ($100)
Trisha Chornyj ($125)
Regan Kohlhart ($150)

https://www.jennastoner.com/donors

List of past donors in 2018

Data accessed via ElectionsBC:

$300 from Barbara McDonald
$200 from Elijah Dann
$400 from Jenna Stoner
$100 from John Chapman
$250 from Laurie Spear
$224 from Matt Welsh
$250 from Michalina Hunter
$340 from Ted Prior
$90 from anonymous contributors (donations less than $100)