City council says it's going to take some more time to make sure it's making the right changes to its policy on temporary farm worker housing.
The most controversial aspects of the plan were the ideas that farms housing over 40 workers needed a special approval, and that workers couldn't be inside those trailers for over eight months a year.
At last night's public hearing, council heard from multiple members of the agriculture community, along with a proposal of alternate recommendations from the BC Fruit Growers Association.
Those included increasing the limit from 40 workers to 60, and bumping up the time limit from eight months to ten.
President of the BC Cherry Association Sukhpal Bal says any cut-off number should be determined based on the size of the farm.
"What would meet the needs of a large cherry operation is one worker per acre, when it comes to harvest," he said.
"We understand that neighbours don't want to see hundreds and hundreds of people on the farm, we get that. But if a person is diversifying and buying more acreage, I don't see it being viable to say well, you've (already) got your 60 (workers)."
Alex Geen is a young farmer, whose family owns Coral Beach Farms in Lake Country.
He says as someone starting his career, he wants to feel supported.
"As a young Canadian interested in pursuing agriculture, I find it a bit disheartening to see a move that would restrict the ability for our industry to grow," he said.
"Why should local youth in Kelowna take an interest in this rejuvenated local industry, that so many have touched on this evening, if the city is not going to stand with them on it?"
After taking in a couple hours worth of feedback, Mayor Colin Basran says the draft policy is a good start, but it isn't there yet.
"You're not going to get everybody into one box - that's going to be impossible. So I think what we need is a good base, and I think what we've got here is the workings of some. And it just needs a bit (of) further tweaking," he said.
Multiple councillors echoed that sentiment, saying they don't want to stand in the way of local agriculture producers, and that the policy needs more planning and consultation.
Council's final decision was to defer the policy to a future council meeting, where changes to the proposal can be made.