Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:02]

AND CALL OUR COUNCIL MEETING FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2022 TO ORDER.

[Councillor Morgan will read the Opening Statement.]

AND I WILL ASK COUNCILLOR MORGAN TO PLEASE READ THE OPENING STATEMENT.

THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WE ARE LOCATED IN CHIEF DRYGEESE TERRITORY.

FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL IT HAS BEEN THE TRADITIONAL LAND OF THE YELLOWKNIFE STANDING FIRST NATION.

WE RESPECT THE HISTORIES, LANGUAGES AND CULTURES OF ALL OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, INCLUDING THE NORTH SLAVE METIS AND ALL FIRST NATIONS, METIS AND INUIT, WHOSE PRESENCE CONTINUES TO ENRICH OUR VIBRANT COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU.

THERE WERE NO AWARDS CEREMONIES OR PRESENTATIONS FOR THE AGENDA.

[Items 3 & 4]

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS.

WE HAVE MINUTES OF COUNCIL FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2022, PRESENTED FOR ADOPTION, COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

I MOVE THAT MINUTES OF COUNCIL FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2022 BE PRESENTED FOR ADOPTION.

THANK YOU. SECONDER.

COUNCILLOR MUFANDAEDZA.

ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS? SEEING NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR. THANK YOU.

AND JUST A NOTE FOR THOSE ON THE TABLE OR WATCHING ONLINE.

COUNCILLOR MORSE HAS JOINED US BY TELECONFERENCE.

NEXT, WE HAVE DISCLOSURE, PECUNIARY INTEREST AND GENERAL NATURE THEREOF.

DOES ANY MEMBER HAVE A PECUNIARY INTEREST IN ANY MATTER BEFORE COUNCIL TONIGHT? SEEING AND HEARING NONE.

NEXT, WE HAVE CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS.

THERE WERE NO THERE WAS NO CORRESPONDENCE, NOR WERE THERE ANY PETITIONS FOR THE AGENDA.

THERE WERE NO STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE AGENDA.

THERE WERE NO DELEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.

THERE WERE NO STATEMENTS FOR THE AGENDA.

AGENDA. ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS STATEMENTS FROM THE FLOOR? SEEING AND HEARING NONE.

[Items 11 - 13]

NEXT, WE HAVE INTRODUCTION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS, GOVERNANCE AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 12, 2022.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN, PLEASE.

I MOVE THAT COUNCIL DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TWO ONE UTILIZE THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF CITY OWNED LANDS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN BY CONTRIBUTING TO THE LAND FUND TO FACILITATE A) SELLING LOTS EIGHT, NINE AND TEN BLOCK 31 PLAN 65, WHICH IS 5016, 5018 AND 5022 50TH STREET FOR LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUE PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS AND B) SELLING LOT 34 BLOCK 30, WHICH IS THE 5050 LOT FOR LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUES PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF REFERENCE AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ATTACHED TO AND FORMING PART OF THE MEMORANDUM TO COMMITTEE DATED SEPTEMBER 12, 2022.

NUMBER TWO, TRANSFER $2.275 MILLION FROM THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND TO THE LAND ADMINISTRATION FUND TO COVER THE LAND VALUE OF THE PROPERTIES LISTED ABOVE. NUMBER THREE, TRANSFER $141,000 FROM THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND TO THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT RESERVE TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES. AND FOUR, TO CLOSE THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND.

THANK YOU. DO HAVE A SECONDER.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS OPENING IT UP TO DISCUSSION.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN. THANK YOU.

SO UNFORTUNATELY I WASN'T HERE ON SEPTEMBER 12TH FOR THE GPC DISCUSSION, BUT A COUPLE OF THINGS CAME TO MIND LOOKING AT THIS.

CERTAINLY I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THE OVERALL IDEA AND IT'S EXCITING THAT THERE IS A PROPOSAL TO REVITALIZE THE AND JUST TO NOTE, THE ACTUAL PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE 5050 WILL BE THE NEXT ITEM.

SO IT'S A TWO PART MOTION WITH THIS ONE BEING ABOUT THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND, WHICH DOES REFERENCE POINT B, WHICH IS, THEN WE'LL DEBATE AT THE NEXT POINT JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S CLEAR.

SO IT'S MORE, SO I'LL JUST SAVE MY COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS THEN FOR THE NEXT ONE.

OKAY, PERFECT.

FOR MYSELF, I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THIS MOTION AS PRESENTED.

I THINK IT'S NICE TO CONSOLIDATE THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND.

IT'S A BIT OF A SHELL GAME IN THAT IT CAME FROM THE LAND FUND AND IT WAS PUT INTO THE SPECIFIC FUND TO AND WITH IT WE COULD ONLY DO CERTAIN PROJECTS. AND SO NOW WE'RE RETURNING IT TO THE LAND FUND WHERE WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO MORE WITH IT, AND THEN TRANSFERRING THE REMAINING AMOUNT TO THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT RESERVE, KIND OF CLOSING THAT ONE RESERVE.

SO I THINK AS OUR LAST ACTION OF A COUNCIL KIND OF GET TO CLEAN UP A COUPLE OF RESERVES.

SEEING NOTHING FURTHER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

[00:05:07]

COUNCILLOR MORSE. YOU WERE IN FAVOR? I SAID I HAVE A QUESTION.

I'M SORRY. OKAY.

WE'LL HOLD THE VOTE. QUESTION TO COUNCILLOR MORSE.

YEAH. THANK YOU.

AND I DO APOLOGIZE FOR HAVING TO BE ON PHONE.

I WASN'T EVEN GOING TO MAKE IT TO THIS MEETING, SO I'M GLAD I'M ABLE TO BE HERE.

I WAS JUST WONDERING.

SO I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE FOR THE 5050 LOT, BUT THE OTHER THREE LOTS, IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME WHY THEY'VE BEEN PULLED INTO THIS MOTION.

CAN THAT JUST QUICKLY AND SUCCINCTLY BE EXPLAINED? MS. THISTLE. SORRY.

THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.

PURSUANT TO COUNCIL DIRECTION, ADMINISTRATION WENT AND LOOKED AT THE TWO RESERVE FUNDS, BEING THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND AND THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT RESERVE. AND WE BROUGHT FORWARD A PREVIOUS MEMO WITH RESPECT TO THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT RESERVE, AND THAT'S THE WORK THAT CAME FORWARD AND WE WILL BE DOING UNTIL 2023 TO BRING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AN ALL INCLUSIVE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT DOWNTOWN INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

THE MEMO THAT CAME FORWARD AND THE MOTION THAT'S BEFORE COUNCIL TONIGHT WAS ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USE OF THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND.

EXCUSE ME.

SO THE GENERAL MOTION IS TO SELL THESE PROPERTIES AT LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUE.

AS THE MAYOR'S REFERENCED, THE SPECIFIC PURCHASE AGREEMENT THAT WE ARE CONTEMPLATING WITH RESPECT TO THE 5050 LOT IS THE NEXT MOTION.

MS. WHITE, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? THANK YOU. QUICK ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS WITH THE WAY IN WHICH THE 5050 HAS BEEN MARKETED WITH THE RFP.

WE THOUGHT THAT WAS A, SORRY, I FEEL LIKE I'M ECHOING.

I AM. OKAY.

WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS A GOOD WAY TO PROCEED WITH THESE LOTS AS THEY HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME AS WELL.

THEY'RE ALSO WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN.

THEY'RE IN THE SAME GENERAL AREA AND COULD BENEFIT FROM A SIMILAR PROCESS.

SO THAT'S WHY THESE THREE WERE INCLUDED ALONG WITH THE WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE 5050 LOT.

THANK YOU. YEAH.

AND JUST TO NOTE, THE CITIES [INAUDIBLE] FOR TEN YEARS AND WE HAVEN'T HAD A BITE.

THAT BEING SAID, IT IS A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS.

AND SO PERHAPS SOMEBODY WILL COME IN WITH A PROPOSAL THAT THEY WANT TO BUY THE LOTS FOR 100,000 TO BE A MORE SUCCESSFUL PROPOSAL THAN SOMEBODY WHO COMES IN AND WANTS TO BUY THE LOTS FOR A DOLLAR. WOULD THAT BE CORRECT, MS. THISTLE? YES.

THE FIRST STEP IN THE PROCESS WILL BE DEVELOPING THAT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, BUT THAT IS DEFINITELY A POSSIBILITY THAT WE COULD GET DIFFERENT OFFERS, DIFFERENT VALUES, BUT WITH A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, WE CAN DICTATE SOME OF THE TERMS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE MET FOR IT TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION.

I MIGHT HAVE HAD A BIT MORE TO SAY, BUT BEING ON THE PHONE, I RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS DIFFICULT.

SO I'LL KEEP MY COMMENTS TO MYSELF AND JUST [INAUDIBLE] MOTION.

THANKS. THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

THANKS FOR THAT. AND THANKS, COUNSELOR MORSE, FOR STARTING A BIT OF A LINE OF INQUIRY HERE.

BUT I, CAN I GET SOME INFORMATION ON WHAT ADMINISTRATION ENVISIONS MIGHT BE, SOME OF THE CONDITIONS IN A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS IS THE VISION FOR THESE OTHER LOTS AND 50TH STREET THAT THEY'RE SIMILARLY HOUSING OR INVOLVE RETAIL ON THE GROUND FLOOR THAT THEY'RE MULTISTORY OR CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN A BIT ABOUT WHAT THE VISION IS FOR THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL CONDITIONS? MS. THISTLE.

AT THIS POINT, WE HAVEN'T DEVELOPED ANY TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS.

MS. WHITE. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

IT WILL BE SIMILAR. SO THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE MAIN FLOOR BE COMMERCIAL USES AS WELL AND THAT IN THAT AREA THERE IS A MINIMUM OF TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT.

SO THAT SECOND STORY WOULD BE ENCOURAGED TO BE SOME FORM OF HOUSING.

ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY WE WANT TO INVESTIGATE IS RIGHT NOW THOSE PROPERTIES ARE CURRENTLY MARKETED AS THREE LOTS TOGETHER AND THERE'S A POTENTIAL THAT MAYBE ONE PERSON ONLY WANTS ONE LOT AND ANOTHER PERSON OR BUSINESS WANTS TWO LOTS.

SO LOOKING AT KIND OF PLAYING THE TETRIS GAME OF DO WE HAVE TO SELL THEM AS THREE? IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY OR IS THERE SOMEONE OUT THERE WITH A PROPOSAL TO LOOK AT THEM IN A DIFFERENT VIEW THAN MAYBE WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO MARKET FOR THE LAST TEN YEARS? SO LOOKING ON CREATIVITY, OBVIOUSLY WE WANT ANY DEVELOPMENT TO BE IN KEEPING WITH COUNCIL'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AS WELL AS OUR COMMUNITY PLAN.

AND WE'VE GOT OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY, SO WE'LL TIE A BUNCH OF THOSE PIECES ALL TOGETHER WHEN CREATING THE RFP.

[00:10:03]

THANK YOU. SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. WE'LL CALL THE VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR.

THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN. ITEM 13.

I MOVE THAT COUNCIL DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO A PURCHASE AGREEMENT AS PER THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR LOT 34 BLOCK 30, PLAN 2564, WHICH IS THE 5050 CORNER IN THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.

THANK YOU. DO HAVE A SECONDER? COUNCILLOR PAYNE, I KNOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION SO I WILL HAND THE CHAIR TO DEPUTY MAYOR SMITH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR MAYOR ALTY.

THANK YOU. SO JUST LIKE TO ADD A SECOND SENTENCE TO THIS AND IT WOULD BE THE SALE OF LOT 34 BLOCK 30 PLAN 2564, THE 5050 LOT FOR LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUE WILL INCLUDE CONDITIONS TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND BE SECURED VIA A LEGAL AGREEMENT.

AND IF I HAVE A SECONDER, I'LL SPEAK TO THE.

SECONDER, WE HAVE COUNCILLOR SILVERIO.

THANK YOU. SO, YEAH, THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THIS LAW RIGHT NOW IS IS FOCUSED HEAVILY ON REVITALIZATION AS WELL AS OTHER THINGS LIKE THE THEA REPORT AND COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND COUNCIL'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES DOES TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR LAND AND HOUSING.

BUT WHEN WE DID THE RFP, IT WAS VERY MUCH ABOUT THIS IS IF YOU BUY IT AT APPRAISED VALUE.

AND SO I THINK IF IT'S GOING TO BE AT A SALE OF LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUE, ADDING SOME EXTRA CONDITIONS AROUND ADDRESSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THEN DOING THAT THROUGH A LEGAL AGREEMENT, WE COULD GET INTO THE DETAILS OF AND BE EXPLICIT.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT A BIT MORE BROAD FOR ADMINISTRATION TO BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPONENTS TO WHETHER IT'S 20 OR 30% OR TEN YEARS OR 15 OR 20 YEARS, JUST HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO GET THIS PROJECT OFF THE GROUND, BUT ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MEETING OUR SOME BROADER COMMUNITY'S OBJECTIVES, WHICH IS SOME OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS WE CAN ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND SO I'D LIKE TO LEAVE IT WITH ADMINISTRATION TO DO THE NEGOTIATION AND DO THE LEGAL AGREEMENT ON IT.

OPENING UP TO QUESTIONS. COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I'M JUST PRECARIOUS IF THERE IS A, DEFINED SOMEWHERE IN ONE OF OUR ZONING, WHETHER IT BE OUR ZONING BYLAW OR BUILDING BYLAW OF THE TERM AFFORDABLE HOUSING, DOES IT HOLD ANY KIND OF CRITERIA THAT WOULD BE SPECIFIC? MAYBE I'LL START THERE.

MS. THISTLE. OUR BYLAWS DO NOT CONTAIN A DEFINITION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT THIS TIME.

SO IN LACK OF OUR EXPLICIT DEFINITION, WOULD IT THEN GO TO THE NEXT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT.

AND DOES NWT DEFINE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE IN NWT? MS. THISTLE.

YES, THE TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT DOES HAVE DEFINITIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGH CMHC AND NWT HOUSING CORPORATION.

AS WELL, MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY DEFINE AFFORDABILITY IN DIFFERENT WAYS, SO IT WOULD BE UP TO ADMINISTRATION TO TAKE THE DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL TO INCLUDE OR ADDRESS AFFORDABILITY IN A PURCHASE AGREEMENT.

WE WOULD ASSESS WHAT THAT IS IN THE TERRITORY AND WHAT CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY DO AND ESSENTIALLY TAKE THAT AS A GUIDE AND MAP FOR A PURCHASE AGREEMENT.

MS. WHITE. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? NO, THAT'S GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

YEAH, I CAN SEE WHERE THE MAYOR'S COMING FROM.

YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY, I GUESS I KNOW THAT IT WAS PART OF THE PRESENTATION, BUT I GUESS THE PART THAT I WAS MOSTLY IN FAVOR FOR WAS JUST THE HOUSING COMPONENT, NOT NECESSARILY ITS AFFORDABILITY.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IF WE'RE SELLING A LOT, THERE'S A BUSINESS CASE TO BE MADE.

AND IF THE DEVELOPERS FIND A BUSINESS CASE FOR, YOU KNOW, HIGH END HOUSING, RENTAL HOUSING, THERE'S ALSO A LACK OF THAT IN OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL.

AND OF COURSE, ANY HOUSING THAT GETS ADDED WILL, OF COURSE, PUT PRESSURE OFF OF SOME OF THE OTHER APARTMENT BUILDINGS THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN TOWN.

[00:15:02]

SO I GUESS I JUST HAVE HESITATIONS AND PUTTING UP OTHER ROADBLOCKS THAT MIGHT NOT BE IN LINE WITH THE VISION THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS IN MIND.

I THINK ALSO, YOU KNOW, THAT WHEN YOU ADD AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE'RE RIGHT IN THE CORE OF OUR DOWNTOWN.

THERE MAY BE A RETAIL MIX.

THIS MAY BE, YOU KNOW, LONGER TERM RENTALS OR A MIX OF SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM RENTALS.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, HAVING A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF IT BEING JUST A CERTAIN TYPE OF MODEL WOULD BE TOO CONSTRICTIVE.

SO I CAN CERTAINLY APPRECIATE WHERE THE MAYOR IS COMING FROM, BUT I GUESS I'M NOT, I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT THAT THAT WOULD BE THE BEST PATH FORWARD. SO I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE THE MOTION THAT'S PRESENTED.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU, MADAM DEPUTY CHAIR.

I'M IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION BROUGHT FORWARD.

I THINK THAT IF THIS DEVELOPER WAS PAYING MARKET PRICE FOR THIS LOT, THEN I THINK IT WOULD BE UNFAIR FOR US TO ASK FOR A COMPONENT OF, TO OFFER SOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

BUT THIS DEVELOPER IS GETTING A PRETTY SWEET DEAL ON THIS PROPERTY.

AND I THINK THAT IT'S WELL JUSTIFIED TO PUT THIS TERM INTO THIS AGREEMENT.

I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, BUT I'LL I'LL WAIT FOR A LITTLE BIT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

THANKS. I WILL SUPPORT THE PROPOSED MOTION.

I THINK WE AT LEAST HAVE AN EXAMPLE TO FOLLOW OUR MODEL IN THAT, YOU KNOW, CMHC, WHICH IS A FEDERAL AGENCY, PROVIDES CONTRIBUTION FUNDING ON THE CONDITION THAT, TO, HOUSING PROJECTS LIKE THIS THAT A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THINGS, 20%, ARE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THEY HAVE SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS FOR WHAT THAT IS TO LOOK LIKE.

AND IN A SENSE, WE'RE ALSO CONTRIBUTING FUNDING TO THIS PROJECT BY PROVIDING THIS BIG UPFRONT SUBSIDY OF THE LAND COST.

AND SO I THINK IT'S A FAIR ASK TO REQUIRE THAT A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE, AT LEAST OF THE UNITS BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, THE DEVELOPER HAS MENTIONED THAT ONE OF THEIR GOALS FOR THIS PROJECT IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

I'M NOT SURE THAT THEY PROVIDED A SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF WHAT THAT MEANT OR WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.

BUT GIVEN THAT THEY HAVE MENTIONED THAT IT IS ONE OF THE GOALS, I THINK IT'S FAIR FOR US TO HOLD THEM TO THAT AND PUT SOME SPECIFICS IN THERE.

AND GIVEN THAT THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC SUBSIDY GOING INTO THIS UP FRONT, CERTAINLY IT'S IN THE CITY'S INTEREST TO HAVE A HOUSING, MORE HOUSING IN THE DOWNTOWN AND HAVE A BUILDING LIKE THIS.

BUT I THINK IT'S, THERE ALSO STILL IS A NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY.

AND WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE PROGRESS STILL ON OUR TEN YEAR PLAN TO END HOMELESSNESS AS QUICKLY SCROLLING THROUGH TO TRY TO GET SOME STATS ABOUT WHERE ARE STILL THE MAJOR GAPS IN, ACROSS THE SPECTRUM OF HOUSING.

BUT, I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT WE DO STILL HAVE SOME GAPS IN TERMS OF AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING.

AND SO THIS COULD FILL A BIG GAP.

AND I THINK IT'S WISE TO AT LEAST GO FORWARD WITH SOME NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER TO INCLUDE THIS AS PART OF THE LEGAL AGREEMENT AND PERHAPS DO SOME CONSULTATION WITH CMHC AND THE GNWT IN TERMS OF HOW TO NAIL DOWN BOTH DEFINITIONS AND RELATIVELY STRAIGHTFORWARD WAYS WE MIGHT ENFORCE IT.

SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO INCLUDE IN NEGOTIATIONS FOR CONDITIONS AROUND THIS AGREEMENT.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MUFANDAEDZA.

THANK YOU [INAUDIBLE]. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS AMENDED.

YES. ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING IS THE DEFINITION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

BUT UNTIL THAT COMES FORWARD, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL GET THAT DEFINITION ON WHAT DOES AFFORDABLE HOUSING LOOK LIKE.

WITHOUT THE CITY'S DEFINITION, IT COULD BE $3,000 A MONTH TO $12,000 A MONTH.

SO I WOULD WANT TO SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

BUT WE'LL SUPPORT THIS MOTION FOR, BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT IS A SUBSIDIZED LOT AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT AFFORDABLE MEANS.

[00:20:07]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU.

JUST A QUESTION FOR ADMINISTRATION.

DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT? FOLLOWING WHAT COUNCILLOR KONGE HAD PUT FORWARD A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT HAVING FEES PAID LIKE THE, WHAT WOULD, I GUESS EQUAL TO THE COST OF THE LOT, THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOT.

AND THEN RETURN AT SPECIFIC MILESTONES IN THIS DEVELOPMENT JUST TO ENSURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL GO AHEAD AS PLANNED AND NOT CHANGE MIDSTREAM.

THANK YOU. MS. THISTLE.

THERE IS NO PURCHASE AGREEMENT CURRENTLY AND MS. WHITE HAS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION.

I MET WITH THE PROPONENTS ON TUESDAY LAST WEEK AND RECEIVED CONFIRMATION THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS AS PART OF THE NEGOTIATION ON AN AGREEMENT.

SO THAT IS PUTTING SOME MONEY DOWN AND TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND BUILDING PERMIT STAGE.

SO NOT JUST ONE REFUND BUT A COUPLE STAGES WHERE MONEY WOULD BE REFUNDED AS THEY PROGRESS THROUGH THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT ITSELF.

SO THEY ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU. AWESOME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR MORSE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? HEARING NONE.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? SEEING NONE. I MYSELF, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THIS.

I THINK THAT MOVING FORWARD WITH ANY SORT OF PROJECTS IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE, WE DEFINITELY NEED TO ADDRESS HOUSING AS IT IS AFFORDABLE LIVING.

THE COST OF LIVING IS AT AN ALL TIME HIGH, SO ANY CHANCE WE CAN POSSIBLY GET TO ALLEVIATE OR ASSIST IN ANY WAY I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT.

SO YES, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.

AND WITH THAT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS PRESENTED.

IN FAVOR.

AND THAT MOTION CARRIES, I WILL HAND THE CHAIR BACK TO MADAM MAYOR.

THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MORGAN, DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT? WELL, FIRST I JUST WANTED TO INQUIRE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION.

THIS MAY BE CONDITIONS WERE ALREADY PLANNING TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE DEVELOPER.

BUT FIRST, COUNCILLOR PAYNE MENTIONED THE IDEA OF THE DEPOSIT AND THAT, WE'VE HEARD THAT THE DEVELOPER IS WILLING TO NEGOTIATE THIS.

IS IT WORTH ADDING THAT INTO OUR MOTION? CURRENTLY AS WORDED AS AMENDED, THE MOTION SAYS IT WILL INCLUDE CONDITIONS TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IS IT USEFUL TO ADD INTO THERE A DEPOSIT AS PART OF A LIST OF A FEW THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE SALE IS TO INCLUDE OR REQUIRE OR IS THAT REDUNDANT TO INCLUDE IT IN THE MOTION? MS. THISTLE.

I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH TO WORK WITH TO DRAFT OR NEGOTIATE THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT.

IT IS PREFERABLE TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY WHEN WE'RE NEGOTIATING, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE ADDRESSING AFFORDABILITY AS WELL.

AS WE'VE MENTIONED IN THE GPC A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, A WEEK AGO.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO THAT.

FOR EXAMPLE, IT COULD BE A FORGIVABLE LOAN.

SO IF WE WERE GOING TO LOOK AT A FORGIVABLE LOAN AS A WAY TO ENSURE AFFORDABILITY, THEN WE LIKELY WOULDN'T PROCEED WITH THE FORGIVABLE OR REIMBURSABLE DEPOSIT.

SO LEAVING A LITTLE FLEXIBILITY THERE FOR ADMINISTRATION TO PROCEED WITH THOSE KINDS OF NEGOTIATIONS WOULD LIKELY BE BEST.

MS. WHITE, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? NO, I THINK I AGREE FULLY BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T WANT TO SAY YOU HAVE TO PUT X NUMBER OF DOLLARS DOWN WHEN EXACTLY THEY'RE LOOKING FOR SOME FORM OF FORGIVABLE LOAN PROCESS.

SO LEAVING A FLEXIBILITY WOULD BE GREAT TO FOR THE NEGOTIATIONS WE'RE GOING TO ENTER INTO.

THANK YOU. OK ONE THING THAT MIGHT BE OBVIOUS BUT MIGHT BE GOOD FOR US TO INCLUDE IN A LEGAL AGREEMENT, JUST TO SPECIFY THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS THAT WE'RE EXPECTING SO THAT THIS DOESN'T TURN AROUND AT SOME POINT TO BECOME COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND THEN SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT ON UPPER FLOORS.

WE DEFINITELY, I MEAN, WE WANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT WE ALSO JUST WANT A CERTAIN NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS AT ALL.

[00:25:03]

IS IT WORTH, I'M NOT GOING TO SUGGEST ANY NUMBER RIGHT NOW, BUT TO INCLUDE THAT AS A CONDITION TO SPECIFY THE CITY'S EXPECTATION FOR A MINIMUM NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS THAT WILL COME OUT OF THIS.

CAN I GET ADMINISTRATION'S ADVICE ON THAT? MS. THISTLE. IT'S LIKELY PREMATURE AT THIS POINT TO SPECIFY A MINIMUM NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS, AS I DON'T BELIEVE THE NEGOTIATIONS HAVE BEEN THAT DETAILED.

BUT MS. WADE, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? THANK YOU. NO, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, NEGOTIATIONS HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO THOSE SPECIFICS.

AND WE ALSO NEED TO CONSIDER THERE WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, SAY, BACHELOR SUITES OR ONE BEDROOM VERSUS, SAY, THREE BEDROOM OR LARGER SUITES.

SO THE WAY IN WHICH THEY MARKET WILL BE BASED ON THE MARKET RATHER THAN STIPULATING WE NEED X NUMBER OF THIS AMOUNT OR X NUMBER OF THIS MANY BEDROOMS AS WELL AS THE DESIGN ON THAT PROPERTY, IT'S A LITTLE BIT AWKWARD.

THEY'RE GOING TO NEED TO FIT IT AS BEST THAT THEY CAN.

NOT TO SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT DWELLING UNITS AND WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING.

BUT FIRST, WHAT WE NEED FROM THEM IS THE RESPONSE, THE COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THAT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL.

THANK YOU. AND TO BE CLEAR, LIKE I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT AT THE OUTSET, EITHER COUNCIL OR ADMINISTRATION SPECIFY A NUMBER. WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS THAT WE SECURE LEGAL AGREEMENT THAT INCLUDES A NUMBER, A MINIMUM NUMBER.

SO THE MOTION WOULD JUST READ, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT WILL INCLUDE CONDITIONS TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND A MINIMUM NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS.

SO WE'RE NOT SPECIFYING THAT MINIMUM NOW, BUT THAT AT SOME POINT WHEN WE DO NAIL DOWN THE LEGAL AGREEMENT, IT SHOULD SPECIFY A MINIMUM NUMBER TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE SOME WAY OF ENSURING THAT THEY DON'T AT SOME LATER POINT TURN AROUND AND PRODUCE TO TWO UNITS AND THEN SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT FOR THE REST OF IT.

IS THAT.

I THINK WELL, BECAUSE THE CITY IS THE REGULATOR WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, THE BUILDING PERMITS.

SO I THINK WE'VE GOT A LOT OF LEVERS THAT THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO TO PULL A FAST ONE ON US.

BUT MS. THISTLE PERHAPS CAN PROVIDE SOME CLARITY ON THAT.

YEP. FIRST, THEY NEED TO, AS MS. WHITE INDICATED, SUBMIT A COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE WEBSITE, AS WE INDICATED IN GPC.

THAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET.

SO THAT'S THE FIRST STEP.

THEN THAT RFP SUBMISSION WILL BE EVALUATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF REFERENCE.

IT ALSO WILL BE EVALUATED WHEN THEY SUBMIT A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION, AND IT WILL GO ACCORDING TO THE ZONING BYLAW REQUIREMENTS, MINIMUM MAXIMUM STANDARDS.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S THE BUILDING PERMIT STAGE WHERE THEY'LL GET ISSUED A BUILDING PERMIT AND ALL THOSE PIECES.

THERE'S OPPORTUNITY AND REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY TO STEP IN AND REGULATE SEPARATE EVEN FROM A PURCHASE AGREEMENT.

SO THE DETAILS WILL BE DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL OF THOSE STEPS.

BUT YEAH, AT THIS POINT TO ESTABLISH A MINIMUM OR EVEN DICTATE A MINIMUM IS A LITTLE PREMATURE.

I MEAN, I JUST DON'T WANT US TO GET OURSELVES DOWN A PATH WHERE WE'RE AT SOME POINT, WE DON'T HAVE CLEAR MINIMUM EXPECTATIONS SET THAT WE CAN SAY, IF, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T MEET THESE, WE'RE NOT APPROVING THIS DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BECAUSE IT JUST DOESN'T FIT WITH WHAT WE'RE ENVISIONING HERE.

I MEAN, I WON'T INSIST THAT THIS IS INCLUDED NOW IN THE MOTION.

AND AGAIN, TO BE CLEAR, I WASN'T SUGGESTING THAT WE TRY TO LAY OUT A MINIMUM NUMBER NOW, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE END UP WITH A LEGAL AGREEMENT THAT HAS ENOUGH SPECIFICS THAT IF IT SORT OF, IF THE PLAN SORT OF GRADUALLY CHANGE AND CHANGE AND CHANGE, THAT WE HAVE SORT OF CLEAR PARAMETERS OR GUIDELINES THAT WE CAN POINT TO AT SOME POINT AND SAY, HEY, WAIT, THIS NO LONGER FITS WHAT OUR VISION AND COMMON UNDERSTANDING WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR THIS LAW, AS OPPOSED TO GETTING PRESSURED THAT AS IT GETS FURTHER AND FURTHER, FURTHER DOWN, DOWN THE TRACKS, THAT WE KIND OF KEEP SAYING YES BECAUSE WE JUST WANT THEM TO DEVELOP SOMETHING. I JUST WANT US TO MAKE SURE THAT AT SOME POINT EARLY IN THE PATH, WE HAVE SOME CLEAR EXPECTATIONS THAT ARE LAID OUT IN LEGAL AGREEMENT THAT ALLOWS US TO PUSH BACK IF THE PROJECT SLOWLY EVOLVES INTO SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT MEET WHAT THE CITY'S VISION IS FOR REVITALIZING

[00:30:04]

COUNCILLOR MORSE WANTS TO INTERJECT AT THIS POINT.

YEAH, AND I THINK THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, THERE'S THE EVALUATION CRITERIA.

SO ONCE THEY GET, IF THERE RFP IS SUCCESSFUL AND IT'S BEEN SELECTED, THAT'S WHEN THE LEGAL AGREEMENTS HAPPEN.

SO IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN JUST SELLING A LOT ON ON NIVEN.

AND THE PERSON JUST HAS TO DEVELOP BASED ON THE ZONING BYLAW AND THE BUILDING BYLAW.

IF THEY'RE SUCCESSFUL IN IN THEIR RFP FOR THIS LAW, THEY WILL BE HELD TO THE PROPOSAL THAT THEY THEY PUT FORWARD.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN, I'M SORRY MORSE.

THANKS. YEAH, THIS IS KIND OF A CONCERN I'VE HAD, AND SOMETHING I'VE BEEN WONDERING ABOUT IS THAT THE COUNCIL MOTION IS VERY OPEN ENDED AND LEAVES THE ADMINISTRATION A HUGE AMOUNT OF LEEWAY TO CRAFT AN AGREEMENT.

AND JUST NOTICING THAT SOME OF THE CONCERNS BROUGHT UP BY COUNCIL, IT ISN'T CLEAR TO ME WHY THERE CAN'T BE ANOTHER STEP WHERE COUNCIL GETS A LOOK AT THIS BEFORE IT GOES FORWARD. AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT FOR ME TO PASS A MOTION HERE ON THE PHONE, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF COUNCILORS WANT TO CONSIDER DOING THAT, BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM TO ME LIKE THERE'S THERE'S CONCERNS AS TO WHAT THIS PROJECT MIGHT BE, BECAUSE WE HAVE NO IDEA.

WE HAVEN'T SEEN IT. SO WITHOUT HAVING SEEN THE PROPOSAL, I KNOW I ASKED ABOUT THIS LAST WEEK, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING, LIKE, ARE THERE GOING TO BE STEPS WITHIN THIS PROCESS IN WHICH COUNCIL IS GOING TO GET ANOTHER LOOK? OR ARE WE EFFECTIVELY JUST HANDING IT OVER TO ADMINISTRATION AND COUNCIL WON'T BE INVOLVED AGAIN UNTIL, LET'S SAY, A BUILDING IS ON THAT SPOT? SO IT'S KIND OF A QUESTION IN A STATEMENT AND MAYBE A SUGGESTION.

MS. THISTLE. IT'S GOING TO BE A TYPICAL LAWYER ANSWER, BUT IT DEPENDS.

IT DEPENDS ON THE RESPONSE TO THE RFP, BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER IT COMPLIES FULLY WITH THE ZONING BYLAW, WHEN I MEAN, COMPLY, F THERE'S NO DISCRETIONARY USE, THEN IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO COME TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

MS. WHITE.

THANK YOU. AND ALSO, WE HAVE TO REMEMBER WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN ZONE, THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT USES, RIGHT? SO ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME FORM OF COMMERCIAL ON THE MAIN FLOOR.

THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT USES THAT COULD BE IN THERE, AND IT DOES NOT STIPULATE THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE X NUMBER OF SAY, YOU HAD 10 STORY BUILDING, THAT NINE OF THOSE HAVE TO BE RESIDENTIAL. THERE'S OTHER PERMITTED USES AS WELL.

SO IT'S A LITTLE PREMATURE TO DISCUSS THAT WHEN WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED A COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THAT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. AND THE RFP DOCUMENT ITSELF DOES NOT MAKE THOSE STIPULATIONS.

IT SAYS THAT IT MUST BE IT MUST DETAIL HOW THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, AND IT DOES LIST A NUMBER OF STUDIES THAT IT NEEDS TO REFER TO AND SHOW HOW IT IS MEETING THOSE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

BUT THERE'S NOTHING SPECIFIC TO THE USE THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING TO TONIGHT.

THANK YOU.

ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCILLOR MORSE.

WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN ONLY HEAR WHEN COUNSELORS ARE TALKING.

I CAN'T HEAR ADMINISTRATION'S ANSWERS.

I APPRECIATE THE GIVING ONE, BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO HEAR ADMINISTRATION ON THE CALL.

I'M GOING TO, I THREW MY COMMENTS OUT THERE AND WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT SOMEONE IN THE ROOM AND COULD MAKE A MOTION IF THEY'RE INTERESTED IN DOING THAT.

BUT I DIDN'T HEAR THE ANSWER.

AND SO PERHAPS COUNCILLORS DISAGREE.

BUT IF THAT'S THE CASE, THERE'S NO POINT IN ME MAKING THE MOTION ANYWAY, SO.

WELL, YEAH. I'LL JUST STICK TO APPROVING AND DISAPPROVING HERE.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

JUST A QUICK QUESTION. JUST AS A FOLLOW UP TO COUNCILLOR MORSE'S QUESTION FOR ADMINISTRATION, DO YOU THINK, DOES THE ADMINISTRATION BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO ADD AN EXTRA LAYER OF APPROVAL OR I GUESS ANOTHER BOUNCE PASS BY COUNCIL ONCE A PROPOSAL, SOMETHING TANGIBLE IS IN HAND OR YEAH, MAYBE I'LL JUST LEAVE IT THERE FOR ADMINISTRATION TO KIND OF MAKE A CALL ON THAT ONE.

SO I GUESS HAVE ADMINISTRATION DO THE EVALUATION CRITERIA ,COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH THE SCORING AND HAVE COUNCIL FORMALLY ENDORSE THE RFP SCORING? SEE MY HESITATION THERE IS THAT IF WE'RE SAYING GREEN LIGHTS, IT'S GREEN LIGHTS FOR THE ZONING BYLAW THAT WE'VE JUST PASSED AS WELL.

SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW.

JUST TRYING TO FURTHER THE POINT THAT COUNCILLOR MORSE WAS TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE I DO FEEL THAT AS WELL,

[00:35:03]

THAT, YES, WE WANT TO SEE SOMETHING DONE.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE IN BROAD STROKES THEY'RE SPEAKING THE RIGHT LANGUAGE, BUT WE'RE STILL YET TO SEE ANYTHING SPECIFIC AT ALL, REALLY.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S A, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A PART OF ME THAT THINKS IT'S A LITTLE UNFAIR THAT WE HAVE A NEW COUNCIL THAT'S GOING TO BE COMING IN IN A MONTH'S TIME.

AND HERE WE ARE GIVING AWAY THE GEM OF DOWNTOWN, WHICH I STILL THINK IS, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THEIR PRESENTATION.

AND LIKE I SAID, WHAT THEY'RE BRINGING TO THE TABLE IS VERY POSITIVE.

BUT AGAIN, IT'S IT'S JUST A PROMISE AT THIS POINT.

THERE'S NOTHING BEEN TANGIBLE THAT A COUNCIL HAS VOTED ON.

SO IS THERE SOME MECHANISM THAT I KNOW THAT THE ZONING BYLAW MECHANISM WOULD THAT, IF IT IS OUTSIDE OF ITS VARIANCE OR CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE, BUT LIKE ADMINISTRATION HAS JUST RESPONDED THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PERMITTED USES AND WE'VE MADE DT PARTICULARLY VERY PERMISSIVE.

SO I GUESS I JUST I KIND OF WANTED TO GET ADMINISTRATION'S TAKE ON THE INNER TURMOIL THAT A COUPLE OF US COUNCILLORS ARE HAVING AND WHETHER THEY CAN ARTICULATE THAT IN SUCH A WAY THAT PUTS OUR CONCERNS AT REST.

YEAH. AND I THINK IT'S THROUGH THE LAND ADMINISTRATION BYLAW, BECAUSE THAT'S THE, THEIR LAND ADMINISTRATION BYLAWS IS THE BYLAWS THAT WE USE TO DISPOSE OF LAND AND COUNCILS SELECTED TO DISPOSE OF LAND VIA A CALL FOR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS.

AND THEN THE, IS IT, THROUGH THE LAND ADMINISTRATION BYLAW THAT WE'VE GIVEN THE REVIEW OF THE RFP TO THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND LANDS.

SO, MS. THISTLE, PERHAPS THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF EXPLAIN OR ELABORATE WHERE COUNCIL COULD HAVE A BIT MORE THEIR.

YEAH, YOU'RE CORRECT. THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE DISPOSAL OF THIS PROPERTY PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE RFP BY COUNCIL MOTION.

IF A PROPONENT SUBMITTED A RFP THAT TICKED THE BOXES THAT ARE REQUIRED AND CURRENTLY IF THEY PAID THE ASKING PRICE, THIS WOULD NEVER COME BEFORE COUNCIL.

ADMINISTRATION BROUGHT IT BEFORE COUNCIL AS A SUGGESTION AND RECOMMENDATION AS A WAY TO USE THE REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE FUND. WE WERE LOOKING AT BIG PICTURE AND BIG INITIATIVES THAT THAT MONEY COULD REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE DOWNTOWN.

FOR THE SPECIFIC QUESTION.

YES. IF WE HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL IN BETWEEN TO GET APPROVAL AND SPECIFIC DETAILS DURING THE NEGOTIATION, ONE THAT'S A LITTLE OUT OF THE ORDINARY DEFINITELY WILL LEAD TO DELAYS.

YEAH. I GUESS THE DELAYS DON'T BOTHER ME AS MUCH AS THE OUT OF THE ORDINARY OR MAKING A KIND OF A JANKY PROCESS WHERE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN GRANTED AUTHORITY.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IN ESSENCE, IT'S A FAUX AUTHORITY WITH ANOTHER UNKNOWN THAT COULD THEN VOTE COMPLETELY RANDOM.

SO YEAH, I HEAR EVERYONE'S CONCERNS ON THIS ONE.

I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE SAME THING.

YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, REASON WHY I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS IS THAT WE'VE HELD THIS LAND FOR TEN YEARS AND NOTHING HAS HAPPENED IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE.

AND YEAH, SO FOR EXTREME SITUATIONS I GUESS CALL FOR SOME EXTREME MEASURES AND MAYBE A BIT OF FAITH ON OUR SIDE.

SO I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THE THING COUNCIL MAY WANT TO CONSIDER AND IT'S JUST OFF THE TOP OF THE HEAD, BUT THE LAND ADMINISTRATION BYLAW IF COUNCIL, BECAUSE THE PROBLEM IS, YES ADMINISTRATION CAN COME BACK WITH THEIR SCORING AND IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE, WELL, WHY DID YOU GIVE THEM 5% ON THAT AND WHY YOU'D NOT DO 12%? AND SO THEN BASICALLY COUNCIL WANTS TO BE PART OF THE RFP REVIEW COMMITTEE, OTHERWISE YOU'RE JUST RUBBER STAMPING ADMINS WORK.

SO IT MAY BE SOMETHING FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE LAND ADMINISTRATION BYLAW OR REVIEW OF RFP SHOULD BE A COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL AND ADMIN, PROS AND CONS.

PERHAPS NOT LEGALLY SOMETHING, BUT YEAH, JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A BIT OF A SORT OF A DILEMMA IN TERMS OF PROCESS IN THAT IF A DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING TO PAY THE APPRAISED PRICE, I UNDERSTAND WE WOULDN'T BE HERE AND THAT ANY NEGOTIATION WOULD PURELY BE ADMINISTRATION.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THAT COUNCIL SPEND $1,000,000 ESSENTIALLY OF TAXPAYER MONEY FOR THIS PROJECT.

[00:40:02]

AND SO WE'RE NOT IN THE SAME PLACE AS IF IT WAS JUST SORT OF GOING THROUGH THE REGULAR MOTIONS OF WHAT FITS WITHIN ZONING BYLAW.

AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT FOR THAT AMOUNT OF SUBSIDY, THERE'S SOME SORT OF MINIMUM EXPECTATIONS OR BOUNDARIES THAT COUNCIL MIGHT WANT TO PUT AROUND THIS PROCESS GIVEN THE SUBSIDY.

AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT IT WON'T WORK VERY WELL FOR COUNCIL TO BE REVIEWING THE RFP.

AND AS I MENTIONED AT THE LAST MEETING, DECIDING WHAT COLOR THE SIDING SHOULD BE AND, YOU KNOW, NUMBERS OF UNITS NECESSARILY IN THIS KIND OF THING, BUT.

I THOUGHT MAYBE ONE PARALLEL IS, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE CITY GOES INTO NEGOTIATIONS, SAY BARGAINING WITH A UNION OR SOMETHING.

THE COUNCIL IS NOT IN THERE AT THE BARGAINING TABLE AND REVIEWING EVERY PROPOSAL BACK AND FORTH THAT WOULD NEVER WORK.

BUT AT THE BEGINNING, COUNCIL SETS BROAD PARAMETERS IN TERMS OF WE WON'T, IN YOUR NEGOTIATIONS, YOU CAN'T GO BEYOND THIS ON THIS END AND THIS ON THIS END, WE HAVE SOME MINIMUM EXPECTATIONS.

YOU HAVE TO STAY WITHIN THESE BOUNDARIES OR THIS BOX AND THEN ADMINISTRATION SORT OF GO FOR IT.

AND AT THE MOMENT, OUR SORT OF BOUNDARIES THAT THIS NEGOTIATION COULD PROCEED IN IS ESSENTIALLY JUST WHATEVER FITS WITHIN THE ZONING BYLAW, I SUPPOSE.

AND THE RFP THAT EXISTS CURRENTLY, MINUS THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY THE APPRAISAL OR THE APPRAISED VALUE, I SUPPOSE.

IS THE INTENTION THAT ANYTHING THAT GOES FORWARD HAS TO FIT WITHIN THE EXISTING RFP THAT WAS OUT THERE, MINUS THE PART ABOUT HAVING TO PAY APPRAISED VALUE THAT THOSE ARE THE PARAMETERS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITHIN.

MS. THISTLE.

YES, IT HAS TO BE A SUCCESSFUL SUBMISSION WITH RESPECT TO THE RFP THAT'S CURRENTLY POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR MANY YEARS, AS WELL AS THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MOTION EARLIER THIS EVENING WITH RESPECT TO AFFORDABILITY.

OKAY. AND IS THERE, USUALLY WHEN WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, DIFFERENT PEOPLE ARE BIDDING AND YOU HAVE TO SCORE HIGH ENOUGH TO OUTCOMPETE OTHER PEOPLE.

BUT IF THERE'S ONLY ONE BIDDER, YOU KNOW, IF THEY SCORE 5%, 10%, BUT THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES, DO THEY STILL PASS OR IS THERE LIKE A MINIMUM PASSING GRADE OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? IT HAPPENS ON A FEW UNFORTUNATE RFP TENDERS.

SO NOT UNIQUE TO THE CITY THAT YOU ONLY GET ONE BIDDER AND THAT YOU'RE SELECTED, BUT THERE'S STILL CONDITIONS AND IT CAN REGO OUT TO TENDER OR RFP IF IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE.

BUT MS. THISTLE, FURTHER INFORMATION, IF WE ONLY GET ONE RFP.

YES, EXCUSE ME.

AND WHEN WE REFER TO A SUCCESSFUL RFP, IT NEEDS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN THE TERMS OF REFERENCE WITH RESPECT TO THAT RFP.

SO IF IT DOES NOT MEET THOSE TERMS OF REFERENCE, WE DO NOT CONSIDER IT A COMPLETE SUBMISSION OR AN ACCEPTABLE SUBMISSION.

AS MS. WHITE INDICATED, THERE'S NUMEROUS STRATEGIES LISTED IN THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE RFP THAT DO NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AS PART OF THIS, WHICH LEADS TO SOME OF WHY THE APPLICATION OR THE DISCUSSIONS TO DATE HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED A COMPLETE SUBMISSION IN RESPONSE TO THAT RFP.

MS. WHITE.

NO, I DEFINITELY WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

THERE'S WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER A MINIMUM STANDARD THAT'S ALREADY BEEN OUTLINED BY CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS YOU HAVE UP TO DATE PLANNING DOCUMENTS.

SO YOU HAVE AN UP TO DATE COMMUNITY PLAN AND A VERY UP TO DATE ZONING BYLAW.

SO THOSE ARE THE RULES, OR THE TEST, IF YOU WILL, THAT WE'RE BASICALLY APPLYING TO ANY DEVELOPMENT.

AND IT'S NOT JUST THIS ONE. IT WOULD BE ANYONE ELSE WHO CAME IN RESPONDING TO THIS RFP.

THERE'S NO MINIMUM SCORE.

BUT I WOULD SAY THE MINIMUM SCORE IS WHAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF NOT JUST THE DOWNTOWN, BUT THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.

AND THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND THE LAND USE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO MAKE THOSE SORTS OF DETERMINATIONS.

AND WE HOPE THAT WE'LL DO THE BEST FOR THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.

THANK YOU. BUT IF SOMEBODY GOT A ZERO OUT OF 30% ABILITY TO MEET CITY'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OR PAST EXPERIENCE AND REVITALIZATION PROJECTS, THEY HAVE NO EXPERIENCE.

IF YOU WISH TO REMAIN IN THE CONFERENCE, PLEASE PRESS STAR 1] [LAUGHTER] SO YEAH, IF SOMEBODY IS GETTING ZEROS ON PAST EXPERIENCE ABILITY TO MEET THAT RFP IS NOT GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

IS THAT CORRECT, MS. THISTLE? THAT IS 100% CORRECT.

[00:45:01]

OKAY. JUST A FEW MORE QUESTIONS THEN ON WHAT? SO THE SORT OF PARAMETERS HERE, THE TAX ABATEMENT.

SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE THE POSSIBILITY FOR TAX ABATEMENT AT LEAST FOR THE FIVE YEARS, BECAUSE IF IT FULFILLS THE CRITERIA IN DOWNTOWN ZONE, AND THEN THERE'S THE OPTION THAT AT COUNCIL'S DISCRETION TO EXTEND THAT TAX ABATEMENT.

IS THAT, IF, AS PART OF THIS NEGOTIATING PROCESS, THE LEGAL AGREEMENT WITH ANYONE THAT'S SUCCESSFUL IN THEIR PROPOSAL.

DOES ADMINISTRATION HAVE DISCRETION TO SORT OF DANGLE THAT AS A PART OF THE NEGOTIATIONS TO EXTEND THE TAX ABATEMENT, OR WOULD ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT EXTENDING PAST FIVE YEARS HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL AT THAT POINT TO BE APPROVED? MS. THISTLE.

DEPENDING ON WHAT'S BROUGHT FORWARD IN THE NEW YEAR WITH RESPECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ADMINISTRATION AND DEPENDING ON THIS DEVELOPMENT MIGHT BE APPLYING FOR ANY KIND OF ABATEMENT WOULD AFFECT THAT RESPONSE.

AS WELL IF THE BYLAW DICTATES THAT COUNCIL HAS TO APPROVE ANY EXTENSION, IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL.

MS. WHITE.

THANK YOU. YES, IT CURRENTLY, IF THAT WAS REQUESTED, IT WOULD CURRENTLY HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL.

THAT'S IN THE BYLAW AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW.

BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT MATTERS.

BUT TO DATE, NO REQUEST OR EVEN CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE.

I WAS JUST IN MY PAST MEMO IDENTIFYING IT FOR COUNCIL SO THAT YOU WERE AWARE THAT THAT IS A POTENTIAL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR PAYNE.

THANK YOU. I JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION.

SO WHEN THIS DEVELOPER CAME IN AND DONE A PRESENTATION FOR US, THEY SORT OF SOLD US ON THIS IDEA.

AND BECAUSE WE'RE SITTING AT AROUND ZERO VACANCY RATE HERE LIKE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IN, I BELIEVE IT WAS 180 APARTMENTS OVER A 12 STORY BUILDING, YOU KNOW, RETAIL ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

THAT'S WHAT WE WERE, THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE DECIDED TO GIVE THIS LOT FOR A DOLLAR.

RIGHT. SO IS.

THIS WHOLE RFP IS THAT SET SO ANOTHER DEVELOPER COULD COME IN IF THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENT SET UP BY THE CITY, THEY COULD POSSIBLY GET THE SAME DEAL AND IF THEY SCORE HIGHER, THEN THEY WOULD MOVE ON WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT.

IS THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING? AND IT REALLY LIKE IT DOESN'T SIT WELL WITH ME THAT WE'D GIVE AWAY A PROPERTY AND THEN OFFER A TAX ABATEMENT. SO IS THAT A BYLAW THAT CAN BE CHANGED WITH THE NEW COUNCIL IN REGARDS TO IF A DEVELOPER GETS A PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR A NOMINAL FEE OF $1, THEN WE CAN TAKE OUT THAT OPTION OF GETTING A TAX ABATEMENT FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS? IS THAT AN OPTION? COUNCIL COULD MAKE THAT OPTION.

THERE ARE SOME BUILDINGS GETTING BUILT RIGHT NOW THAT HAVE RECEIVED A SUBSTANTIALLY LARGER GRANT TO GET BUILT NOT FROM THE MUNICIPALITY AND THEY'RE GETTING A TAX ABATEMENT, BUT SO THERE'S LOTS OF LOTS OF THINGS TO CONSIDER, IF COUNCIL DID WANT TO TAKE AWAY TAX ABATEMENTS, IT IS AN INCENTIVE.

AND SO IF PEOPLE ARE, IF IT'S ACTUALLY INCENTING DEVELOPMENT, THEN IT IS, YEAH.

MR. SILVERIO, THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE OTHER COUNCILS OR THE PREVIOUS QUESTIONS.

WITH RESPECT TO THE RFP PROCESS, YES, IT'S CURRENTLY OPEN AND IT IS AVAILABLE FOR ANYBODY INTERESTED TO SUBMIT ON THAT REQUEST FOR A PROPOSAL.

IT IS AN ONEROUS PROCESS, WHICH IS LIKELY WHY WE HAVEN'T SEEN COMPLETED APPLICATIONS OVER THE PAST NUMBER OF YEARS.

MS. WHITE. THANK YOU.

YES. SO TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, SHOULD ANOTHER VIABLE RESPONSE TO THE RFP COME IN, INCLUDING A DIFFERENT MONETARY AMOUNT, IT WOULD BE SCORED IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT'S IN THE RFP, AS WOULD ANYTHING FROM HOLLOWAY.

SO IT IS AN OPEN PROCESS AS OF RIGHT NOW.

THE SECOND PIECE WAS, THERE WAS A LOT OF QUESTIONS, SO I'VE JUST BEEN GOING BACK TO THEIR ACTUAL WORDING IN THEIR PROPOSAL AND IT DOES SPECIFICALLY SAY IN THEIR RESPONSE THAT THEIR ASK IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR WANT TO DEVELOP FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME FRAME, WHICH DOES INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO THAT'S RIGHT IN THEIR STATEMENT THERE.

SO THAT I BELIEVE IS PART OF THE PRESENTATION.

AND THEN THE SECOND PIECE ABOUT, OR THE SECOND QUESTION ABOUT CAN TAX ABATEMENT TERMS BE CHANGED WHEN WE BRING FORWARD A NEW INCENTIVE BYLAW,

[00:50:01]

THEN ABSOLUTELY THAT'S A COUNCIL DECISION.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? THE MOTION AS AMENDED.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

IT'S JUST A LITTLE MINOR ONE JUST TO SEE IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE.

THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION THAT'S ON THAT LOT CURRENTLY.

WHAT, HOW MANY FLOORS IS IT SET TO? I THINK IT'S 45 METERS.

IT'S THE MAXIMUM OF THE CITY.

MS. THISTLE.

MS.. WHITE.

THANK YOU. SO IN THIS SPECIFIC AREA, DUE TO FLIGHT PATHS, IT IS 45 METERS.

THERE'S NO EXCEPTION TO THAT WHATSOEVER.

WHAT WE DID NOTE IN SPEAKING WITH THE CURRENT PROPONENTS AS WELL AS I BELIEVE I PUT IN MY MEMO, HERE WE HAVE A LOT THAT IS ACTUALLY SITTING IN FRONT OF SOME CITY INFRASTRUCTURE BEHIND IT.

SO THE HEIGHT WILL ACTUALLY POTENTIALLY BE LOWER THAN THAT BECAUSE WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT OUR MUNICIPAL SERVICES CAN STILL DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO. SO WE'RE ON TOP OF THE BUILDING AT THE LOWER MALL, IF YOU ALL MAY REMEMBER THAT.

SO WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP THOSE SIGHTLINES AVAILABLE AS WELL.

SO THAT'S ALSO BEEN PUT OUT THERE.

IT WILL IMPACT HEIGHT.

HMM. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT PART OF THIS WAS THE PROPONENT WOULD PROBABLY BE ONE OF THE BEST PEOPLE TO DO SO BECAUSE IT WOULD, IN ESSENCE, BE ABLE TO CLEAN UP SOME OF THOSE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS THAT WE HAVE, THE CAVEATS THAT ARE ON THAT PARTICULAR LOT.

IS THAT STILL A GOAL OF THE RFP TO ACHIEVE A BETTER USE OF THAT PARTICULAR LOT? MS. THISTLE.

YES, THE RFP HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT HAVING A BETTER USE OF THAT LOT.

WITH RESPECT TO THE CAVEAT, THEY WEREN'T SO MUCH WITH RESPECT TO HEIGHT, IT WAS MORE ABOUT USE AND PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING.

AND THE REASON THAT THIS IS A GOOD GROUP IS BECAUSE THEY ARE THE OWNERS OF SOME OF THOSE CAVEATS SO THEY CAN WITHDRAW THEM ON THEIR OWN INSTEAD OF THE CITY HAVING TO TRY TO WITHDRAW THOSE CAVEATS WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT, IS THERE A CAVEAT ON THAT PARTICULAR LOT RIGHT NOW AND HOW HIGH IS THAT? MS. THISTLE. THERE'S NO HEIGHT CAVEAT.

IT'S THE ZONING BYLAW THAT WOULD DICTATE THE HEIGHT IN THAT AREA.

OKAY. THANKS.

JUST GOING AFTER AN ANGLE OF HOW MANY STORIES JUST TO THINK OF VALUE FOR US.

AND IF THERE WAS, SAY, A CAVEAT IN PLAY, WAS GOING TO MAYBE SUGGEST A MINIMUM BECAUSE OF COURSE WE ALL KNOW THAT OUR ZONING BYLAW WOULD ALLOW MINIMUM OF TWO STORYS.

SO WE'D HATE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, THIS 12 STORY PROPOSAL AND SO MANY UNITS AND THEN IT TURNS INTO A TWO STORY SORT OF MINIMUM OF OUR ZONING BYLAW.

SO ANYWAY, JUST AN ANGLE THAT I THOUGHT I WOULD PURSUE AND DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S ANY FRUIT AT THE END OF THAT TUNNEL.

THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCILLOR SMITH? JUST A COMMENT.

I DON'T WANT TO DOWNPLAY THE IMPORTANCE OF SOME OF THESE PARAMETERS THAT SOME OF US ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.

BUT HOW I ENVISION THIS OR HOW I SEE IT IS WE'VE BEEN SITTING ON THIS 5050 LOT FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

AND WE HAVE TO KIND OF PUT A LITTLE BIT OF FAITH IN THAT.

THIS COMPANY, WHO ALSO HAS ANOTHER LOT, WHO HAS INVESTED WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN, THEY WANT TO INVEST MORE WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN.

AND I BELIEVE A FEW YEARS AGO IT WAS REQUESTED TO BE A BEAUTIFUL PARKING LOT.

AND I MEAN, THIS IS BEYOND MUCH BETTER THAN ANOTHER PARKING LOT.

THEY'RE SUGGESTING RETAIL SPACE, LIVING SPACE IN THE UPPER LEVELS.

AND I THINK WE HAVE TO PUT A LITTLE BIT OF FAITH IN THIS COMPANY THAT HAS ALREADY INVESTED WITHIN YELLOWKNIFE AND WANT TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE AND PUT A LITTLE FAITH IN OUR ADMINISTRATION AND LET THEM DO THEIR PORTION OF IT.

I REALLY THINK THIS WILL BE REALLY GOOD FOR THE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION, SOMETHING THAT WE KEEP BRINGING BACK TO THE TABLE, THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DO AND KEEP PUSHING FORWARD WITH AND COMING OUT OF COVID.

I MEAN, WE HAVEN'T SEEN A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE WANTING TO DEVELOP AND THIS GROUP REALLY DOES.

AND THEY'VE COME TO US NOT ONCE BUT TWICE WITH DIFFERENT SUGGESTIONS.

AND I THINK THIS IS A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY.

AND I THINK WE JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT OF FAITH AND AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS IT WAS AMENDED.

THANK YOU.

COUNCILLOR SILVERIO.

I APPROVE IT.

I'LL GET TO YOU AFTER COUNCILLOR SILVERIO, COUNCILLOR MORSE.

OKAY. THANKS. SORRY. IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO HEAR WHAT'S GOING ON.

SO APOLOGIES.

I WAS JUST WONDERING WHERE WE AT WITH THE RFP? ARE WE STILL ON, BECAUSE WE WERE TALKING WITH ONE COMPANY, RIGHT?

[00:55:07]

YES. HOLLOWAY IS IN THE PROCESS OF SUBMITTING THEIR RFP.

BUT IF THERE'S SOMEBODY WHO'S LICKETY SPLIT QUICK, THEY CAN FIRE ONE IN AND TRY TO BEAT HOLLOWAY.

OH, AND THERE'S A DEADLINE FOR IT.

MS. THISTLE. THERE'S CURRENTLY NO DEADLINE IN THE RFP POSTED TO THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

IT'S BEEN THERE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

COUNCILLOR MORSE.

SO THANKS. YEAH.

JUST VERY QUICK COMMENTS.

YOU KNOW, I DID EXPRESS SOME HESITANCY AROUND THIS, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO ECHO A BIT OF WHAT COUNCILLOR SMITH SAID AND JUST AGREE THAT I THINK THE POTENTIAL HERE IS VERY EXCITING AND I'M QUITE EXCITED TO BE HEARING FROM HOLLOWAY AND TO BE HAVING THIS PROPOSAL COME FORWARD AFTER TEN YEARS OF THE LOT SITTING EFFECTIVELY VACANT.

AND I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE KUDOS TO ADMINISTRATION FOR BRINGING FORWARD A PROPOSAL THAT IS PRETTY BOLD AND CONTAINS SOME RISK.

I OFTEN FIND MYSELF, YOU KNOW, COMPLAINING THAT GOVERNMENT NEVER WANTS TO TAKE RISK UP HERE IN THE NORTH AND AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO IF WE'RE GOING TO DO PROGRESSIVE AND EXCITING THINGS.

AND SO I DO WANT TO GIVE CREDIT TO ADMINISTRATION FOR DOING JUST THAT.

I THINK THE CITY HAS BEEN DOING WELL, PUTTING THE VISITOR CENTER DOWNTOWN, COMING FORWARD WITH PROJECTS LIKE THIS.

I MEAN, THERE ARE NAYSAYERS.

AND TO THEM, I JUST SAY, I MEAN, AT LEAST WE'RE TRYING SOMETHING.

AND YES, THERE IS A RISK THAT CERTAIN THINGS MAY FAIL.

AND THAT'S ALWAYS A RISK WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING NEW AND YOU'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFICULT.

SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE MY ENDORSEMENT TO ADMINISTRATION TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS AND AND TO THANK THEM FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD.

AND I HOPE THAT IT IS SUCCESSFUL.

YOU KNOW, FOR YELLOWKNIFE, I THINK IT COULD BE A GREAT THING.

SO, YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT BECAUSE I REALLY DO THINK IT'S EXCITING AND I HOPE THAT STUFF LIKE THIS KEEPS COMING FORWARD.

IT'S EXCITING TO SEE THIS COMING FORWARD LIKE THIS, PROJECTS LIKE THIS.

SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

THANKS. I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE AT THE SEPTEMBER 12TH MEETING TO GIVE INITIAL COMMENTS.

I'M DEFINITELY SUPPORTIVE OF THE VISION AND I STRONGLY HOPE THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE END UP WITH WHAT WE'VE ENVISIONED IN MANY DIFFERENT PLANNING DOCUMENTS AND REPORTS AND COMMUNITY PLAN AND ZONING BYLAW, WHICH IS TO REVITALIZE THE DOWNTOWN.

WE NEED MORE COMMERCIAL RETAIL AT GROUND LEVEL, STREET LEVEL THAT PEOPLE CAN WALK INTO OFF THE STREET.

AND WE NEED MORE HOUSING, SPECIFICALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO THAT IS THE HOPE THAT WE END UP THERE.

I'M NOT SO KEEN TO THINK THAT TO GET THERE WE JUST NEED TO HAVE FAITH OR THAT WE JUST SORT OF BELIEVE THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL JUST WANT THIS ENOUGH TO MAKE IT HAPPEN JUST BASED ON GOODWILL.

I CERTAINLY HOPE, THAT WOULD BE NICE IF THAT'S THERE AS WELL.

BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY STEP OF THE PROCESS WE DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER.

AND I REALIZE THAT COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE THE POWER TO GET INTO THE DETAILS AND DO THIS NEGOTIATION DIRECTLY, BUT THAT AS ADMINISTRATION IS DOING THIS, THAT WE PUT IN AS MANY LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE OR BINDING PARAMETERS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROCESS IS SUCCESSFUL TO GET WHAT WE WANT AT THE END OF THE DAY.

BECAUSE I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING.

I KNOW WE ALL WANT THIS, BUT WE STILL NEED TO THINK OF THIS AS A BUSINESS DEAL WHERE WE HAVE COMMON INTERESTS, COMMON GOALS WITH THE DEVELOPER. BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT FAITH.

I DON'T THINK. THIS IS ABOUT PUTTING IN PLACE A PROCESS AND AGREEMENTS THAT WILL LEAD US TO THE GOAL THAT WE ALL AGREE NOW IS WHAT WE WANT.

BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WITH A CLEAR HEAD AND WITH CLEAR PARAMETERS AND ENFORCEABILITY, WE CAN ACTUALLY GET THERE.

SO IT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIONS COURSE IN TERMS OF NEGOTIATING WHEN THEY SEE THE THE PROPOSAL ACTUALLY COME IN.

BUT I THINK COUNCIL HAS MADE IT CLEAR, BOTH THROUGH OUR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, PLANNING DOCUMENTS AND THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD SPECIFICALLY AROUND THIS, WHAT OUR EXPECTATIONS ARE.

AND HOPEFULLY THE NEXT COUNCIL WILL ALSO BE HEADING IN THAT SAME DIRECTION AND HAVE THOSE, SHARE THOSE COMMON GOALS AND VISION

[01:00:07]

AND WILL SEE THIS PROJECT THROUGH.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

I THINK IT'S AN EXCITING PROJECT.

A QUICK GLANCE. I KNOW RESIDENTS HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, AND SO I DO WANT TO SPEND A LITTLE TIME TO ELABORATE ON WHY I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT FROM A HOUSING, REVITALIZATION, FINANCIAL AND CLIMATE CHANGE PERSPECTIVE.

SO WE'RE INCENTIVIZING DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN AND SUBSIDIZING HOUSING THROUGH THE DONATION OF LAND.

IT'S NOT FREE LAND.

IT'S AN INVESTMENT TO ADDRESS CURRENT COMMUNITY NEEDS.

ONE OF THE RISKIEST PHASES OF DEVELOPING RENTAL HOUSING IS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE.

SO IN LIEU OF GIVING A SUBSIDY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS WHILE OPERATING, THE CITY IS FRONTLOADING OUR CONTRIBUTION AND PROVIDING THE SUBSIDY AT THE START SO THE PROJECT GETS OFF THE GROUND. IN EXCHANGE FOR THE SUBSIDY, THE CITY BECOMES A PARTNER IN THE PROJECT AND GETS TO DICTATE SOME CONDITIONS LIKE THAT THE CONSTRUCTION HAS TO BE COMPLETE BY A CERTAIN DATE AND THAT A CERTAIN NUMBER OF UNITS MUST BE MADE AFFORDABLE.

OUR TEN YEAR PLAN TO END HOMELESSNESS DEFINES AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS RENTAL OR OWNERSHIP HOUSING THAT REQUIRES CAPITAL SUBSIDIES OR CAPITAL SUBSIDIES PLUS ONGOING OPERATING SUBSIDIES. SO THIS IS ABOUT OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THIS IS OUR CAPITAL SUBSIDY.

THE PLAN SAYS THAT WE NEED A MINIMUM OF 180 MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.

THIS WAS BACK IN 2017.

I'M SURE WE PROBABLY NEED MORE SINCE THEN, AND I'M NOT SAYING THIS WHOLE BUILDING SHOULD BE AFFORDABLE, BUT I DO THINK THAT A PERCENTAGE OF UNITS SHOULD BE SET AS AFFORDABLE FOR A MINIMUM LENGTH OF TIME, WHICH THE AMENDMENT ACCOMPLISHES.

BEYOND THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE ALSO NEED HOUSING, PERIOD.

AND THIS PROJECT WILL ADD A LOT OF HOUSING RIGHT IN THE DOWNTOWN.

WE HAVE BUSINESSES RIGHT NOW WHO CAN'T GET EMPLOYEES BECAUSE THERE'S NOWHERE TO LIVE.

THIS IS GOING TO ADD MUCH NEEDED HOUSING IN THE CITY.

BEYOND PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING FROM A REVITALIZATION PERSPECTIVE, IT'LL BE ADDING A LOT OF PEOPLE OR CUSTOMERS DOWNTOWN, TOO, WITH 180 UNITS.

THAT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE HEART OF OUR DOWNTOWN.

AND I KNOW THERE WERE CONCERNS IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT PARKING FOR THE VISITOR CENTER, BUT THIS LAW WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE THE VISITOR CENTER PARKING AND THE ZONING BYLAW DOESN'T ALLOW PARKING LOTS ON MAIN STREET.

SO I THINK THE CITY NEEDS TO FOLLOW OUR OWN LAWS.

WE'RE NOT ABOVE OUR OWN LAWS.

OF COURSE, THERE'S ALWAYS QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKING, BUT WE NEED TO START FOCUSING MORE ON HOUSING HUMANS AND FOCUS LESS ON HOUSING CARS.

AND THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE.

FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE, IT ADDS REVENUE TO THE TAX BASE WITHOUT ADDING MORE EXPENSES.

BECAUSE WE ALREADY PLOW THESE ROADS, WE HAVE BUSES IN THE AREA AND MUCH MORE.

NOBODY LIKED THE RECENT TAX INCREASE AND THIS ADDS REVENUE, WHICH WE CAN USE TO COVER INFLATION COSTS WITHOUT HAVING TO INCREASE ALL TAXES.

IN A NUTSHELL, WE'RE DONATING THE LAND IN EXCHANGE FOR COMMITMENT TO A DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PROJECT AND AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT THAT WILL BE BUILT PRONTO.

THE CITY ISN'T IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDING OR MAINTAINING HOUSING, BUT WE DO HAVE ACCESS TO LAND SO WE CAN SPUR REVITALIZATION AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT THROUGH THE DONATION OF LAND.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS PRESENTED.

WITH THAT, SEEING NOTHING FURTHER.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS AMENDED.

IN FAVOR. AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

COUNCIL MORGAN.

[Item 14]

I MOVE THAT COUNCIL APPOINT MELISSA SYER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE YELLOWKNIFE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, TO SERVE ON THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR A THREE YEAR TERM COMMENCING SEPTEMBER 27, 2022, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 26, 2025.

THANK YOU. SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR SILVERIO.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

FAVOR. AND THAT CARES UNANIMOUSLY.

[Items 15 - 17]

COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

I MOVE THE COUNCIL 1) ADOPT FOR INFORMATION THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTER PLAN AS PREPARED BY NGL NORDICITY GROUP AND 2) DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO DEVELOP AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION TO GUIDE DECISION MAKING AND INVESTMENT IN ARTS AND CULTURE.

THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECOND? COUNSELOR MUFANDAEDZA.

ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? YEAH. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.

COUNSELOR MORSE. YEAH.

IN THE MEETING LAST WEEK WHERE WE DISCUSSED ITEMS FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE BUDGET, I SUGGESTED THAT I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE THE ARTS COORDINATOR POSITION SUGGESTED BY THIS STRATEGY.

I'M JUST WONDERING, THAT MAY NOT BE PART OF THIS MOTION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT IT IS INCLUDED FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION.

YOU BET. NEXT MOTION.

[01:05:01]

YEAH. ANYTHING FURTHER? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR. AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

COUNSILLOR MORGAN. I MOVE THE COUNCIL DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TO THE BUDGET, 2023 PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY.

1) THAT FUNDING TO IMPLEMENT 7.2 IN THE WAYFINDING STRATEGY BE INCLUDED IN BUDGET 2023.

2) THAT A STAFF POSITION BE ADDED AS RECOMMENDED IN THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTERPLAN AND 3) BRING FORWARD PUBLIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUDGET 2023 TO THE NEW COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECONDER? COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. ANY DISCUSSION AND JUST TO NOTE, THIS IS, WE'RE BRINGING THIS MEMO FORWARD FOR COUNCIL.

IT'S NOT ALL THESE ITEMS WILL BE INTERJECTED INTO THE BUDGET THE COUNCIL WOULD THEN HAVE TO REMOVE.

SO THIS IS COUNCIL WILL HAVE TO ADD.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION ON WHAT ADDING IT TO THE PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY MEANS.

IT DOESN'T MEAN ADDING IT INTO THE DRAFT BUDGET.

IT MEANS INCLUDING IT FOR DISCUSSION THAT THE NEW COUNCIL CAN DISCUSS ADDING THESE THINGS TO THE BUDGET.

CORRECT. YEAH. SO COUNCIL WILL GET THE BUDGET, THE DRAFT BUDGET 2023 PLUS THEY'LL GET THE HANDOUT OF THE BUDGET 2023 PUBLIC INPUT AND THEN THEY CAN REVIEW IT AND SAY, YEP, I WANT TO ADD FUNDING FOR, TO IMPLEMENT 7.2 OR NO, I DON'T WANT TO ADD ANY OF THIS, BUT THANKS FOR THE FEEDBACK. OKAY.

OKAY. THANKS. ANYTHING FURTHER? SEEING NONE.

SORRY. COUNCILLOR MORSE.

IF YOU GUYS COULD SEE WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW, YOU'D UNDERSTAND WHY I SOUND LIKE I'M TALKING FROM A HUGE WINDSTORM.

I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT [INAUDIBLE] IT BE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET.

NOT IN THE PUBLIC SUMMARY.

SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT AMENDMENT THEN IF THAT'S THE CASE.

BUT I WANT IT INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET, IN THE DRAFT BUDGET.

DO WE HAVE A SECONDER TO ADD THE STAFF POSITION? COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. COUNCILLOR MORRIS, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YEP. I JUST WANTED TO SUGGEST TO COUNCIL THAT WE HAVE THIS POSITION ADDED TO THE DRAFT BUDGET, BECAUSE I REALLY DO FEEL THAT WITHOUT THE POSITION THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTERPLAN MAY OR MAY NOT BE IMPLEMENTED.

AND I, GIVEN THAT COVID HAPPENED AND THAT WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET TO THIS AS QUICKLY AS WE MIGHT HAVE LIKED TO AS A COUNCIL, BUT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WE SET AS A PRIORITY FOUR YEARS AGO, AND WE'RE ONLY JUST GETTING TO NOW.

AND SO WE REALLY ARE HANDING THIS OFF TO THE NEXT COUNCIL.

BUT IT REALLY IS MY INTENTION TO ENSURE THAT, AND IT WAS MY INTENTION WHEN I AGREED TO ADD THIS TO OUR GOALS AND PRIORITIES, THAT THE CITY KIND OF PUTS A BETTER FOCUS ON THE ARTS AND WHAT IT CAN DO FOR [INAUDIBLE].

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ENDLESSLY ABOUT INCREASING TOURISM IN THE COMMUNITY AND THE ARTS IS A HUGE PIECE OF THAT.

AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO PUT THAT FOCUS ON IT.

AND I JUST THINK THAT THE STAFF POSITION, WITHOUT IT, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ENSURE THAT THIS STRATEGY IS IMPLEMENTED.

SO IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME THAT IT'S INCLUDED.

I THINK THAT THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUTTING IT FORWARD AS A PUBLIC COMMENT AND PUTTING IT FORWARD AS SOMETHING IN THE DRAFT BUDGET.

ABSOLUTELY, THE NEXT COUNCIL AND THAT'S UP TO THEM.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO, AS ONE OF MY LAST MOTIONS, HAVE IT INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT [INAUDIBLE].

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANYTHING FURTHER FROM COUNCIL ON THIS ONE, COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS? WELL, MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE I'M FEELING A LITTLE CHEEKY, BECAUSE I'M USUALLY THE GUY THAT'S TIGHT ON THE BUDGET, BUT I KNOW THAT I WON'T BE AT THOSE DELIBERATIONS.

SO I'M LIKELY TO TO SUPPORT COUNCILLOR MORSE'S MOTION MORE SO THAT, I GUESS A LITTLE BIT OF DISAPPOINTMENT THAT WE JUST DIDN'T GET AROUND TO THIS EARLY ENOUGH IN OUR COUNCIL TERM.

YOU KNOW, JUST ECHOING COUNCILLOR MORSE'S COMMENTS THERE THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS VERY MUCH WAS A PRIORITY FOR US.

AND I UNDERSTAND WE JUST HAD A LITTLE PANDEMIC IN THE MEANTIME.

SO SOME THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, TOURISM AND ARTS FUNDING AND THINGS LIKE THAT WE DID LOSE OUR PATH ON THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DO TALK ABOUT TOURISM AND CULTURE, YOU KNOW, ART IS INHERENTLY A PART OF THAT.

AND SO, YEAH, I COULD SUPPORT PUTTING A POSITION IN THERE BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BETTER SERVE SORT OF SOME OF THE INTENTIONS THAT THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL HAD.

AND JUST LIKE ANY OTHER PY, THEY CAN DELIBERATE THAT AT BUDGET TIME AND AND STRIKE IT IF THEY FEEL IT'S NECESSARY.

[01:10:05]

BUT AGAIN, AS KIND OF A LAST DITCH EFFORT FOR CHECKING OFF SOME BOXES THAT THIS COUNCIL WANTED TO DO, THIS PLAN WAS VERY MUCH AT THE FOREFRONT OF OUR DESIRES.

AND EVEN THOUGH WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO DEBATE TOO TOO MUCH ABOUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE IT BE STAFFED GOING FORWARD.

SO, YOU KNOW, JUST TO START THE CONVERSATION, I'D BE IN SUPPORT OF COUNCILLOR MORSE'S MOTION.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER? COUNCILLOR MORGAN? YEAH, I WOULD ALSO BE SUPPORTING THAT.

AND I WAS HOPING MYSELF ACTUALLY THAT BOTH 1 AND 2 WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT BUDGET AS THE DEFAULT.

AND CERTAINLY THE NEW COUNCIL HAS THE POWER TO TAKE THAT OUT.

IT'S STILL A DRAFT, BUT IT'S IT'S MORE POWERFUL I THINK FOR THE DEFAULT TO BE THAT IT'S INCLUDED IN WHAT'S PRESENTED THEN.

I MEAN, WHEN IT'S SORT OF JUST AN EXTRA LITTLE PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S STAPLED TO THE BACK OR SOMETHING, IT'S SORT OF THESE ARE THE OPTIONAL EXTRAS IS KIND OF THE MESSAGE THAT'S BEING SENT.

AND OF COURSE, LIKE I SAID, COUNCIL HAS THE POWER TO DECIDE WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT AND WHAT'S IN AND WHAT'S OUT.

BUT, I THINK GIVEN THAT BOTH, YES, CERTAINLY THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTERPLAN WAS A CORE PART OF THIS COUNCIL'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. BUT I THINK THE WAYFINDING STRATEGY AND OUR VISION AROUND LIVABLE CITY TRAIL CONNECTIONS CERTAINLY HAS BEEN, IS PART OF OUR CORE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AS WELL AND HAS BEEN PART OF OUR DISCUSSIONS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

SO I THINK IT'S FAIR TO INCLUDE BOTH IN THE DRAFT AND THEN LEAVE IT TO THE NEXT COUNCIL TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION.

BUT TO INCLUDE BOTH AS THE DEFAULT BEING, THIS IS WHAT IS SUGGESTED OR PROPOSED WOULD MAKE A POWERFUL STATEMENT FROM THIS COUNCIL.

THANK YOU. AND I JUST WANT TO READ, SO THE MOTION AS AMENDED WITH WHAT I'M RECOMMENDING, BASED ON WHAT COUNCILLOR MORRIS WAS SAYING, IS THE COUNCIL DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TO THE BUDGET, 2023 PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY 1) THE FUNDING TO IMPLEMENT 7.2 IN THE WAYFINDING STRATEGY BE INCLUDED IN BUDGET 2023 AND 2) BRING FORWARD PUBLIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUDGET 2023 TO THE NEW COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION.

AND THEN PART TWO OF THE MOTION WOULD BE THE COUNCIL DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TO THE BUDGET 2023.

AND ONE IS THAT A STAFF POSITION BE ADDED AS RECOMMENDED IN THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTERPLAN, JUST SO FOLKS HAVE THAT VISUAL OF WHAT WE WOULD BE VOTING ON, THIS IS, AND I KNOW YOU'VE STRUGGLED TO HEAR COUNCILLOR MORSE, BUT DID THAT CAPTURE WHAT YOU WERE INTENDING? I'M GOING TO TRUST YOU THAT IT DOES, BECAUSE I MOSTLY HEARD THAT.

BUT IT'S GETTING VERY WINDY WHERE I'M STANDING RIGHT NOW.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD? YEAH, JUST I THINK THAT I AGREE WITH WITH WHAT YOU HAD SAID THERE, BUT I THINK COUNCILLOR MORGAN TOOK IT A LITTLE STEP FURTHER.

AND I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S AN APPETITE OUT THERE TO DISCUSS THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE WAYFINDING STRATEGY, AGAIN, WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS IN THE FIRST YEAR.

WE SAW AN EXCELLENT PLAN COME FORWARD FROM ADMINISTRATION ON THAT ONE.

WE HAD DREAMS IN OUR EYES OF TRAIL SYSTEMS BEING MARKED AND THAT WE WOULD SEE GROUPS OF TOURISTS WALKING FROM ONE LOCATION TO ANOTHER TO REALLY ENHANCE OUR CITY AND REALLY ENHANCE THE DIY KIND OF PRODUCT OFFERING THAT YOU COULD HAVE IN THIS COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, BEING A MORE LIVABLE AND WALKABLE PLACE FOR RESIDENTS AND NEW RESIDENTS.

SO I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK IT'S A COMPELLING ONE AGAIN, WHEN I GUESS I'M REALLY JUST DOWN FOR A DEBATE AT BUDGET TIME.

SO I'D SAY LET'S PUSH AS MUCH IN THERE AS POSSIBLE AND LET THEM REJECT IT.

YOU KNOW, LIKE, WELL, MAYBE NOT IN THAT WAY, BUT YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT WERE CORE PRINCIPLES THAT WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT.

ADMINISTRATION HAS SPENT A TON OF TIME, AND I THINK THAT THE CONSULTANT PUT TOGETHER SOME GOOD LOOKING MATERIAL FOR THAT WAYFINDING STRATEGY AND TO HAVE IT JUST BE AN ADDENDUM.

AND WE ALL KNOW WHEN A BUDGET IS, YOU KNOW, GOING MAYBE THE CHOP RAVINE TRAIL AGAIN FOR THE NEXT TIME INSTEAD OF AND MAYBE WE'LL GET A WAYFINDING, YOU KNOW.

BUT I'VE REALLY FOUND THAT THIS ,OUR BUDGETS FROM THE LAST COUPLE OF COUNCILS, OR A COUPLE YEARS UNDER THIS COUNCIL, WE SORT OF HAVE TALKED A GOOD GAME WHEN IT COMES TO TRAILS AND CONNECTIVITY, BUT WE'VE WE REALLY HAVEN'T DONE A LOT IN MOVING THE NEEDLE.

SO THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO GET DONE.

[01:15:03]

AND YEAH, I WOULD BE VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF PUTTING BOTH OF THOSE AS COUNCILLOR MORGAN HAD HAD SUGGESTED.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO ADD SOME TWO PIECES TO THAT, BUT HEY, LET'S PUSH IT IN THERE.

LET'S LET THEM REJECT IT.

AND MAYBE THE OTHER THING, TOO, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING ELSE MIGHT GET REJECTED.

AND THIS IS SOME GOOD STUFF BECAUSE THIS IS GOOD STUFF.

THIS IS NOT FRIVOLOUS.

THIS IS ALL STUFF THAT WE HAD AS PRIORITIES FOUR YEARS AGO.

AND WHERE I'M SITTING RIGHT NOW, I STILL SEE THESE AS PRIORITIES NOW.

SO THOSE ARE MY TWO CENTS.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? AGAIN. WELL, I GUESS WE COULD ADD BOTH THAT AT ONCE IF COUNCILLOR MORSE WAS SO INCLINED TO DO A REVISED MOTION.

THE FUNDING TO IMPLEMENT YOU CAN REVISE IT IF A MAJORITY OF COUNCILLORS ARE IN FAVOR.

OKAY, WE'LL START WITH ONE AND THEN WE'LL ADD A SECOND MOTION AS AMENDED IF NEEDED.

FOR ME, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTIONS AS PRESENTED.

I THINK IT'S LIKE TO LOOK AT ALL THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE PUBLIC.

APPENDIX E TO H AND WE HAD THREE PRESENTATIONS AND THEN COUNCILLORS ADDED SOME STUFF AT THE MEETING.

I THINK IT'S JUST CLEANER IF ADMINISTRATION IS MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE BUDGET, PLUS ADDING ALL THE MOTIONS THAT COUNCIL APPROVED THIS PAST TERM AND THEN COUNCIL CAN ADD STUFF BACK IN VERSUS TRYING TO WEED THROUGH THE DOCUMENT TO DETERMINE WHAT WAS ITEMS THAT CAME FORWARD THROUGH BUDGET, THE PUBLIC INPUT.

YEAH. BECAUSE THE HOCKEY RINK BOARDS FOR SOME OF THE PLACES OR MORE GARBAGE CANS, I THINK A LOT OF THE INPUT THAT WE RECEIVED IS IMPORTANT.

SO TO CHOOSE JUST THE TWO ITEMS OF THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTER PLAN AND THE WAYFINDING, I THINK, YEAH, FOR ME I'M NOT COMFORTABLE ADDING THEM TONIGHT.

I'D PREFER TO ADD THEM IN VERSUS REMOVE THEM LATER ON BECAUSE THEN WE'LL HAVE TO REALLY SIFT THROUGH THE WHOLE 300 PAGE DOCUMENT TO TRY TO FIND WHAT WAS ADDED TONIGHT AND WHAT WASN'T. SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, BUT I APPRECIATE WHERE FOLKS ARE COMING FROM ON THAT.

COUNCILLOR SMITH. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THAT MOTION.

I HAVE A BIT OF A DIFFICULT TIME WITH THE, NOT THAT I'M AGAINST THE ARTS AND CULTURE.

MY BACKGROUND'S ARTS, LIKE THAT'S WHAT I DO, I CREATE STUFF FOR A LIVING.

BUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STAFFING POSITIONS, I HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT TIME DETERMINING WHETHER THIS ONE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANY OTHER POSITION THAT YOU KNOW COUNCIL MIGHT GET FROM ANOTHER REPORT SAYING, WE NEED TO HAVE THIS.

I MEAN, A FEW YEARS AGO IT WAS THE INDIGENOUS LIAISON, IN WHICH CASE THE COUNCIL DEEMED THAT THAT WASN'T IMPORTANT ENOUGH.

SO WHAT MAKES THIS POSITION MORE IMPORTANT THAN INDIGENOUS LIAISON, WHICH RECONCILIATION IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE HAPPENING FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS TO COME, ESPECIALLY WITHIN THIS COMMUNITY.

SO I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

AND AS FAR AS THE REST, I THINK BOMBARDING OUR NEXT COUNCIL WITH ALL OF THESE EXTRA ADD-ONS AND SAYING THEY HAVE TO WEED OUT OF THEM IS, THAT'S KIND OF LIKE HOW WE FELT WHEN WE GOT ON.

WE JUST HAD ALL THIS STUFF HIT US AT ONCE AND I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST TO, THE ADMINISTRATION BE ABLE TO GIVE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS BECAUSE THIS IS THEIR TASK. THIS IS WHAT THEY DO FOR US TO BE ABLE TO TELL US THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, PRIORITIES.

WHAT WHAT KIND OF LEEWAY DO WE HAVE? SO I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MORSE, DID YOU WANT TO CLOSE? SURE. YEAH.

JUST SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED.

I MEAN, I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT WE WERE ASKED IF WE WANTED TO ADD BUDGET ITEMS. WE'RE NOT SELECTING SOME THAT WERE SUGGESTED BY THE PUBLIC AND NOT SELECTING OTHERS.

I MEAN, THESE ARE JUST ITEMS THAT I OR COUNCIL WANTED ADDED TO THE BUDGET AND WE WOULD NORMALLY [INAUDIBLE] ADMINISTRATION TO ADD THINGS TO THE DRAFT BUDGET AS WE DO EVERY YEAR.

SO IT'S JUST PART OF THE NORMAL PROCESS.

I DON'T THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE THAT DIFFERENTIATION AND I JUST, FOR ME IT'S JUST A WAY TO ENSURE THAT COUNCIL CARRIES AN AGENDA

[01:20:04]

FORWARD AND THAT THE NEXT COUNCIL CAN KIND OF DECIDE ON IT.

BUT THAT, YOU KNOW, I'VE JUST SEEN A LOT OF STRATEGIES.

WE HAVE MANY STRATEGIES THAT I'VE SEEN APPROVED OVER THE SEVEN YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL AND MANY OF THEM HAVE BEEN PARTIALLY IMPLEMENTED, OT IMPLEMENTED OR YEAH, I MEAN, ONE OF THOSE TWO THINGS, PARTIALLY OR NOT, AND I THINK ONE OF THE TOUGH THINGS IS THAT WE, IT'S VERY EASY TO GET A STRATEGY DONE FROM OUTSIDE HELP WITH A CONSULTANT, BUT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT THAT STRATEGY IF WE DON'T CREATE THE CAPACITY WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION TO DO SO.

SO I THINK BY APPROVING THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTER PLAN, I MEAN, WE NEED TO CREATE THE CAPACITY FOR THAT TO BE IMPLEMENTED OR THERE'S NO POINT IN APPROVING IT.

AND SO THAT'S THE CONNECTION THAT I WANTED TO MAKE.

THAT'S WHY I SUGGESTED THIS BE ADDED TO THE BUDGET, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S CONFUSING TO DO SO.

I THINK IT'S JUST COUNSEL STANDING BEHIND THE DECISION AND CREATING A CAPACITY TO IMPLEMENT SOMETHING THAT WE SET AS A GOAL AND A PRIORITY.

BUT OF COURSE IT IS UP TO COUNCILLORS WHETHER THEY WANT TO SUPPORT IT OR NOT.

SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

CAN I ADD ONE MORE? SURE.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

I JUST NEEDED TO RESPOND TO THE THOUGHT OF JAMMING IT IN ON ANOTHER COUNCIL.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE KIND OF CLEAR THAT THESE ARE TOPICS THAT I RAN ON, TOURISM, ARTS AND CULTURE SPECIFICALLY. SO FOR ME, IT'S REALLY JUST A CLOSING THE BOOK ON A INITIATIVE THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE WERE PASSIONATE ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO.

AND JUST BECAUSE OF HAPPENSTANCE AND HOW THE COUNCIL TERM ENDED UP GOING, THAT WE NEVER REALLY GOT TO THESE THINGS.

SO IT'S NOT THAT I WANT TO JAM IT ON SOMEBODY, IT'S JUST THAT I THOUGHT THAT THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT WORK AND THINGS THAT I THINK COULD BETTER OUR COMMUNITY AND FOR ALL.

SO ANYWAY, JUST THOSE ARE MY LAST COMMENTS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SEEING NOTHING FURTHER.

AGAIN, THIS IS THE AMENDMENT TO DIRECT STAFF TO ADD JUST THE STAFF POSITION TO THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTERPLAN.

AND THEN WE CAN ADD A, GO TO ANOTHER AMENDMENT ABOUT ADDING FUNDING FOR 7.2 IN THE WAYFINDING STRATEGY.

BUT TO THE MOTION TO ADD A STAFF POSITION AS RECOMMENDED IN THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTERPLAN.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR.

[INAUDIBLE] OPPOSED.

AND THAT CARRIES WITH MAYOR ALTY AND COUNCILLOR SMITH OPPOSED.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. YEAH.

I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW UP ON COUNCILLOR MORGAN'S COMMENTS ABOUT ADDING 7.2 TO THE DRAFT BUDGET.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION NOW.

AND DO WE HAVE A SECONDER.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

SO I'LL JUST DO THE QUICK.

AS PER COUNCIL PROCEDURES BYLAW TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HAS THE WRITTEN VERSION.

SO THE MOTION AS AMENDED WOULD BE THE COUNCIL DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TO THE BUDGET 2023.

YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S KIND OF MOOT BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD THERE.

THE COUNCIL DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO BRING FORWARD.

PUBLIC RECOMMENDATIONS RIGHT, FOR BUDGET 2023.

YEA. THE COUNCIL DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO BRING FORWARD PUBLIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUDGET 2023.

FOR THE NEW COUNCIL TO, FOR THE NEW, TO THE NEW COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION AND POINT TWO WOULD BE THE COUNCIL DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TO THE BUDGET 1) THAT A STAFF POSITION BE ADDED AS RECOMMENDED IN THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTER PLAN.

AND 2) THAT FUNDING TO IMPLEMENT 7.2 IN THE WAYFINDING STRATEGY BE INCLUDED IN BUDGET 2023.

SO I'LL JUST GIVE EVERYBODY A MOMENT TO CONSIDER THAT.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. YEAH, I THINK I SPOKE TO DEATH ABOUT IT ALREADY.

BUT AGAIN, JUST AN INITIATIVE THAT AGAIN WAS STARTED AT THIS COUNCIL.

I THINK THAT IT DOES HOLD VALUE.

WE HAVE FORGOTTEN ABOUT TOURISM AND HOW CHALLENGING IT CAN BE FOR SOME NEWCOMERS AND TOURISTS TO NAVIGATE OUR CITY.

IT ALSO, IN EFFECT, HIGHLIGHTS SOME OF THE ASSETS THAT WE HAVE.

YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T DRAW PEOPLE TO IT, PUT A SIGN ON IT, WELCOME PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE UPON IT, IT'S NOT AS MUCH AS IT COULD BE.

SO I THINK THAT THE PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED WAS EXCELLENT.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT MOVE FORWARD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

[01:25:01]

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ONE? YEAH. FOR ME THE SAME.

REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO DEBATING THEM.

I LIKE BOTH THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTERPLAN AND THE WAYFINDING STRATEGY, BUT I JUST WANT TO KEEP IT SEPARATE.

SO TO THE MOTION AS AMENDED.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR. OPPOSED.

AND THAT CARRIES WITH MAYOR ALTY AND DEPUTY MAYOR SMITH OPPOSED.

THAT'S TO THE AMENDMENTS, NOW TO THE MOTION AS AMENDED.

I BELIEVE BASED ON THOSE AMENDMENTS, WE'VE ALREADY PASSED THE MOTION, THAT WE'VE DIRECTED TO BRING FORWARD THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND WE'VE DIRECTED TO ADD THE TWO ITEMS TO THE BUDGET. NEXT, WE HAVE NEW BUSINESS, SO WE HAVE A MEMORANDUM REGARDING WHETHER TO APPOINT PAUL PARKER AS AN ADJUDICATOR PURSUANT

[Items 18 & 19]

TO ADMINISTRATIVE MONETARY PENALTY BYLAW NUMBER 5054 FOR THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

I MOVE THE PURSUANT TO SECTION 17 OF ADMINISTRATIVE MONETARY PENALTY BYLAW NUMBER 5054 PAUL PARKER BE APPOINTED FOR A TWO YEAR TERM AS AN ADJUDICATOR FOR THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE. THANK YOU.

SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR SMITH.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR. AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT, WE HAVE A MEMORANDUM REGARDING WHETHER TO AUTHORIZE MYSELF TO TRAVEL TO VICTORIA FROM OCTOBER 3RD TO FOURTH TO ATTEND THE LIVABLE CITIES FORUM.

[Items 20 & 21]

COUNCILLOR MORGAN. I MOVE THAT THE MAYOR BE AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL TO VICTORIA, B.C., FROM OCTOBER 3RD TO FOURTH, 2022 TO ATTEND THE LIVABLE CITIES FORUM.

THANK YOU. SECONDER COUNCILLOR SILVERIO.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR. AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT, WE HAVE A MEMORANDUM REGARDING WHETHER TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD ON HOMELESSNESS TO ALLOCATE INCREMENTAL REACHING

[Items 22 & 23]

HOME FUNDING FOR THE 2022-2023 FISCAL YEAR.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN.

I MOVE THAT COUNCIL 1) APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD ON HOMELESSNESS TO ALLOCATE $1,388,373 OF THE INCREMENTAL 2022-2023 REACHING HOME CANADA STRATEGY TO END HOMELESSNESS FUNDING AS FOLLOWS.

HOUSING FIRST FOR ADULTS, 14,000.

HOUSING FIRST FOR FAMILIES, 26,000.

PREVENTION AND SHELTER DIVERSION, 146,000.

2) DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH CANADIAN MORTGAGE HOUSING CORPORATION, CMHC, ON TRANSFERRING ASPEN APARTMENTS TO AN ORGANIZATION FOR NON-MARKET HOUSING.

3) THAT CAB RECONVENE AT THE BEGINNING OF NOVEMBER 2022 AT THE LATEST TO EVALUATE PROGRESS AND DETERMINE NEXT STEPS WITH THE FUNDING.

THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECONDER.

COUNCILLOR SILVERIO.

OPENING IT UP TO THE DISCUSSION, COUNCILLOR MORGAN, I JUST HAVE A NOTE THAT TECHNICALLY, NUMBER ONE, IT'S SAYING WE'RE GOING TO ALLOCATE $1.3 MILLION TO THESE THREE THINGS THAT DON'T ADD UP TO 1.3 MILLION.

THERE IS $1.3 MILLION AVAILABLE, BUT MOST OF IT IS GOING TO GO TO OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IMPLIED IN NUMBER TWO AND THREE.

BUT IT'S A STRANGE, SORRY THAT I'M NOTICING THIS NOW AND NOT AT GPC TODAY, BUT THAT THE WORDING OF NUMBER ONE IMPLIES THAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOCATE $1.3 MILLION AND LIST THREE THINGS THAT DON'T ADD UP TO ANYWHERE CLOSE TO $1.3 MILLION WE CAN ADD IT. YEAH.

YES. AND JUST LIKE COUNCILLOR MORGAN IDENTIFIED AND AS WE DISCUSSED AT GPC, IT DOESN'T ADD UP TO THAT FULL AMOUNT BECAUSE WE'RE HOPING THAT CMHC IS GOING TO TRANSFER ASPEN APARTMENTS TO A NON-MARKET HOUSING ORGANIZATION AND WE CAN USE THE REMAINING FUNDS TO RENOVATE ASPEN, BUT WE NEED TO GET THEM TO MOVE SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

SO WE'LL HOPEFULLY GET THIS CHOP CHOP THROUGH THE MEDIA.

WITH THAT, ANYTHING FURTHER? SEEING NOTHING FURTHER.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR.

AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT WE HAVE ENACTMENT OF BYLAWS.

BYLAW NUMBER 5062, A BYLAW TO DISPOSE OF LOT 34 BLOCK 30 PLAN 2564 FOR LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUE IS PRESENTED FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING IF YOU WISH TO REMAIN IN THE CONFERENCE, PLEASE PRESS STAR] .

COUNCILLOR MORGAN. I MOVE SECOND READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5062.

[01:30:03]

THANK YOU. SECONDER, COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR. AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

COUNCILLOR MORGAN, I MOVE THIRD READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5062.

THANK YOU. SECONDER, COUNCILLOR SMITH.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IN FAVOR. AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THERE WAS NO DEFERRED BUSINESS AND THERE WERE NO TABLED ITEMS FOR THE AGENDA.

IS THERE ANY DEFERRED BUSINESS OR ARE THERE ANY TABLED ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR? THERE WAS NO OLD BUSINESS FOR THE AGENDA.

IS THERE ANY OLD BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR? THERE WERE NO NOTICES OF MOTION FOR THE AGENDA.

ARE THERE ANY NOTICES OF MOTION FROM THE FLOOR? THERE WERE NO DELEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA.

THERE WERE NO ADMINISTRATIVE INQUIRIES FOR THE AGENDA.

ARE THERE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE INQUIRIES FROM THE FLOOR? COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

IT'S NOT OVERLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE INQUIRY.

I JUST WANTED TO THANK ADMINISTRATION FOR OUR TERM.

THIS IS MY LAST COUNCIL MEETING AS A COUNCILLOR HERE TODAY.

I'M NOT GOING FOR REELECTION.

DECIDED TO FOCUS ON MY BUSINESS AND I'M GOING TO BE DOING DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION 90 FEET AT A TIME.

SO LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT.

BUT JUST WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO THANK EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU FOR BRINGING ME ALONG AND TEACHING ME ALL THAT YOU HAVE DONE OVER THE YEARS.

I WANTED TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES AND MADAM MAYOR FOR BEING AN EXCELLENT CHAIR.

IT'S TOO BAD MS. BASSI-KELLETT IS NOT HERE TODAY BECAUSE I ENJOYED MANY YEARS OF WORKING ALONGSIDE OF HER.

SO GOOD LUCK TO EVERYBODY AND GOOD LUCK TO THE NEXT COUNCIL.

IT'S BEEN TRULY AN HONOR TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY THAT I LOVE SO VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

AND I HATE TO BURST YOUR BUBBLE, BUT YOU HAVE ONE MORE MEETING.

WHEN'S THAT? MONDAY, OCTOBER 24TH.

TODAY WAS THE FINAL DAY WE CAN MAKE FINANCIAL DECISIONS, EXCEPT IF IT'S AN EMERGENCY, WE CAN MAKE THEM ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 24TH.

SO MONDAY, OCTOBER 24TH, WE WILL RECONVENE AT 1205 GPC 7 P.M.

AT COUNCIL, BUT BETWEEN THEN AND NOW IS YES KIND OF THE ELECTION PERIOD.

SO THANKS EVERYBODY.

MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOVE BY COUNCILLOR SMITH.

SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR SILVERIO.

ANYBODY OPPOSED.

SEEING NONE. WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT MONTH.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.