Jul 22, 2024 Governance & Priorities Committee

[1. Opening Statement ]

[00:00:05]

AND I'LL CALL OUR GOVERNANCE AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE MEETING FOR MONDAY, JULY 22ND, 2024 TO ORDER, AND I'D LIKE TO BEGIN BY ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE IS LOCATED IN CHIEF DRYGEESE TERRITORY.

FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL, IT HAS BEEN THE TRADITIONAL LAND OF THE YELLOWKNIVES DENE 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.

[2. Approval of the agenda ]

THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF.

DOES ANY MEMBER HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST TODAY? SEEING NONE.

[4. A memorandum regarding whether to adopt a Workplace Violence Policy ]

MISS WHITE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE THE ITEM.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

CITY EMPLOYEES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING SERVICES OR UNDERTAKING ACTIVITIES THAT MAY BE AT HIGHER RISK OF ENCOUNTERING WORKPLACE VIOLENCE.

THIS POLICY SUPPORTS CREATING A RESPECTFUL WORK ENVIRONMENT AND ADDRESSING ISSUES OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE SHOULD THEY OCCUR.

UPDATING THE CITY WORKPLACE VIOLENCE POLICY DEMONSTRATES COUNCIL'S COMMITMENT TO PREVENTING, PROTECTING AND ADDRESSING WORKPLACE VIOLENCE AT THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE AND WITHIN ITS FACILITIES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

OPENING IT UP TO QUESTIONS.

COMMENTS. DISCUSSION FROM COUNCIL.

COUNCILLOR FEQUET. THANKS, MADAM CHAIR.

VERY IMPORTANT POLICY TO HAVE.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS CONSIDERING THE OTHER TWO POLICIES THAT WERE REFERENCED, THE RESPECTFUL WORKPLACE AND THE ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICY.

DID STAFF CONSIDER WHETHER UPDATES OR INCORPORATION OF THIS TYPE OF CONTENT INTO EITHER OF THOSE POLICIES WAS APPROPRIATE, AND ARE THOSE TWO OTHER POLICIES THAT I JUST MENTIONED WERE THEY ALSO PUT BEFORE COUNCIL AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST? MISS WHITE? I WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THE SECOND QUESTION, WHICH IS, YES, THEY ARE ALSO AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE.

SO ALL POLICIES THAT COME TO COUNCIL, YOU CAN SEE ON OUR POLICIES SECTION OF OUR WEBSITE.

THERE'S A NUMBER OF THEM THERE.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE RESPECTFUL WORKPLACE AND ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICY AS WELL AS THE WORKPLACE CONDUCT POLICY.

I WILL ASK CATHY TUMOTH IF THERE'S BEEN ANY CONSIDERATION TO UPDATING THOSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

I KNOW THERE'S A SCHEDULE ATTACHED FOR REVIEW OF THOSE POLICIES, AND SO THEY DO ARE REVIEWED ON SORT OF A SCHEDULE ATTACHED TO THAT.

SO THERE IS A POLICY IN PLACE FOR AND PRACTICE IN PLACE FOR A REVIEW, AND AS TO WHEN THAT SCHEDULE IS RIGHT NOW I'M NOT CERTAIN, BUT THERE'S A PROCESS IN PLACE FOR THAT FOR CERTAIN. THANK YOU.

SEEING. DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR THIS.

THIS IS COMMON CORPORATE POLICY TO HAVE.

I'VE NEVER REALLY SEEN ANY PLACE THAT I'VE WORKED AT THAT DOESN'T HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL THE WORK THAT THEY PUT INTO THIS TO GET US ALL MODERN AND CONTEMPORARY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SEEING NOTHING FURTHER, WE WILL BRING THIS FORWARD TO OUR COUNCIL MEETING ON MONDAY, AUGUST 26TH AT 7 P.M..

[5. A memorandum regarding whether to repeal and replace Livery Licence By‐law 4526, as amended ]

MISS WHITE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE THE ITEM.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THE PURPOSE OF THE LIVERY LICENSE BYLAW IS TO REGULATE TAXIS TO ENSURE SAFE, EFFICIENT AND RELIABLE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR BOTH RESIDENTS AND OUR VISITORS.

THE CONSIDERATIONS IN THE MEMO OUTLINE PROPOSED CHANGES AND ADMINISTRATION IS SEEKING DIRECTION AND ENDORSEMENT TO REPEAL AND REPLACE THE LIVERY LICENSE BYLAW.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, DID YOU WANT TO KICK OFF? YEAH. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND THANKS TO STAFF FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.

SO FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE WHY IS IT NOT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF TO INCLUDE AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW FOR OR ADDRESS RIDESHARE COMPANIES? YEAH, I GUESS I'LL FINISH THERE FOR NOW.

THANK YOU, MISS WHITE.

THANK YOU. I'LL ASK MISS THISTLE TO RESPOND.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

WE ALSO HAVE MITCHELL ROLAND, WHO'S THE MANAGER OF MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT, AND RYLUND JOHNSON, AS THEY'VE BEEN THE DIRECT DRAFTERS WORKING ON THIS AS WELL, AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE TODAY. THE REASON WE DIDN'T PROPOSE REGULATING RIDESHARE IN A REPEAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE LIVERY LICENSE BYLAW IS TO DATE, WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY DEMAND FOR THIS, AND WE HAVE A BIT OF A DIFFERENT CONTEXT IN THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE IN THAT WE DON'T REGULATE THE NUMBER OF TAXI LICENSES, WHICH DOES HAPPEN IN OTHER CITIES.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, IF WE WERE TO REGULATE RIDESHARE, WE'D HAVE TO TREAT THEM EITHER THE SAME AS TAXIS, WHICH IF WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE, AS YOU'VE SEEN IN THE

[00:05:10]

SO THAT'S WHY WE ANTICIPATE IF IT'S COUNCIL'S DESIRE TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE AS PART OF THIS REVIEW THEN IT WILL TAKE US LONGER.

SO WE'D BE LOOKING AT Q1 2025 AT THE EARLIEST TO HAVE THIS COMPLETED, BECAUSE IT WILL BE QUITE A COMPLICATED PROCESS.

IF YOU LOOK AT CALGARY, FOR EXAMPLE, IT WAS A LONG DEBATE AND QUITE TIME CONSUMING TO DETERMINE HOW AND WHEN AND IN WHAT WAY TO REGULATE RIDESHARE COMPANIES.

THANK YOU. THANKS.

YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THE COMPLICATIONS FOR SURE.

JUST WHAT WOULD SORT OF BE THE OUTCOME IN A YEAR OR TWO? IF RIDESHARE COMPANIES DID START POPPING UP WOULD WE HAVE TO REVISIT THIS WHOLE THING? DO WE HAVE STAFF OR RESOURCES TO ENFORCE THAT THEY DON'T COMPLY WITH THE BYLAW? MISS WHITE. THANK YOU, MISS THISTLE.

THANKS. WE WOULD LIKELY HAVE TO REVISIT THE SITUATION.

IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE SITUATION WHERE SHORT TERM RENTALS WERE NOT DEFINED IN ANY OF OUR BYLAWS, SO WE DIDN'T HAVE A WAY TO REGULATE THEM PER SE.

SO WE EITHER NEED TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE EXPLICITLY NOT PERMITTED IN THE CURRENT OR NEW TAXI BYLAW OR IN A COUPLE OF YEARS, IF THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS HAPPENING, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT IF WE WERE GOING TO REGULATE THEM AND HOW THAT WOULD HAPPEN.

THANK YOU. YEAH, JUST TO COMMENT ON THAT.

TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE EXTRA WORK AND IT WOULD TAKE MORE TIME.

HOWEVER, I THINK IT'S ALWAYS BETTER TO BE PROACTIVE THAN REACTIVE.

PERHAPS IF THIS CAN BE SOMETHING SORT OF IN CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMUNITY AND TAXI COMPANIES.

YEAH. JUST JUST LOOKING TO AVOID BEING REACTIVE ON THIS ONE.

NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE HIRING A CONSULTANT AS MENTIONED IN THE MEMO.

IS THERE A BUDGET FOR THIS? WHERE WOULD THAT MONEY COME FROM? MISS WHITE.

MISS THISTLE. THANKS.

IT'S A LOCAL PERSON THAT WE'VE CONTRACTED, AND IT'LL BE PAID WITH INTERNAL BUDGET.

OKAY. OUT OF ACTIVE OR JUST CURIOUS WHERE THAT MONEY COMES FROM? MISS WHITE. MISS THISTLE.

FROM OUR COMMUNICATIONS BUDGET, WE WANTED A NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY TO HELP US ASSIST WITH THE COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT SO THAT WHEN WE HOLD IN-PERSON MEETINGS, IT'S NOT THE CITY LEADING THE ENGAGEMENT SESSION.

THIS WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS.

WE ALSO HIRED A CONSULTANT TO ACT AS A NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY THAT COULD PROVIDE US WITH A REPORT AFTER THE ENGAGEMENT SESSIONS, SO THAT IT WAS A FACILITATED DISCUSSION BETWEEN EVERYBODY. RIGHT ON.

THANK YOU, AND PART 3.8 MENTIONS CHECKS DONE ON TAXIS BY STAFF.

IS IT FELT THAT THE CHECKS, AS THEY ARE NOW ARE AN EFFECTIVE USE OF STAFF TIME? MISS WHITE? THANK YOU.

MR. ROLAND. YEAH, THANK YOU.

SO THE TAX INSPECTIONS ARE WHAT WE'RE CALLING SAFETY CHECKS.

WE CALL THEM TAX INSPECTIONS, AND SO THOSE.

I FEEL THOSE ARE A GOOD USE OF STAFF TIME.

IT'S THE CURRENT BYLAW REQUIRES THAT TAXIS UNDER THE AGE OF SIX MODEL YEARS OLD, GET ONE INSPECTION DONE BY STAFF PER YEAR, AND THEN ANY TAXI OVER THE AGE OF SIX BETWEEN THE AGES OF SIX AND 15 MODEL YEARS OLD NEEDS TWO INSPECTIONS OR AN INSPECTION EVERY SIX MONTHS.

SO TWICE A YEAR, AND COINCIDING WITH THAT IS MECHANICAL INSPECTIONS AS WELL, AND IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR OFFICERS TO ENSURE A, THAT THE THAT THE METER DISPLAYS THE FARE IS WORKING PROPERLY AND IS ACCURATE, AND AS WELL AS MAKING SURE THAT THE VEHICLE IS SAFE ALONG GOING HAND IN HAND WITH THE MECHANICAL INSPECTION WHICH CHECKS UNDER THE HOOD AND UNDER THE VEHICLE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, AND ARE ANY CHANGES, THERE'S SORT OF A MENTION, I THINK, NEAR THE END OF THE MEMO TALKING ABOUT SORT OF MORE MORE TIME FOR STAFF AND TO DO WITH CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS SORT OF PROPOSED.

WOULD THAT RELATE IN ANY WAY TO THE PROPOSAL WE SAW A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT FOUR NEW MED OFFICERS IN 2025?

[00:10:08]

MR. ROLAND. NO.

SO THESE ARE CURRENT LEVELS.

WE DON'T ANTICIPATE WITH THE AMENDMENT OR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE CURRENTLY LICENSED BY LAW THAT THERE WILL BE ANY ADDITIONAL STAFF TIME REQUIRED.

SO THOSE THOSE REQUESTS ARE NOT IN RELATION TO THIS.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YEAH, CURIOUS TO HEAR WHAT MY COLLEAGUES THINK ON THE RIDESHARE THING.

THANKS AGAIN FOR YOUR WORK STUFF.

THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR.

COCHRANE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

JUST MORE COMMENTS.

FIRST OFF, I WANT TO THANK STAFF FROM CHANGING OR THE SUGGESTED CHANGING FOR THE LIVERY LICENSE BYLAW TO THE TAXI BYLAW.

PLAIN LANGUAGE HELPS, ESPECIALLY ON SOMETHING AROUND LIKE THIS.

FOR THE REST OF IT, I'M EXCITED TO SEE WHAT STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT WILL LOOK LIKE OUT OF THIS, BECAUSE I'M SO ASSUMING THERE'S A LOT MORE THAT COULD BE PROPOSED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY WORKING IN THIS INDUSTRY THAN JUST FROM SUGGESTED HERE, AND I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT THE PARTITIONS IN TAXIS AS OF YET.

I WANT TO HEAR SOME MORE INFORMATION UPON THAT, JUST BECAUSE YOU WILL BE TAKING AWAY ONE SEAT OUT OF I'VE CALLED MANY A TAXI, MANY A TIME WHERE YOU KNOW YOU'RE TRYING TO GET MORE THAN THE THREE IN THERE. SO BRINGING IT DOWN TO TWO COULD BE A PROBLEM.

ANYWAY, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE WORK AND LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.

THANK YOU.

WANTED TO KNOW HOW ARE HOW HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO ASSESS THE LACK OF DEMAND FOR RIDESHARE IF WE'VE NEVER ACTUALLY HAD A RIDESHARE? I THINK BASED JUST FOLKS HAVEN'T REACHED OUT TO ASK TO HAVE IT IN THE BYLAW, BUT MISS WHITE.

NO, THAT SOUNDS CORRECT, BUT I'LL ASK CARRIE IF SHE WANTS TO ADD TO THAT.

THANK YOU. YEAH.

WE'VE HAD NO CONTACT TO THE CITY.

NO REQUESTS MADE. WITH RESPECT TO RIDESHARE, THERE'S BEEN NO RUMBLINGS ABOUT RIDESHARE.

WHEN SHORT TERM RENTALS WERE KIND OF UP AND COMING.

AIRBNB, VRBO.

THOSE KINDS OF ACCOMMODATIONS.

WE WERE CONTACTED NUMEROUS TIMES, PEOPLE TRYING TO GET LICENSED OR COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT HAPPENING.

THERE'S BEEN NONE OF THAT TO DATE.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BASING THAT PORTION OF OUR ASSESSMENT ON, AND THEN WITH RESPECT TO THE RECOMMENDATION, IT'S WE DO HAVE A DIFFERENT CONTEXT IN THAT WE DON'T REGULATE TAXI LICENSES.

SO YOU MIGHT HAVE SEEN IN THE NEWS AND IN OTHER CITIES IN PREVIOUS YEARS, THEY BECOME REALLY VALUABLE.

THEY CAN BE WORTH 100-$200K.

THEY'RE LIKE A LEGACY THAT PEOPLE TRANSFER DOWN THROUGH THEIR FAMILY BECAUSE THEY'RE SO VALUABLE, AND WE DON'T SEE THAT IN YELLOWKNIFE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DATE CHOSEN NOT TO REGULATE THE NUMBER OF TAXI LICENSES THAT WE ISSUE.

SO IT WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE DEMAND, AND WE ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS.

HOWEVER, IF COUNCIL DIRECTS US TO INCLUDE IT, WE CAN DO THAT.

IT WILL JUST TAKE US LONGER TO DO THE ASSESSMENT.

THANK YOU.

COULD I JUST ASK MISS THISTLE, WHEN YOU'RE GOING OUT AND DOING THESE ENGAGEMENT SESSIONS? IF IT'S ENGAGEMENT SESSIONS ARE BEING DOMINATED BY A DEMAND FOR RIDESHARE, WOULD ADMINISTRATION COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND SAY IN OUR DISCUSSIONS IT SEEMS TO BE A BIG ITEM AND LOOKING FOR DIRECTION.

MISS WHITE, THANK YOU, MISS THISTLE.

YES, WE WOULD DEFINITELY DO THAT.

SO HOW WE FORESEE ENGAGEMENT ROLLING OUT IS THERE'LL BE LIKELY A PUBLIC SURVEY.

WE'RE GOING TO DO TARGETED STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT.

SO WE'LL DO LIKE A GENERAL PUBLIC SESSION, BUT THEN ALSO SOME TARGETED SESSIONS WITH TAXI COMPANY OWNERS, WITH DRIVERS, THEN WITH SOME OF THE USER GROUPS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM PREVIOUSLY, LIKE THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS GIVEN TO COUNCIL A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.

ANYTHING THAT WE AREN'T RECOMMENDING, BUT THAT WE HEAR A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR THROUGHOUT THAT ENGAGEMENT, WE DEFINITELY WOULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH THE NEW INFORMATION AND POSSIBLY SOME NEW RECOMMENDATIONS.

I DON'T KNOW, MR. JOHNSON, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? OKAY. NO, THAT'S IT FROM US.

THANK YOU.

SO WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU BECAUSE I'VE HEARD A FEW TIMES THE DETERRENT SEEMS TO BE TIME.

SO IF WE ADD THIS, IT'S JUST GOING TO INCREASE THE TIME FRAME FOR THIS CONSULTATION TO COME BACK OR THE CONSULTANT TO COME BACK WITH INFORMATION.

I WOULD PREFER THAT AN ASSESSMENT BE DONE CORRECTLY, WHETHER IT TAKES A YEAR TO TWO YEARS, RATHER THAN WE'RE NOT GOING TO ADD THIS IN THERE JUST BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO ADD MORE TIME, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT US TO COME BACK IN FIVE YEARS OR TEN YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.

WHEN THIS BECOMES A HEAVY ITEM, I'D RATHER IT BE PUT INTO THE CONSULTATION OR THE CONSULTING PORTION RIGHT AWAY SO THAT WE ARE BEING PROACTIVE, JUST LIKE COUNCILLOR MCCLELLAN HAD POINTED OUT.

[00:15:07]

IF THESE ARE THE VEHICLES THAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THE ROAD, I WANT US TO PUT OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD.

IS THAT GOING TO BE LANGUAGE THAT'S PUT INTO THE TAXI CONDITION AS WELL? MISS WHITE, THANK YOU, AND I WILL ASK EITHER MISS THISTLE OR MISTER--MISS THISTLE.

THANK YOU. I CAN START AND I CAN PASS IT ALONG.

YES. IT'S ALREADY BEEN FLAGGED AS A CONCERN.

THE PHYSICAL LOOK OF TAXI VEHICLES, AND WE CAN SAY IT WILL BE IN THE OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKELY TO BE IN THE NEXT BYLAW TO BE DETERMINED BY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL, AND ALSO THAT WILL BE A PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT AND EDUCATION, BECAUSE WE REALLY SEE THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THOSE KINDS OF DISCUSSIONS WITH TAXI DRIVERS AND TAXI COMPANIES TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WHEN WE HAVE A NEW BYLAW, THIS IS A REQUIREMENT AND THAT WE WILL BE ENFORCING AND MR. ROLAND, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? THAT COVERS MOST OF IT.

OBVIOUSLY, AS MENTIONED, THERE ARE SOME TAXES IN YELLOWKNIFE THAT ARE HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT BODY DAMAGE AND THE BUMPERS, AND WE TRY TO FLAG THAT THROUGH OUR INSPECTION PROCESS. OF COURSE, THINGS HAPPEN WITHIN THE YEAR OR SIX MONTHS THAT WE DO THE INSPECTION, BUT REALLY FIRMING UP THIS LANGUAGE WOULD HELP US GIVE US A TOOL TO REALLY ADDRESS THESE ISSUES.

THANK YOU. EXCELLENT.

THANK YOU.

OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OTHER THAN I HOPE YELLOWKNIFERS HAS COME FORWARD WITH THEIR THEIR WANTS AND THEIR NEEDS FOR TRANSPORTATION WITHIN YELLOWKNIFE. I KNOW MANY PEOPLE WHO COME HERE KNOW ALREADY THAT UBER DOESN'T EXIST HERE.

THESE THESE THINGS DON'T EXIST HERE, AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S NO ASK FOR THEM, BECAUSE WE KNOW THEY ALREADY DON'T EXIST.

SO IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, EVEN OUR NEXT GENERATION IS LOOKING FOR, THEY WANT MAKE SURE YOU COME FORWARD.

YOUR INPUT IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS ALTOGETHER, BECAUSE THE LIVERY LICENSE HAS BEEN ON THE DOCKET SINCE MY FIRST TERM.

SO, I MEAN, THE TERM LIVERY IS VERY OLD, SO AN UPDATE TO IT IS VERY, VERY PLEASING TO SEE.

MERCI. JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF BEFORE WE CONTINUE BECAUSE THE CONSULTANT IS ONLY DOING THE ENGAGEMENT PART, IT'S INTERNAL STAFF THAT ARE THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO THAT ANALYSIS ON WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR RIDESHARE.

SO WE WOULD STAFF WOULD GO DO THAT.

WE WOULDN'T DO ENGAGEMENT.

STAFF WOULD THEN COME BACK WITH A NEW MEMO AND THEN ENGAGEMENT WOULD BEGIN.

CAN WE JUST GET CLARIFICATION IF COUNCIL WANTS TO HAVE STAFF ACTUALLY INCLUDE RIDESHARE.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT OR SORRY, MISS WHITE.

THANK YOU. SO YES, OUR WORK PLAN WILL BE ALTERED BASED ON THE DIRECTION PROVIDED BY COUNCIL, BUT I'LL ASK MISS THISTLE IF THERE'S ANYTHING TO ADD.

THANK YOU. SO I'M GOING TO SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD, BUT SIMILAR TO SHORT TERM RENTALS.

WE CAME TO COUNCIL AND SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PROPOSE AND WE WANT TO ENGAGE ON THESE THINGS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO ENGAGE WITH RESIDENTS AND THE PUBLIC AND THEN COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL SAY, OH, BUT WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT BECAUSE THEN WE REALLY HAVE TO GO BACK OUT AGAIN.

SO THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S MEMO IS TO SAY THIS IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING FROM ADMINISTRATION, AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ENGAGE ON.

SO WE WEREN'T GOING TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE.

IF COUNCIL'S WILL IS FOR US TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE, THEN WE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE THAT DIRECTION.

NOW, WE WON'T NEED TO COME BACK BEFORE WE START ENGAGEMENT BECAUSE WE'LL JUST INCLUDE THAT AS PART OF IT.

IF WE GO OUT AND ENGAGE AND WE GET A WHOLE BUNCH OF NEW INFORMATION, THEN WE COULD COME BACK WITH A SUMMARY AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE HEARD FROM, YOU KNOW, A MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THEY WANT RIDESHARE OR IT WAS REALLY NOBODY WANTED IT.

WE CAN DO THAT TOO.

IF WE NEED FURTHER DIRECTION, BUT WHERE DOES THE CONSULTANT IS JUST ASKING, AS A FACILITATOR, REALLY, TO GET US THROUGH THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS, AND SO IT'S NOT THE CITY TALKING TO PEOPLE IN THE CITY COLLECTING THE INFORMATION.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMEBODY ASSIST US WITH THAT.

SO IT'S NOT A US VERSUS THEM.

IT'S LIKE WE'RE ALL WORKING THROUGH THIS TOGETHER, AND LET'S GET TO A REALLY GREAT BYLAW AT THE END THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY, BUT WHAT WE REALLY WANT IS COUNCIL'S INPUT ON THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC AND ENGAGE ON STUFF AND THEN GET DIFFERENT DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL OR NOT DO RIDESHARE AND COUNCIL'S LIKE DO RIDESHARE AND THEN WE

[00:20:06]

SO, YEAH, IT'S TODAY IF IT'S THE WILL OF COUNCIL THAT THEY WOULD LIKE US TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE, THEN WE'D LIKE TO SEE THAT ADD IT NOW SO THAT WE KNOW WE HAVE TO ENGAGE ON THAT AND THEN IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE, WE JUST DIDN'T FEEL IT WAS NECESSARY, AND THEN IT JUST FLAGGING TO COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL THAT IF WE INCLUDE RIDESHARE, IT WILL TAKE US LONGER BECAUSE THIS IS QUITE A CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE.

IT WILL TAKE A LOT MORE RESEARCH AND IT WILL BE STAFF LIKE ESSENTIALLY RYLUND JOHNSON AND MITCHELL ROLAND, I AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY WORKING THROUGH THIS PROCESS TO BRING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE FEEL WE CAN IMPLEMENT AND ENFORCE WITH THE RESOURCES WE HAVE. SO WE'LL BE DOING ALL THAT DRAFTING WORK.

IT'S JUST WE NEED SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC.

YOU KNOW, IF WE PROPOSE WE WANT TO INCREASE, WE WANT TO LET TAXI DRIVERS, FOR EXAMPLE, BE ABLE TO ACCEPT A DEPOSIT BEFORE THEY TAKE A RIDE.

YOU KNOW, DO THEY WANT THAT? DO THEY NOT WANT THAT? IF WE PROPOSE $30, IS IT BETTER AT 20? IS IT BETTER AT 15? WE'RE NOT THE PEOPLE IN THE CABS AND WE'RE NOT THE USERS.

SO WE REALLY WANT TO ENGAGE IN HERE.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYTHING WE HEAR, WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN A BYLAW, IT JUST WILL TAKE ALL THAT IN.

LOOK AT WHAT MUNICIPALITIES DO ACROSS THE COUNTRY OF SIMILAR SIZE AND THEN MAKE AN EDUCATED RECOMMENDATION BASED ON OUR RESEARCH, BASED ON PRECEDENT, BASED ON OUR, YOU KNOW, LEGAL POSITION TO SAY THIS IS WHAT WE RECOMMEND IS A GOOD BYLAW MOVING FORWARD.

THANKS. YEAH, AND JUST THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN I WANT TO USE A RIDESHARE VERSUS I WANT TO START A RIDESHARE WOULD BE THE THINGS WE WANT TO CONSIDER. LIKE IF NOBODY IN OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO START A RIDE, SHARE.

DO WE PAUSE THIS BYLAW TO DO ALL THAT WORK? SO JUST SOMETHING FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.

COUNCILLOR FEQUET. THANKS, MADAM CHAIR.

THANKS FOR STAFF FOR BRINGING THIS MEMO FORWARD.

WITH ALL THE CONSIDERATIONS LISTED OUT.

I DO ENDORSE.

ABSOLUTELY. THE CITY ADVANCING THIS PROJECT AS EFFICIENTLY AND AS EFFECTIVELY AS POSSIBLE.

READING THROUGH THOSE 2021 SURVEY RESULTS WAS PRETTY DISTURBING.

SO, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC SAFETY IS DEFINITELY ONE OF OUR TOP CONCERNS.

SO I APPRECIATE THIS BEING THIS GETTING TO THIS, AND I ALSO APPRECIATE THE THIRD PARTY FACILITATOR HELPING HAVE SOME OF THESE CONVERSATIONS TO H ELP US YOU KNOW, BE A PARTY IN THE CONVERSATION AND NOT NOT NECESSARILY LEADING OR DICTATING THIS.

A COUPLE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, AND I RECOGNIZE YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD ON ENGAGING ON ALL THESE QUESTIONS.

THE PRE-TRIP DEPOSIT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT IDEA.

I KNOW THAT REALLY HURTS A LOT OF TAXI DRIVERS.

I HAVE SOME FRIENDS WHO DEAL WITH THAT STUFF ALL THE TIME AS AS DRIVERS.

IT'S A SMALL TOWN, AND AS A USER MYSELF, OF TAXIS DEFINITELY THE PRE-FARE WOULD BE BETTER THAN A DEPOSIT, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH A REFUND AT THE END OR AN ADDITIONAL PAYMENT BECAUSE YOU'RE TAKING UP TAXI DRIVERS' TIME, BUT AGAIN, DEFER TO WHATEVER THEIR THEIR INPUT IS.

WITH 3.8, I GUESS, JUST A QUESTION.

THAT'S THE INTRODUCTION OF THE MILEAGE, THE 450,000KM.

WHAT DO OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE IN PLACE WITH RESPECT TO THAT? IS THERE A MILEAGE KIND OF UPPER LIMIT ON THE VEHICLES? MISS WHITE, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, MR. ROLAND. HI.

THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.

SO THE REASON THAT WE INCLUDED THAT IS BACK HISTORICALLY BACK, I BELIEVE IT WAS IN 2021.

WE HEARD FROM ONE OF THE DRIVERS OR SEVERAL DRIVERS THAT DURING COVID, THEY WANTED SOME ECONOMIC BREAKS ON THEIR REQUIREMENTS.

SO BACK THEN, TAXIS WERE ONLY ABLE TO BE IN USE UP UNTIL THEY REACHED, WELL, TEN YEARS OLD, I GUESS, AND THEN THEY COULDN'T BE A TAXI ANYMORE.

COUNCIL AT THAT TIME HAD DECIDED TO AMEND THE BYLAW TO ALLOW FOR 15 YEARS.

KIND OF GIVING A BIGGER BREAK, BUT WE'VE COME TO THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE KILOMETER AND THE MILEAGE ON THE TAXIS ARE SOMETIMES A BETTER INDICATOR OF THE VEHICLE'S CONDITION, RATHER THAN THE YEAR OF THE VEHICLE.

THERE COULD BE TAXIS THAT ARE NINE YEARS OLD, BUT ONLY HAVE 100,000KM ON THEM, WHERE THERE COULD BE TAXIS THAT ARE FOUR YEARS OLD AND HAVE 450,000KM ON THEM.

I DO HAVE SOME DATA ON THIS.

IS THAT IN YELLOWKNIFE, THERE ARE CURRENTLY APPROXIMATELY SIX TAXIS THAT ARE OVER 450,000KM.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT A TOTAL OF 145 TAXIS, SIX OF THEM ARE OVER THAT 450,000KM.

SO REALLY, IT WOULDN'T BE LIKE WE'RE FORCING A LOT OF PEOPLE TO HAVE PUT A STOP TO USING THESE TAXIS.

[00:25:06]

I'M NOT SURE OF ANY OTHER JURISDICTION WILL REVIEW.

I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT ON THIS PART BUT THIS IS WHAT WE REALLY THINK IS WOULD ALLOW US TO BETTER DETERMINE A VEHICLE'S CONDITION.

DOES THE KILOMETERS, MEANING IT'S MORE DRIVEN, MORE IT'S ON THE ROAD, MORE THE WEAR AND TEAR, EVERYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT.

THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THAT.

AS A DRIVER OF TWO VEHICLES THAT ARE ALMOST 15 YEARS OLD.

THE REASON I'M ASKING IS JUST RECOGNIZING THAT YOU KNOW, THESE ARE TAXI DRIVERS LIVELIHOODS AND HAVING A CUTOFF.

I WOULD BE HESITANT TO HAVE A CUTOFF BECAUSE IF SOMEONE KEEPS THEIR VEHICLE IN REALLY GOOD SHAPE, WHY CUT THEM OFF, RIGHT? WHETHER IT'S AN AGE OR A MILEAGE.

HAVE ANY OF THOSE SIX TAXIS YOU MENTIONED THAT ARE OVER THAT PROPOSED CUTOFF HAVE ANY OUTSTANDING CONCERNS DURING THEIR TWICE A YEAR INSPECTIONS NOW THAT THEY'RE OVER THE SIX.

MISS WHITE. SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE AVAILABLE AT THIS MOMENT, BUT I THINK COMING FORWARD, WHEN THIS INFORMATION IS BROUGHT BACK AFTER CONSULTATION, MAYBE WE COULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THAT 450,000KM.

THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THAT RESPONSE, AND YEAH, I WAS JUST CURIOUS AND I TOTALLY, AGAIN, RESPECT THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO TAKE PLACE, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL GATHER SOME INPUT, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE EXPECTATIONS BE CLEAR.

SO IF WE DO HAVE AN UPPER LIMIT ON YEARS AND MILEAGE, THAT MAYBE RESULTS IN 3 OR 4 INSPECTIONS BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY, REALLY OLD, BUT IF IF SOMEONE IF THAT'S THEIR CAR AND THEY'RE KEEPING IT IN GOOD SHAPE AND THEY'RE PASSING INSPECTIONS, I MEAN, THAT IS THE TOOL WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE, NOTWITHSTANDING ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN IN THE INTERIM, THAT PEOPLE ARE MAKING SURE THEIR VEHICLES ARE SAFE AND CLEAN FOR FOLKS TO USE.

SO THANKS, AND THEN WITH RESPECT TO JUST LAST COMMENT ON THE BYLAW, THE RIDESHARE.

I APPRECIATE THE KIND OF ESTIMATE THAT WAS PROVIDED OF APPROXIMATELY Q1 2025.

SO, YOU KNOW, AROUND 3 TO 5 MONTHS POTENTIAL DELAY IN THIS PROJECT, AND THAT RIDE SHARING WASN'T KIND OF INITIALLY PART OF THIS PROJECT, AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT DECIDING TO DO IT OR REGULATE IT, AND IF SO, HOW DO YOU WANT TO IS ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS, BUT I THINK TRYING TO BE STRATEGIC WITH OUR TIME, IF WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND PAY AND A CONSULTANT AND UNDERTAKE ENGAGEMENT WITH THE PUBLIC.

I WOULD CERTAINLY PREFER THAT IT BE PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT AND THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED NOW, JUST SO WE KNOW AND IF THERE'S ABSOLUTELY ZERO FEEDBACK AND INTEREST IN IT, COOL. WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE THOSE OTHER CONVERSATIONS, BUT IF THERE IS STAFF CAN CAN START DOING THAT RESEARCH IN THE BYLAW THAT COMES FORWARD CAN INCLUDE THAT IN THE WAY THAT THE PUBLIC WANTS TO SEE IT.

I WOULD HATE FOR US TO MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE PROACTIVE, KNOWING THAT THINGS ALWAYS COME UP, AND IF WE CAN LOOK AROUND THE CORNER AND TRY TO SAVE US SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE THAT MIGHT THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE FOR SURE.

SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK ON THIS SO FAR.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR PAYNE.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

JUST A QUESTION, LIKE, AND GOING OFF WHAT STACIE WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH THE CONDITION OF THE CABS.

I'VE SEEN A LOT OF PRETTY ROUGH, ROUGH LOOKING CABS OUT THERE ON THE STREET, AND DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY OR WILL WE HAVE THE ABILITY OR THE D ESIRE TO BE ABLE TO USE OUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO ISSUE WARNINGS TICKETS FOR VEHICLES THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY DAMAGED.

MISS WHITE. MISS THISTLE.

YES WE WILL.

GOOD TALK. OKAY.

THANK YOU, AND THE SECOND QUESTION.

YOU HAD TALKED ABOUT DOING EXTERIOR CHECKS, INTERIOR CHECKS AND THEN CHECKS UNDER THE HOOD.

SO WHAT EXPERTISE IS BEING USED TO CHECK UNDER THE HOOD? AND WHAT ARE YOU ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR? I'M ASSUMING THAT WE DON'T HAVE SOME SOME MECHANICS WITHIN BYLAW DEPARTMENT.

NO, I THINK THEY HAVE TO GO GET THEIR OWN MECHANICAL REPORT, MISS WHITE.

THANK YOU. I BELIEVE SO AS WELL, MR. ROLAND. YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT.

SO THE MECHANICAL INSPECTION DONE BY A CERTIFIED LICENSED MECHANIC AT A SHOP IN TOWN.

WHATEVER THE CHOOSING OF THE DRIVERS, THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR IT AND GET IT DONE.

EITHER ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR, WHATEVER THE REQUIREMENT IS FOR THAT AGE OF TAXI, WE DO THE SAFETY CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE METER IS DISPLAYING THE PROPER FARE AMOUNT.

[00:30:03]

OFFICERS, WHEN THEY DO THE TAXI INSPECTIONS, WILL ALSO CHECK FOR THE WINDSHIELD, AND WE'VE BEEN GOOD ABOUT FLAGGING THAT NOW, AND WORKING WITH DRIVERS TO COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS TO GET THAT FIXED IN A TIMELY MANNER AS WELL.

THANK YOU. I PROBABLY GOT MISUNDERSTOOD IN WHAT YOU WERE SAYING EARLIER.

I THOUGHT THAT YOU GUYS HAD DONE.

I KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, THAT THERE'S MECHANICAL INSPECTIONS THAT HAVE TO BE DONE AT MECHANIC SHOPS, BUT I HAD THOUGHT THAT YOU HAD SAID THAT YOU GUYS CHECK UNDER THE HOOD AS WELL.

OKAY. ALONG WITH MOST HERE, I'M IN SUPPORT OF DOING THE RESEARCH RIGHT NOW ON RIDESHARING.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT WE'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH IN THE PAST, WE'VE DOORDASH CAME IN PRETTY QUICK, AND NOBODY EXPECTED THAT AIRBNB CAME IN WITH A VENGEANCE. YOU KNOW, LIKE, THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE NEED TO BE UP ON BECAUSE IT IS THE WAY THAT THINGS ARE MOVING FORWARD.

IT'S GIVEN PEOPLE THE ABILITY TO MAKE MONEY WITH THINGS THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE AND ACTUALLY FROM USING UBER DOWN SOUTH AND CABS DOWN SOUTH, I THINK THE THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF UBER ACTUALLY BRINGS THE WHOLE GAME UP FOR EVERYBODY, AND IT MAKES PEOPLE WANT TO KEEP THEIR CABS IN BETTER SHAPE AND KEEP THEIR CARS IN BETTER SHAPE.

SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT GOING INTO HOPEFULLY A BOOMING TOURISM INDUSTRY UP HERE, I KNOW THAT COVID KILLED IT A BIT, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE COMING BACK RIGHT NOW AND COMING BACK IN A IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.

I THINK NOW IS A GOOD TIME.

YOU KNOW, WHEN PEOPLE JUMP OFF THIS PLANE, IF THEY'RE FLYING UP HERE, THE FIRST THING THAT THEY SEE IS OUR CAB DRIVERS, AND, AND I THINK THAT WE DESERVE OR WE SHOULD BE GIVING THE BEST FIRST IMPRESSION TO THIS CITY.

THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT AREN'T BEYOND AREN'T IN OUR CONTROL, BUT I THINK THAT WE DEFINITELY HAVE CONTROL OF THIS, AND WE CAN DICTATE WHERE THIS INDUSTRY GOES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

BEFORE WE GET TO ROUND TWO FOR MYSELF, I JUST WANTED TO SAY A BIG THANKS TO STAFF FOR THE MEMO.

I REALLY APPRECIATE HOW IT'S LAID OUT AND HAS THE TOPICS THAT YOU'LL BE LOOKING TO ENGAGE ON AND SO LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM FROM RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS ON THAT.

FOR MYSELF WITH THE RIDESHARE, I'M OKAY NOT ENGAGING ON IT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MAJORITY WOULD LIKE TO ENGAGE ON THAT.

SO HAPPY TO HAVE STAFF ENGAGE ON THAT, I THINK MAYBE MISS THISTLE CAN CLARIFY JUST SO THAT WE HAVE EXPECTATIONS CLEAR.

IT WOULD BE LATER IN 2025 THAT THIS BYLAW WOULD BE COMING FORWARD IF WE CONSIDER INCLUDING RIDESHARE IN THE ENGAGEMENT.

MISS WHITE, IF I COULD JUST GET AN UPDATE FROM ADMIN ON THEIR PROJECTION FOR THE TAXI BYLAW IF WE INCLUDE RIDESHARE.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO YES, IT WILL ADD A LITTLE TIME, BUT I'LL ASK MISS THISTLE TO GIVE THE DETAILS.

THANK YOU. SO BECAUSE THIS IS QUITE A COMPLICATED AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE.

THE EARLIEST WE [INAUDIBLE], BEING ABLE TO HAVE A BYLAW BEFORE COUNCIL WOULD BE IN Q1 2025.

HOWEVER, BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE WITH SHORT TERM RENTALS IT CAME TO COUNCIL MANY TIMES.

I THINK IT TOOK 3 TO 5 YEARS FOR US TO FINALLY GET REGULATIONS IN PLACE WITH RESPECT TO SHORT TERM RENTALS.

I ANTICIPATE THAT IF WE RECOMMEND INCLUDING RIDESHARE IN THE BYLAW IT COULD TAKE QUITE A WHILE.

SO WE LIKE I SAID, WE ANTICIPATE WE COULD HAVE A BYLAW TO COUNCIL BY THE END OF Q1 2025, WHETHER THAT BYLAW WILL BE ADOPTED AT THAT TIME.

I'M A LITTLE SKEPTICAL.

IT'LL PROBABLY BE LATER IN 2025 JUST BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY BIG ISSUE, AND LIKELY WILL TAKE MORE THAN ONE MEETING FOR US TO GET TO AN ADOPTED BYLAW.

I DON'T KNOW. YEAH.

PERHAPS I COULD JUST PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT.

THE MOST IMPORTANT ENGAGEMENT WOULD PROBABLY BE WITH RIDESHARE COMPANIES.

IF WE CONTACT UBER OR LYFT, THEY HAVE A SET OF BYLAWS AND A STANDARD THEY ARE WILLING TO MOVE TO.

WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING HERE WITH MORE STRINGENT STANDARDS FOR DRIVERS, CAMERAS, SECURITY IT'S NOT IN THOSE COMPANIES INTEREST TO ALLOW THAT TO BE UNDER THE BYLAW.

I WOULD SAY YELLOWKNIFE PROBABLY DOESN'T HAVE THE BARGAINING POWER TO GET THEM TO SHIFT.

CALGARY WAS IN A BACK AND FORTH NEGOTIATION FOR YEARS.

[00:35:01]

SO THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE CONTACTING THESE COMPANIES AND SAYING, WHAT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO REGULATE IT? HERE'S WHAT YELLOWKNIFE IS CURRENTLY PROPOSING, AND I'LL NOTE THE MEMO BEFORE YOU HAS QUITE A FEW MORE STRINGENT REGULATIONS.

SO IT REALLY BECOMES A DEBATE WHETHER YOU'RE WILLING TO HAVE TWO STANDARDS HERE.

TAXI DRIVERS HAVE ALL OF THESE EXTRA REGULATIONS UBER AND LYFT.

YOUR BUSINESS MODEL DOESN'T GET ANY OF THEM AND YOU GET THAT MARKET ADVANTAGE.

SO I MEAN, AS MUCH AS WE CAN GO OUT AND TALK TO THE PUBLIC AND THEY SAY THEY WANT THAT, IT'S A NEGOTIATION WITH THOSE COMPANIES, NONE OF WHICH HAVE COME FORWARD TO US AND THAT'S WHO REALLY THE CONVERSATION WOULD HAVE TO BE WITH.

THANK YOU. YEAH.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL HAVING OUR EXPECTATIONS SET BECAUSE NOT ONLY DO THOSE COMPANIES, WE NEED TO HAVE YELLOWKNIFERS WHO ARE INTERESTED, AND IF WE ARE MAKING IT MORE STRINGENT, YOU KNOW, REQUIRING TAXI COMPANIES TO HAVE AN ACCESSIBLE VEHICLE, WE'VE GOT TO HAVE THE SAME FOR THE UBER DRIVERS, AND SO ARE WE GOING TO DECREASE OUR TAXI BYLAW AND HAVE NO KILOMETERS AND HAVE NO ACCESSIBILITY? SO SOME THERE, AS AS NOTED IN THE MEMO, IT'S COMPLICATED RIDESHARES SO HAPPY FOR US TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION, BUT JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE WE'RE SETTING OUR, OUR EXPECTATIONS.

DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE AND THEN COUNCILLOR FEQUET.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

THERE ARE 145 LICENSED TAXIS AND 197 CHAUFFEURS DRIVERS IN A TOWN OF 20,000, IN A PLACE THAT REPRESENTS, WHAT, TEN KILOMETERS ALTOGETHER? IT'S A FAIRLY SATURATED MARKET, AS IS, I'M NOT SURE OUTSIDE OF BECAUSE, AGAIN, BREAKING IT DOWN TO WHAT PUBLIC WILL WANT BEING THEIR EXPERIENCE FOR DOWN SOUTH. OF COURSE THEY'RE GOING TO SAY THAT VERSUS INDUSTRY OR THE INTEREST IN THAT.

PROBABLY NOT OUTSIDE OF UBER OR LYFT.

ONCE WE HAVE CONTACT WITH THEM, WHO WILL DEMAND SOMETHING THAT BASICALLY GIVES THEM A LITTLE EDGE IN A COMPETITION VERSUS OUR LOCAL INDUSTRY, WHICH I JUST DON'T KNOW IF WE REALLY WANT TO GO DOWN THAT WAY.

PLUS, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SURGE RATES WOULD REALLY WORK WITHIN OUR CURRENT TAXI MODELS.

IT SEEMS LIKE THE MAJORITY IS FOR THIS ENGAGEMENT HERE, AND I WON'T STAND AGAINST THAT, BUT I DO JUST WANT TO PUT IN THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION IS THAT IF WE BRING UP THESE RIDESHARES, THE ONLY WAY WE'RE GOING TO GET THEM HERE IS THAT IF WE GIVE THEM LITERALLY THE ABILITY TO KILL OFF OUR OTHER TAXI COMPANIES, AND I'M JUST REALLY NOT FOR THAT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR FEQUET.

THANKS, MADAM CHAIR. PERFECT SEGUE.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WHEN I SAID I ENDORSED THIS BEING PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT.

I AM NOT DELUSIONAL THAT LYFT OR UBER ARE GOING TO COME HERE.

I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I CARE IF THEY COME HERE.

I WAS FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON THE FACT THAT IF OUR CITIZENS WANT IT, WHICH IS AN IF WE ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION AT THE END OF THE DAY, HOW WE REGULATE IT, AND I HAVE HEARD ONE ASSUMPTION MENTIONED A COUPLE TIMES ABOUT TWO STANDARDS.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM.

I DON'T THINK THERE SHOULD BE TWO STANDARDS IS MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE, AND IF THEY WANT TO COME HERE UNDER THOSE STANDARDS, GREAT.

IF THEY DON'T, THAT'S FINE TOO BUT AT LEAST WE'RE REGULATING THEM IF THEY COME HERE AND WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS.

THAT'S KIND OF THE EFFICIENCY I WAS SPEAKING OF.

SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT, THAT I'M NOT SUPPORTING TWO STANDARDS, I RECOGNIZE THAT LYFT AND UBER MAY NOT CARE ABOUT YELLOWKNIFE, BUT IT'S MORE ABOUT ASKING CITIZENS SINCE ENGAGEMENT IS ALREADY GOING TO BE HAPPENING AND WE'RE PAYING FOR THAT, AND WE'RE GOING THROUGH A NICE THIRD PARTY PROCESS, AND IT WILL SAVE US SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE IF THIS EVER DOES COME UP, AND AT THAT TIME, IF, YEAH, IF THERE'S A CASE OR A BIG COUP THAT THE RESIDENTS OF YELLOWKNIFE WANT UBER AND THEY'RE WILLING TO PAY FOR IT, THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT OR THE COUNCIL OF THE DAY.

WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT AT THAT TIME.

SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WAS THE EFFICIENCY I WAS SPEAKING TO.

THANKS. COULD I ASK A POINT OF CLARIFICATION? ARE YOU, WHEN YOU WANT THE PUBLIC TO WEIGH IN ON UBER AND THEIR THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE IT HERE? YOU'RE ASKING, DO YELLOWKNIFE RESIDENTS WANT TO BE DRIVERS? BECAUSE I THINK JUST ASKING, DO YOU WANT IT? IT CAN BE, YES, BUT, YOU KNOW, HAY RIVER IS STRUGGLING TO GET A TAXI DRIVER, SO THE COMMUNITY WANTS IT, BUT NOBODY WANTS TO DO IT.

SO OUR COMMUNITY MIGHT WANT UBER, BUT NOBODY WANTS TO BE AN UBER DRIVER, AND SO WE'RE GOING TO DELAY A BYLAW FOR.

SO JUST WONDERING IF YOU WANT ADMIN TO ENGAGE ON THE DEMAND TO BE A DRIVER AND SET UP OR OR JUST THE RIDERS.

YEAH, THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

I FULLY TRUST AND HAVE FAITH IN STAFF TO ENGAGE FULSOMELY ON ALL THE THINGS THEY NEED TO KNOW TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND BE ABLE TO MAKE AN INFORMED RECOMMENDATION FOR COUNCIL AT THE END. SO YES, THAT'S PROBABLY THOSE ARE LIKELY TWO QUESTIONS, AND THERE'S PROBABLY OTHERS THAT STAFF WILL COME ACROSS THAT THEY'LL NEED TO ANSWER.

[00:40:05]

I'M THANK YOU FOR YOUR.

I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THOSE THINGS.

SO THAT MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO ME, AND I'M OKAY WITH PULLING BACK FROM SUPPORTING THIS PUBLIC CONSULTATION NOW ON RIDESHARE, BUT I DO THINK AT ONE POINT IN THE FUTURE IT'S GOING TO COME BACK AND MAYBE WE JUST DEAL WITH IT THEN. THANK YOU.

SO NOW COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.

THANK YOU.

I STILL WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS ON THE BOOKS FOR IT TO BE WITHIN THE CONSULTATION.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, RIDESHARE AND LYFT, YOU KNOW, THEY WON'T HAVE THE SAME PARAMETERS AS WE PRESENTLY HAVE, BUT THEN I ASKED THE QUESTION OF WHY DO WE HAVE THESE PARAMETERS? YOU LOOK AT THE DOCUMENT THAT CAME UP AND PEOPLE ARE BEING SEXUALLY HARASSED IN CABS, PEOPLE ARE BEING MISTREATED, AND WE'VE HAD PEOPLE BEING BEATEN.

SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THESE BYLAWS FOR TAXI DRIVERS AND I MEAN, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE ALL OF THESE PARAMETERS HERE IF PEOPLE FELT SAFE IN TAXIS, AND THAT BECOMES THE MAIN POINT.

SO, YOU KNOW, LYFT AND UBER COULD BE HERE IF WE DIDN'T HAVE TO GO TO THESE EXTENTS FOR PEOPLE TO FEEL SAFE AND TRANSPORTATION. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I LAND, AND I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE OPTION OF RIDESHARE AND UBER WITHIN THE CONSULTATION PORTION, BUT TO BE TO BE FAIR, THAT CAN HAPPEN IN ANY MODE OF TRANSPORTATION.

SO JUST FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER A TAXI OR RIDESHARE, THERE COULD BE SAFETY CONCERNS FOR DRIVERS AND PASSENGERS.

COUNCILLOR MCGURK.

THANKS. I SUPPORT JUST BRINGING THIS AS PRESENTED.

I DON'T THINK THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION IS NECESSARY AT THIS POINT.

I THINK THAT IF WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THAT, IT CAN BE A SEPARATE ITEM.

AS STAFF HAVE MENTIONED, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BAT IT AROUND A LOT, AND FOR THAT REASON, IT'LL TAKE UP A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF STAFF TIME ANYWAY, AND B, IT'S JUST NOT WORTH IT, I THINK, IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

IF THESE THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING TO PUSH THIS BACK MORE YEARS.

THE REASON WHY RIDESHARE RIDESHARE SERVICES ARE MAYBE SOMETIMES SAFER, THOUGH THEY'RE NOT OFTEN IS BECAUSE THERE'S AN ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISM.

THERE'S A PUBLIC FEEDBACK.

EVERY TIME YOU ARE PICKED UP BY A DRIVER, YOU'RE ABLE TO RATE THEM AND YOU CAN COMMENT ON THEIR SERVICE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER, LIKE, FOR STAFF TO CONSIDER, BUT THAT IS SORT OF WHAT THIS WHAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THEY'RE ADDRESSING IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISM. SO I THINK THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES IS SUFFICIENT IN THIS MOMENT, AND I THINK IF WE'RE REALLY TAKING PUBLIC SAFETY SERIOUSLY, THEN WE MOVE FORWARD ON THIS NOW RATHER THAN LATER.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

YEAH. I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF PUTTING THE RIDESHARE IN THIS RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REGULATING SOMETHING THAT NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR OR TALKED ABOUT.

SO CART BEFORE THE HORSE, I SAY WE DO THE TAXI BYLAW FOR THE SAFETY PORTIONS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING IT FOR.

IN MY OPINION, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THIS RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. SO HEARING COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN AND THEN COUNCILLOR FEQUET FOR CLARIFICATION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YEAH. THANKS FOR THE DISCUSSION.

I THINK I WOULD LIKE THAT INFORMATION.

WE'RE MAKING A BUNCH OF ASSUMPTIONS.

WE'RE SORT OF SAYING WE DON'T WANT RIDESHARE INCLUDED BECAUSE WE THINK CITIZENS WANT IT, BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO BE DRIVERS, AND THE COMPANIES DON'T WANT TO FOLLOW OUR STANDARDS. I WOULD GUESS THAT THOSE ARE ALL CORRECT ASSUMPTIONS, BUT THERE ARE ASSUMPTIONS.

WERE THOSE ALL THE CASE, I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF TWO DIFFERENT LEVELS OF STANDARDS FOR RIDESHARES AND FOR TAXIS.

YEAH. SO I JUST I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE IN THE BYLAW NOW.

I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME INFORMATION FROM THE PUBLIC AND FROM THOSE COMPANIES TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS AND MAKE IT INFORMATION, NOT ASSUMPTIONS, BUT IF THAT'S NOT THE MAJORITY HAPPY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MEMO AS PRESENTED.

[00:45:03]

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR FEQUET, YOU HAD A QUESTION.

YEAH. JUST FOLLOWING COUNCILLOR WARBURTON'S COMMENT ABOUT NOT WANTING IT IN RIGHT NOW, I GUESS I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THE CONVERSATION WAS ONLY ABOUT THE ENGAGEMENT NOT PUTTING IT IN THE BYLAW.

I UNDERSTOOD FROM STAFF THAT THE ENGAGEMENT IS HAPPENING.

THIRD PARTY IS GOING TO FACILITATE IT.

THEY'RE GOING TO WRITE UP WHAT THEY HEAR AND COME WITH A PROPOSED BYLAW WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT INCLUDE RIDE SHARING, AND THAT'S FINE IF IT DOESN'T, BECAUSE NO ONE TALKS ABOUT IT, BUT AT LEAST WE DID THE ENGAGEMENT AND WE ASKED THE QUESTION.

SO IN THAT SCENARIO, THERE WOULDN'T BE PROBABLY AN EXTENSIVE DELAY, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT THE COMPLICATEDNESS OF HOW TO REGULATE RIDESHARE, POTENTIALLY TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD OR NOT.

WE DON'T HAVE ALL THAT BECAUSE STAFF'S GOING TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION TO MAKE AN INFORMED RECOMMENDATION ABOUT THAT BYLAW.

SO I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT BECAUSE I HEARD SOME COUNCILLORS TALK ABOUT LIKE THE BIG DELAY, AND I UNDERSTOOD, YES, THERE WILL BE A DELAY IF WE DECIDED TO PUT IT IN, AND WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A TRICKY CONVERSATION OF HOW TO REGULATE IT.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A DELAY FOR ENGAGEMENT, TOO, BECAUSE ADMIN WOULD HAVE TO OUTLINE CONSIDERATIONS.

AT LEAST THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING BASED ON THE MEMO, BUT MISS WHITE, IF WE CAN GET CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I'LL PASS IT TO MISS THISTLE.

YES. WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE INCLUDING RIDESHARES PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT.

SO IF IT'S THE WILL OF GPC AND COUNCIL, WE WILL INCLUDE RIDESHARE AS PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT, AND THEN BASED ON THE ENGAGEMENT AND THE WILL OF GPC, IF RIDESHARE IS ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED, THEN THAT WILL TAKE QUITE A BIT MORE LEGAL RESEARCH AND REVIEW BEFORE WE'RE EVEN IN A POSITION TO DRAFT A BYLAW, AND THEN THAT WILL BE A COUNCIL DETERMINATION ABOUT WHETHER THEY WANT TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE OR NOT IN THE BYLAW AND HOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO REGULATE THAT, WHETHER IT WOULD BE TO THE SAME STANDARD, DIFFERENT STANDARDS.

ADMINISTRATION WILL MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE LEGAL PRECEDENTS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST.

WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS THAT THIS IS A REALLY CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC.

WE'RE LIKELY GOING TO HEAR BOTH SIDES WHEN WE DO GO OUT TO ENGAGE IF WE INCLUDE IT.

I ANTICIPATE TAXI COMPANIES WILL NOT BE IN FAVOR OF UBER, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HEAR EVERYBODY SAYING YEAH AND THEN IT IS COMPLICATED TO REGULATE AS MR. JOHNSON'S INDICATED, OTHER CITIES MUCH BIGGER THAN US HAVE STRUGGLED WITH IT.

SO IT WILL BE A LONGER PROCESS AND THAT'S WHY IT WOULD TAKE LONGER FOR US TO DO THAT LEGAL REVIEW AND RESEARCH TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION FOR COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL.

SO INSTEAD OF HAVING IT TO YOU IN 2024, IT WOULD BE Q1 2025, AND THAT'S ASSUMING THAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR DIFFERENT STANDARDS.

THAT'S WHAT ALL THE RESEARCH WOULD BE ABOUT, RIGHT? IT WOULD BE A LOT SIMPLER IF LIKE I GUESS MY QUESTION IS SORRY.

IS THERE A PROCESS CHECK IN POINT WHERE AFTER THE ENGAGEMENT AND WHATEVER ADMIN HEARS LIKE BEFORE YOU WENT OFF AND DID ALL THAT WORK, LIKE SAY YOU'RE LIKE, WHOA, PEOPLE REALLY WANT RIDESHARE.

WE AT LEAST NEED TO PRESENT SOME INFORMATION TO COUNCIL.

WOULD THAT BE THE POINT WHERE IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO CHECK IN WITH COUNCIL, TO KNOW IF YOU NEED TO DO ALL THAT WORK? OR MAYBE BASED ON THE ENGAGEMENT FEEDBACK, COUNCIL'S FINE WITH YOU NOT DOING ALL THAT WORK FOR THE PROPOSED BYLAW.

WOULD THAT MAKE SENSE IN THE PROCESS TO AVOID A POTENTIAL DELAY? MISS WHITE? SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT WE GO OUT FOR CONSULTATION, AND IF GPC DIRECTS ADMINISTRATION TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE, THERE WILL BE AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME FOR THE CONSULTATION.

AT THAT POINT, IT WOULD BE COMING BACK TO COUNCIL AND GPC, AND IF IT WAS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE BYLAW, IT WOULD BE ADDITIONAL TIME.

IF NOT, THEN IT WOULD JUST BE THE EXTENSION FROM THE CONSULTATION PERIOD.

SO I THINK THERE'S TWO SEPARATE PIECES, CONSULTATION AND THE DRAFTING OF THE BYLAW DEPENDING ON THE DIRECTION FROM GPC, BUT I WILL ASK MISS THISTLE TO ELABORATE.

YES. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN OTHER AREAS YOU HAVE SEEN IT WITH ZONING AND PLANNING ISSUES, AND WHEN WE GO OUT FOR A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, COUNCIL WILL SOMETIMES ASK FOR A SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, BUT PART OF THAT SUMMARY IS ALSO OUR RECOMMENDATION OR KIND OF EXPERTISE OR LEGAL RESPONSE.

SO IF WE ENGAGE ON RIDESHARE AND WE BRING BACK A SUMMARY OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT TO BE TOTALLY FORTHRIGHT WITH COUNCIL AND TO GIVE YOU THE BEST ADVICE ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD, WE'D HAVE TO DO THE LEGAL REVIEW AND RESEARCH AT THAT TIME IF WE'RE BRINGING YOU FORWARD.

IF NOT, ADMINISTRATION WOULD SIMPLY PROVIDING YOU WITH, LOTS OF PEOPLE WANT RIDESHARE, BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY GIVING YOU ENOUGH INFORMATION TO BASE A DECISION ON OR TO GIVE

[00:50:08]

SO IF WE'RE GOING TO INCLUDE RIDESHARE AS PART OF THE ENGAGEMENT, IT WILL JUST BY NATURE DELAY THE PROCESS SOMEWHAT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE US MORE TIME TO GO THROUGH THAT OF OKAY, WE HEARD SOME PEOPLE WANT RIDESHARE, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING OR WE ARE RECOMMENDING BECAUSE A, B, C, D SIMILAR AGAIN TO SHORT TERM RENTALS WHEN IT WAS PEOPLE WANT WANTED MORE, MORE REGULATION, SAY FOR HEALTH, AND WE'RE LIKE, WELL, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT'S IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH ACT UNDER THE TOURISM REGULATIONS.

AND WE COULD GIVE THAT RESPONSE.

WELL, RIGHT NOW, TODAY, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IF WE HEAR FROM SOME PEOPLE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE RIDESHARE INCLUDED IN A BYLAW, WHEN WE GO TO ENGAGE, WHICH LIKE PROBABLY WE WILL HEAR FROM SOME PEOPLE, THEY WOULD LIKE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER OR THE RESPONSE TO GIVE YOU TODAY.

SO IT WOULD TAKE SOME TIME FOR US TO DO THAT LEGAL REVIEW AND RESEARCH TO GIVE YOU DIRECTION ON SHOULD WE INCLUDE THIS IN THE DRAFTING OF THE BYLAW.

SO WE'RE HAPPY TO TAKE DIRECTION FROM GPC.

I'M JUST CAUTIONING YOU THAT IF WE INCLUDE IT AS PART OF THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, WHICH WE'RE ALSO HAPPY TO DO, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION TODAY, THAT ONCE WE RECEIVE ALL THAT BACK, TO PROVIDE YOU WITH THE REPORT, WITHOUT ANY KIND OF LEGAL INTERPRETATION OR REVIEW OR RECOMMENDATION, IS NOT GOING TO BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR YOU OR FOR US TO MAKE FURTHER DECISIONS.

DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? AND THAT I HOPE THAT EXPLAINED IT, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER MORE QUESTIONS.

YEAH, THE ONLY THOUGHT I HAD WAS I THINK WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT SUMMARY OF ENGAGEMENT WITHOUT A LEGAL ANALYSIS WOULD BE HELPFUL, BECAUSE IF A THOUSAND PEOPLE WANTED TO DRIVE AND A THOUSAND PEOPLE WANTED TO USE IT, I MEAN, THAT'S A THAT'S HELPFUL TO KNOW WHETHER WE WOULD BOTHER TO ASK STAFF TO THINK AND DO THE RESEARCH ON THE BYLAW.

SO I'M NOT SURE THAT NOT RECEIVING THAT IS GOING TO BE HELPFUL.

I THINK. I THINK IT MIGHT BE AND WE DON'T KNOW, AND AGAIN, YEAH, I'LL JUST REITERATE MY PREFERENCE TO INCLUDE AN ENGAGEMENT I APPRECIATE THE CITY MANAGER'S RESPONSE ABOUT.

YEAH, THERE'S KIND OF TWO DELAYS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL THE BYLAW WORK IN THE END, AND THERE'S THE CONSULTATION WORK, WHICH IS A LOT MORE SMALLER IN THE FRONT END.

I'M OKAY WITH THE FRONT END DELAY.

MAYBE NOT THE BACK END, BUT I CAN MAYBE THE PROPER OR THERE'S ENGAGEMENT AND LEGAL REVIEW, AND THEN THE SECOND STAGE IS BYLAW DRAFTING.

THOSE WOULD BE THE TWO PHASES AND REDRAFTING AND ITERATIONS OF THAT.

COUNCILLOR MCGURK.

SORRY. I GUESS I'M WONDERING IF IT WOULD IF ADMINISTRATION THINKS IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO JUST TAKE TO ASK THAT QUESTION IN ENGAGEMENT AND JUST USE IT AS A DATA SET.

IF DOWN THE LINE WE DO LOOK INTO THIS, OR THERE IS MORE SORT OF DESIRE TO DO A MORE FULSOME ENGAGEMENT WE AT LEAST HAVE A PREVIOUS DATA SET TO KNOW IF THE THE DESIRE HAS INCREASED OR LESSENED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE.

AGAIN, I THINK IT WOULD ONLY BE USEFUL AS A DATA SET, BUT I WONDER IF THE ADMINISTRATION THINKS THAT WOULD BE USEFUL FOR WOULD JUST BE USELESS NUMBER TO HOLD ON TO.

MISS WHITE, THANK YOU.

SO I GUESS ON THE SURFACE, ALL DATA IS ALWAYS USEFUL, BOTH TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO HAVE HISTORICAL.

I THINK IT WILL BE KEY.

WHAT IS THE QUESTION THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY ASKING TO THE PUBLIC? SO WE WILL PROBABLY LOOK FOR DIRECTION THERE, BUT I'LL ASK MISS THISTLE IF SHE HAS SOMETHING TO ADD.

THANK YOU. THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD IS TO ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC AND ASK THEM IF THEY WOULD LIKE SOMETHING, AND THEN TO NOT DO ANYTHING WITH THAT INFORMATION IS ALWAYS DIFFICULT.

IF WE DON'T BRING IT FORWARD AT ALL, IF IT'S JUST.

OH, WE HEARD THIS.

MANY PEOPLE WOULD LIKE UBER, BUT WE DON'T ACTUALLY REVIEW IT.

WE DON'T MAKE A RECOMMENDATION WITH RESPECT TO IT.

THEN THE QUESTION IS WHY ARE WE ASKING THE PUBLIC? SOMETIMES IT CAN SEEM VERY DISINGENUOUS IF WE ARE ASKING QUESTIONS WITH NO INTENTION OF ACTING ON IT.

THAT WOULD BE MY CAUTION THERE, BUT I AGREE.

DATA IS GREAT. IT'S GOOD TO HAVE THE INFORMATION, BUT IT CAN GET A LITTLE TRICKY WHEN YOU'RE DOING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.

IF YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS AND DON'T HAVE ANY INTENTION OF TAKING ANY ACTION.

YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT.

MAYBE A LITTLE LIKE ITALICIZED.

THIS IS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY, BUT NO.

YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT I UNDERSTAND THANKS.

THE OTHER POINT IS THIS WILL COME FORWARD TO COUNCIL.

AUGUST 26TH AT 7 P.M..

[00:55:01]

HOWEVER, THAT WE MIGHT GET FLOODED.

SO WE WILL SEE BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, BUT WITH NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, WE WILL BRING FORWARD THE RECOMMENDATION AS PRESENTED ON MONDAY, AUGUST 26TH AT 7 P.M, AND IF YOU HAVE FEEDBACK, COUNCIL@YELLOWKNIFE.CA.

ON THAT, THE NEXT ITEM IS IF I SCROLL BACK TO THE TOP.

[6. A memorandum regarding Councillor Stacie Arden‐Smith’s and Councillor Rob Warburton’s travel to Calgary, AB to attend the FCM Conference from June 6 ‐9, 2024 ]

ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE.

[CHUCKLING] YEAH. SEEING NOTHING.

THANKS FOR SUBMITTING.

NEXT, WE HAVE A DISCUSSION REGARDING WHETHER TO INCREASE THE FEE FOR A DEVELOPMENT APPEAL.

[7. A discussion regarding whether to increase the fee for a development appeal ]

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. SO, YEAH, I WANT TO DISCUSS BASICALLY A MOTION TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPEAL FEE AND THE FEES AND CHARGES BYLAW FROM $25 TO $5750.

THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT.

YOU GET TO DO DO YOU HAVE ANY BACKGROUND YET? YOU GET TO LAUNCH INTO EVERYTHING? NO, IT'S A DISCUSSION POINT, SO.

OKAY, WELL, THAT WILL BE THE FUTURE MOTION THEN.

SO, YEAH, THE RATIONALE HERE IS THIS LEGISLATIVE PROCESS OF THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN APPEAL MECHANISM.

IF AN AFFECTED PARTY THINKS THE APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BY THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE ADVERSELY AFFECTS THEM WITH A MISAPPLICATION OF ZONING BYLAW.

IN REALITY, WE ALL KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING.

WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING IS THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD PROCESS IS BEING USED TO DELAY AND TRY TO PREVENT PERMITTED ZONING BYLAW USES.

IT'S PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE FOR RESIDENTS TO DISAGREE WITH ZONING BYLAWS, BUT THE TIME AND PLACE FOR VOICING THOSE CONCERNS IS DURING THE ZONING BYLAW REVIEW PROCESS.

BY ENGAGING IN THAT REVIEW PROCESS, RESIDENTS CAN PARTICIPATE IN ROBUST PUBLIC DEBATE ON ZONING DEVELOPMENT.

APPEAL BOARD PROCESS IS NOT A WAY TO CIRCUMVENT OR BYPASS THE ZONING BYLAW PROCESS, WHICH IS WHAT'S CURRENTLY TRYING TO HAPPEN.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT COST CURRENTLY FOR THE LOW COST OF 25 BUCKS, AN APPELLANT WHO BELIEVES THEY ARE ADVERSELY AFFECTED AND LIKELY TO GET A DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD HEARING, A PROCESS THAT CAN TAKE OVER 100 DAYS TO START TO FINISH, EVEN FROM A STRAIGHTFORWARD APPEAL.

THERE ARE, HOWEVER, THREE PARTIES IN THIS PROCESS.

THERE'S THE APPELLANT, THERE'S THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE, AND THERE'S A DEVELOPER.

THE APPELLANT CAN PREPARE AS MUCH OR AS LITTLE AS THEY WISH FOR THAT HEARING.

THEY INVESTED 25 BUCKS, AND IT'S UP TO THEM TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH FURTHER, FROM A COST PERSPECTIVE THEY'RE WILLING TO GO.

HOWEVER, FOR THE OTHER PARTIES, THE COSTS THEY INCUR ARE DISPROPORTIONATE TO THE $25 SPENT BY THE APPELLANT AND ARE IN MOST TIMES NON-NEGOTIABLE.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE CITY FIRST.

THE CITY HAS TWO SIGNIFICANT COSTS, IN MY OPINION.

THEY HAVE STAFF TIME, WHICH IS A BIG ONE, AND FINANCIAL COST TIME FOR THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.

STAFF TO PREPARE FOR JUST AN AVERAGE APPEAL IS APPROXIMATELY 100 HOURS PER APPEAL.

THAT'S 100 HOURS.

OUR STAFF ARE NOT WORKING ON ALL THE OTHER INCREDIBLY PRESSING HOUSING AND LAND ISSUES THAT WE HAVE WANTED TO FOCUS ON, AND IS ACTUALLY RIGHT IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN, CITY STAFF PROVIDED THIS ANALYSIS AND BACKGROUND WORK ON THE COST OF DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BACK IN MAY 2022.

DISCUSSION AT A PREVIOUS GPC.

WHAT THEY WHAT THEY HAD IN THAT WRITE UP WAS RECOVERY COSTS AT THE TIME WAS ESTIMATED FOR FROM THE CITY SIDE FOR [INAUDIBLE] APPEAL AT $5,750, WHICH IS WHERE THE NUMBER CAME FROM.

THIS WAS BASED ON A STRAIGHTFORWARD HEARING PROCESS AND DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR LARGER, MORE COMPLEX APPEALS WHICH THEY INDICATED WOULD COST MULTIPLES OF THAT.

GIVEN THIS ANALYSIS WAS OVER TWO YEARS AGO, I THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT THIS ESTIMATE, IF ANYTHING, IS ON THE LOW SIDE NOW.

NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT DEVELOPER.

WHOEVER THAT PERSON IS HAS TO BE PREPARED TO RESPOND TO THESE HEARINGS AS WELL.

THIS ALSO COMES AT SIGNIFICANT COSTS, SUCH AS LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL HELP TO PREPARE THOSE RESPONSES.

I REACHED OUT TO A NUMBER OF DEVELOPERS WHO HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND ON AVERAGE, THIS PROCESS COSTS EACH DEVELOPER $18,000 IN PROFESSIONAL FEES, LAWYER FEES, AND GETTING READY FOR THOSE APPEALS.

THIS IN NO WAY ACCOUNTS FOR THE ACTUAL COST OF THOSE PROJECTS, WHICH IS TIME.

THIS APPEAL PROCESS ADDS OVER 100 DAYS OF POTENTIAL DELAY, WHICH THE DEVELOPER HAS TO CARRY.

ALL THE COSTS OF THAT IDLING PROJECT NOW, INCLUDING LAND FINANCING, INTEREST COSTS, CREWS AND CONTRACTORS IF THEY DON'T QUIT OR MOVE ON TO OTHER PROJECTS.

AS WE ALL KNOW, THE BUILDING SEASON IN YELLOWKNIFE IS INCREDIBLY SHORT, AND THE MAJORITY OF THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROJECTS YOU SEE BEING BUILT TODAY IN YELLOWKNIFE ARE OVER A YEAR BEHIND SCHEDULE, DUE MAINLY TO THESE KIND OF DELAYS.

100 DAY DELAY CAN AND HAS PUSHED MANY PROJECTS TO THE FOLLOWING YEAR.

[01:00:02]

AN ARGUMENT CAN BE MADE THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PROCESS TO ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY.

I ABSOLUTELY AGREE, BUT WE'RE NOT REMOVING ACCOUNTABILITY.

IT'S JUST INJECTING SOME COST REALITY INTO A PROCESS THAT COSTS EVERYBODY ELSE A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF TIME, MONEY TO DEAL WITH THESE APPEALS ESPECIALLY AS WE'VE SEEN IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, THESE APPEALS GENERALLY DON'T GO ANYWHERE.

IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS, ALL EXCEPT TWO APPEALS HAVE FAILED DUE TO DUE TO NOT MEETING THE METRICS LAID OUT IN THE GOVERNING TERRITORIAL LEGISLATION, AND REMINDER THIS IS A VERY LEGISLATED COMMITTEE PROCESS.

THE TWO SUCCESSFUL APPEALS SIMPLY MEANT THOSE PROJECTS STILL WENT AHEAD, BUT WITH MASSIVE DELAYS AND AMENDMENTS.

ALL THIS COSTS OUR COMMUNITY IN THE MIDDLE OF A HOUSING CRISIS WAS A COUPLE CONDOS AND 20 LESS RENTAL UNITS.

I FAIL TO SEE HOW THIS PROCESS IS CURRENTLY BENEFITING ANYONE.

WE'RE IN A HOUSING CRISIS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO START BEING REAL ABOUT THE BARRIERS AND THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN OUR CITY.

THIS IS ONE SMALL, MINUSCULE, SMALL CHANGE WE CAN MAKE THAT WILL HELP US FOCUS OUR STAFF TIME, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND ENERGY ON HARD WORK OF ADDING MORE HOUSING, NOT CONSTANTLY FIGHTING TO ADD WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE PERMITTED.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

OPENING IT UP TO DISCUSSION, COUNCILLOR PAYNE.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I COULDN'T AGREE MORE WITH COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.

YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF A WEAPONIZATION OF OF THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL PROCESS, AND YOU'RE RIGHT, LIKE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IT'S COSTING THE DEVELOPERS FOR NOTHING, YOU KNOW, IT'S RIDICULOUS.

SO I'M IN COMPLETE SUPPORT OF THIS AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD.

THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR.

COCHRANE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

TO ECHO THE STATEMENTS FROM COUNCILLOR PAYNE, I ALSO AM IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS INCREASE TO THE FEES.

IF THE APPEAL OR APPELLANT IS SERIOUS ABOUT THIS, THEN THEY CAN TAKE THE TIME TO ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE TO THE COSTS THAT ARE ALREADY GOING TO BE HELD ON OR ADDED EVEN TO THE DEVELOPER, LET ALONE OUR STAFF TIME.

THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS.

SO YES, FULLY SUPPORT THIS GOING FORWARD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, AND I THINK TO NOTE, COUNCILLOR WARBURTON IS ALSO PROBABLY RECOMMENDING IF IT IS SUCCESSFUL, THE MONEY IS RETURNED, JUST LIKE THE CURRENT PRACTICES. COUNCILLOR FEQUET, AND THEN COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.

THANKS, MADAM CHAIR. IN GENERAL, FOR ALL THE REASONS ALREADY MENTIONED, I AM ALSO SUPPORTIVE OF US CHANGING OUR PROCESS.

HOWEVER, THE FEE ITSELF, I REALLY I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE UNDERSTANDING WHERE THAT NUMBER CAME FROM AND WHAT STAFF'S TYPICAL TIME IS RELATED TO ONE OF THESE APPEALS.

I DO RECOGNIZE, THOUGH, THAT WE NEED TO BALANCE THAT REALITY WITH THE ABILITY OF OUR CITIZENS TO HAVE MEANS OF SEEKING, YOU KNOW ASSISTANCE, SUPPORT, HELP IF THEY BELIEVE SOMEONE HAS BEEN WRONGED, AND I RECOGNIZE THAT $5,750 IS PROBABLY OUT OF THE REACH FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE IN THAT SITUATION.

SO I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF A SMALLER FEE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER WOULD BE, BUT WHEN I THINK OF THE DEDUCTIBLE ON OUR, LIKE, WATER SEWER INSURANCE PROGRAM, AROUND A THOUSAND BUCKS, OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE AT SOME TIME SAID THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REASONABLE TO BE PAID, AND I RECOGNIZE THAT A THOUSAND BUCKS IS A LOT OF MONEY TO PUT DOWN, AND YOU GOT TO BE PRETTY SERIOUS.

IT'S ABOUT THE LOSS AVERSION, THE PSYCHOLOGY OF LOSS AVERSION.

SO WHETHER IT'S 500 OR 5000, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET RID OF LIKELY A LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MAYBE USING THE PROCESS THAT IN A WAY THAT THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO.

SO MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE SOMETHING IN THAT RANGE OF 500 TO 1000 BUCKS, MAYBE SIMILAR TO OUR SEWER.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF, WE WANT TO ENSURE PEOPLE FEEL LIKE WE'RE NOT JUST SETTING A FEE THAT NO ONE'S EVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE SERIOUS BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE BIG IMPLICATIONS, NOT JUST FOR HOUSING AND DEVELOPERS, BUT FOR OUR STAFF, AND THAT'S CORE SERVICES THAT THE CITY IS NOT NOT DELIVERING.

WHEN WE'RE SPENDING 100 HOURS ON A DEVELOPMENT APPEAL THAT ISN'T ACTUALLY A MISAPPLICATION OF THE ZONING.

SO I AM SUPPORTIVE OF IT IN PRINCIPLE.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE THAT FEE COME DOWN TO SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE REASONABLE AND OPEN TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES ON WHAT THAT MIGHT BE.

THE OTHER THING FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION, THE ONTARIO LAND TRIBUNAL HAS WHAT DO THEY CALL IT, A LOW INCOME WAIVER.

SO THERE COULD BE PERHAPS LIKE AN ASTERISK SAYS IF YOU ARE ELIGIBLE FOR ACCESS FOR ALL THE FEE WOULD BE WAIVED FOR DEVELOPMENT APPEAL.

COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.

THANK YOU.

PRETTY MUCH MIMICKING WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN STATED.

VERY APPRECIATIVE FOR COUNCILLOR WARBURTON FOR HAVING BROUGHT THIS FORWARD AND FLAGGING IT, AS WELL AS INFORMATION THAT ADMINISTRATION HAD BROUGHT FORWARD BECAUSE MAN HOURS ARE VERY IMPORTANT.

[01:05:01]

SO I APPRECIATE THIS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD, AND THAT ADDITION THAT MADAM MAYOR HAD JUST MADE IN TERMS OF THOSE WHO ARE LOW INCOME, I WOULD LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY PUT THAT IN THERE AS WELL.

MERCI. THANK YOU.

COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANKS TO COUNCILLOR WARBURTON FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND ECHO A LOT OF THE THOUGHTS OF COUNCILLOR FEQUET AND ARDEN-SMITH.

YEAH. FULLY IN SUPPORT OF RAISING THE FEE AND TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF APPEALS WITH LITTLE OR NO LEGAL STANDING.

IT'D BE GREAT IF THE GNWT COULD ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING LEGISLATION, BUT FROM WITHIN OUR OWN POWERS, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD APPROACH.

HOWEVER, YEAH, I'D ECHO THAT 5700 BUCKS IS PROBABLY A LITTLE MUCH, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME SORT OF THRESHOLD FOR LOW INCOME, PERHAPS NOT TO WAIVE THE FEE ENTIRELY, PERHAPS JUST TO HAVE IT AS A $25 FEE.

SOMETHING THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT FINANCIAL RESOURCES ISN'T THE DETERMINING FACTOR IN WHETHER APPEAL IS LAUNCHED OR NOT.

IT'S THE STRENGTH OR VALIDITY OF OF THE CASE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COUNCILLOR MCGURK. THANKS.

I AM IN GENERAL SUPPORT OF THIS JUST IN TERMS OF KIND OF, YEAH, SHOWING THE PUBLIC THE REALITY OR KIND OF REFLECTING THE REALITY OF THE PROCESS.

I DO HAVE A BIT OF A STRUGGLE WITH THE WITH THE FACT THAT WITH IS THIS IT IS THE STICKER SHOCK AND KNOWING THAT IF I WERE A RESIDENT WHO MADE MORE JUST WAS JUST ABOVE THE THRESHOLD FOR ACCESS FOR ALL, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO LIKE CURRENTLY, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PONY UP $5,700 COMFORTABLY AND EVEN IF I KNEW FOR A FACT THAT MY APPEAL WAS GOING TO GO THROUGH, AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WORRIES OR WORRIES ME KIND OF OR IS KIND OF EATING AT ME, I GUESS THAT WE DO STILL AS A CITY, HAVE A HAVE TO BE ACCOUNTABLE TO OUR RESIDENTS, AND THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL PROCESS IS ABOUT, AND IT'S NOT IT COMES AT IT COMES AT A COST TO THE CITY, NOT THE RESIDENT. I THINK IT WAS THE SORT OF PRINCIPLE OF OUR SERVICE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DO THINK IT SHOULD THIS FEE SHOULD BE HIGHER.

I THINK WE SHOULD BE DISCOURAGING PEOPLE FROM FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINTS.

SO I YEAH, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT I THINK I JUST NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT MORE BUT GENERALLY IN SUPPORT, BUT THAT'S THE ONE THING THAT SORT OF STICKS OUT TO ME.

THANK YOU. YEAH.

FOR MYSELF, SUPPORTIVE OF RAISING THE FEE.

IT IS THAT QUESTION OF HOW MUCH, AND IT'S TRICKY BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS LIKE ADMIN AND BROUGHT FORWARD IN 2022 THERE'S SAINT ALBERT AT $200, THERE'S VANCOUVER AT, WELL, VANCOUVER IS NOW 2840, THE ONTARIO LAND TRIBUNALS, $400 FOR RESIDENTS, $1,000 FOR BUSINESSES.

SO IT'S HARD TO FIND SOMETHING, AND THEN WHEN I THINK OF WHAT OUR FEES AND IT'S EITHER THE LEFT POCKET OR THE RIGHT POCKET PAYING IT'S TAXPAYERS OR IT'S A USER CHARGE, AND RIGHT NOW WE MAKE KIDS PAY 50%, WHICH IS TAXES AND 50% USER CHARGE, BUT IN THIS ONE, IT'S ABOUT GETTING ACCESS TO PROCEDURAL JUSTICE.

I WOULDN'T BE IN SUPPORT OF GOING THE FULL RECOVERY COST, BUT I COULD SEE GOING WITH THE CITY OF VANCOUVER'S OR EVEN JUST DOING THAT 50%.

SO ABOUT 2500 FOR AN APPEAL HERE IN YELLOWKNIFE WITH THE ASTERISKS OF WAIVING IT FOR RESIDENTS ELIGIBLE FOR ACCESS FOR ALL.

TO KEEP IT SIMPLE AND NOT INVENT A NEW LOW INCOME WAIVER POLICY FOR THAT.

SO BUT HEARING JEN, WELL, I SHOULD SAY EVERYBODY'S IN SUPPORT OF INCREASING THE FEE. I'M NOT HEARING NECESSARILY.

THERE WOULD BE COUNCILLOR WARBURTON FOR THE 5000.

COUNCILLOR PAYNE.

THE 50% RECOVERY COST SOUNDS GOOD.

I MEAN, THAT'S THAT FALLS IN LINE WITH A LOT OF OUR THINGS THAT WE ALREADY DO.

[01:10:05]

THAT'S WHAT I THINK ABOUT.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO.

[LAUGHTER] YEAH. SO WE GOT TO WE GOT TO STOP PEOPLE LIKE ME.

THAT PERSON DOES HAVE TO COME TO THE HEARING AND SUCCESSFULLY DEFEND THEMSELVES AND SAY WHY THEY ARE ADVERSELY AFFECTED, AND HOW THE MISAPPLICATION HAS ADVERSELY AFFECTED THEM.

SO IT ISN'T EASY.

THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT TIME AND EFFORT INTO IT.

ANY OTHER ROUND TWO DEPUTY MAYOR.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I THINK THE 50% RECOVERY RATE DOES MAKE SENSE.

I ALSO AGREE WITH THE AMENDMENT TO ADD THE ACCESS TO ALL POLICY AS A WAY TO ALLOW THOSE WHO WOULD BE GIVEN THE EXCEPTION.

I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD WAY TO INDICATE OF WHO WOULD BE ALLOWED, AND ALSO IF THEY WANT TO TAKE THE TIME TO BE THE CRUX, TO FIND THAT LOOPHOLE, THEN I GUESS THEY CAN. I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. ARE FOLKS OKAY WITH KIND OF A FLAT? IT'S NOT FULL COST RECOVERY 50%, BUT JUST 2500, SO IT'S NOT GOING IN 510 INCREMENTS.

OKAY. SO IT'S 2500 AND THEN WAIVING IT FOR ACCESS FOR ALL APPLICANTS.

FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR ROUND TWO BEFORE I GO TO COUNCILLOR WARBURTON TO CLOSE.

COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO ECHO MY SUPPORT FOR THE MADAM MAYOR'S PROPOSAL WITH THE 25 WITH THE ACCESS FOR ALL CONDITION.

THANK YOU.

SEEING NOTHING FURTHER.

COUNCILLOR WARBURTON. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND THANK YOU FOR THE SUPPORT AND THAT GREAT CONVERSATION.

I THINK A SET FEE VERSUS A PERCENTAGE IS GREAT.

KEEN TO NOT MAKE MORE WORK FOR STAFF BEYOND AMENDING A FEE BYLAW, AND YEAH, LIKE OTHER JURISDICTIONS I KNOW, LIKE ONTARIO, THEY'VE GOTTEN RID OF APPEALS FOR ANYTHING UNDER 12 UNITS OF HOUSING.

SO THIS IS A TOPIC THAT'S GOING TO COME TO US EVENTUALLY, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYONE BEING OPEN TO IT.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

WITH THIS, MISS WHITE, WOULD ADMINISTRATION, WOULD THE PREFERENCE BE THAT WE VOTE ON, WELL, NO, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BEST TO HAVE A MEMO COME FORWARD TO GPC.

AUGUST 26TH WITH THE PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE, AND THEN WE CAN JUST VOTE ON IT THERE VERSUS TWO SEPARATE DIRECTING STAFF TO BRING THIS FORWARD AND THEN BRINGING THE BYLAW FORWARD FOR A VOTE.

MISS WHITE, THANK YOU.

SO I'LL BE HONEST AUGUST 26TH FOR A MEMO TO CHANGE THE FEES AND CHARGES BYLAW.

AS IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE MY DEPARTMENT THAT WILL BE DOING IT IS PROBABLY NOT FEASIBLE.

I'LL JUST BE HONEST RIGHT NOW.

SO YEAH, WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION TO BRING A MEMO BACK TO GPC AND THEN COUNCIL FOR FOR THIS MATTER.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

SO WE'LL BRING FORWARD THE MOTION TO INCREASE THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL FEE FROM $25 TO $2500, WITH THE FEE WAIVED FOR ACCESS FOR ALL ELIGIBLE RESIDENTS TO COUNCIL ON AUGUST 26TH AT 7 P.M., AND THEN FROM THAT, A MEMO WILL COME FORWARD WITH THE BYLAW CHANGE.

SEEING NOTHING FURTHER.

[8. A discussion regarding the Development Appeal Board ]

SO FOR MYSELF, I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS REVIEWING AND MODERNIZING THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD AND ENHANCING STAFF AND BOARD CAPACITY.

SO IN PARTICULAR I'M LOOKING FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, WHETHER THAT'S BOARD TRAINING AND INCREASE TO BOARD HONORARIUMS A DEPUTY SECRETARY TO PROVIDE BACKUP TO THE SECRETARY, INTERNAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS, ANY CHANGES TO OUR LEGISLATION OR TERRITORIAL IF STAFF WANT TO MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS? I'M NOT PRESUPPOSING WHAT'S REQUIRED.

THESE ARE JUST SOME OF MY HAREBRAINED IDEAS, AND IF MORE FUNDING IS NEEDED IN 2025 TO IMPLEMENT THEM THEN THE REQUEST TO ADD THAT FUNDING

[01:15:07]

SO IF THE RECOMMENDATIONS CAN ALL BE DONE WITHIN OUR CURRENT RESOURCES, THAT'S GREAT, BUT IF NOT, WHAT'S REQUIRED AND HOW MUCH WILL IT COST? FOR ME, THE TWO ISSUES THAT I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS WITH THIS IS ONE ONE IS THE BOARD HAS HAD A FEW HEARINGS WHERE THEY HAVEN'T HAD JURISDICTION TO HEAR THEM.

THERE WAS AN APPEAL AT THE END OF LAST YEAR AND THAT WAS THE RULING IN THE END.

SO MY QUESTIONS ARE WOULD TRAINING HELP AVOID THESE SITUATIONS? IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE LEGISLATIVELY THAT COULD HELP IN THESE SITUATIONS? YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT HEARING, THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING WAS DELAYED BY OVER TWO MONTHS, AND TIME IS MONEY AND DELAYS INCREASE RISKS AND COSTS FOR NONPROFIT AND FOR PROFIT HOUSING.

AS COUNCILLOR WARBURTON JUST SAID, IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT HOUSING, WE NEED SYSTEMS THAT REFLECT THAT, AND I ALSO FEEL THAT WE NEED STAFF REDUNDANCY OR SUPPORT FOR THE SECRETARY.

SO IF WE ONLY HAVE ONE EMPLOYEE SUPPORTING A HEARING, ALL WORK STOPS.

IF THEY'RE SICK, IF THEY'RE ON VACATION, IF THEY'RE IN TRAINING, ETC.

SO CAN WE HAVE A DEPUTY SECRETARY, EITHER INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL, TO THE CITY PROVIDING SUPPORT? CAN WE HAVE BOARD MEMBERS OR EXTERNAL LEGAL WRITING DECISIONS AND WITH EXTRA SUPPORT, CAN WE SPEED UP THE PROCESS? BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S THAT FROM START TO FINISH, IF WE MAXED OUT EACH LEGISLATIVE STEP IT WOULD TAKE 104 DAYS, AND IN OUR SHORT BUILDING SEASON, THAT CAN REALLY BE A BARRIER TO BUILD.

SO I'M NOT LOOKING FOR ANSWERS TODAY.

I JUST WANT TO START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT WOULD MODERNIZING THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD LOOK LIKE.

SO MY QUESTION TO STAFF WOULD BE BASED ON THE CURRENT WORK PLAN AND WORKLOAD.

IS THERE CAPACITY TO DO THIS WORK? AND IF NOT, WHAT WOULD HAVE TO COME OFF YOUR PLATE? MISS WHITE, THANK YOU, AND I'LL SPEAK TO IT AS THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S NOT JUST MY DEPARTMENT ALONE, AS THE SUPPORT FOR THE DAB IS ACTUALLY THROUGH THE CLERK'S DEPARTMENT.

SO ANY CHANGE IN PROCESS OR ANY CONSIDERATIONS? YES. YES. THEY IMPACT OUR DEPARTMENT AND WE WOULD LIKELY BE THE LEAD ON ANY ANSWERING OF QUESTIONS TO COUNCIL.

IT ALSO IMPACTS LEGAL DIVISION AS WELL AS SOMETIMES MED AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THE CLERK'S DEPARTMENT.

SO AT PRESENT AS LEAD I WOULD SAY THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT IS THAT I WOULD HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, IF THAT IS WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION OF WHAT COMES OFF TO DO THIS WORK WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE ANALYSIS REQUIRED, BUT ON THE TOP OF MY LIST RIGHT NOW, WE ARE WORKING ON THE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES BYLAW, AND WE ARE WORKING ON SOME, WELL, THREE MAJOR PROJECTS UNDER THE HOUSING ACCELERATOR FUND, AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE RIGHT NOW THE KAM LAKE CONSULTATION PORTION IS WHAT WE'RE ON RIGHT NOW.

SO THOSE ARE THE ITEMS WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A LARGER CONVERSATION ON THE WORK PLAN IN GENERAL WITH THIS AND THE PREVIOUS ITEM COUNCIL DISCUSSED. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY LIKE BOARD TRAINING OR ANYTHING IN THAT REGARDS.

I DID GO BACK TO OUR 2019 GOVERNANCE AND COMMITTEE REVIEW.

UNFORTUNATELY, WITH THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD, THEY WERE JUST LIKE, IT'S LEGISLATIVE.

YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING EXCEPT TRAINING.

SO AT THE MINIMUM, IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO IN REGARDS TO ENHANCING OUR TRAINING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR? MISS WHITE, THANK YOU.

SO I WILL ASK MISS THISTLE IF THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SHE COULD PROVIDE.

YES. WE DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR FOR MORE TRAINING BUT MAYBE THERE'S SOME PREVIOUS HISTORY HERE THAT SHE COULD SEND SOME LIGHT ON.

THANK YOU. WHEN MEMBERS ARE APPOINTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD, THEY DO RECEIVE TRAINING FROM CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.

IN ADDITION, WANTED TO COMPLICATE IT MATTER.

IN PAST, THERE HAVE BEEN INSTANCES WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD HAS HAD LEGAL ADVICE GIVEN TO THEM.

IT'S NOT. THEY DON'T HAVE THEIR OWN LAWYER OR ANYTHING, BUT THEY HAVE IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES HAD SOME GUIDANCE, BUT THEY DO RECEIVE TRAINING FROM CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.

IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY JUST RECOGNIZING CITY CLERK'S OFFICE IS PRETTY SMALL.

AN OPPORTUNITY FOR EXTERNAL TRAINING.

I IMAGINE IF I JOINED A BOARD LIKE THIS, IT IS YOU KNOW, PROCEDURAL JUSTICE AND ACTUALLY KNOWING THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT IS A MISAPPLICATION THAT ADVERSELY AFFECTS YOU?

[01:20:05]

SO IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE SOME EXTERNAL TRAINING PROVIDED TO THE MEMBERS AS WELL? MISS WHITE SO I CAN SAY I AM AWARE THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT SUPPORT MUNICIPAL APPEAL BOARDS FOR LAND USE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AND THERE IS TRAINING AVAILABLE.

IF WE WERE DIRECTED BY COUNCIL, WE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THOSE ARE AND WHAT HOW IT WOULD ALIGN WITH THE PROCESS THAT IS TAKEN IN THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES, WHICH IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN OTHER OTHER JURISDICTIONS, BUT THERE IS DEFINITELY TRAINING OUT THERE.

IT'S JUST WHAT WOULD ALIGN.

THANK YOU. THANKS.

YEAH, AND I'M HOPING NOT TO GET INTO THE SPECIFICS OF LIKE, DIRECTING STAFF TO DO EXTERNAL BOARD TRAINING.

THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO GO BROADER AND HAVE REVIEW AND MODERNIZE THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD AND ENHANCE STAFF AND BOARD CAPACITY.

SO IF STAFF WOULD LIKE, I'LL GET A MOTION FROM MY COLLEAGUES TO RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE EXTERNAL BOARD TRAINING OR WHETHER ADMIN WOULD BE MORE IN SUPPORT OF THAT BROADER MOTION.

MISS WHITE, THANK YOU.

I THINK IT WOULD BE ACTUALLY, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF GPC COULD OUTLINE EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WITH REGARDS TO THIS, AND WE COULD COME BACK WITH SOME.

THIS IS HOW IT COULD BE ADDRESSED AND THE RESOURCES AS TO WHERE TO GO, BECAUSE IT WOULD JUST GIVE US SOME PARAMETERS TO WORK WITHIN RATHER THAN GIVING US A BIG QUESTION OF HOW CAN WE CHANGE IT.

I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS THE ISSUE AND CONCERN YOU'RE LOOKING TO CHANGE, AND HOW WE MAY BE ABLE TO ADDRESS IT IS WHAT WE WOULD BRING BACK.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

SO I GUESS I'LL WORK ON MY MOTION, BUT IT'S TO HAVE STAFF LOOK INTO WHETHER THERE'S A NEED AND VALUE FOR EXTERNAL BOARD TRAINING WHETHER TO INCREASE THE BOARD HONORARIUMS. WHETHER A DEPUTY SECRETARY CAN PROVIDE BACKUP TO THE SECRETARY.

ANY INTERNAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS, ANY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO OUR LEGISLATION? AND AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE BOARD'S HEARD A FEW APPEALS RECENTLY THAT THEY DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR.

SO I'M TRYING TO AVOID SITUATIONS LIKE THAT.

I'M TRYING TO HEAR RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO ADDRESS THAT, AND AGAIN, WE NEED STAFF REDUNDANCY AND SUPPORT AT THE, THE STAFF LEVEL OF THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD.

SO WHAT CAN WE DO? IS THAT AN INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL DEPUTY SECRETARY, IS THAT LEGISLATIVELY ALLOWED? CAN BOARD MEMBERS OR EXTERNAL LEGAL RIGHT DECISIONS SO I CAN WRITE UP ALL MY QUESTIONS AND PUT IT TOGETHER AS A WHOLE MOTION, BUT I'LL PAUSE THAT PAUSE THERE AND SEE IF COUNCIL HAS ANY.

COUNCILLOR FEQUET. THANKS, MADAM CHAIR.

I AM NOT TOO FAMILIAR WITH THE LEGISLATION SURROUNDING THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD, SO GETTING TO YOUR MOTIVATION OF HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS PROCESS MORE EFFICIENT? DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF THAT OVERALL.

I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THE LEGISLATION OR OUR POLICIES ARE THE BARRIER FROM US TAKING AN APPROACH WHERE I KNOW WITH OTHER TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS, THERE'S OFTEN DISCIPLINE POLICIES OR APPROACHES WHERE TYPICALLY A LEGAL SOMEONE WITH LEGAL TRAINING IS APPOINTED TO CONSIDER THE CLAIM, THE SUBMISSION ON ITS OWN MERITS, AND, YOU KNOW, IF IT PASSES CERTAIN CRITERIA, LIKE IT'S NOT VEXATIOUS, IT'S, YOU KNOW, BLACK AND WHITE FALLS OUTSIDE OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD, THEN IT'S NOT EVEN HEARD IN A FRIENDLY RESPONSE IS SENT.

I DON'T IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS POSSIBLE WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD OR ARE THERE IS THERE LEGAL OR LEGISLATIVE REASONS WHY THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE? MISS WHITE, THANK YOU.

SO WHAT CAN WHAT A PERSON CAN APPEAL IS OUTLINED IN THE LEGISLATION.

HOW THEY DO IT IS WHAT IS IN OUR ZONING BYLAW.

SO THE TWO WORK TOGETHER, AND I BELIEVE MOST APPEAL BOARDS AND THIS IS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, TAKE THE VIEW THAT IT IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO HEAR AND ALMOST EVERY PIECE OF LEGISLATION I'M AWARE OF HAS THAT HOW HOW ARE YOU ADVERSELY IMPACTED, WHICH CAN MEAN ANY NUMBER OF THINGS, BECAUSE IMPACTS CAN BE BOTH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE, AND IT'S TO THE BOARD TO DETERMINE BOTH THE APPLICATION BY THE MUNICIPALITY, BUT ALSO THOSE IMPACTS TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE

[01:25:01]

SO IT'S A COMBINATION OF BOTH.

IT ALWAYS STARTS WITH THE LEGISLATION AND WE WOULD WORK DOWN FROM THERE.

THANK YOU. I THINK ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, TOO, WAS ABOUT WHETHER YOU CAN GET A LIKE A LEGAL OPINION ON THE SUBMISSION BEFORE TO DETERMINE THE VALIDITY BEFORE IT EVEN A HEARING GETS CALLED MISS WHITE.

SO I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE LEGISLATION HAVING ANY PROHIBITION AGAINST THAT.

I WILL ASK MISS THISTLE IF SHE IS AWARE OF THAT.

THANK YOU. NO, THERE'S NOTHING EXPLICITLY NOT PERMITTING THAT.

HOWEVER, THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD MAKES THE DECISION WHETHER IT'S GOING TO HEAR SOMETHING OR NOT.

SO THEY CAN'T HIRE SOMEONE TO MAKE THAT DECISION FOR THEM.

SO IT'S QUITE EXPLICIT IN THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD DECIDES WHETHER IT HEARS AN APPEAL, AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD IS THE ONE THAT PROCEEDS WITH RENDERING A DECISION IF THEY DO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN APPEAL.

SO IT'S NOT UP TO THE CHAIR, IT'S NOT UP TO EXTERNAL.

IT'S THE IT'S EXPLICITLY STATED NUMEROUS TIMES THROUGHOUT THE ACT.

IT'S THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD THAT MAKES THOSE DECISIONS, AND I GUESS I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL BOARD.

SO WHILE IT'S NOT HELD TO THE STRICTEST STANDARDS OF A COURT, THEY DO RECEIVE QUITE A HIGH LEVEL OF DEFERENCE FROM COURTS, AND SO WHILE THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE BOUND BY THE RULES OF EVIDENCE THAT COURTS FOLLOW, THEY ARE A QUASI JUDICIAL BOARD.

SO, AGAIN, JUST LIKE A JUDGE COULDN'T SAY TO SOMEBODY, HEY, TELL ME IF I SHOULD MAKE THIS DECISION OR NOT.

THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THOSE DECISIONS.

AS THANKS FOR THAT.

HAS THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD HAD A CHANCE TO CONSIDER ITS OWN TERMS OF REFERENCE OR GUIDING POLICY WITH RESPECT TO THE TIMELINES THAT IT'S OPERATING UNDER? I UNDERSTAND THE LEGISLATIVE TIMELINES ARE MORE TOP ENDS, BUT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T DO BETTER, ASSUMING WE HAD THE HORSEPOWER AND THE RESOURCES TO DO THAT.

HAVE HAVE THEY HAD A CHANCE TO CONSIDER TERMS OF REFERENCE OR WHATEVER IT IS THE POLICY THAT GUIDES THE OPERATIONS OF THE BOARD.

MISS WHITE.

THANK YOU. I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHETHER OR NOT THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD HAS HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY, AS IT IS A YOU KNOW, IT'S AN ARM'S LENGTH BOARD BUT WHAT I CAN SAY JUST ON THE SECOND POINT BROUGHT UP BY COUNCILLOR FEQUET, IS THE LEGISLATION IS PRETTY CLEAR WITH REGARDS TO TIMELINES THAT THE DECISION IS 60 DAYS.

IT DOES ACTUALLY OUTLINE IN THE LEGISLATION THAT CAN BE EXTENDED.

SO THERE'S CERTAIN PARAMETERS ALLOWING FOR THAT, BUT IT DOESN'T ALLOW OR DOESN'T IDENTIFY THAT YOU CAN REDUCE THOSE TIMELINES TO THE DECISION, AND SO REALLY BASED ON THE STATUTORY INTERPRETATION OF THE LEGISLATION AND THE FACT THAT THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT SPECIFICALLY GRANTS THE AUTHORITY TO INCREASE TIMELINES, THE ABILITY TO DECREASE THOSE TIMELINES DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE PERMITTED THROUGH THE LEGISLATION, BUT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TERMS OF REFERENCE HAS BEEN REVIEWED, I WOULD ASSUME WHEN PEOPLE ARE APPOINTED, THAT OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED.

MAYBE MISS THISTLE CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

I'M NOT SURE.

MISS THISTLE, THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT GRANTS THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD THE ABILITY TO CREATE PROCEDURES LIKE FOR THEIR BOARD.

IT'S NOT TERMS OF REFERENCE PER SE.

ALSO, THEY ARE AN ARM'S LENGTH BOARD.

SO WHILE THE CITY MIGHT LIKE TO PUT A BUNCH OF PARAMETERS IN PLACE, THIS IS AN ARM'S LENGTH BOARD CREATED BY TERRITORIAL LEGISLATION. THE DEVELOPMENT, THE ZONING BYLAW REALLY COPIES AND PASTES THE SECTIONS OUT OF THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT.

THE CITY CORPORATE DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO ESSENTIALLY REGULATE THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD.

OUTSIDE OF THAT, IT IS AN ARM'S LENGTH BOARD, AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE THAT WAY BECAUSE WE, THE CITY, MAKE THE DECISIONS ABOUT DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE THE CITY CAN'T BE THE ONES THAT HEAR THE APPEAL.

SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE APPOINTED.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE HEARING, EXCEPT UNLESS WE'RE REPRESENTING THE CITY, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PEOPLE WRITING THE DECISION.

WE HAVE ZERO OR SHOULD HAVE ZERO INFLUENCE ON THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SITTING ON THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD, BECAUSE IT'S A NEUTRAL LIKE THEY'RE A NEUTRAL BOARD THAT HEAR THE EVIDENCE FROM BOTH SIDES AND RENDER A DECISION, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S LIKE VERY ARM'S LENGTH.

SO WHILE WE WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO CONTROL IT.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WITHIN THE ABILITY OF THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.

IT IS A TERRITORIALLY LEGISLATED APPEAL BOARD.

THAT'S PART OF A FAIR PROCESS THAT, YOU KNOW, GRANTS RESIDENTS AND DEVELOPERS ALIKE THE ABILITY TO MOVE THROUGH A PROCEDURE THAT'S

[01:30:02]

MERCI FOR THAT RESPONSE.

MAYBE A QUESTION TO MADAM MAYOR, THEN.

JUST RECOGNIZING THE GROUP DISCUSSION WE JUST HAD ON THE FEE.

WE JUST JACKED IT UP.

TWO ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE.

I ASSUME WE'RE GOING TO GET A LOT LESS SUBMISSIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD.

I'M ALL FOR INCREASING EFFECTIVENESS OF OUR OPERATIONS, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING, GIVEN THE DECISION WE JUST MADE AND THE LIKELIHOOD THAT'S GOING TO REDUCE NEFARIOUS SUBMISSIONS AND ALSO MEAN THAT DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD HOPEFULLY IS MEETING LESS IS THIS AN AREA WE WANT TO ADD TO THE WORK PLAN VERSUS WHEN I LOOK AT SOMETHING LIKE SERVICE LEVEL STANDARDS, Q4 2025.

WHEN I COMPARE THOSE TWO THINGS IN MY HEAD IN IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DECISION WE JUST MADE WITH THE FEES, I'M JUST WONDERING IF THIS IS THE BEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK, AND MAYBE YOU HAVE MORE INSIGHT INTO THAT.

YEAH, THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.

I DO STILL LIKE RECOGNIZING THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD'S ARM'S LENGTH FROM THE CITY.

WE STILL ARE THE ONES THAT CAN PROVIDE THEM RESOURCES.

SO I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE A DUTY TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR APPEAL BOARD HAS THE RESOURCES NECESSARY TO OPERATE EFFICIENTLY, AND SO I THINK WE SHOULD BE DOING EXTERNAL BOARD TRAINING, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S CURRENTLY BEING DONE, BUT I CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S WELL, NO, I WON'T SAY WHETHER IT'S A WHOLE DAY.

MAYBE IT'S A WHOLE WEEKEND. MAYBE IT'S REALLY FULSOME.

SO I DO STILL THINK THAT WE, WE HAVEN'T BEEN SUPPORTING OUR BOARD AND THE STAFF THAT HAVE TO OPERATE THE BOARD SUFFICIENTLY.

SO THAT'S WHERE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO THIS BOARD, BUT RECOGNIZING WE'VE REACHED OUR 90 MINUTE MARK, LET'S TAKE A TEN MINUTE BREAK AND COME BACK AT 1:47 P.M..

WE WILL CALL OUR MEETING BACK TO ORDER.

TOM, ARE YOU STILL ONLINE? YOU'RE SHOWING YOU ARE, BUT.

I THINK HE MIGHT BE FLYING, SO I GOT HIS TEXTS OF HIS QUESTIONS.

YEAH, I THINK JUST FOR THE MINUTES, THOUGH, WE MIGHT NOTE THAT COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN IS NOW OUT OF THE MEETING.

OKAY. SO SORRY.

RESUMING. YEAH, AND JUST TO KIND OF SUMMARIZE MY WHOLE THING THERE IS, YES, THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARDS AT ARM'S LENGTH, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT CREATING.

WE'RE DESERTING THEM ON AN ISLAND.

SO I WANT TO KNOW WHAT RESOURCES ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE SURE THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD IS AS EFFECTIVE AS POSSIBLE.

COUNCILLOR FEQUET.

THANKS, MADAM CHAIR.

MAYBE JUST A QUESTION FOR ADMIN.

I THINK THERE IS A POT, A LINE ITEM IN THE BUDGET THAT'S ALLOCATED TO COUNCIL AND ITS COMMITTEES.

COULD YOU REFRESH MY MEMORY ON WHAT THAT AMOUNT IS? AND SECOND, IF THAT AMOUNT IS INTENDED FOR ALSO LIKE ANY TRAINING OR ORIENTATION OR FOR ANY OF THE COMMITTEES.

MISS WHITE. THANK YOU.

I DO NOT KNOW THAT AMOUNT AT THIS POINT IN TIME AS WELL.

KAVI PANDOO IS NOT AVAILABLE.

WHAT I CAN DO IS GET YOU AN ANSWER AND BRING IT BACK SO THAT GPC IS AWARE AND WHAT IT IS USED FOR AS WELL.

THANK YOU. OKAY, AND JUST ADD SOME MORE CONTEXT WHEN YOU'RE PROVIDING THAT ANSWER.

YEAH. JUST CURIOUS IF WE I GUESS ACROSS ALL OF OUR COMMITTEES AND BOARDS ARE, YOU KNOW, ENDING UP WITH A SURPLUS EACH YEAR, I.E.

THERE ACTUALLY IS MONEY TO DO TRAINING AND WE'RE JUST UNABLE TO DO IT FOR DIFFERENT REASONS, AND IF SO, WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT THOSE SPECIFIC BARRIERS ARE BECAUSE MAYBE IT'S NOT JUST THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD, MAYBE IT'S THE OTHERS AS WELL.

THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS GOING IN MY BRAIN.

SO JUST TO PROVIDE THAT CONTEXT, THANK THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

ANY OTHERS? DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

AS YOU SO ELOQUENTLY PUT IT IN YOUR EMAIL, IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT HOUSING, WE NEED SYSTEMS THAT REFLECT THAT, I THINK ALL NEW TRAINING OR BOARD TRAINING IS GOOD TRAINING AND I WILL SUPPORT THAT.

I APPRECIATE THE STAFF'S REQUEST FOR SPECIFICITY, BUT I HAVE FULL CONFIDENCE THAT YOU CAN MEET THOSE DEMANDS AND I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION GOING FORWARD.

THANK YOU. I DID JUST PUT IT TO A MOTION TOGETHER.

SO THAT COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO REVIEW AND MODERNIZE THE DEVELOPMENT APPEAL BOARD AND ENHANCE STAFF AND BOARD CAPACITY.

[01:35:06]

WHETHER THERE'S A NEED FOR EXTERNAL BOARD TRAINING.

TWO WHETHER THERE'S A NEED FOR AN INCREASE TO BOARD OR HONORARIUMS. THREE WHETHER A DEPUTY SECRETARY, EITHER INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL, CAN PROVIDE BACKUP TO THE SECRETARY FOR REDUNDANCY AND HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

NEXT QUESTION WHETHER THERE ARE ANY INTERNAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS.

WHETHER THERE ARE ANY CHANGES NEEDED TO OUR BYLAWS TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS AND WHAT EXTRA SUPPORT WOULD BE NEEDED TO IMPROVE OR SPEED UP THE PROCESS.

SO THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS AND VERY TIMELY.

WOW, LOOK HOW QUICK YOU ARE.

I DO SUPPORT THAT MOTION GOING FORWARD.

NOTHING LIKE A QUICK TEN MINUTE BREAK.

ANY OTHERS? SEEING NODDING HEADS IN SUPPORT.

OKAY, WE WILL BRING THAT FORWARD TO OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING ON MONDAY, AUGUST 26TH AT 7 P.M..

[9. A discussion regarding road safety ]

YEAH. SO THIS IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION I'M LOOKING TO HAVE TODAY, AND ABOUT ROAD SAFETY FOR PEDESTRIANS, CYCLISTS AND VEHICLES ALIKE.

SO EVERYONE HAS A ROLE TO PLAY IN ENSURING THAT WE GET FROM POINT A TO POINT B SAFELY, AND I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO OUR WORK ON THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, I KNOW STAFF ARE DOING OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES TO ADDRESS THIS EVER SINCE THE CITY'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE.

SO TO START WITH, FOR PUBLIC WORKS, I BELIEVE IT IS, BUT I KNOW WE'VE HAD A CALL TO MAKE ONE INTERSECTION HAVE NO RIGHTS ON A RED, SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF STAFF WOULD BE ABLE TO OUTLINE THE CRITERIA THEY CONSIDER WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER TO MAKE A NO RIGHTS ON RED.

SO I KNOW WE HAVE THE ONE AT THE CORNER OF EVANS.

SO YEAH, JUST LOOKING FOR A BIT OF INFORMATION FROM STAFF ON THAT CRITERIA.

MISS WHITE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I'LL ASK MR. GREENCORN TO RESPOND.

THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE SOME SOME BACKGROUND.

SO GENERALLY WE USE THE TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF CANADA'S MANUAL.

IT'S OFTEN REFERRED TO AS THE TAC MANUAL TO FIND TO DETERMINE THE DIFFERENT STEPS OR WARRANT ANALYSIS REQUIRED FOR DIFFERENT MODES OF TRAFFIC CONTROL.

FOR EXAMPLE, FOR A RIGHT TURN ON RED, A RESTRICTION MAY BE APPROPRIATE IF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS EXIST.

INADEQUATE SIGHT LINES OR RESTRICTIVE GEOMETRY.

IRREGULAR INTERSECTION WITH MORE THAN FOUR APPROACHES AND MULTI-PHASE CONTROL.

SO LIKE A FIFTH ROAD INTERSECTION OR THINGS THAT ARE OUT OF THE ORDINARY CONFLICTS WITH EXCLUSIVE PEDESTRIAN PHASES, THE EXISTENCE OF UNUSUAL MOVEMENTS SUCH AS DOUBLE LEFT TURNS BY OPPOSING TRAFFIC.

A HISTORY OF TURN RIGHT TURN ON RED COLLISIONS ON A PARTICULAR APPROACH, OR THE PROXIMITY OF A RAILROAD CROSSING OR SIGNAL WITH PREEMPTION ON THAT APPROACH. SO PREEMPTION IS BASICALLY SOME MUNICIPALITIES HAVE SENSORS ON THEIR EMERGENCY VEHICLES THAT PREEMPT GREEN LIGHTS.

IT'S CALLED GREEN LIGHT PREEMPTION.

WE'VE ALREADY LOOKED INTO THAT.

WE'RE A LITTLE TOO TIGHT FOR THOSE BECAUSE OF HOW TIGHT OUR BLOCKS ARE DOWNTOWN.

IT DOESN'T PROVIDE THE PREEMPTION NECESSARY, SO I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THAT CONVERSATION.

SO THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES, SO HOW WE GENERALLY ADMINISTRATE ADMINISTER THAT IS EITHER ON A PUBLIC COMPLAINT BASIS PER AN OBSERVED, AN OBSERVED PROBLEM OR AN INCIDENT SUCH AS THE ACCIDENTS THAT WE'VE SEEN, AND FROM THERE WE DO A WARRANT ANALYSIS.

SO THAT COMPLETED AND THAT DETERMINES ANY LEVEL OF TRAFFIC CONTROL THAT'S REQUIRED BASED ON THE TAC MANUAL.

SO THAT CAN COME FROM ANY LEVEL OF CONTROL, SUCH AS SIGNAGE TO A COMPLETE STOP INTERSECTION.

SO A THREE WAY STOP, FOUR WAY STOP, OR FULLY ACTUATED TRAFFIC LIGHTS, DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS, OR DIFFERENT RESTRICTIONS OR PROHIBITIONS ON TURNING MOVEMENTS, PARKING, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S HOW THESE THAT'S HOW THESE ARE ADMINISTERED THROUGHOUT YELLOWKNIFE.

THE ONE AT EVANS, FOR EXAMPLE, IS A RESTRICTED RIGHT TURN ON RED BECAUSE OF A POOR SIGHT LINE ALONG WITH THE CURVATURE OF THE ROAD, BLIND CORNER, IF YOU WERE, ALONG WITH A SINGLE LINE OF TRAFFIC THAT IS NARROW IN APPROACH.

SO YOU HAVE TO BASICALLY CREEP OUT INTO THE INTERSECTION TO EVEN SEE IF SOMETHING'S COMING, WHICH PUTS YOU IN IN THE PEDESTRIAN RIGHT OF WAY, SO TO SPEAK.

SO THAT'S HOW THE DEPARTMENT APPROACHES THESE DIFFERENT SITES.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT PROVIDES SOME INSIGHT.

THANK YOU, AND BASED ON THE TIME REQUIRED TO DO AN ANALYSIS.

I KNOW A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC ASKED ABOUT WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE ON THE GITZEL AND FRANKLIN CORNER.

WOODS, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR STAFF TO DO A REVIEW OF THAT, THAT CORNER TO SEE IF IT'S WARRANTED AND BY THE END OF

[01:40:08]

MR. GREENHORN. THANK YOU.

THANKS FOR THAT. WE'VE DONE A PRELIMINARY SCREEN, BUT I WOULDN'T SAY THAT'S FORMAL ENOUGH TO COME UP WITH A SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSION.

SO WE WOULD LIKE TO DO, AS YOU SUGGESTED, A FORMAL REVIEW AND GO THROUGH THAT WARRANT ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE HOW MANY OF THOSE FACTORS OR CRITERIA MAY BE MET.

JUST FOR COMPLETENESS AND OUT OF DUE DILIGENCE FOR THE INTERSECTION.

SO I CAN'T SEE ANY ISSUE WITH HAVING THAT DONE BY THE END OF THE SUMMER, FOR SURE.

THANK YOU. I KNOW WE ALL WISH IT'S YESTERDAY, BUT THIS STUFF TAKES TIME AND SO APPRECIATE STAFF'S WORK ON IT.

FROM THE MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT SIDE JUST WONDERING IF STAFF CAN FILL US IN ON SOME INITIATIVES THAT ARE UNDERWAY OR IN PROCESS AND HOW THEY SUPPORT ROAD SAFETY.

MISS WHITE? THANK YOU, AND I'LL ASK MR. ROLAND TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

THAT'S GREAT. SO OBVIOUSLY MED ONE OF OUR BIG PART OF OUR JOB IS ROAD SAFETY AND TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT ENSURING PEOPLE ARE FOLLOWING THE RULES OF THE ROAD, AS WE SAY.

SO ONE OF THE INITIATIVES THAT WE'RE DOING, WE'VE DONE FOR OVER THE PAST YEAR, A LITTLE BIT LONGER.

SO WE'VE BEEN UNDERTAKING SPECIFICALLY AT TO DEAL WITH PEDESTRIANS AND INTERSECTION SAFETY.

WE'VE BEEN DOING WHAT WE CALL STRATEGIC ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVES OR TARGETED ENFORCEMENT OPERATIONS, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM.

WHERE WE'RE LOOKING FOR THIS SPECIFIC BEHAVIOR AND TAKING ACTION BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO THEM STRATEGICALLY THROUGHOUT THE CITY AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS, WHICH WHERE COULD BE BASED ON PUBLIC COMPLAINTS OR OFFICER OBSERVATIONS AND WHERE THESE THESE AREAS ARE.

I WILL NOTE THAT THE GITZEL AND FRANKLIN CORNER, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT AREA IN MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT OR AT THE INTERSECTION OF MATONABEE AND FRANKLIN AVENUE AS WELL. WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINTS THERE.

SO BUT THESE THINGS ARE OFTEN FRAMED BY PUBLIC COMPLAINTS.

SO A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THE INTERSECTION OF FRANKLIN AVE AND 47TH STREET NEAR THE RED APPLE.

IT'S AN UNCONTROLLED INTERSECTION WITH PEDESTRIAN FLASHING LIGHTS.

I WON'T GET INTO DETAIL ON HOW WE DO THESE OPERATIONS OR WHAT THEY ENTAIL, BUT WE DO FIND THEM TO BE EFFECTIVE.

WE ALSO HAVE THAT, I THINK EARLY INTO THE NEW YEAR, IN JANUARY WE ACQUIRED TWO RADAR SPEED SIGNS.

NOT TO GET CONFUSED WITH PHOTO RADAR.

PHOTO RADAR IS PROHIBITED AND ILLEGAL IN NORTHWEST TERRITORIES.

CAN'T BE USED HERE, BUT THESE SPEED SIGNS ARE ESSENTIALLY.

YOU MIGHT SEE THEM IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES OR OTHER JURISDICTIONS.

IT'LL BE A SIGN SAYING, AN ELECTRONIC SIGN THAT LIGHTS UP SAYING YOUR SPEED IS RADAR BUILT INTO IT TO DETECT THE VEHICLE SPEED, AND THEN IT WILL DISPLAY IF YOUR VEHICLE'S GOING 35KM AN HOUR, IT'LL SAY YOUR SPEED IS 35KM/H, AND THEN THIS THE ONES THAT WE HAVE, THEY CAN FLASH AND BLINK AND READ A DIFFERENT MESSAGE SAYING SLOW DOWN OR WHATEVER.

THOSE ARE TO BE PLACED.

THOSE AREN'T UP YET. THEY'LL BE PLACED BY THE END OF THE SUMMER.

WITH THE HELP OF THE ROADS AND SIDEWALKS DIVISION PUBLIC WORKS.

THEY AREN'T PORTABLE SIGNS.

I SHOULD MENTION THAT.

HOWEVER, WITH SOME WORK, THEY CAN BE MOVED.

THEY'RE SOLAR POWERED, WHICH IS GOOD.

THEY HAVE BATTERIES ON BOARD, AND THE BIG PART FOR MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT IS THAT THEY COLLECT DATA.

SO THE DATA IS COLLECTS HOW MANY VEHICLES WENT BY THE SPEED OF THE VEHICLES? SO WE CAN SEE KIND OF ANY OUTLIERS, AND IT WOULD ALLOW US TO LET'S SAY WE GET FREQUENT PUBLIC COMPLAINTS IN AN AREA ACROSS THE CITY SAYING, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, MY PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS SPEEDING. WE CAN PUT THE SIGNS UP THERE TO FIRST AS ALMOST AS A DETERRENCE.

I'M CAREFUL ABOUT THAT WORD, BUT BUT IT ALLOWS US TO TRACK THAT INFORMATION IN THAT DATA, AND THEN WE CAN EITHER AFFIRM, YES, THERE IS AN INCREASE, YOU KNOW, SPEEDING GOING ON IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR. NO, THERE ACTUALLY ISN'T.

IT MIGHT BE A PERCEPTION ISSUE GOING ON, BUT IT ALLOWS US TO LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON HARD DATA RATHER THAN EMOTIONS AND FEELINGS KIND OF THING.

SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE INITIATIVES.

OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE ALWAYS OUT.

WE'RE OFFICERS ARE WHERE WE'RE FEW BUT MIGHTY.

SO WE'RE OUT AND WE'RE IN THE COMMUNITY ACTIVELY.

SO. YES. THANK YOU.

THANKS. YEAH.

I DIDN'T REALIZE YOUR SPEED SIGNS WERE ALSO COLLECTING DATA.

SO I REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, THEN THE DEPARTMENT CAN USE IT FOR TO INCREASE THE STRATEGIC ENFORCEMENT IF THERE IS THAT CERTAIN AREA.

SO IF THERE IS AN ITEM COMING FORWARD IN BUDGET 2025 TO SAY, PUT SIGNS AT EVERY SCHOOL THAT'S THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING BUT I DO LOOK FORWARD, I THINK THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN, INSTEAD OF DOING WHACK A MOLE AND ADDRESSING EVERYTHING OR, YOU KNOW, FOCUSING ON THIS AND THEN THIS AND THEN THIS.

I LIKE THAT MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN IDEA SO WE CAN LOOK AT AT EVERYTHING, AND IN THE MEANTIME, YEAH, REALLY ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO SLOW DOWN,

[01:45:08]

SO OPENING IT UP DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU.

I THINK THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN WILL BE THE PLACE TO CONSIDER THE LARGER INITIATIVES ON THIS.

THOUGH I DO WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR AGREEING FOR THE FORMAL REVIEW AND WARRANT ANALYSIS BY THE END OF THE SUMMER.

THAT'S VERY MUCH APPRECIATED. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHERS? COUNCILLOR FEQUET.

THANKS, MADAM MAYOR, AND THANK YOU AGAIN, YEAH, STAFF, FOR THAT COMMITMENT, FOR THE WARRANT ANALYSIS.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S THE FIRST STEP.

APPRECIATE ALL THE CITIZENS WHO TOOK THE TIME TO EMAIL US THEIR THOUGHTS ON THIS TOPIC.

I'M JUST CURIOUS FOLLOWING UP FROM MR. ROLAND'S COMMENTS, DO WE HAVE ANY PLANS TO MOVE THOSE RADAR SPEED SIGNS TO EITHER OF THOSE AREAS ALONG FRANKLIN? MISS WHITE, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, MR. ROLAND. SO THE SIGNS ARE NOT UP YET AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, BUT WE DO PLAN ON GETTING THEM UP BY THE END OF SUMMER BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE THAT IF THAT IS A RECOMMENDATION.

WE DO THIS BASED ON, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A LOT OF COMPLAINTS IN THERE.

YOU KNOW, NJ SCHOOL ZONE IS A BIG ONE THAT WE GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.

OTHER AREAS THROUGHOUT TOWN NIVEN DRIVE, FOR EXAMPLE, WE GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS.

LATHAM ISLAND, WE GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS FOR SPEEDING.

SO IT REALLY DEPENDS.

WHEREAS THE, THE FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THE GITZEL STREET AND THE MATONABEE STREET ISSUES WERE NOT NECESSARILY SPEED RELATED.

THESE SIGNS ARE ONLY GOING TO TELL US SPEED RELATED INFORMATION, NOT RED LIGHT RELATED INFORMATION LIKE THAT.

SO WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT WOULD BE APPLICABLE IN THE SITUATION FOR THAT.

[SNEEZING] THANK YOU. BLESS YOU FOR THAT ANSWER, AND FOR CAT'S SNEEZE.

[CHUCKLING] THANK YOU FOR THAT RESPONSE.

YEAH. NO, I UNDERSTAND THE OTHER RELATED TO SPEED.

JUST A LOT OF CITIZENS ARE UNDER THE BELIEF THAT A LOT OF THE SPEEDING AND SOME OF THE BEHAVIOR, I GUESS, ON THE ROADS THESE DAYS ARE, YOU KNOW, DUE TO THE INCREASED NUMBER OF CONTRACTORS AND TOURISTS IN TOWN AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO RECOGNIZING THOSE SPEED SIGNS MAY HELP IN THOSE AREAS.

JUST A QUESTION ON BEHALF OF COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, SINCE HE HAD TO STEP OFF HE WAS NOTING THAT THE SIDEWALKS ALONG FRANKLIN THAT PAST 57TH STREET ARE MARKED AS MULTI-USE PATHS AND HE WAS WONDERING IS THERE ANY SIGNAGE OR MARKINGS OUT THERE TO INDICATE THAT THE PEDESTRIANS THAT THIS IS A SUPPOSED TO BE A SHARED PATH? AND IS IT OUR INTENT THAT MULTI-USE PATH IS FOR CYCLISTS OR DO WE ASSUME CYCLISTS WILL BE ON THE ROAD? MISS WHITE, THANK YOU.

I'LL ASK MISS ELLIOTT IF SHE MAYBE WANTS TO RESPOND TO THIS.

THANK YOU. YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

THE MULTI-USE PATHS ARE THE TWO METER WIDE SIDEWALKS ALONG FRANKLIN, AND YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THEM ONLINE.

THAT HAS BEEN UPDATED, AND WE HAVE A CYCLING BROCHURE THAT ALSO INDICATES WHICH ARE MULTI-USE AND WHICH ARE BIKE ROUTES, THINGS LIKE THAT, AND CURRENTLY THE COMMUNITY SERVICE DEPARTMENT IS ENGAGING WITH A CONTRACTOR TO DO SIGNAGE ACCORDING TO OUR WAYFINDING PLAN.

SO WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT.

THE STARTING POINT IS MULTI-USE PATHS.

SO THERE SHOULD BE SOME SIGNS LATER THIS YEAR.

THANK YOU FOR THAT RESPONSE.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? YEAH.

I THINK A BIG THANKS AGAIN TO STAFF.

WE'LL LEAVE IT IN YOUR CAPABLE HANDS TO FIND THE BEST SPOTS FOR THOSE CURRENT SIGNS, AND HOPEFULLY THEY GO WELL AND WE CAN, YOU KNOW, PILOT AND THEN GROW BIGGER, AND THEN YEAH, I THINK THE COMMUNITY WILL BE NICE AND ENGAGED FOR OUR DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN.

SO WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS THEN.

WITH THAT, WE HAVE REACHED THE END OF OUR AGENDA.

SO IF I CAN GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN, MOVED BY DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE, AND WE WILL SEE EVERYBODY TONIGHT AT 7 P.M..

HAVE A GOOD AFTERNOON.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.