[00:00:04]
>> WE WILL RESUME OUR GOVERNANCE AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE MEETING.
[4. 2025 Budget Deliberations.]
LAST NIGHT, WE CONCLUDED AT COMMUNITY SERVICES, WHICH IS PAGE 51.WE DO HAVE SOME TABLED MOTIONS FROM LAST NIGHT WITH SOME ANSWERS FOR TODAY.
ON THE CAPITAL PROJECTS, PAGE 145 WAS THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND ST. JOE'S AND NJ INTERSECTION.
ADMINISTRATION HAD FURTHER INFORMATION ON IF WE WANTED TO MAKE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, HOW MUCH THOSE WOULD COST.
MR. VAN DINE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO INTRODUCE THAT INFORMATION?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
YES, WE'VE GOT SOME UPDATES ON A NUMBER OF MOTIONS THAT WE'RE PREPARED TO DO SO.
I'LL JUST NOTE FOR COUNCIL'S BENEFIT THAT ON SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT DID COME LAST EVENING, WE HAVE UPDATED THE Q&A PACKAGE AS WELL, AND THAT HAS BEEN RECENTLY UPDATED IN THE PORTAL, AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO THAT.
ON THIS PARTICULAR MATTER, I'M GOING TO DEFER TO MR. GREENCORN TO GIVE US AN UPDATE SPECIFICALLY ON THE COST ESTIMATES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHANGES THAT COUNCIL HAS ASKED US TO LOOK INTO. THANK YOU.
>> THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. MY ESTIMATES THAT I'LL PROVIDE NOW ARE BASED ON WHAT I THOUGHT I HEARD, SO FEEL FREE TO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
CONCRETE BUMP OUTS INTO THE INTERSECTION TO REDUCE THE WALKING WIDTH ACROSS THE FULL WIDTH OF RANGE LAKE ROAD.
I DID SOME QUICK ESTIMATIONS BASED ON OUR UNIT PRICES AND I WOULD EXPECT TO DO THOSE TIMES FOUR, ONE ON EACH SIDE AT TWO DIFFERENT INTERSECTIONS, IT'LL BE ABOUT $70,000.
WE'LL NEED ENGINEERING LAYOUT SERVICES TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE LAID OUT AND PRICED AND QUOTED THROUGH APPROPRIATE TENDER PROCESSES, SO PROBABLY ANOTHER 20,000 FOR THAT ON THE HIGH END.
SO PROBABLY LOOKING AT BRINGING THE TOTAL TRAFFIC LIGHT BUDGET FROM 165 TO 255.
>> THANK YOU. IF COUNCIL WAS INTERESTED, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO ADD 90,000 TO THIS ITEM TO MAKE THOSE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS.
COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO WHETHER YOU WANT TO MOVE THAT?
>> YES. IT WAS A VERY ACCURATE SUMMATION OF, I THINK, WHAT WE DISCUSSED, AND YES, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. TO THE MOTION TO ADD 90,000 TO, DUBBED, THE TRAFFIC LIGHT UPGRADES PAGE.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION ON THAT ONE? COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
>> AS A TOTAL NEOPHYTE ON THIS KIND OF ENGINEERING.
WHAT IS THE COMPLEXITY INVOLVED IN ADDING BUMP OUTS? OUR STREET IS ALREADY ASPHALTED OVER.
DO BUMP OUTS HAVE TO GO IN AT THE SAME TIME? I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK LONG-TERM.
AGAIN, TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN COMING UP.
LONG-TERM, IF WE DID REDO THIS AREA FOR THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS, HOW HARD IS IT TO GO BACK IN LATER AND ADD BUMP OUTS AT A FUTURE TIME? ANYWAY, I'LL STOP THERE.
>> I THINK THE INTERSECTION MAY GET DUG UP TO ADDRESS THE NEED TO REPLACE THESE, SO MAY BE JUST THAT FURTHER PART. MR. VAN DINE.
>> THANK YOU. I'LL DEFER TO MR. GREENCORN ON THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THERE'LL CERTAINLY BE SOME EXCAVATION TO REMOVE THE RATHER LARGE OVERHEAD POLES THAT ARE THERE NOW.
WHAT IT WILL ALSO MEAN IS THE REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING CONCRETE AND CREATING THE BUMP OUTS WITH FORMWORK, ETC.
WE CAN PIN TO ASPHALT IF WE CAN SAVE IT, OTHERWISE, IT'LL BE CREATING THE BUMP OUT AND CREATING A PATCHWORK AROUND IT AND THEN PATCHING IT WITH ASPHALT AFTER THE FACT.
IF YOU WANTED TO SEE THEM, THERE'RE SIMILAR DOWNTOWN IF YOU MAKE RIGHT TURNS.
THERE'S BUMP OUTS AT VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS TO PROTECT PARKED VEHICLES.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILLOR PAYNE THEN COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. JUST A QUESTION.
HOW MANY FEET FROM THE SIDEWALKS WOULD THESE BUMP OUTS BE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
[00:05:01]
FOR THE NUMBER OF FEET, I'LL DEFER TO MR. GREENCORN. THANK YOU.>> I DON'T HAVE THEM OFF TOP OF MY HEAD.
I BELIEVE THEY BUMP OUT PROBABLY ABOUT TWO METERS, I WOULD THINK.
MAYBE A LITTLE LESS, BUT JUST ENOUGH TO PROVIDE PROTECTION.
IT PROTECTS THE PARKING LANE, BUT IN THIS CASE, IT'S NOT PROTECTING THE PARKING LANE, IT'S CREATING A SMALLER TRANSITION OR WALK WIDTH FOR PEDESTRIANS.
WE WOULD, AT MINIMUM, KEEP IT 3.5 METER DRIVING LANE AND THE 3.5 METER DRIVING LANE, SO THE BUMP OUT WOULD BE LESS THAT.
I DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
MY QUICK SKETCH ESTIMATED EACH BUMP OUT AT ABOUT 50 SQUARE METERS EACH, AND THAT'S WHERE I CAME UP WITH THE PRICING FOR IT.
HOPEFULLY, IT COMES IN UNDER THAT.
>> THE ONLY THING I WORRY ABOUT, UNTIL WE HAVE THAT TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN DONE, I'M REALLY NOT IN SUPPORT OF DOING ANY CHANGES.
I'D BE OKAY WITH DOING SOMETHING TEMPORARY IF WE WERE TO DO A BOARD OR SOMETHING THERE OR A PLANTER OR WHATEVER, SOMETHING THAT CAN BE REMOVED FOR SEASONAL.
WE COULD TAKE IT AWAY IN THE SUMMER OR WHATEVER.
I DON'T WANT TO PUT TOO MUCH MONEY INTO SOMETHING THAT IN THE FUTURE WE MAY NEED TO CHANGE.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR PAYNE PRETTY MUCH TOOK THE WORDS OUT OF MY MOUTH, BUT RIGHT GEEZ.
I'M MORE CONCERNED THAT WE'RE THROWING MONEY AT AN ISSUE WHEN WE HAVEN'T DONE THE MASTER PLAN, WHEN WE HAVEN'T DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY.
ARE THE BUMP OUTS GOING TO ACTUALLY AID IN PREVENTING THE ACCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN THESE INTERSECTIONS, OR IS IT JUST, AGAIN, SOMETHING WE'RE JUST THROWING MONEY AT? I'D RATHER SEE THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN BEING DONE FIRST BEFORE WE JUST DECIDE TO PUT MONEY WHERE IT COULD BE POSSIBLY BETTER SPENT LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD IN SOMETHING THAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO PREVENT TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS OR ACCIDENTS.
> DEFINITELY CAN'T STOP IT, BUT THE PREMISE BEHIND SHRINKING IT IS IT'S LESS INTERACTION BETWEEN A PEDESTRIAN AND A VEHICLE.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE USED IN VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS, BUT APPRECIATE THOSE POINTS.
ONLY AROUND TWO THERE. COUNCILLOR MCGURK.
>> IS THERE ANY CHANCE THAT THESE ROADS WILL BE DUG UP FOR PAVING IN THE SHORT-TERM, OR WOULD IT PROBABLY BE A WHILE FROM NOW? BECAUSE WHAT I'M WONDERING IS IF THE CONCERN FROM OTHER COUNCILORS IS THAT THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN WILL COME IN AND CHANGE HOW WE WANT TO USE THAT OR HOW WE DO END UP LAYING OUT THAT ROAD.
IF THE ROAD IS IN GOOD CONDITION AND WILL BE MAINTAINABLE FOR ANOTHER DECADE, THEN THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR. THANKS.
>> I'VE SEEN ONE THAT GETS STRIPPED UP.
THEY DO TAKE A PART OF THE ROAD ALREADY TO REMOVE AND INSERT NEW THINGS, BUT MR. VAN DINE.
I'LL JUST OFFER A GENERAL COMMENT AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO MR. GREENCORN FOR THE SPECIFICS.
COUNCIL SURFACING A LOT OF THE VALUE CONFLICTS THAT MERGE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT TRYING TO DEAL WITH ONE PUBLIC QUESTION THAT HAS COME FORWARD WITH RESPECT TO A SAFETY QUESTION, ONLY TO REALIZE THAT THERE'S SOME DOMINO EVENTS THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED BEFORE YOU'RE MAKING DECISIONS FOR FINANCIAL INVESTMENT.
THAT ULTIMATELY WOULD BE A COUNCIL DECISION ON TERMS OF HOW TO RECONCILE THOSE VALUE QUESTIONS ABOUT SHORT-TERM VERSUS MEDIUM TERM, BUT THEY ARE WORTH CONSIDERING FOR ALL OF THE POINTS MENTIONED.
THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN CONCEPT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE COUNCIL WITH MORE OF A GLOBAL PICTURE ON WHERE IT WANTS TO GO WITH RESPECT TO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS. THAT WILL INFORM SOME OF THOSE VALUE TRADE OFFS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COME TO COUNCIL ON WHERE IT WANTS TO PUT ITS EMPHASIS ON, WHAT PRIORITIES MIGHT BE PLACED.
THAT BEING SAID, RIGHT NOW, I THINK THERE'S SEEMS TO BE SOME PERTINENT KNOWLEDGE THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE GRAPPLING WITH WITH RESPECT TO SAFETY IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH IS A REAL AND PRESSING ISSUE.
THERE ARE COSTS. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. GREENCORN TO ELABORATE ON THE RELATIVE RISK FACTOR OF INVESTING IN THIS MEASURE VERSUS SHIFTING GEARS,
[00:10:07]
LET'S SAY, IN TWO YEARS OUT, IF WE DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.MR. GREENCORN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT?
>> SURE. I THINK WHAT WE HAVE HAPPENING HERE IS A CONVERGENCE OF NOT JUST IDEAS AND WANTING TO CHANGE THINGS, BUT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED.
I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, WHEN WE REPLACED SOMETHING, WE SHOULD MAKE IT BETTER.
I THINK MAYBE AN OLIVE BRANCH, IF YOU WOULD INDULGE ME, WOULD BE TO IN 2025, TO DO THE LIGHT POLES AT 52ND STREET AT FRANKLIN.
HOLD OFF ON THE REPLACEMENT OF THESE LIGHTS, WE COULD PROBABLY PUT SOMETHING TEMPORARY TO SHORTEN THE CROSSWALK AND HAVE A LOOK AT IT FROM A BIGGER PICTURE AND CONTEMPLATING THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE PUT THE BUMP OUTS IN, WE WOULD WANT TO PUT THE NEW LIGHTS RIGHT OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUMP OUTS, NOT BACK ON THE ROAD SO THAT THEY'RE CLEARLY VISIBLE.
IF WE DO THAT IN ADVANCE OF A BIGGER PLAN OR SOMETHING, THEN WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY AHEAD OF TIME.
I THINK WHAT I'M PROPOSING IT STILL KEEPS COUNCILLOR WARBURTON'S IDEA ALIVE, MAYBE ALIVE TO 2026.
WHILE ALSO ADDRESSING THE CURRENT CONCERNS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE CAN LIMP ALONG THESE LIGHTS FOR ANOTHER YEAR.
I'M JUST TRYING TO SATISFY ALL PARTIES HERE BY COMING UP WITH A COMPROMISE. THANKS.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU. THAT IS HELPFUL.
I GUESS, ANOTHER QUESTION WOULD BE, IF WE INSTALL THESE LIGHTS THIS FISCAL YEAR, WHEN WE DO END UP RIPPING UP THOSE ROADS, CAN WE MOVE THEM? IF WE NEED TO DO THIS WORK, AND IT MIGHT NOT COME WITH THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE ENTIRE ROAD NO MATTER WHAT, WOULD IT JUST MAKE SENSE TO STILL INCLUDE IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET?
>> WHETHER IT MAKES SENSE OR NOT WILL BE UP FOR YOU TO DECIDE IN THE END, BUT I WILL INVITE MR. GREENCORN TO OFFER A COMMENT ON THE, I GUESS, THE RELATIVE EASE OF REMOVING THINGS ONCE THEY'VE BEEN PUT IN PLACE. MR. GREENCORN.
>> FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, YES.
I BELIEVE WE COULD INSTALL THEM IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION, PUT IN A TEMPORARY BOLLARD OR JERSEY BARRIER TO HELP WITH THE SHORTENING OF THE INTERSECTION.
THEN IF WE DID SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE, WE COULD PROBABLY UNBOLT THEM AND BOLT THEM TO A NEW LOCATION. I'LL STOP TALKING NOW.
>> I DON'T KNOW. I GUESS, I'M JUST THINKING, IF WE'RE REPAVING AND WE'RE BUILDING NEW SIDEWALKS, WE'LL HAVE TO LIFT THEM UP AND MOVE THEM ANYWAY.
THAT'S MY THOUGHT. THAT'S IT FOR ME. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK ALL THE BRANCH RECOMMENDATION FOR A COMPROMISE IS FAIR AND, I GUESS, MY QUESTION WOULD BE TO THE SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO AMEND YOUR MOTION TOWARDS THIS COMPROMISE?
>> YEAH, I LOVE CHEAPER AND QUICKER SOLUTIONS, SO THAT SOUNDS LIKE THAT TICKS THE BOXES AND DOESN'T SPEND ALL THAT MONEY.
THEN WE'LL SEE IF THAT ACTUALLY WORKS WELL AND ACTUALLY CAN HELP MASTER PLAN BECAUSE WE'LL SEE SOMETHING IN ACTION, SEE IF TEMPORARY STUFF DOES WORK.
>> CAN I JUST GET A CONFIRMATION FROM ADMINISTRATION? I'LL JUST PAUSE THERE AND SEE IF YOU'D LIKE TO RESPOND.
>> WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE 90,000 MAY NOT BE FULLY REQUIRED FOR THAT INTERIM SOLUTION.
I'M RELUCTANT TO DECOMMIT ALL OF THAT $90,000 AT THIS JUNCTURE, JUST IN CASE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO DO FURTHER ESTIMATES, BUT I WOULD SAY THERE WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY LESS AND WE WOULD NOT NEED 90,000.
>> SHALL WE TABLE THIS AND COME BACK TOMORROW WITH A NEW FIGURE?
>> YES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
>> SORRY, MAYOR ALTY. NO, WE DIDN'T GET TO IT YESTERDAY,
[00:15:01]
BUT I ACTUALLY HAVE A MOTION MYSELF FOR THE TRAFFIC LIGHT UPGRADES.WE JUST NEVER GOT AROUND TO DISCUSSING IT AND MOVED ON BECAUSE WE WERE TABLING THAT PIECE, BUT IT ALL LINKS UP.
>> SURE. WHY DON'T YOU TALK ABOUT IT.
I WAS ABOUT TO GO TO YOUR OTHER MOTION, BUT [OVERLAPPING]
>> SORRY. IT LINKS UP WITH WHAT WAS JUST DISCUSSED. THERE'S TWO PIECES TO THIS.
ONE IS I WASN'T GOING TO TOUCH THE 2025, BUT I THINK CONSIDERING WHAT WE JUST DISCUSSED, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE MAYBE THAT WE DEFER THE 95,000 THAT ADMIN STATED IN THE ANSWERS TO COUNCIL, THE 95,000 THAT IS OF THE 2025 165 THAT RELATES TO THESE TWO CROSSWALKS, THAT WE DEFER THAT TO 2026.
THAT RELATED TO THE, AGAIN, ANSWERS TO COUNCIL'S QUESTIONS, RELATED TO THE AI UPGRADES FOR TRAFFIC LIGHTS, MY PROPOSAL IS TO CUT THE $580,000 IN 2026 AND THE 80,000 IN 2027 FOR THE AI RELATED UPGRADES BECAUSE, AGAIN, THAT'S A BIG EXPENSE AS WE, AGAIN, TALK ABOUT LOOKING AT TRANSPORTATION MORE HOLISTICALLY, AND ADMIN SAID IN THEIR ANSWERS THAT THEY'D BE WILLING TO SEE THAT DELAYED UNTIL AFTER TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR SUCH A BIG EXPENSE.
THE TOTALITY OF THIS WOULD BE THAT COUNCIL DEFER 95,000 FOR THE TWO CROSSWALK INSTALLATIONS ON RANGE LAKE ROAD UNTIL 2026, AND CUT 580,000 IN 2026, AND 80,000 IN 2027 FOR TRAFFIC LIGHT UPGRADES.
>> MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE 2026 AND 2027 IS ALWAYS JUST THROWN OUT THERE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE, SO I WOULD JUST FOCUS ON 2025 BECAUSE WE'LL GET INTO THE 10-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN AND ALL OF A SUDDEN [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'VE GOT MY EYES ON THAT ONE.
>> WE COULD ADD AN EXTRA WEEK OF DELIBERATIONS ON THAT ONE.
>> WITH THIS, I WOULD JUST SAY THEN LET'S STICK WITH, IF WE SAY THAT COUNCIL DEFER THE 95,000 FOR THE TWO CROSSWALK INSTALLATIONS ON RANGE LAKE ROAD, THEN THE WHOLE QUESTION OF 90,000 FOR 2026 GETS BACK TO THE POINT YOU JUST RAISED OF LET'S FOCUS ON 2025.
THEN REALLY, IT'S JUST ABOUT DEFERRING THE TWO CROSSWALKS TO 2026.
THEN WHAT WE NEED TO DO FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE, AROUND $90,000 FOR BUMP OUTS, ETC, BECOMES A 2026 QUESTION, NOT A 2025 QUESTION.
WE JUST REPLACE THE DOWNTOWN 52ND FRANKLIN LIGHTS CARRY ON.
>> IF THERE'S AN APPETITE TO CONSIDER THAT AND TELL ADMINISTRATION TO JUST WORK ON THE INTERSECTION DURING 2025 FOR CONSIDERATION IN 2026, WE CAN DO THAT, OR WE CAN AGAIN TABLE IT AND DISCUSS IT TOMORROW IF WE'VE GOT AN INTERIM COST.
MR. VAN DINE, DID YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING THERE?
>> WHEN I SEE THE HOVERING, I ASSUME.
COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, IT WAS YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION, DID YOU WANT TO TABLE IT?
>> I'M HAPPY TO, BUT I DON'T IMAGINE SOME JERSEY BARRIERS ARE GOING TO BREAK THE BANK, SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR THAT NUMBER, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL TABLE THIS AND FOLKS CAN REMEMBER WHAT COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN JUST SAID, AND WE WILL DISCUSS THIS AGAIN TOMORROW.
THE NEXT ITEM WAS THE COUNCIL INCLUDE 10,000 FOR THE TRIAL-PAINTED BIKE LANES ON FOREST DRIVE, BETWEEN FRANKLIN AV AND 51A AV, RANGE LAKE ROAD BETWEEN FINLAYSON DRIVE AND VOLGA AV, 52ND STREET BETWEEN 49TH AV AND 52ND AV, AND 47TH STREET BETWEEN 49TH AV AND 52ND AV, STARTING IN SPRING 2025.
MR. VAN DINE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE FURTHER INFORMATION?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. YES, I WOULD, AND I'LL BE RELYING ON MR. GREENCORN ONCE AGAIN TO ELABORATE, AND I MAY REQUIRE SOME ASSISTANCE FROM MR. MCLENNAN AS WELL.
SUFFICE IT TO SAY THAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR THE PAINT ITSELF THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED IS WELL WITHIN, I THINK, THE EXPECTED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
WHAT IS NOT CONTEMPLATED IN THAT COST IS THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION, NOT SO MUCH CONSULTATION, BUT INVOLVEMENT IN MAKING WHAT WOULD BE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CURRENT TRAFFIC FLOW THAT WOULD BE HAPPENING THERE.
IN ADDITION TO THE EXPECTATION OF THE ALTERED PARKING AND SOME LEVEL OF SIGNAGE AND ENFORCEMENT THAT WOULD NEED TO OCCUR TO COMPLIMENT THAT EFFORT.
I JUST WANTED TO BRING TO COUNSEL'S ATTENTION THAT THERE IS SOME RIPPLE EFFECTS, IF YOU WILL, OF THIS, AND THAT'S NOT TO SUGGEST THAT ADMINISTRATION IS NOT ON SIDE WITH MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE
[00:20:02]
A MORE ACCESSIBLE GREEN AND TRANSPORTATION-FRIENDLY COMMUNITY THAT INVOLVES CYCLING.I DO BRING THAT TO COUNSEL'S ATTENTION BECAUSE WHEN WE UNDERTAKE, SUCH CHANGES DO HAVE A RIPPLE EFFECT IN TERMS OF REQUESTS FROM THE PUBLIC FOR RESPONSES TO WHY WE'RE DOING CERTAIN THINGS.
IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT WITH RESPECT TO ENFORCEMENT.
IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT WITH RESPECT TO A NUMBER OF THINGS WHICH ARE COSTS INCURRED IN TIME AND OTHER OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE'RE NOT DOING OTHER THINGS, EITHER CHASING DOGS OR OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT BE HAPPENING IN THE MUNICIPALITY.
TO THE MOTION WITH RESPECT TO THE COST OF THE PAINT ITSELF AND DOING THE ADJUSTMENTS IN THE WORK, YES, IT CAN BE DONE.
BUT I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR COUNSEL'S INTEREST IN PARTICIPATING IN SOME OPPORTUNITY TO INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY IN A CHANGEOVER THAT WOULD IMPACT THE OPERATION OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU.
>> PART OF THAT, IF COUNSEL DID WANT TO PROCEED WITH THE 10,000 WOULD BE TO COME FORWARD AT A GPC JUST SO THAT WE'RE ALL STANDING UNITED BEHIND THE DECISION AND HAVE THOUGHT OF ALL THE CONSIDERATIONS, IMPLEMENTATION, ETC.
COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT, ADVANCE IT?
>> I'D LIKE TO ADVANCE IT, AND JUST TO SPEAK TO IT, I TOTALLY APPRECIATE WHAT THE CITY MANAGER IS SAYING THERE.
I WOULD POSIT THOUGH THAT THERE HAS BEEN PLENTY OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ON THESE ISSUES IN THE PAST.
WE AGAIN, HAVE AS A CITY OVER A DECADE AND MORE, TALKED ABOUT THESE THINGS.
THESE ARE AGAIN, STREETS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED BY THE CITY ITSELF IN PAST DIFFERENT ITERATIONS OF PLANS, AND AGAIN, THE PROPOSAL IS THESE ARE A TRIAL THING.
THE IDEA OF HAVING TO GO TO SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FOR FOUR ROADS IN OUR CITY FOR SOMETHING THAT'S A TRIAL, THAT IS SEASONAL BY NATURE BECAUSE BIKE LANES GET COVERED BY SNOW IN THE WINTER AND THAT'S HOW WE'VE OPERATED THEM AS A CITY.
AGAIN, I WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AND HAVE A VOTE ON IT.
IF MY COLLEAGUES DISAGREE, THAT'S FINE.
BUT I THINK YESTERDAY, AND AGAIN, COUNCILLOR WARBURTON PUT IT RIGHT, IS WE NEED TO TRY THINGS, AND SO I WOULD PUT THIS, IT'S A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY, IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF ACTUALLY ONE SHOWING THAT AFTER A DECADE AND MORE OF TALKING ABOUT MORE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE, AND WE HAVE DONE A LOT ALREADY IN TERMS OF MULTI-USE PATHWAYS, WHICH IS FANTASTIC.
BUT AS WE PUSH TOWARDS A MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN, I DO THINK WE ALSO NEED TO TRY THINGS TO SEE WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN'T.
THAT'S WHERE I STILL STAND ON IT.
I THINK THE IDEA OF HAVING TO DO SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, I JUST DON'T THINK IS NECESSARY.
WE HAVE DONE THAT MULTIPLE TIMES ON THESE AREAS.
>> THANKS. THERE'S THE IAP2, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE ACRONYM IS, BUT IT'S A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SPECTRUM FROM INFORM, CONSULT, INVOLVE, COLLABORATE AND POWER.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO GO TO THE EMPOWER SPECTRUM, BUT WE SHOULD BE AT THE MINIMUM INFORM SPECTRUM FOR THESE.
I THINK IT'S BEING CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
MR. VAN DINE, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER?
>> NO, I BELIEVE THAT SUMS IT UP, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN?
>> JUST A COMMENT TO SAY I'M IN SUPPORT.
APPRECIATIVE OF THE COMPLEXITIES BROUGHT OUT BY ADMIN AND THE NEED TO INFORM AND LET THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS, BUT I AGREE WITH COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN'S POINT, SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MCGURK THEN DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
>> I ALSO AGREE WITH ALL THE POINTS THAT WAS RAISED BY FELLOW COUNCILLORS.
I THINK THAT WE HEARD THAT 30% OF YELLOWKNIFERS DON'T DRIVE.
I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF BIKE ADVOCATES HERE IN THE CHAMBER, AND THEY'VE CERTAINLY SAID THEIR PIECE, AND SO I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE, THEN COUNCILLOR PAYNE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. I'M ONE OF THOSE 30% WHO DON'T DRIVE AND THOUGH I DO AGREE WITH THIS MOTION IN SPIRIT, I DO BELIEVE THAT WAITING UNTIL THE MTP IS COMPLETED HERE WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL.
THAT WAY WE CAN DECIDE UPON THE ALLOCATION, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT, WHICH EVEN THOUGH I KNOW WE HAVE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FROM ACTIVISTS WITHIN COMMUNITIES OF MOTION, I THINK NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT IS A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT ON THIS ISSUE.
NOT TO MENTION, AGAIN, I THINK THERE WILL BE PLENTY OF TIME TO BE ABLE TO ALLOCATE THROUGH THE MTP.
I GET WHERE EVERYONE IS STANDING UPON THE QUOTES AROUND PLANS.
[00:25:03]
BUT I DO THINK THIS MASTER DOCUMENT WILL BE THE THING TO LEAD US. THANK YOU SO MUCH.>> THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR PAYNE.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. GARRETT PRETTY MUCH COVERED WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, BUT I FEEL THAT SOMETIMES WE'RE ALWAYS TRYING TO MAKE THINGS WORK.
I THINK THAT ONCE THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN GETS COMPLETED, THEN MAYBE WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER.
RIGHT NOW, I KNOW IT'S ONLY $10,000.
IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY, BUT IT'S TAXPAYERS MONEY AND EVERY CENT THAT WE SPEND, I THINK, WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF WHO'S PUTTING IT OUT THERE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER? WE CAN SEE ALL THESE DIFFERENT SIDES ON THIS ONE.
IT DOES OFFER AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN ASPECT TO GIVE THESE A TRY, SEE HOW IT WORKS, ALTER THEM, CREATE CONVERSATION TO GET PEOPLE TO BE MORE INVOLVED IN THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
WELL, NOT TO CREATE A CULTURE WAR.
AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE MULTIMODAL.
WITH THAT, TO THE MOTION TO INCLUDE 10,000 FOR THE TRIAL-PAINTED BIKE LANES, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSE? THAT CARRIES WITH COUNCILLOR PAYNE, COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH, AND DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE OPPOSED.
THE NEXT MOTION IS THAT ORIGINALLY IT WAS 30,000, BUT YOU'LL HEAR MOMENTARILY THAT 45,000 BE ADDED TO THE BUDGET TO IMPROVE THE DOG PARK.
IT COULD TECHNICALLY BE MORE IF WE WENT ALL HOG WILD, BUT MR. VAN DINE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ONE.
>> THANK YOU. I REALLY LIKE TO THANK THE COMMUNITY SERVICES TEAM UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF MR. WHITE, WHO DID DO SOME ANALYSIS SINCE LAST NIGHT WITH RESPECT TO POTENTIAL COSTS.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. WHITE IN A MOMENT.
THAT NUMBER 45 IS CERTAINLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF CLASS D FOR SURE.
THAT IS A MID-RANGE THAT COULD INCLUDE A HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE UPGRADE AND A LOWER LEVEL OF SERVICE UPGRADE, BUT I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO EXPAND. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LAST NIGHT, ONE OF THE FIRST QUESTION THAT CAME OUT WAS THE STANDARD THAT THIS FACILITY IS MAINTAINED TO, AND IT IS, IN FACT, A CLASS B PARK.
ON THE BEST CASE SCENARIO IS THAT IT IS VISITED THREE DAYS A WEEK DURING OUR NON-SNOW DAYS FOR MAINTENANCE AND FOR LITTER CONTROL.
WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT PUBLIC COMPLAINTS THAT WE RECEIVED OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS ON IT, AND LARGELY AROUND THE ENTRANCE TO THE FACILITY, SO WE HAVE A COST TO UPGRADE THAT TO A TWO-GATE SYSTEM THAT IS MORE ROBUST THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.
WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT LIGHTING AND INCREASING SOME OF THE SIGNAGE SO THAT PEOPLE ARE MORE AWARE OF THE RULES AND WHERE THE LITTER CONTAINER IS LOCATED, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT DESTROYED OUTSIDE THE DOOR.
OUR CLASS D ESTIMATE WOULD BRING US INTO THAT $45,000 PRICE RANGE, AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY UPGRADES TO THE SURFACE.
IF WE WERE GOING TO CHANGE OR ADD TO THE SURFACE, THEN THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY MORE.
IT IS A $66,000 ITEM ALL ON ITS OWN.
IN TERMS OF LIGHTING, WE WILL BE DISCUSSING THIS WITH NAKA IN THE SPRING.
BEST CASE SCENARIO IS THAT, LIKE OTHER PARKS, THEY MAY PROVIDE A POLE AT NO CHARGE ON THE CAPITAL SIDE, AND WE WOULD SIMPLY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE O&M.
THERE HAS BEEN MAYBE ONE OR TWO OCCASIONS WHERE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT FOR US, BUT IN MOST CASES THEY DO, SO IT WOULD BE HOPEFUL THAT THEY CAN FOR THE DOG PARK. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. THE MOTION WOULD BE TO ADD 45,000 TO IMPROVE THE DOG PARK WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF AN UPGRADE TO THE GATE OR THE FENCE, AND HOPEFULLY A BIT MORE GRAVEL.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? COUNCILLOR PAYNE?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. WAS THAT 45? YOU SAID PLUS 65 FOR GRAVEL OR INCLUDING GRAVEL WOULD BE 65?
>> TO GO ALL IN WITH THE GRAVEL WOULD BE THE OTHER EXTRA 60,
[00:30:04]
SO THE 45 WOULD BE IF WE COULD ADD A BIT MORE OF THE FENCE.>> IF YOU WANTED TO DO ALL THE UPGRADES.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. JUST A QUESTION, IF THAT WILL ALSO BE TO ADD MORE SEATING IN THERE AS THERE ARE YELLOWKNIFERS WITH DISABILITIES AND SENIORS THAT GO IN THERE ON A REGULAR BASIS AND UTILIZE THE [INAUDIBLE] AND I HAVE TO SAY ANECDOTALLY, IT'S NOT VERY COMFORTABLE.
>> POSSIBILITY WITH OUR ACCESSIBILITY FUNDING TO IF IT WAS TO BE ADDRESSED THAT WAY. MR. VAN DINE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION.
CAN I INVITE THAT QUESTION TO BE REPEATED, PLEASE?
>> THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD MORE BENCHES TO THE DOG PARK FROM AN ACCESSIBILITY PERSPECTIVE.
>> THANK YOU. MR. WHITE, CAN I ASK YOU TO RESPOND TO THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ABSOLUTELY DID DISCUSS THAT AND THE BENCHES ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE 45 AS IT WOULD BE ADDED THROUGH THE ACCESSIBILITY FUND PROGRAM. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT CLEARS EVERYTHING UP.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN?
>> JUST A QUESTION. APOLOGIES. I'VE LOST TRACK OF THE ANSWER TO THIS ONE.
IF THIS PARK IS IN THAT CYCLE OF PARKS THAT GET MAINTENANCE OR NOT.
>> FROM A CAPITAL PERSPECTIVE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS, BUT THE O&M PERSPECTIVE, IT IS. MR. VAN DINE?
>> MADAM CHAIR HAS THAT CORRECT. CLASS B.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK FOR ME, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE PUBLIC FEEDBACK ON THIS ONE, AND APPRECIATE WHERE THOSE PEOPLE ARE COMING FROM.
FOR ME, THIS ONE JUST DOESN'T QUITE MAKE MY PRIORITY LIST, SO I'LL BE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER TO THE MOTION TO ADD 45,000 TO IMPROVE THE DOG PARK? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? 01, 2, 3, 4.
THAT CARRIES WITH COUNCILLOR PAYNE, MCGURK, MCLENNAN, AND WARBURTON OPPOSED.
WE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MINISTER WAWZONEK TODAY, MINISTER OF FINANCE ABOUT CARBON TAX GRANT, AND SO THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE WILL BE RECEIVING $629,035, SO THAT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE WE JUST RECEIVED WORD THIS AFTERNOON.
THAT'S GOOD FOR OUR BOTTOM LINE.
MR. VAN DINE, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING FURTHER?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. YES, I WILL.
WE'RE STILL NOT CLEAR WHEN THOSE DOLLARS WILL ARRIVE, SO I JUST PROVIDE THAT CAUTION AND WE'LL DO OBVIOUSLY THE RECONCILIATION AND THE MATH ASSOCIATED.
REMIND COUNCIL THAT ONCE THE BUDGET IS PASSED, THAT WE WILL BE LOOKING AT ACTUAL DECISIONS AROUND RATES IN THE NEW YEAR WITH RESPECT TO THE DECISIONS FROM 2025.
THAT MAY PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL CONTEXT FOR THOSE DECISIONS WHEN THEY COME.
>> WITH THAT, I THINK WE'VE COME TO YES, THE END OF LAST NIGHTS, COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
>> I THINK I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD AN AMENDMENT OR AMEND MY MOTION REGARDING THE TRANSFORM YOUR YARD PROGRAM.
I THINK THAT WAS OUR LAST TABLED MOTION.
>> YES. THAT ONE WASN'T CLEAR IF IT WAS A MOTION TABLED, BUT YES.
WE'LL GO BACK TO PAGE 50, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGY. COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD AMEND MY MOTION SIMPLY TO READ ADD $25,000 FOR GROW IMPLEMENTATION, AND I CAN SPEAK TO IT.
>> UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FUNDING FOR THE TRANSFORM YOUR YARD PROGRAM IS DEPENDENT ON SUCCESSFUL APPLICATION, FUNDING FOR THE PROGRAM, THIS WOULD BE JUST TO ENSURE THAT THE PROGRAM RUNS IN CASE IT DOESN'T GET ACCEPTED FOR THAT FUNDING, AND IF IT DOES, WE'RE DOING THE WATER RATE REVIEW EARLY IN THE NEXT YEAR, AND ONE OF THE BIG ITEMS IN GROW WAS SUBSIDIZATION FOR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS AND WATER RATES.
[00:35:01]
I THINK THAT MONEY COULD BE USED THERE AND WOULD BE VERY WELL USED.JUST LOOKING, IT'S A SMALL AMOUNT, BUT I THINK EVERYTHING WE CAN DO TO IMPROVE THE RESILIENCE OF OUR COMMUNITY IN RESPECT TO THE FRAGILITY OF OUR SUPPLY LINES, I THINK IT'S ALL INCREDIBLY VALUABLE.
>> THE MOTION IS TO ADD 25,000 FOR GROW IMPLEMENTATION, AND ADMINISTRATION COULD USE THAT HOWEVER THEY SEE FIT FOR THE PROGRAM.
MR. VAN DINE ON THE ADVISABILITY OF THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THAT SEEMS TO BE WE HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION? I COULD USE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT.
COULD WE TABLE IT AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT ONE ONCE WE'VE WRAPPED UP.
I'LL JUST MARK THAT ONE DOWN, 25K GROW IMPLEMENTATION.
SEEING NOTHING FURTHER, WE WILL GO TO COMMUNITY SERVICES.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTORATE IS PAGE 55.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? PERFECT. I DID REALLY APPRECIATE THE DOWNTOWN CLEANUP PROGRAM THIS YEAR.
I THINK THAT ONE WENT REALLY WELL. COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAD A QUESTION REGARDING THE STREET OUTREACH PROGRAM.
BASICALLY, I'M KEEN TO SEE THE RECOMMENDATION 1.2 FROM THE STREET OUTREACH PROGRAM REVIEW WE RECEIVED BE IMPLEMENTED.
THAT WAS TO ASSIST THE PROGRAM WITH GOVERNANCE WORK TO SORT OUT POLICY ISSUES.
I GUESS MY QUESTION, IT COULD BE FOR ADMIN OR FOR THE MAYOR OR FOR COUNCILOR HENDRICKSEN AS THE CHAIR OF CAB, IS THERE ANY ABILITY OR CAN YOU SEE ANY ABILITY FOR US TO USE REACHING HOME MONEY TO FUND A ONE YEAR TERM POSITION TO HELP WITH THAT WORK?
>> ONE YEAR TERMS ARE ALWAYS TOUGH TO STAFF, BUT I THINK WHEN THE CONTRACTOR WAS HERE PRESENTING ON IT, HE ALSO SAID IT MIGHT JUST BE A CONTRACTOR TO DO SOME OF THAT WORK.
IF IT IS ABOUT DOING THE GOVERNANCE ASPECTS THAT WERE RECOMMENDED IN THE PROGRAM OR THE REVIEW.
MR. VAN DINE, IS THERE ANY FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE MONEY IN REACHING HOME?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. [NOISE] WE DO FIND FROM TIME TO TIME AS WE'RE CYCLING IN FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT AS WE'RE RECEIVING FUNDS AND SOMETIMES ADJUSTMENTS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA THAT WE ARE ABLE TO HAVE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY TO ADJUST.
WE TEND TO RUN THOSE QUESTIONS THROUGH THE COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD AT THE TIME.
WE'VE NOTED THAT THE REPORT THAT WE DID RECEIVE DOES HAVE A LOT OF POSITIVE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN MOVING FORWARD IN THE DIRECTION OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ALL ASPECTS AS FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE.
WITH RESPECT TO THE GOVERNANCE QUESTIONS THAT HAD BEEN RECOMMENDED IN THE REPORT, WE TOO HAVE THAT ON OUR LIST AS AN AREA TO INVEST, BUT I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO ELABORATE ON RELATIVE FLEXIBILITY AND WHAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO IN THE COMING YEAR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE DO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY, AS MR. VAN DINE MENTIONED TO CONSIDER THIS THROUGH OUR REACHING HOME CAB FUNDING.
ALSO, ADMINISTRATIVELY, WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE VARIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS AND OPTIONS ON HOW WE COULD REACH THOSE, WE DO FEEL THAT A GOOD PORTION OF THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND PROCEDURES COULD BE FACILITATED OUR CURRENT HOMELESSNESS SUPERVISOR AS WELL.
WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF OPTIONS THAT WE COULD LOOK AT. THANK YOU.
>> RIGHT ON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WILL LEAVE THIS ALONE FOR NOW AND LEAVE IT IN THE VERY CAPABLE HANDS OF STAFF AND CAB. THANK YOU.
[00:40:01]
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER ON THE DIRECTORATE BUDGET? SEEING NONE.
NEXT, WE GO TO THE, I HATE THE PRINTING, THE ARENAS.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE ARENAS? SEEING NONE.
NEXT, WE HAVE THE CURLING CLUB. COUNCIL WARBURTON.
>> MAY HAVE BEEN ANSWERED IN THE Q&A. I MAY HAVE MISSED IT.
THE POWER GOING DOWN IN ALL THE FACILITIES OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS WHEN RATES ARE CLEARLY GOING UP.
I JUST REFRESH YOUR MEMORY ON WHAT THE RATIONALE WAS ON THAT. THANK YOU.
>> I THINK THERE WAS A FORMULA ISSUE THAT'S BEEN CORRECTED SINCE. MR. VAN DINE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MADAM CHAIR, I'M PLEASED TO SAY THAT THE OVERSIGHT AND DUE DILIGENCE THAT COUNCIL PROVIDES ADMINISTRATION FROM TIME TO TIME IS EXTREMELY HELPFUL IN UNCOVERING ERRORS THAT DO APPEAR FROM TIME TO TIME.
THAT QUERY DID RESULT IN US DOING FURTHER INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE THAT THERE WAS A FORMULA CORRECTION THAT WAS REQUIRED.
THAT HAS RESULTED IN US IDENTIFYING SOME UNANTICIPATED RISES IN THAT UTILITY RATE FOR US IN THE ORDER OF ABOUT $450,000.
THANK YOU TO THE COUNCILOR FOR POINTING THAT OUT AND BRINGING THAT TO OUR ATTENTION.
>> TO BE CLEAR, I DIDN'T BRING THAT UP.
I ASKED THE QUESTION, BUT SALES CAUGHT IT.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
>> DO WE KNOW THAT CARBON TAX MONEY COMING TO THE CITY? DO WE KNOW HOW FLEXIBLE WE CAN USE THAT MONEY? IS THAT LIKE WE CAN PUT THAT WHERE WE NEED TO AKA OFFSET THE 450 POWER ISSUE OR IS THAT NEED TO BE USED IN CERTAIN AREAS?
>> NO, IT JUST GETS TO GO TO GENERAL COFFERS.
ANYTHING FURTHER? THE NEXT ONE IS CITY HALL, PAGE 58.
>> THANKS. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR ADMIN, AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIMELY RESPONSES AND THE UPDATED Q&A.
FIRST QUESTION, JUST LOOKING AT THE RESPONSES REGARDING THE REVENUE AND THE COSTS SPECIFICALLY AT THE FIELDHOUSE TRACK AND THE PLAYGROUND, IT APPEARS THAT THE COST OF THE BOOKING CLERK ALONE AT THE FIELDHOUSE IS ABOVE AND BEYOND THE REVENUE THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
OUR FACILITIES ARE NOT PRICED FOR COST RECOVERY.
AS A RESULT, WE CERTAINLY UNDERTAKE A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT TO TRY AND DETERMINE WHAT THE LEVEL OF TOLERANCE AND ABILITY BASED ON THE CITY'S OVERALL FINANCIAL PICTURE TO OFFER SOMETHING OF VALUE TO RESIDENTS THAT INCLUDES AS MANY RESIDENTS AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT ANY ECONOMIC HARM.
YOU'LL SEE A LARGE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE ACTUAL REVENUES COLLECTED AND THE ACTUAL COSTS OF RUNNING THE FACILITY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. THERE'S VARIOUS SERVICES AT THE FIELD OF HOUSE, OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S THE TRACK, THERE'S THE PLAYGROUND, AND THERE'S THE ROCK CLIMBING WALL.
IF AND RECOGNIZING THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR OTHER CUSTOMER SERVICE AGENTS AND BOOKING CLERKS AT THE NEW AQUATIC CENTER, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO OPEN UP THE FACILITIES AT THE FIELD HOUSE SO THAT THERE IS NO COST AND RE ALLOCATE THAT POSITION OVER TO THE NEW FACILITY? RECOGNIZING THAT THE EXPENSES RIGHT NOW CURRENTLY WE THE REVENUE AND THAT'S ACTUALLY GIVING OUR RESIDENTS ACCESS TO THAT.
FOLLOWING UP OBVIOUSLY ON THE SENIORS REQUEST AND PRESENTATION EARLIER THIS YEAR, BUT THIS WOULD ACTUALLY OPEN UP THOSE THREE FACILITIES TO ALL RESIDENTS AT NO COST OR PAYING THEIR TAXES, AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT HELP WITH THE STAFFING NEEDS AT THE NEW AQUATIC CENTER.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE ADMIN CAN SPEAK TO?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
THAT WOULD BE A BOLD AND COURAGEOUS POLICY SHIFT FOR ADMINISTRATION
[00:45:01]
OR FOR A COUNCIL TO TAKE ON AND I SAY THAT NOT QUITE TONGUE IN CHEEK, BUT IN SINCERITY THAT THERE IS SOME BODY OF EVIDENCE AND KNOWLEDGE TO SUPPORT THAT IF THERE IS A LEVEL OF FEE ASSOCIATED, THEN THE ATTENTION AND CARE OF THAT FACILITY IS INCREASED AS OPPOSED TO A FREE SERVICE THAT SOMETIMES MAY ENCOURAGE OTHER BEHAVIOR THAT MIGHT NOT ALSO BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF YELLOWKNIFERS AND THEIR INVESTMENTS AND FACILITIES IN THE LONG TERM.I WOULD JUST PUT THAT AS A CAUTION, AND I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO ADD BEYOND THIS.
WE DID DO A LITTLE BIT OF CALCULATION AS TO THE RELATIVE REVENUE LOSS THAT MIGHT OCCUR FROM EXPANDING THE SERVICE TO SENIORS THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS BEYOND THE THREE DAYS TO A FULL WEEK.
WE DID NOT LOOK AT IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF GIVING THAT AS A GENERAL BENEFIT TO THE POPULATION.
I REALLY DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT IN TERMS OF THE RELATIVE IMPACT THAT WOULD HAVE ON US POTENTIAL SAVING THAT I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL MEMBER IS LOOKING TO TRY AND TO ACHIEVE WITH THAT POLICY SHIFT, BUT I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO ELABORATE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MAYBE I'LL SHED A BIT OF A DIFFERENT LIGHT ON IT.
OUR LEGEND SYSTEM, WHICH IS NO LONGER IN PLACE, AND AS OF TODAY, WE LAUNCHED XPLOR REC VERY SUCCESSFULLY.
I'D LIKE TO PUT A PLUG IN FOR THAT.
NEITHER OF THOSE PROGRAMS RECORD THE REVENUE EVERY TIME THAT A CARD IS SWIPED.
IT SIMPLY COUNTS THE ACCESS TO THE TRACK TO THE PLAYGROUND OR FOR DIFFERENT USES THAT WE HAVE FOR DROP INS AND THAT SORT OF THING.
WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT AT THE FIELD HOUSE, WE BRING IN ABOUT $126,000 A YEAR, AND THAT WOULD BE FOR ALL THREE COMPONENTS.
CLIMBING WALL, THE PLAYGROUND, AND FOR THE TRACK USE, AND THAT IS SIMPLY THE PEOPLE WHO PAY AT THE SITE.
EITHER PAY CASH, VISA, OR DEBIT AS THEY ENTER THE FACILITY.
THE PASSES THEMSELVES ARE RECORDED IN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GL, AND IT'S NOT DISTRIBUTED AMONGST THE VARIOUS COMPONENTS THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO USE THEIR PASS AT.
AT ONE POINT, WE DID TRY OR WE CONSIDERED A PASS FOR EACH.
BUT THEN IF YOU'RE A SWIMMER AND A TRACK USER AND MAYBE YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WANTS TO GO INTO THE PLAYGROUND, THEN THAT'S THREE DIFFERENT PASSES THAT YOU HAVE TO USE.
THAT'S WHY YOU WENT TO THE FLEXI PASS SYSTEM.
THE TRACK USE IS BY FAR ONE OF OUR MOST SUCCESSFUL COMPONENTS IN ANY OF OUR FACILITIES, AND IT HAS JUST OVER 23,000 ANNUAL VISITORS A YEAR.
THE INDOOR PLAYGROUND IS SUBSTANTIALLY LESS AT 7,000, AND I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HAVE THE NUMBERS FOR OUR CLIMBING WALL.
I THINK IF WE GO TO A FREE SYSTEM AT THE FIELD HOUSE, THERE WILL BE A TON OF QUESTIONS ON WHY NOT ELSEWHERE IN THE FACILITIES, AND THEN THE WHOLE QUESTION OF FAIRNESS AND HOW EACH FACILITY IS BEING MANAGED.
IF WE DON'T HAVE A BOOKING CLERK, WE WILL STILL NEED ADDITIONAL SUPERVISORY STAFF BECAUSE I WOULD IMAGINE THE FACILITY WILL JUST BE PACKED ALL DAY EVERY DAY.
WITHOUT GIVING IT A WHOLE LOT OF THOUGHT, THERE WOULD BE SOME PRETTY BIG RAMIFICATIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. THANK YOU.
>> DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE, I'LL PASS IT OVER TO YOU.
I'LL PROPOSE A MOTION JUST ON A ONE YEAR TRIAL.
THAT'S MAYBE THE THEME OF OUR BUDGET, ACTUALLY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH YOUR WORSHIP, AND WITH THAT, I RECOGNIZE THE MAYOR.
>> I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE WAIVE THE ADMISSION FEES FOR THE FIELDHOUSE TRACK AND PLAYGROUND IN 2025 AND RE ALLOCATE BOOKING CLERKS OR CASHIER STAFF TO OTHER RECREATION FACILITIES.
I THINK ONE, OUR RECREATION FEES ARE GETTING PRETTY EXPENSIVE, GOING UP BEYOND NINE DOLLARS IN ADMISSIONS.
WHEN THERE IS QUESTIONS ABOUT WHY NOT THE POOL, THE MORE USERS THAT WE HAVE, THE MORE STAFF WE NEED, WHEREAS THE FIELD HOUSE TRACK AND THE PLAYGROUND, IT THERE'S NO FURTHER STAFF TO MONITOR.
THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO PROVIDE FREE RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTS WHEN IT'S -40 OUT.
[00:50:02]
WE TRIED IN 2025 AND SEE HOW IT GOES.IF NEED BE, WE REINTRODUCE IT IN 2026, AND IF OVER A YEAR OF GOING TO THE TRACK, YOU LOVE IT, MAYBE SOMEBODY THEN BUYS THE MEMBERSHIP FOR 2026.
I THINK THERE'S A FEW DIFFERENT BENEFITS TO THIS, BUT IT IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO NOT HAVE REALLY ANY IMPACT ON THE BUDGET.
THERE WILL BE SOME KINGS TO WORK OUT, OF COURSE, BUT AS IS WITH EVERY PROJECT.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR, TO THE MOTION. COUNCILOR MCGURK.
>> I LIKE THE IDEA OF TRIALING IT.
OBVIOUSLY, IT'S GOOD TO TRY THINGS.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT WITH IT BEING A SERVICE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN PAINTING BIKE LANES ON THE ROAD WHERE PEOPLE EXPECT THINGS LIKE THAT TO CHANGE CONSISTENTLY.
>> I WONDER HOW OTHER COUNSELORS FEEL ABOUT MAYBE MAKING IT A WINTER TRIAL BECAUSE THAT IS WHEN PEOPLE NEED OR WANT IT THE MOST AND IS IT EXPECTED TO GO AWAY INSTEAD OF PEOPLE HOLDING OUT ON IT NEXT YEAR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR MCGURK.
THE PROPOSAL IS TO HAVE FREE ACCESS IF SOMEONE IS GOING TO USE THE TRACK, TO USE THE PLAY AREA, BUT MAINTAIN A CHARGE FOR THE CLIMBING WALL AND TO RENT THE FIELDS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN TO THE MAYOR.
>> YEAH, DEFINITELY THE FIELDS BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING EXCLUSIVE USE AND THE TRACK IS OPEN.
MY REASONING WITH THE CLIMBING WALL WAS THAT THERE IS A STAFF MEMBER THERE, AND SO IF THE STAFF MEMBERS STANDING BESIDE THE PAY MACHINE TO ACCEPT IT AND THEN GO ON TO THE CLIMBING WALL WAS MY REASONING FOR THAT.
IF I CAN, WHILE I GOT THE MIC, TO COUNCILLOR MCGURK'S POINT, THAT IS ONE OPTION.
HOWEVER, SUMMERS HAVE BEEN SUPER SMOKY, SO THE FIELD HOUSE HAS BEEN THAT ONE OPPORTUNITY TO RECREATE AND CLEANER AIR.
YEAH, I'LL JUST TAKE ANOTHER MINUTE TO THINK.
THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN. TO THE ADMINISTRATION.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WOULD LIKE TO JUST OFFER TO COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION THAT THERE ARE SOME HEALTH AND SAFETY QUESTIONS THAT COME ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT OF PERSONNEL THAT WE HAVE ON SITE IN ORDER TO MONITOR THE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE HAPPENING THERE.
WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT ANALYSIS, AND SO JUST OFFERING THAT UP AT THIS JUNCTURE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
>> IF I CAN ALSO ADD JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THERE ARE DROP IN PROGRAMS THAT ARE OFFERED AT THE FIELD HOST AS WELL.
THE ONLY ONE THAT COMES TO MY MIND RIGHT NOW IS TENNIS.
IS THE INTENTION TO HAVE ALL DROP IN PROGRAMS FREE AS WELL?
>> I WAS GOING WITH JUST THE TRACK AND THE PLAYGROUND, AND THEN DROP INS WOULD BE IF STAFF.
UNLESS DROP INS CURRENTLY HAVE NO STAFF ON THE FIELD, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE THE QUESTION TO ADMINISTRATION.
>> THANK YOU. I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT HE JUST POSED TO HIMSELF.
>> THANK YOU. IF THERE IS STILL A CHARGE FOR THE DROP IN PROGRAMS, THEN THERE WILL STILL BE A NEED FOR A BOOKING CLERK OF SOME SORT AT SOME POINT.
LIKE I SAID, I'M DRAWING A BLANK RIGHT NOW ON THE DROP IN PROGRAMS THAT WE OFFER EXCEPT FOR I DO KNOW THAT THERE'S TENNIS AT THAT FACILITY. THANKS.
>> BUT THERE'S NO CITY STAFF WHO HAVE TO PARTICIPATE LIKE, THEY'RE NOT THERE TO MONITOR ON THE FIELD WITH TENNIS.
IT'S JUST RIGHT NOW A BOOKING CLERK THAT RUNS DROP IN TENNIS.
>> I'LL DEFER TO MR. WHITE ON THIS, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE DROP IN NATURE IS TO ALLOW FREE ACCESS AND THAT THE PERSONNEL THAT ARE THERE TO LOOK AFTER OTHER THINGS ARE NOT THERE TO MONITOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE DROPPING IN.
BUT MAYBE MR. WHITE CAN ELABORATE. THANK YOU.
OUR MAINTENANCE STAFF, THEIR ROLE WOULD BE TO SET UP AND TAKE DOWN THE TENNIS NETS.
THEN OF COURSE, ANY MAINTENANCE THAT FOLLOWS THAT.
THEN THE BOOKING CLERK IS AT THE FRONT OF THE FACILITY EITHER TAKING THEIR CASH OR THEIR SWIPE CARD. THANKS.
[00:55:06]
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
>> I DON'T THINK THIS HAS BEEN ANSWERED YET.
CAN ADMIN SPEAK TO HOW MANY STAFF CURRENTLY WORK AT THE FIELD HOUSE AT A GIVEN TIME IN ADDITION TO THE BOOKING CLERK? I GUESS WHAT A BOOKING CLERK, NO JUST FINISH WITH THE FIRST ONE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN. MR. VAN DINE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THE BOOKING CLERK IS ONE OF A TEAM, I UNDERSTAND TO BE THREE, BUT I'LL DEFER TO MR. WHITE JUST TO GIVE YOU THE FIRM NUMBERS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE THE MAINTENANCE STAFF THAT ARE THERE FOR ALL OPENING HOURS.
WE HAVE THE CLIMBING WALL STAFF ARE THERE MONDAY TO FRIDAY, 5:00-9:00, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, I BELIEVE IT'S 9:00-9:00, AND THEN OUR BOOKING CLERKS ARE THERE FROM 6:00 IN THE MORNING TILL 10:00 AT NIGHT.
SORRY 6:00 IN THE MORNING, 10 AT NIGHT, MONDAY TO FRIDAY, AND SATURDAY AND SUNDAY.
I THINK IT'S 8:00 TILL 9:00 OR 8:00 TILL 10:00.
>> THANKS FOR THAT. A QUESTION FOR THE MAYOR.
IS PART OF YOUR PROPOSAL TO THEN IF WE REDUCE THIS, A BOOKING CLERK HERE TO THEN REDUCE THE LIKE A BOOKING CLERK THAT'S NEEDED FOR THE OPENING OF THE AQUATIC CENTER.
>> YEAH, SO IT'D BE TO REALLOCATE BOOKING CLERK STAFF TO THE RECREATION FACILITIES.
>> THAT'S HOW I TOOK IT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. THANKS FOR THAT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN, COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
>> MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED ALREADY. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
THAT WAS BRIEF. COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
ANYTHING FURTHER TO THE MOTION? THIS ONE IS A TOUGH ONE.
ARE WE CONSIDERING TABLING THIS? I TOO AM READY TO GO.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IT'S A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING.
WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT REDUCING AT THE FIELD HOUSE? WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT REDUCING POSITIONS AT THE FIELD HOUSE OR NOT HIRING ADDITIONAL POSITIONS AT THE FIELD HOUSE?
>> MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE'RE REALLOCATING BOOKING CLERK STAFF TO OTHER RECREATION FACILITIES, BUT OVER TO ADMINISTRATION ON HOW TO DO IT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. I BELIEVE THE INTENT OF THE MOTION IS TO REALLOCATE A RESOURCE THAT'S CURRENTLY AT THE FIELD HOUSE TO ANOTHER FACILITY.
IN THIS CASE, IT COULD VERY WELL BE THE AQUATIC CENTER IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
THE NET RESULT OF THAT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT THAT I BELIEVE HAS BEEN INTIMATED, WILL BE BEYOND THE BOOKING CLERK'S ACTIVITIES ROLE THEMSELVES BECAUSE THERE ARE A SMALL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL AT THE FACILITY AT THE TIME NOW, AS MR. GRANT, AND MR. WHITE HAS POINTED OUT, WE HAVE COVERAGE FOR CERTAIN ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING THE CLIMBING WALL, INCLUDING SOME OF THE OTHER POINTS REFERENCE.
THERE ARE FACILITY STAFF FROM A MAINTENANCE PERSPECTIVE THAT ARE THERE ON AN ONGOING BASIS.
THIS PROPOSAL, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO ANY REQUESTS FOR INCREASED STAFF FOR THE FIELD HOUSE.
THIS I BELIEVE SEEMS TO BE TOUCHING ON THE GENERAL PRESENTATION LAST EVENING WHERE THERE WAS AN INCREMENTAL REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL STAFF OVERALL FOR FACILITIES AND SPECIFICALLY THE AQUATIC CENTER.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE DYNAMIC. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I HAVE ZERO IDEA ABOUT HOW TO VOTE FOR THIS.
LIKE I KNOW IT'S GOING TO HAVE SOME PRETTY SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FIELD HOUSE.
I WOULD IMAGINE WE'LL PROBABLY HEAR FROM SOME STAFF ON THIS.
CAN WE OPERATE THE FIELD HOUSE WITH A REALLOCATION OF THE BOOKING CLERK TO ANOTHER FACILITY?
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I BELIEVE ON PAPER.
THERE'S LOTS OF ARGUMENTS THAT CAN MAKE THAT PERSUASIVE.
[01:00:01]
THE OPERATION OF THAT IMPACT, I MIGHT BE STILL TO BE DETERMINED, AND I THINK WE STILL NEED TO POTENTIALLY ASSESS WHAT THE OPERATIONAL IMPACTS MIGHT BE, BUT CERTAINLY THE LOGIC ON PAPER, I THINK IS VALID. THANK YOU.>> YOU'RE LOOKING AT DOING THIS FOR A YEAR LIKE A YEAR'S TEST, I GUESS?
[LAUGHTER] WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO A SIX MONTH TRIAL INSTEAD OF A YEAR? I MEAN, THAT'S GOING TO PUT US THROUGH THE WINTER, AND THAT WOULD BE THE MAJORITY OF TIME THAT WE WOULD NEED THIS.
MAYBE IF WE GET WE CAN HAVE A SLIDING SCALE OF PRICES.
IF WE GOT A SMOKY DAY, WE CAN HALF THE COST IF WE WANT IT.
THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX ON THIS ONE AND PROVIDE A CHEAPER SERVICE FOR THE PUBLIC.
IN THE BEGINNING, WE HAD A BUNCH OF SENIORS THAT CAME TO US AND WANTED AN EXTRA DAY OF FREE WALKING.
NOW IT'S TURNED OUT TO BE A LOT MORE.
PERSONALLY, I THINK MORE DISCUSSION NEEDS TO BE HAD ON THIS AND NOT JUST ON THE FLY AND OFF THE CUFF.
I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT MORE LIKE THEY SAID, IT'S GOING TO BE A RIPPLE EFFECT ON A FEW THINGS.
THE BIG ONE BEING THE STAFF FEELING LIKE THEY'RE LEFT OUT IN THE COLD ON THIS WITHOUT BEING TALKED TO ABOUT IT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL FOR PAYING TO THE MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. JUST A QUESTION, THE MULTIPLEX, IT ONLY HAS ONE MAINTAINER OPERATING THROUGH THE DAY.
THE FIELD HOUSE SIMILAR SIZE FACILITY.
THE MULTIPLEX DOES HAVE SOME CASUAL BOOKING CLERKS THAT COME IN FOR THOSE TWO DROP INS, THE SKATING AND THE PICKLEBALL.
I THINK WE COULD DO CASUAL CASHIER FOR THE FIELD HOUSE FOR THE DROP IN PROGRAMS. I THINK THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO BE A BIT MORE FLEXIBLE WITH OUR STAFF TO GIVE THIS AND THAT'S WHY I WAS PROPOSING A YEAR.
ALSO APPRECIATE JUST DOING THE WINTER, BUT THE SUMMERS HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN PRETTY SMOKY AND WE GET THE CALLS FROM THE PUBLIC OF LIKE, HEY, CAN YOU OPEN UP THE FIELD HOUSE? THAT'S WHERE TRY A YEAR, WE COME BACK NEXT BUDGET AND SAY, IT DIDN'T WORK OUT, IT DID WORK OUT, BUT WE'VE AT LEAST GOT THAT YEAR OF DATA.
I THINK WE CAN BE MORE FLEXIBLE.
I THINK THE CLIMBING WALL ATTENDANT, BEING ABLE TO ACCEPT CASH AND PAYMENT, GET THEM HOOKED UP AND GO.
I THINK THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY THAT WE CAN DO TO MAINTAIN OUR OPERATIONS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH A WORSHIP, COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
>> THANK YOU. NOW, I HAVE A QUESTION.
THEY ALREADY ASKED OR MENTIONED THE RATIO AT MULTIPLEX AND STUFF.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS A BIG LIFT.
THIS IS EXACTLY THE STUFF THAT I WANT TO SEE US DO IS REALLOCATE RESOURCES INSTEAD OF ALWAYS JUST ADDING AND ADDING BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING CURRENTLY.
WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SOME MORE BODIES AT IT.
IF WE CAN TRY FOR A YEAR TO REALLOCATE THIS, I DON'T THINK IT IS A BIG ASK.
I THINK IT IS EASY WAY TO TRY SOMETHING WITH INCREASING MORE TAXES BECAUSE WE KNOW AS SOON AS WE AD A POSITION, IT'S ESSENTIALLY THERE FOREVER.
THIS IS A WAY FOR US TO TRY AND SEE IF IT WORKS.
IF IT DOESN'T WORK, AND WE CAN WAYS HIRE SOMEONE LATER, IF IT WORKS, AND WE HAVEN'T RAISED TAXES AND INCREASED STAFFING FOR SOMETHING THAT WE DIDN'T NEED. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
T HANKS, MR. CHAIR. YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'M ABSOLUTELY IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
I THINK THIS IS EXACTLY OUR JOB IS TO FIND WAYS TO NOT COST OUR RESIDENTS MORE, BUT GIVE THEM MORE BANG FOR THEIR BUCK OR MORE VALUE.
I HAVE FULL FAITH IN OUR STAFF IN BEING ABLE TO OPERATIONALIZE THIS.
I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT CHANGE IS ALWAYS DIFFICULT AND THAT'S WHY A TRIAL IS GOOD BECAUSE WE CAN COLLECT SOME DATA.
I'M DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF 12 MONTHS.
WE CAN SEE A FULL YEAR BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THINGS CHANGE IN THE SUMMER AND TO COUNCILLOR PAYNE'S QUESTION, THERE IS A CASHIER BEING ASKED TO BE ADDED FOR THE NEW POOL.
BEING MORE FLEXIBLE WITH THIS POSITION, THE IDEA IS THAT THAT'S ONE LESS POSITION WE HAVE TO ADD.
WE ARE REDUCING THE BUDGET ASK AND GIVING RESIDENTS THIS FREE ACCOMMODATION.
I TOTALLY APPRECIATE THE CITY MANAGER'S POINT OF VIEW THAT RESEARCH, IT MIGHT NOT WORK OR IT MIGHT DAMAGE OUR FACILITY WITH PACKS OF PEOPLE, BUT, IS THAT THE WORST THING EVER IF EVERYONE'S HEALTHY AND HAVING FUN? I'M WILLING TO TRY IT FOR A YEAR, SO I DEFINITELY WANT TO JUST VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR THE MOTION.
[01:05:02]
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR FEQUET, COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
>> THANKS. I AM DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF IT IN MY HEART AND IN MY HEAD, BUT MY GUT SAYS THERE'S SOMETHING AROUND OH, LIKE HEALTH AND SAFETY SORRY, I WAS GETTING WORKY THERE.
BUT AROUND HEALTH AND SAFETY AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COVERED THERE.
I GUESS QUESTION FOR ADMIN, DO YOU KNOW THAT THERE ARE NO HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPLICATIONS NOW AND IF NOT, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE AS COUNCIL, AND THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY WERE DOTTING ARISE AND CROSSING OUR TS. CAN ADMIN SPEAK TO THAT? I GUESS MY THING WOULD BE IF WE'RE NOT SURE JUST TABLING IT FOR THE NIGHT AND THEN ACTUALLY VOTING ON IT TOMORROW BECAUSE AGAIN, MY HEAD, MY HEART SAY, YES, BUT MY GUT SAYS, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.
IF ADMIN CAN SPEAK TO MAKING SURE FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, HEALTH AND SAFETY.
ARE THERE ANY HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERNS IF THIS WERE TO PASS? DO YOU KNOW WOULD WE BE SQUARED AWAY? IF NOT, CAN YOU TAKE THIS AWAY TONIGHT TO CONFIRM THAT? THANKS.
>> THANK YOU. MR. CHAIR LAST NIGHT.
I MADE REFERENCE TO STAR TRACK TONIGHT.
I'LL MAKE REFERENCE TO STAR WARS.
THERE IS A DISTURBANCE IN THE FORCE.
WITH THAT, I DO APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE THOUGHT AND THE ATTENTION THAT'S BEEN PUT INTO A PARTICULAR POSITION WITHIN A PARTICULAR FACILITY TO TRY TO ACHIEVE SOME OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCIES.
FROM A PRAGMATIC POINT OF VIEW.
I THINK THERE ARE SOME POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY QUESTIONS THAT DO ARISE THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO TURN OUR ATTENTION TO, AND WE WOULD NOT WANT TO PUT COUNCIL IN AN UNENVIABLE POSITION OF TAKING A DECISION THAT IN THE MOMENT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A LOW HANGING FRUIT ONLY TO HAVE POTENTIALLY LONGER IMPLICATIONS AND POTENTIALLY SOME RISK TO THE CITY.
I DO APPRECIATE COUNCIL MEMBERS INTEREST IN AN OPERATIONAL REVIEW THAT MIGHT IDENTIFY LARGER OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCIES WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION AT LARGE.
DOING IT ON A CASE BY CASE SITE BY SITE, POSITION BY POSITION BASIS, I WOULD OFFER IS PROBABLY NOT THE BEST WAY TO DERIVE DATA ON HOW TO ACHIEVE THOSE KINDS OF EFFICIENCIES.
WE DID MAKE A REFERENCE IN THE PRESENTATION LAST EVENING ABOUT AN ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW FROM MORE OF A CORPORATE PERSPECTIVE, BUT CERTAINLY FROM A FACILITIES PERSPECTIVE, WE COULD INCLUDE IN SUCH A REVIEW THE POTENTIAL FOR SOME SYNERGIES AND EFFICIENCIES ON DELIVERY AND TAKE A MORE COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT THE QUESTION RATHER THAN A TRIAL BASIS FOR A PARTICULAR POSITION ON A PARTICULAR FACILITY.
BUT TO THE COUNSELOR'S INTEREST IN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY, I'M UNDER SOME ENCOURAGEMENT TO PROVIDE A LEVEL OF CAUTION TO COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO TAKING AN ISOLATED DECISION IN A PARTICULAR SPOT FOR THIS PARTICULAR FACILITY, WHERE I DON'T BELIEVE I'VE HEARD IN THE JUSTIFICATION THAT THERE'S AN OPERATIONAL PROBLEM.
AT THAT FACILITY WITH OR AN OPERATIONAL INEFFICIENCY AT THAT FACILITY.
THE QUESTION IS, WHAT PROBLEM ARE WE TRYING TO FIX WITH THIS MOVE TO NECESSITATE A TRIAL THAT MIGHT HAVE SOME IMPLICATIONS.
IT'S CERTAINLY COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE TO TAKE THE DECISION THAT THEY WANT TO TAKE AND WE WILL MAKE OUR BEST EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT. THANK YOU.
>> THANKS FOR THAT. I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF TABLING THIS JUST FOR A NIGHT.
I THINK FOR ME, AND I WON'T SPEAK FOR THE MAYOR, I THINK FOR ME, THE PROBLEM IS WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE POSITIONS.
THIS POTENTIALLY WAYLAYS, ADDING ANOTHER POSITION AT ANOTHER FACILITY THAT'S BRANDS BANK AND NEW, WHERE WE CAN TRY SOMETHING FOR A YEAR, SEE IF IT WORKS, SAVE AS COUNCIL WERBERTON WAS SAYING, SAVE JUST ADDING BODIES AND ACTUALLY SEEING IF WE JUST FOUND A NEW WAY OF PROVIDING SERVICES, COUNCIL.
FORGET WHAT WE'RE SAYING FOR RESIDENTS AT A BETTER BANG FOR YOUR BUCK.
THAT TO ME IS THE PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE AS HOW DO WE GIVE BETTER BANG FOR THE BUCK TO THE RESIDENTS, AND HOW DO WE MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT ADDING POSITIONS AND THEREFORE INCREASING TAX BASE OR TAX REQUIREMENTS OVER MANY YEARS THROUGHOUT THE COUNCIL WARBURTON WAS SAYING.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM FOR ME, JUST ANSWER THAT. THAT'S FOR MYSELF.
FOR ME, JUST THAT OHS PIECE, I JUST IS SITTING IN MY GUT THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SQUARED AWAY ON THAT, BUT I WILL STOP THERE AND PASS IT BACK. THANKS, DEPUTY MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL HENDRIKSEN. BUT TO THE MAYOR, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A RESPONSE TO THIS?
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, THERE'S BEEN LOTS TO TALK ABOUT THE REORG.
MY OTHER POINT WAS THOUGH THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO OFFER FREE RECREATION AT MINUS 40.
ADULTS TO GO TO THE FIELD HOUSE RIGHT NOW IS $9 PER ADMISSION, WHICH IS GETTING PRETTY STEEP.
I APPRECIATE OUR ACCESS FOR ALL PROGRAM.
HOWEVER, I DO THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO PROVIDE A PLACE FOR LITTLE KIDDOS WHEN IT'S MINUS 30 TO GO
[01:10:03]
AND GET TO PLAY IN THE WARMTH AND I'M SURE MANY FAMILIES WILL APPRECIATE THAT ON A SQUIRRELY SATURDAY.>> THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP. COUNCILOR ARDEN-SMITH.
>> THANK YOU. MAN, I WISH I HAD SOME REALLY GREAT STAR TREK REFERENCES OTHER THAN CAPTAIN'S LOG.
BUT I'M TENTATIVELY IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AS IF WE MAKE IT FREE FOR EVERYBODY, THEN JUST EVERYBODY'S GOING TO SWARM THE MULTIPLEX, BUT THE FIELD HOUSE, BUT WE GOT TO REMEMBER EVEN WHEN IN THE SUMMERTIME IT WAS SMOKY, WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE STILL COMING OUT BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVE TO DRIVE OVER TO THE FIELDHOUSE AND YOU HAVE TO FIND A PARKING SPOT AND YOU'RE TAKING KIDS, AND IT'S A LOT OF ENERGY.
I DON'T SEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING A HUGE INFLUX OF PEOPLE HEADING OVER TO THE FIELDHOUSE.
I THINK WE'LL PROBABLY STILL BE SITTING AT CLOSE TO THE SAME NUMBERS.
BUT AS THE MAYOR HAD POINTED OUT, IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO PROVIDE A FREE SERVICE, REALLOCATE, AND IT'S MEANT FOR A YEAR JUST TO DO A TRIAL BASIS.
THEN IN A YEAR'S TIME WHEN WE COME BACK AND DO OUR NEXT BUDGET, WE CAN SEE WHAT WERE THE PROS AND CONS OF THIS.
IT'S THE YEAR OF LET'S GIVE IT A GO.
>> THE YEAR OF LET'S GIVE IT A GO.
I LIKE THAT. COUNCILOR MCGURK.
>> APOLOGIES AS MIGHT HAVE BEEN COVERED EARLIER, BUT WE'VE BEEN TALKING A BIT.
DID WE NOT HAVE SPECIFIC DATA ON HOW MANY PEOPLE USE THE WALKING TRACK AND THE PLAYGROUND? IT WAS JUST GENERAL USE.
SEVEN THOUSAND BUT WE DON'T HAVE INCOME DATA AROUND IT BECAUSE IT'S JUST WHO PUNCHES AND WHO PUNCHES.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILOR MCGURK.
I JUST WANTED TO ANSWER COUNCIL HENDRIKSEN' COMMENT ABOUT WHAT'S THE PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE.
YOU MENTIONED A FEW OF THEM, BUT THE PROBLEM IS MONEY.
WE'RE DEALING WITH THE BUDGET TOUCH.
THERE'S A NEW POSITION BEING ASKED FOR, WHICH I THINK IS UNQUESTIONABLY NEEDED AT THE NEW FACILITY, AND WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO NOT DO THAT.
NOT A NEGATIVE THING, IT'S JUST A REALITY.
I JUST WANTED TO REINFORCE THAT THERE'S A NEW POSITION THAT MIGHT NOT BE NEEDED AND WE CAN ALLAY AND OFFER FREE RECREATION.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILOR FEQUET. COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR HENDRIKSEN ON THE PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE AND THE POSITION STUFF.
I THINK MY HEAD AND HEART ARE ALSO IN SUPPORT, MY GUT IS TALKING ABOUT, AND THE MAYOR BROUGHT IT UP TO ACCESS FOR ALL PROGRAM AND IS OPENING THIS UP TO THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY FAIR.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO CAN, OF COURSE, PAY TO ACCESS THESE FACILITIES QUITE EASILY.
THAT'S THE ASPECT I'M STRUGGLING WITH ON THIS.
I AGREE ON THE PRINCIPLE AND THE CLEVER WAY TO REALLOCATE RESOURCES TO NOT ADD BODIES.
I THINK WHERE COUNCILOR HENDRICKS MIGHT WANT THE NIGHT TO DOUBLE CHECK ON THE OHS STUFF.
I MIGHT WANT THE NIGHT TO CONTINUE TO THINK.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILOR MCLENNAN.
THERE SEEMS TO BE WILL TO TABLE THIS.
I THINK THAT WE CAN AT LEAST DISCERN THAT.
FOR THAT, I SHALL TABLE THIS PARTICULAR ITEM UNTIL TOMORROW SO WE CAN COME BACK WITH THE VARIETY OF QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED HERE AROUND OHS AND EVERYTHING ELSE IN BETWEEN.
FOR THIS POINT, I SHALL THROW THE CHAIR BACK TO THE MAYOR. THAT'S FUN TO SAY.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER ON THE FIELD HOUSE? SEEING NONE, PARKS.
THE LIBRARY. COUNCILOR HENDRICKS?
>> THANK YOU. JUST REGARDING THE 103,000 FOR SECURITY GUARDS AT THE LIBRARY, BEING REQUESTED FROM OCTOBER THROUGH APRIL AND
[01:15:03]
ROUGHLY THE EQUIVALENT AMOUNT THAT WAS MENTIONED IN THE ANSWERS TO COUNCIL FOR THE VISITOR CENTER.CAN VAN ANSWER, DOES THE CITY RECEIVE SECURITY SUPPORT FROM THE MALL'S OWN SECURITY CONTRACTOR SINCE WORK TENANTS OF THE MALL?
>> THE QUAGMIRE OF OWNERSHIP IN THAT SQUARE. MR. VAN DINE?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. NO, WE DO NOT.
>> JUST BECAUSE WE'RE A CONDOS, WE'RE SEPARATE FROM THE LOWER MALL.
ANYTHING FURTHER ON THE LIBRARY? DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
>> ONE COMMENT. I LOVE THE LIBRARY, AND I'M GLAD WE CONTINUOUSLY PUT MONEY TOWARDS OPERATING IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER? SEEING NONE.
POOL FIRST, WHICH IS ALSO, I THINK THE AQUATIC CENTER.
PAGE 64. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, MOTIONS? FOR ME, THE CONCERNS ON THE BOOKING SUPERVISOR AND I JUST THINK WE NEED SOFTWARE WHERE RESIDENTS CAN GO BOOK, PAY ONLINE.
I FEEL LIKE WE'RE THROWING GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD BY HAVE TO HIRE SOMEBODY TO BE ABLE TO VALIDATE WHAT PEOPLE ASK FOR WHERE A VERY LARGE $500 MILLION ASSETS, 30 MILLION PLUS BUDGET.
WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
I WOULD PASS THE CHAIR TO DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
>> THANK YOU. GET WARM IN THIS CHAIR.
WITH THAT, I SHALL PUT FORWARD TO THE MAYOR.
>> MY MOTION IS THAT WE STRIKE THE CUSTOMER SERVICE BOOKING SUPERVISOR FROM THE BUDGET.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE MOTION?
>> YEAH. FOR ME, IT'S A CASE OF I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A SOFTWARE WHERE RESIDENTS CAN GO BOOK BE DONE.
I REMEMBER WHEN YOU COULD BOOK YOUR PLANE TICKETS ONLINE AND ONE COMPANY, YOU COULDN'T, AND I MOVED AWAY FROM USING THAT COMPANY BECAUSE A SATURDAY AT 10 O'CLOCK, IF THAT'S THE TIME THAT I HAVE IT, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO FINISH MY BOOKING, GET THAT OFF THE LIST.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE ADDING POSITIONS TO FINISH ALL THAT STUFF.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH YOUR WORSHIP. ANYTHING TO THE MOTION? WOULD ADMINISTRATION LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE MOTION?
>> NO. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WOULD LIKE TO JUST OFFER FOR COUNSEL'S CONSIDERATION WITH RESPECT TO THIS MOTION.
I AM VERY SENSITIVE AND QUITE AGREE WITH THE MAYOR'S DESIRE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT TECHNOLOGY THAT WORKS AND IS EFFICIENT AND ACTUALLY DOES WHAT IS EXPECTED IN MANY OTHER DOMAINS AND FIELDS AND WE SHOULD NOT BE AN ISLAND ONTO OURSELVES INTO OUR OWN AREA OF TECHNOLOGY THAT DOESN'T WORK THE WAY IT DOES IN THE REST OF THE WORLD.
THAT BEING SAID, THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE DO HAVE THAT WE DID PROCURE DOES NOT PROVIDE US THAT OPPORTUNITY AT THIS JUNCTURE.
THERE IS ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE BASED ON PAST COUNCILS AND OTHER DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT SUPERVISORS TEND TO BE POSITIONS THAT BECOME VERY ATTRACTIVE TO COUNCIL AS TO BEING SOMETHING THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE A WISE USE OF RESOURCES.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT'S THE CASE IN THIS INSTANCE.
HOWEVER, A SUPERVISOR IS A VERY IMPORTANT ROLE TO PLAY WHEN YOU'VE GOT A SPAN OF CONTROL OF STAFF THAT IS BEING INTRODUCED TO A VERY LARGE BRAND NEW FACILITY THAT TAXPAYERS ARE AWARE TO THE TUNE OF ABOUT $71 MILLION, AND WE REQUIRE THE NECESSARY STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO OPERATE.
I WOULD OFFER THAT IN BUDGET 2026, WE MIGHT WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT THE STAFF COMPLIMENTS THAT WE REQUIRE ARE FULLY REQUIRED TO MEET THE INTENDED OUTCOMES THAT ARE THERE, BUT I WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO SUGGEST PRIOR TO OPENING, CUTTING A POSITION THAT WE BELIEVE WOULD BE VERY VALUABLE IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FACILITY OPERATES THE WAY IT'S INTENDED TO OPERATE ON OPENING DAY IN Q2.
I WOULD CAUTION COUNCIL FROM TAKING AN INNOVATIVE DECISION PREMATURELY WITH THIS FACILITY ABOUT TO OPEN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TO THE MAYOR.
[01:20:03]
>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT FOR ME, ONCE YOU OUT OF POSITION, WE'RE NOT GOING TO REMOVE THAT POSITION.
IF WE PUT IT AS A ONE-YEAR TERM, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO HIRE SOMEBODY.
I DO THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SURVIVE FOR 2025 WITH THE CURRENT RESOURCES AS WE DEVELOP A PLAN TO MOVE FORWARD.
I AM STILL IN SUPPORT OF NOT ADVANCING WITH THAT.
THE REASON I ALSO WANTED TO SEE THE PYS AND ACTUAL CHART WAS TO SEE THE SPAN OF CONTROL AND TO SEE IF WE'RE GOING BEYOND AND THE OPPORTUNITIES TO SHIFT PEOPLE AROUND.
I THINK WE'VE GOT THE RESOURCES, AND SO FOR ME, I'M STILL IN SUPPORT OF REMOVING THE POSITION, AND I THINK 2025, WE'VE GOT TO DO A REAL HARD LOOK AT ALL THE POSITIONS AND SPANS OF CONTROL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE USING OUR RESOURCES TO THE BEST OF ABILITY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH YOUR WORSHIP. COUNCIL MCGURK.
>> I THINK THAT IF WE WERE TO VOTE ON THE MAYOR'S PREVIOUS MOTION OR AN APPROVAL, AND THEN IT MIGHT GIVE US ALSO SOME BREATHING ROOM FOR, LIKE YOU SAID, COMING BACK AND LOOKING AT WHETHER OR NOT THE POSITION IS VALUABLE IN 2026.
BUT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I'D HAVE TO DECIDE AFTER WE VOTED ON THAT OTHER ONE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILOR MCGURK.
ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCIL FEQUET?
WE JUST LAUNCHED NEW SOFTWARE TODAY THAT DOESN'T LET US DO ONLINE BOOKING.
MR. VAN DINE. IT'S WORKING VERY WELL.
>> BUT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE ONLINE BOOKING FOR PEOPLE TO PAY AND BOOK THEMSELVES.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. THE ONLINE BOOKING QUESTION WHILE HAD BEEN DESIRED OR MENTIONED IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS, I DON'T BELIEVE WAS A PRIMARY REQUIREMENT OF THE NEW SOFTWARE UPGRADE THAT WAS DONE.
WHY THAT WAS DONE? I CANNOT ANSWER TO PROBABLY THE SATISFACTION OF COUNCIL TONIGHT.
I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT.
HOWEVER, THE LIMITATIONS OF THE PREVIOUS SOFTWARE WERE VERY WELL KNOWN, AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BROUGHT FORWARD A REASONABLE FINANCIAL PROPOSAL FOR REPLACEMENT SOFTWARE THAT WOULD DO THE JOB, AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE NEW SOFTWARE IS DOING THE JOB THAT IT WAS ASKED TO DO.
ONLINE BOOKING WAS PROBABLY NOT SCOPED IN.
I CAN CONFIRM THAT THROUGH FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
I WOULD OFFER THAT WHEN BUDGET PROPOSALS ARE BROUGHT FORWARD, SUCH AS SOFTWARE, WE TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE PROPOSALS ARE AS MODEST AS POSSIBLE FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT COUNCIL COULD PROBABLY IMAGINE, INCLUDING CAPITAL, WHICH WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, DOES NOT INCLUDE BUMP OUTS, DOES NOT INCLUDE OTHER THINGS.
WE TRY TO COME IN WITH RELATIVELY BARE BONES KINDS OF PROPOSALS.
IF THE AMBITION IS HIGHER, THEN WE WOULD INVITE COUNCIL TO OFFER THAT AT THE TIME OF BUDGET SEASON, WHICH IS UPON US TODAY.
IN TERMS OF THIS PARTICULAR SOFTWARE, IT IS OPERATIONAL.
WE HAD QUITE A BIT OF SUCCESS TODAY WITH RESPECT TO THE NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS AND ONLOADING FOR AN OPENING DAY, WHICH DEMONSTRATES THAT IT IS WORKING BASED ON THE LEVEL OF TRAINING AND PLANNING WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY STAFF, WHICH HAS BEEN INCREDIBLE.
PEOPLE HAVE THEIR SWIMMING LESSONS.
PEOPLE HAVE OTHER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES THAT THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET ONLINE FOR.
I THINK WE HAD TWO TRANSACTIONS THAT DID NOT WORK OF A NUMBER THAT I'M JUST GOING TO TURN TO MR. WHITE TO GIVE ME THE NUMBER.
>> YEAH. THANK YOU. THE LAST COUNT WAS THERE WAS 420 REGISTRATIONS DONE TODAY BY INDIVIDUALS, AND TWO OF THOSE HAD ISSUES THAT OUR STAFF ARE FOLLOWING UP ON.
I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS AT THE USER END OR AT THE CITY'S END. T HANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'M VERY HAPPY TO HEAR THAT THAT IS DEFINITELY WORKING SMOOTHLY AND HOPEFULLY TAKING A BURDEN OFF AND MAKING STAFF'S LIFE EASIER.
WHILE WE WERE EXECUTING THAT PROJECT OR SOMETIME DURING THAT PROJECT, DID WE EVER SCOPE OR GET A SENSE OF HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST TO ADD THAT VIEW FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE AND WHAT BOOKING MIGHT COST TO ADD THAT IN THERE?
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'LL HAVE TO TAKE THAT QUESTION UNDER ADVISEMENT TO FIND OUT
[01:25:02]
WHAT WENT INTO THE ACTUAL PROPOSAL AND WHETHER THAT WAS SCOPED IN.I'LL RETURN AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE.
>> THANK YOU. OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE THERE'S A TIT-FOR-TAT HERE.
IF THE MONEY CAN BE REALLOCATED TO MAKE STAFF'S LIFE EVEN EASIER AND ALSO AGAIN, GIVE OUR RESIDENTS SOMETHING THAT THEY'VE BEEN ASKING FOR AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING FOR, GREAT.
BUT IF IT'S A WISH UPON A FAR STAR, THAT WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW, TOO.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR FEQUET. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALSO CURIOUS ABOUT THE PRACTICALITIES AS COUNCILLOR.
I FORGET I WAS JUST MENTIONING, MY COMMENTS RELATED TO THIS, I DO SEE THIS POSITION DEBATE SEPARATE FROM THE CASHIER AND THE PREVIOUS MOTION.
I THANK STAFF FOR ALL THEIR WORK IN RECOVERING FROM A SOFTWARE THAT BAILED ON US TO FIND A SOLUTION AND I APPRECIATE AND I'M VERY THANKFUL FOR ALL THE WORK.
I THINK THIS HAS COME UP A COUPLE OF TIMES IN THIS BUDGET DELIBERATION WHERE I ALSO APPRECIATE BRINGING FORWARD A COST-EFFECTIVE SOLUTION IN TERMS OF SOFTWARE.
HOWEVER, IF THAT COST-EFFECTIVE SOLUTION THEN ALSO REQUIRES $130,000 PLUS POSITION IN PERPETUITY, I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE TWO THINGS THOUGHT ABOUT AS ONE.
SAME WITH THE DOG POUND DISCUSSION AND THE TWO MED POSITIONS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE DOING OTHER THINGS AS WELL, BUT WE'RE THOUGHT OF AS COMPLETELY SEPARATE, WHEREAS I SEE THEM AS INTERTWINED.
FOR THOSE REASONS HERE, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION OF CUTTING THIS POSITION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
BEFORE WE GO TO THE SECOND ROUND WITH COUNCILLOR MCGURK, I WILL SAY THAT I AM ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
BEING THAT WE HAVE A SUPERVISORY POSITION ALREADY THERE, WHICH I BELIEVE WILL BE CALLED THE, AND FORGIVE ME IF I'M WRONG, THE POOL PROGRAMS MANAGER, IS THERE NO REASON WHY SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY OVER THE FRONT END CANNOT BE ALLOCATED THAT POSITION IN SOME GENERAL MANAGER TYPE ROLE? MR. VAN DINE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO RESPOND TO THAT SPECIFIC QUESTION.
THIS IS A LEVEL OF GRANULARITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE CURIOSITY THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING, BUT I'LL DEFER TO THE MANAGER THAT HAS OPERATIONAL OVERSIGHT TO RESPOND. MR. WHITE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE TITLE IS THE AQUATIC PROGRAM SUPERVISOR.
THERE WE GO. AS YOU GUYS WERE ADVISED ON OUR TOUR, WE'RE EXPANDING OUR PROGRAMMING FROM 380 PROGRAMS TO WELL OVER 700 PROGRAMS. WE ARE INTRODUCING A BRAND NEW FACILITY WITH MANY MOVING PARTS, MANY MORE STAFF TO SUPERVISE.
THE SUPERVISOR WILL HAVE THEIR HANDS FULL WITH JUST THE AQUATICS PORTION OF THEIR DUTIES. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. THERE IS ALSO AN ASSISTANT POOL SUPERVISOR.
I'M ASSUMING THAT ROLE WILL BE REDEFINED INTO AN ASSISTANT AQUATIC CENTER PROGRAM SUPERVISOR.
WOULD THAT ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITY NOT BE ABLE TO FILL UP WITH THAT CAVEAT OR SHOULD THAT ROLE NOT BE ABLE TO HIGHLY ASSIST IN THE ROLE EVEN WITH THE NEW OVERSIGHT OF NEW EMPLOYEES? MR. VAN DINE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AS MR. WHITE HAS POINTED OUT, WE ARE DEALING WITH A MAJOR UNKNOWN WITH OPENING A FACILITY OF THIS SIZE WITH THIS LEVEL OF PROGRAMMING IN ITS VERY FIRST YEAR.
THE STAFF ESTIMATES AND COMPLIMENTS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO COUNCIL AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS CONCEPT BEING FIRST THOUGHT ABOUT, SO IT WAS MAPPED OUT.
I DO APPRECIATE THAT THE DISTANCE AND TIME BETWEEN THE TIME THAT COUNCIL HAS APPROVED VARIOUS STAGES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AQUATIC CENTER AND THE STAFF COMPLIMENTS THAT HAVE GONE ON, THAT OUR ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES AS A MUNICIPALITY HAVE PROBABLY SHIFTED OVER TIME.
HOWEVER, THE OPENING HAS NOT YET OCCURRED AND WE ARE PUTTING OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD FOR THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE AND MAKING SURE THAT THIS AQUATIC CENTER IS A SUCCESS.
I WOULD SAY THAT BY ADJUSTING PERSONNEL AT THIS JUNCTURE PRIOR TO OPENING, IS A PROPOSITION THAT IS RISKY IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS AND WANTS, AND DESIRES OF YELLOWKNIFERS IN TERMS OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE OPERATION OF THIS BRAND NEW FACILITY.
[01:30:03]
DOWNSTREAM WITH RESPECT TO HOW OUR FACILITIES ARE OPERATING, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DO A STRUCTURED ANALYSIS OF THAT TO FIND OPPORTUNITIES FOR EFFICIENCIES.WHILE IT'S DIFFICULT TO CREATE AND DIAL BACK TERM POSITIONS OR ANY POSITIONS FOR THAT MATTER, JUSTIFICATIONS AND RATIONALE AND ANALYSIS AND REVIEW CAN PROBABLY BE UNDERTAKEN TO JUSTIFY ANY DECISION COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO TAKE WITH RESPECT TO EITHER ENHANCEMENTS OR DECREASES TO SERVICE LEVELS.
I WOULD JUST INVITE COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT GOOD INFORMATION PRIOR TO INNOVATING ON A $71 MILLION FACILITY THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO OPEN. THANK YOU.
>> WELL MET AND WELL THOUGHT OF. THANK YOU.
ONTO THE SECOND ROUND. COUNCILLOR MCGURK.
>> JUST CONFIRMING THE NAME OF THE BOOKING SOFTWARE IS XPLOR RECREATION.
>> [LAUGHTER] YEAH, I WAS JUST DOUBLE-CHECKING WITH MR. WHITE.
>> THANKS. THIS POS SERVICE PROVIDER DOES OFFER BOTH AN ONLINE STORE AND A MOBILE APP FEATURE.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE HAVE LOOKED INTO WHAT THE COST DIFFERENCE IS OR WHAT THE COST IS TO IMPLEMENT ONE OR BOTH OF THOSE.
>> I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THAT QUESTION UNDER ADVISEMENT AND GET BACK TO THE MEMBERS AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MCGURK. COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
>> THANK YOU. I'M FULLY IN SUPPORT OF REMOVING THAT POSITION.
THE COST TO OUR TAXPAYERS TO OPEN THE DOORS FACILITY IS $2.35 MILLION MORE PER YEAR FOREVER.
IF WE CAN DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING AT ALL, TO POSSIBLY MAKE THIS WORK BETTER, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WORKING AT THIS FACILITY AND THE SPOT WE'RE LOOKING TO GET RID OF IS A BOOKING SUPERVISOR.
IF WE DO THE MOTION TO FREE UP A BOOKING CLERK SOMEWHERE ELSE, THAT FRONT DESK WILL STILL BE COVERED.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MANAGING BOOKING CLERKS, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ACTUAL DESK STAFFING, IN MY OPINION, SO I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF REMOVING THIS.
BECAUSE THIS IS ALREADY A BIG LUMP TO SWALLOW AND I'D LIKE TO FIND SOME WAY OF MAKING THIS A LITTLE LESS PAINFUL. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR WARBURTON. COUNCILLOR PAYNE.
>> THANK YOU. WHEN COUNCIL APPROVED THIS PROJECT, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT YEAR IT WAS, WE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO COST MORE.
WE'RE BUILDING A FACILITY THAT'S GOING TO SERVICE TWICE AS MANY PEOPLE, SO IT'S NOT A BIG SURPRISE TO ANYBODY THAT OUR COSTS ARE GOING TO GO UP.
WE ALL KNEW THIS AS WHAT WE ACCEPTED.
NOW, I THINK IT WOULD BE AN ABSOLUTE HORRIBLE SITUATION IF WE'RE GOING INTO A NEW FACILITY AND BEFORE WE EVEN START, WE'RE BEHIND.
I'D RATHER LOOK AT THE POSITIONS AFTER WE'VE HAD A YEAR RUNNING THIS FACILITY AND THEN SEE WHAT WE NEED OR WHAT WE DON'T NEED.
TO TAKE SOMEBODY OUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK IS AN IRRESPONSIBLE THING TO DO.
IF WE'RE LOOKING AT CUTTING POSITIONS, THERE'S MORE POSITIONS COMING UP THAT WE CAN LOOK AT CUTTING.
I'VE JUST SEEN THE ARTICLE ABOUT THE GNWT AND HOW MANY EMPLOYEES THAT THEY'VE HIRED OVER THE LAST 6, 7 YEARS, AND IT'S 1,000 MORE PEOPLE THAN WHAT WE HAD.
IT'S A TOUGH ONE, BUT IT DOES KEEP OUR ECONOMY GOING.
IF IT WASN'T FOR THE GNWT WITH ALL ITS PEOPLE, WE'D BE IN A PRETTY SHITTY SITUATION, I THINK.
I'M NOT ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF CUTTING POSITIONS ESPECIALLY THIS ONE WHERE IT'S A NEW FACILITY AND THIS IS GOING TO BE THE GEM OF YELLOWKNIFE.
THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE PROUD OF FOR YEARS, AND I JUST DON'T WANT US TO BE BEHIND BEFORE WE EVEN START.
BUT IN REGARDS TO OTHER POSITIONS, MAYBE THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT CUTTING. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR PAYNE. COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
>> I'VE BEEN BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH.
DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE IS HAVING TO DEAL WITH ME; YES, NO, YES, NO, I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING.
I'M GOING TO BE THAT GUY AND SAY, I'M ACTUALLY WHERE COUNCILLOR MCGURK WAS ON HER FIRST ROUND OF QUESTIONING.
I APPRECIATE WHERE COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN IS COMING FROM, THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
ACTUALLY, FOR ME, THIS IS A JOINT DECISION WHERE THE LAST ONE WILL IMPACT MY DECISION ON THIS ONE BECAUSE EVERYTHING COUNCILLOR PAYNE JUST SAID AROUND WANTING TO LEAN IN ON THIS IN TERMS OF A SUCCESSFUL OPENING,
[01:35:02]
I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH.IF ANYBODY WANTS, YOU CAN LOOK AT MY THOUGHTS ON THE AQUATIC CENTER HISTORICALLY WHEN THERE WAS A REFERENDUM, BUT WE'RE IN IT NOW, AND WE NEED TO COMMIT AS A CITY TO MAKING THIS GOOD.
THAT'S WHERE MY HEAD IS AT ON THE AQUATIC CENTER PIECE OF IT.
I THINK BACK TO THE QUESTION WITH THE FIELDHOUSE.
I THINK THERE'S OPPORTUNITY STILL FOR REALLOCATION BASED OFF OF MY OTHER QUESTION THAT I ALREADY HAVE AROUND THAT. THAT'S WHERE MY HEAD'S AT.
I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF CUTTING THIS POSITION BECAUSE I DO THINK AS A CITY, WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY ON THIS NEW AQUATIC CENTER.
WHETHER WE WERE FOR OR AGAINST IT BEFORE, WE'RE FOR IT NOW, AND WE NEED TO MAKE IT A SUCCESS AS COUNCILLOR PAYNE WAS JUST INDICATING.
THAT'S WHERE I'M SITTING ON THIS. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK MAYBE WE SHOULD TABLE THIS ITEM AS WE DID THE PREVIOUS BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE A FEW PEOPLE THAT THEIR DECISION WILL DEPEND BASED ON WHAT THEY PUT FORWARD FOR THE PREVIOUS MOTION.
FOR MYSELF, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH COUNCILLOR PAYNE ON THIS.
WE NEED TO PUT OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD.
WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE GOING INTO THE NEW FACILITY AND WE'VE HALF-ASSED IT.
I MYSELF, I'M REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO MY CHILDREN GOING THERE, AND HAVING THE FULL SERVICE THAT COMES ALONG WITH A BRAND-NEW FACILITY IS VERY IMPORTANT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH. COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THE EXACT SAME THING.
I WOULD LIKE TO TABLE THIS BECAUSE FOR ME, THE DECISIONS ARE LINKED.
AS I SAID EARLIER, THESE STAFF POSITIONS FOR THIS NEW FACILITY ARE OUR BEST GUESS.
STAFF'S DONE A LOT OF WORK TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY NEED AND I'M NOT PREPARED TO DO ANY LESS THAN THAT FOR OUR SUCCESS.
BUT FOR ME, IT'S LINKED TO THE OTHER MOTION BECAUSE IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY, THEN I'M IN, SO I WOULD LIKE TO TABLE THIS AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR FEQUET. YOUR WORSHIP.
>> WELL DUE TO CLOSE BEFORE WE TABLE.
>> WE HAVE ONE MORE BEFORE CLOSING, IF YOU DON'T MIND. COUNCILLOR MCGURK.
>> JUST REALLY QUICK. CAN YOU GIVE US A RUNDOWN OF WHAT CITY STAFF WILL BE WORKING AT THE AQUATIC CENTER, NOT JUST THE LIFEGUARDS AND CUSTOMER SERVICE, CASHIER, ETC, THAT HAVE BEEN LISTED HERE.
BUT I KNOW THAT THERE ARE OFFICES FOR OTHER STAFF.
I'M WONDERING IF WE COULD GET THAT LIST.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MCGURK. THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIVISION OUTSIDE OF THE DIRECTOR WHO WILL BE REMAINING AT CITY HALL, IF I LAST REMEMBER, BUT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MR. VAN DINE.
>> THAT'S CORRECT, MR. CHAIR. WE ARE LOOKING AT ACCOMMODATING OUR COMMUNITY SERVICES STAFF AT THAT FACILITY, FREEING UP THAT PRESSURE THAT'S WITHIN THE EXISTING CITY HALL FACILITY.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S SOMETHING I'M CONSIDERING IN TERMS OF IF THE CUSTOMER SERVICE ASPECT IS MAYBE THE LARGER PIECE THAT WE'RE NEEDING THERE, WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS THE ABILITY TO USE SOME OF THEIR TIME TO DO THAT PART OF THE WORK.
>> ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS TO SPEAK WITH PEOPLE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I DO BELIEVE A LOT OF COMMUNITY SERVICE ACTUALLY DOES A FAIR AMOUNT OF THAT AS WELL.
BUT TO CLOSE, LET'S GO TO THE MAYOR.
>> THANKS. FOR ME, THIS BOOKING SUPERVISOR, YES, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN INCREASE DUE TO THE AQUATIC CENTER, HOWEVER, IF WE HAD SOFTWARE WHERE PEOPLE COULD FINALIZE THEIR BOOKINGS, IT'S NOT AS BIG OF A DEMAND.
TO SAY THAT THIS IS A BRAND NEW POSITION THIS YEAR.
IF WE GO BACK IN THE BUDGETS, 2023, THERE WAS NO PROPOSAL TO NEED A CASHIER.
2024 IS LIKE, WE NEED A CASHIER.
2025 IS LIKE, NOW WE NEED A BOOKING SUPERVISOR.
THERE JUST KEEPS ADDING POSITIONS, AND I APPRECIATE AS WE'RE GETTING CLOSER, WE'RE GOING TO REALIZE WE NEED MORE X, Y, AND Z.
HOWEVER, TO SAY WHEN WE APPROVED THIS BACK IN 2017, WE KNEW THAT WE WERE GOING TO NEED MORE STAFF.
YES, HOWEVER, EVERY YEAR, WE NEED SOMETHING NEW AND THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE FOREVER AND EVER.
BUT FOR ME, I THINK WE'VE REALLY GOT TO FIND A WAY TO MINIMIZE THE TOUCH THAT THE CITY HAS JUST SO PEOPLE CAN BOOK OUR FACILITIES.
WE'RE CREATING MORE WORK BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE RIGHT SOFTWARE.
[01:40:03]
THIS YEAR, IT'S STARTING AT 140,000, BUT THE SALARIES IN JUST TWO YEARS' TIME IS AT 151,000.AGAIN, I FEEL WE'RE THROWING GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN A GOOD SOFTWARE.
IF WE COULD GET A SOFTWARE WHERE PEOPLE COULD FINALIZE WITHOUT A TOUCH FROM CITY HALL, WE FREE UP A LOT OF TIME.
BUT HAPPY TO DISCUSS THIS AGAIN TOMORROW.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM MAYOR. I DO CONCUR WITH EVERYTHING STATED, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE FACT THAT ONCE YOU ADD AN EMPLOYEE, THERE'S NO ABILITY TO REALLY REDUCE AFTER CBA AND ALL THAT.
BUT THERE IS A WILL FOR THE MAJORITY TO TABLE IT, SO WE SHALL BE TABLEING THIS ITEM UNTIL TOMORROW AS WELL.
AT THAT POINT, I SHALL PASS THE CHAIR BACK TO THE MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE'VE REACHED OUR 90-MINUTE MARK, SO WE WILL COME BACK AT 7:22 PM.
PAGE 64, POOL BUDGET, ANYTHING FURTHER? WE'VE TABLED SOME STUFF THAT I THINK WE'LL HAVE CASCADES, SO WE'LL COME BACK TO THE REST TOMORROW.
SEEING NONE, NEXT IS PUBLIC SAFETY.
>> PAGE 71 IS THE PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTORATE.
ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN? NO. THIS IS JUST THE DIRECTORATE. I JUST HAD A QUESTION.
IT TALKS ABOUT 8.106 MILLION THROUGH DMAF.
I'M WONDERING IF THAT SHOULD BE DISASTER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT BECAUSE DMAF WE ONLY WERE GOING TO RECEIVE TWO MILLION FROM THE FEDS TO THE NWTAC TO US.
JUST WONDERING WHAT TO NOTE 1. MR. VAN DINE?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO NOTE 1.
I'VE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT NOTE 1 WITH MR. PANDOO AND I THINK MR. PANDOO WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO TALK TO NOTE 1. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
THE NOTE 1 JUST GOING TO DELINEATE TO SAY THE NUMBER IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE.
IT'S JUST GOING TO CLARIFY TO SAY 2.3 MILLION GOING TO COME FROM THE DMAF, AND THE 5.8 GOING TO COME FROM THE DISASTER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE ARRANGEMENT.
>> ON PAGE 71, EIGHT MILLION IS GOING TO COME FROM DMAF?
>> THIS NOTE, YOU NEED TO READ IT BECAUSE IT'S REFERENCING TO 2023 ACTUALS.
THAT NOTE REFERS TO THE PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT WE HAD AT THE TIME.
THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD CHANGE OR THAT WAS AMBIGUOUS AT THE TIME WAS WE DID NOT KNOW IF THE FUNDS WERE GOING TO COME FROM DMAF OR ANY OTHER SOURCE.
AT THE TIME, THAT NOTE AS IT IS WRITTEN IS CORRECT.
IT WAS ASSUMED EVERYTHING WILL BE COVERED THROUGH DMAF.
NOW, WE KNOW ONLY 2.3 IS COMING FROM DMAF AND THE REST IS COMING FROM THE DFAA.
I THINK IN THE CONTEXT OF WHEN IT'S WRITTEN, THAT WOULD BE JUST ONLY APPROPRIATE JUST TO CHANGE THAT BIT AND NOT THE AMOUNT.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE CLARIFY LIKE IF WE WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IN 2023, WE THOUGHT IT WAS DMAF, BUT WE REALIZED IT'S NOT, THEN LET'S DO THAT.
BUT BECAUSE WHEN YOU FLIP BACK, YOU'RE GOING TO BE LIKE, WHAT? YOU GOT, BUT WE DIDN'T GET MONEY FROM DMAF.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THAT'S IT.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER ON THE DIRECTORATE? SEEING NONE, PAGE 72 IS THE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DIVISION.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? SEEING NONE.
[01:45:02]
THAT WOULD BE ON PAGE 74.>> THANKS, MADAM CHAIR. JUST LOOKING FOR, I GUESS, AN UPDATE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 911 INTEGRATION, AND IF EVERYTHING'S ON TRACK OR IF WE'RE EXPECTING ANYTHING UNEXPECTED IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
I'LL INVITE MR. MCLANE TO GIVE US AN UPDATE. THANK YOU.
>> THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. CURRENTLY, THE PROJECT IS UNDERWAY.
IT IS A SOFTWARE-BASED PROJECT.
AS YOU CAN UNDERSTAND, THERE ARE SOME TECHNICAL PIECES NEEDING TO ALIGN TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE TRAINING AND THE GOAL OF MOVING TO ACCEPT TESTING THE SOFTWARE IN THE PROCESS PRIOR TO THE END OF MARCH 2025. THANK YOU.
>> ANYTHING FURTHER ON FIRE? COUNCIL WARBURTON?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME VACANCY ISSUES IN FIRE FOR A LONG TIME, JUST A LITTLE UPDATE ON WHERE WE'RE AT FOR FILLED JOBS HERE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
OUR RECRUITMENT CONTINUES, AND I'LL INVITE MR. MCLANE TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON A NUMBER OF POTENTIALLY VACANCIES AND OUR CURRENT STAFF PLANS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU TO MY LAST KNOWLEDGE, THERE WAS FIVE VACANCIES.
THERE IS INTEREST FROM A COUPLE OF CANDIDATES, SO WE'RE HOPING TO FILL THOSE VACANCIES AS SOON AS CANDIDATES BECOME AVAILABLE AND ARE WILLING TO TRAVEL TO YELLOWKNIFE IN THE MIDDLE OF WINTER. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S ENCOURAGING TO HEAR.
I KNOW DOWN SOUTH, THERE'S A SURPLUS CURRENTLY OF TRAINED FIREFIGHTERS, SO HOPEFULLY THAT BLOWS WELL FOR US. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER? SEEING NONE.
NEXT, WE COME TO MED. COUNCILLOR WARBURTON?
>> THANKS. IN THE Q&A, WE'D ASKED QUESTIONS AROUND THESE POSITIONS AND JUSTIFICATION.
ONE OF THE ANSWERS WAS THERE WAS TWO SUPERVISORS.
WENT DOWN TO ONE SUPERVISOR, SO THAT INCREASED LOAD ON THAT ONE POSITION MEANT LESS TIME GETTING IN THE CAR.
WHERE DID THAT ONE SUPERVISOR POSITION GO? DID IT GET CUT? DID IT GET MOVED? WHERE DID IT END UP?
>> THANK YOU. I'LL INVITE MR. MCLANE TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THAT ADJUSTMENT. THANK YOU.
>> DURING THAT RESTRUCTURING, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT ONE POSITION HAD MOVED TO THE VACANT NOW FILLED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGER POSITION.
>> SO THAT JOB WAS REALLOCATED, AND THEN IT WAS REPROFILED INTO EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.
IT WAS ESSENTIALLY CUT FROM MED IN ESSENCE?
>> YEAH. THERE WAS A BIT OF A REORG.
I CAN CIRCULATE THAT PRESENTATION.
IT HAPPENED JANUARY 2020 OR 2019, MAYBE.
>> ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN?
>> THANKS, MAYOR ALTY. I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A MOTION OUT TO THAT COUNCIL CUT THE TWO MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT OFFICER POSITIONS FROM THE BUDGET IN 2025, AND I'M HAPPY TO SPEAK TO IT.
>> THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT?
>> THANKS. IN MAY 2023, WE REVIEWED OUR STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR MED.
MANY OF US SAID WE WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE PRIORITIES BECAUSE REALLY WE WERE STILL FIVE MONTHS INTO THE JOB, AND WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE INFORMED RECOMMENDATIONS FROM WHAT WAS PRESENTED.
AT LEAST THAT WAS MY OPINION AT THE TIME.
TWO YEARS IN OUR ROLES, I BELIEVE WE STILL NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE PRIORITIES AGAIN, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE OF NEW FUNDING FOR STREET OUTREACH, PART OF WHICH IS MEANT TO INCLUDE MORE ON THE GROUND PRESENCE, CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DOG POUND, WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED ALREADY, AND A MORE PROACTIVE VIEW OF TRANSPORTATION SAFETY, WHICH I WILL JUST SAY ENFORCEMENT DOES NOT MEAN SAFETY.
ENFORCEMENT IS AFTER THE FACT, WHEN SOMETHING IS UNSAFE.
REALLY UNTIL WE DISCUSS THOSE STRATEGIC PRIORITIES, I CAN'T SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH THESE TWO POSITIONS WITH THAT SAID.
ONCE WE DO, IF WE BELIEVE THERE IS THE NEED, I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY TO HAVE THIS PRESENTED AGAIN IN BUDGET 2026, IF THEY ARE DEEMED APPROPRIATE AT THAT TIME, BUT FOR NOW, I THINK FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT HAVE BEEN
[01:50:03]
DISCUSSED ALREADY ABOUT NOT EXPANDING FASTER THAN WE RECOGNIZE NEED, THAT'S WHERE MY HEAD IS AT, AND THAT'S WHY I BRING THE MOTION FORWARD.>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL FEQUET, DID I SEE YOUR HAND GO UP? COUNCIL FEQUET?
>> THANKS, MADAM CHAIR. I'M FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON.
I DECIDED TO RUN BECAUSE OF PUBLIC SAFETY WAS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS, LIVING AND WORKING IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE AND I VERY MUCH RESPECT AND APPRECIATE WHAT OUR MED TEAM DOES.
BUT YES, WE HAVEN'T HAD THE LARGER STRATEGIC CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT WE HOPE MED WILL BE ACHIEVING.
I THINK THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN FIRST, AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK TO CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO STAFFING.
FOR THOSE REASONS, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MCLENNAN, AND THEN COUNCIL WARBURTON?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
NOT A TON THAT I CAN ADD I'D ECHO A LOT OF THE SENTIMENTS OF THE TWO PREVIOUS COUNCILORS.
VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO THE EXPANDED PRESENCE FROM STREET OUTREACH.
I THINK IT WOULD REQUIRE A MUCH LARGER CONVERSATION IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ADDRESSING ENFORCEMENT AS A LARGER PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURE.
AND WOULD ECHO THE COMMENTS OF THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL WARBURTON?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
I THINK WE CAN'T SAY WE CARE ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, AND THEN THE ONE THING WE HAVE TO MOVE THAT NEEDLE, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE DOWN. I THINK THAT'S RIDICULOUS.
I SEE THAT MED PRIORITIES, WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND SET THOSE PRIORITIES IN THE NEW YEAR.
BUT THAT DOES NOT NEGATE THE NEED FOR WARM BODIES TO BE DOING THE JOB, AND WE'VE VERY CLEAR ARTICULATED THAT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO COVER SHIFTS.
PRIORITIES DON'T MATTER IF THERE'S NO PEOPLE TO DO THAT JOB.
FOR THOSE REASONS, I WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION TO CUT.
I THINK THESE ARE VITAL TO HAVE BECAUSE, THAT'S ALL I HEAR ABOUT ALL THE TIME IS HOW PUBLIC SAFETY IS OUT OF CONTROL IN YELLOWKNIFE AND WE'RE BEING GIVEN A VERY LIMITED TOOLBOX TO DEAL WITH IT, AND THE ONE THING WE'RE BEING OFFERED TO DO HERE AND TO CUT THAT, I THINK WOULD BE HORRIBLE.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCILLOR PAYNE?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I'M RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE HERE.
I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF CUTTING ONE POSITION, BUT REPLACING THE POSITION THAT WE LOST THROUGH THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.
>> JUST TABLE IT. JUST KIDDING.
>> JUST FOR MY OWN CLEAR CONFIRMATION, TO MAKE SURE I'M NOT JUST MISREMEMBERING.
IN OUR FIRST YEAR, WE DID LOOK AT PRIORITIES WE APPROVED.
I BELIEVE THERE WAS FOUR OF THEM.
I DON'T RECALL DOING THAT THIS YEAR.
CAN ADMIN SPEAK TO WHY WE DIDN'T DO THAT? I'M JUST FOLLOWING UP ON COUNCILLOR WARBURTON'S POINT ABOUT AGREE PUBLIC SAFETY IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT, AND I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT WHY WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THOSE PRIORITIES THIS YEAR, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ADMIN CAN SPEAK TO ON THAT FRONT.
>> I THINK THERE WAS A BIG FOCUS ON EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND PREPAREDNESS AND CATCH UP FROM LAST YEAR IN PREPARATION FOR THIS COMING, BUT MR. VAN DINE?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I DO APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE QUESTION.
THERE'S A RATHER LARGE PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT WE'VE NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE NOT REALLY PRESENTING ITSELF TO GIVE US THE CHANCE TO.
THIS PAST YEAR, WE HAVE SEEN AN UNPRECEDENTED LEVEL OF ACTIVITY IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE WITH RESPECT TO ENCAMPMENTS.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE GOVERNOR OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES THROUGH THE MEANS THAT THEY HAVE, AND WE'VE BEEN ALSO WORKING WITH CAB AND WITH OTHER PROGRAM LEVERS WITH RESPECT TO ENHANCING OUTREACH AND DEALING WITH PART OF THAT QUESTION.
WHAT HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED, AND IT WASN'T TO PREVENT PUBLIC SCRUTINY ON THIS, BUT IT WAS TO JUST BRING FOCUS TO THE FACT THAT MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS HAVE BEEN PLAYING AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ROLE IN LIAISING WITH THE POPULATION OF ENCAMPMENT AND NOT EXERCISING FULL ENFORCEMENT THAT MIGHT BE RELATED TO TRESPASS OR OTHER MEANS, BUT EXERCISING LIAISON TYPE FUNCTIONS TO BE ABLE TO FACILITATE QUESTIONS AND QUERIES THAT HAVE COME FROM BUSINESSES, COME FROM RESIDENTS, COME FROM OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS,
[01:55:02]
AND THOSE CALLS WERE NOT INSIGNIFICANT.WE ALSO HAD OUR CHIEF OF OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT UNDERTAKE VOLUNTARY ACTION TO WALK THROUGH ENCAMPMENTS AND PROVIDE ADVICE ON HOW TO BE AS SAFE AS THEY POSSIBLY COULD IN THAT ENVIRONMENT.
TO COUNCIL'S ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT, THEY DO A GREAT DEAL BEYOND WHAT IS EXPECTED IN THE JOB DESCRIPTION PROFILES THAT HAVE BEEN LISTED HERE.
I WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE FAT TO CUT.
I'D BE RELUCTANT TO SUGGEST THAT YELLOWKNIFERS ARE NOT BEING SERVED PRESENTLY BY OUR MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT STAFF.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO THINK CLOSELY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YELLOWKNIFERS ARE CURRENTLY SERVED TO THE DEGREE THAT THEY COULD BE IN THIS SPACE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT RESPONSE, AND THANK YOU FOR ALSO THAT ADDITIONAL CONTEXT TO THE IMPORTANT ROLE THEY PLAY, WHICH EVERYONE MAY NOT BE AWARE OF.
THE CHALLENGE FOR ME IS JUST NOT THAT I DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT MED OFFICERS AND MORE HORSEPOWER IN THIS SPACE.
I THINK IT'S MORE JUST A SEQUENCING OF MAKING SURE THAT WE AGREE AS A COUNCIL WHAT THE PRIORITIES OR OUTCOMES THAT WE'RE HOPING TO ACHIEVE ARE.
I'M HAPPY AND WILLING TO SUPPORT THESE POSITIONS, IF THERE'S A WAY THAT THAT CONVERSATION CAN BE EXPEDITED AND TO COUNCIL WARBURTON'S POINT, I DON'T DISAGREE THAT IT SHOULD BE EXPEDITED.
I DON'T THINK YELLOWKNIFERS ARE BEING SERVED IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE.
EVERYONE THAT PASSES THROUGH IT, LIVES IT, WORKS IN IT, TOURISTS THAT VENTURE AROUND IN IT.
IF THERE IS A WAY AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A TABLE, IT MAY GIVE US SOME TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT OR IF OTHER COUNCILORS HAVE OTHER IDEAS, BUT IF THERE'S A WAY TO EXPEDITE THAT CONVERSATION SO THAT ADDING MORE HORSEPOWER TO A VERY MUCH NEEDED AREA IN A WAY THAT WILL WORK TOWARDS THE OUTCOME THAT THIS COUNCIL WANTS TO SEE, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT.
>> I WANTED TO ECHO COUNCILLOR PAYNE'S COMMENTS.
I THINK I'M ALSO SPLIT ON THIS.
ALSO RECOGNIZE WHAT FELLOW COUNCILORS ARE SAYING AND I THINK IT SEEMS FAIR TO ME TO MOVE TO MAYBE ONLY CUTTING ONE OF THESE POSITIONS.
NOT SURE WHAT EVERYONE ELSE THINKS OF THAT.
>> THE CHALLENGE WITH CUTTING ONE AS YOU GET LOPSIDED CREWS.
SO THEN YOU END UP WITH ONE CREW WITH THREE MED OFFICERS AND THE OTHER WITH TWO.
THE CHANGE THAT HAPPENED WAS INSTEAD OF HAVING TWO SUPERVISORS, IT WENT DOWN TO ONE SUPERVISOR AND INCREASE THE NUMBER OF BOOTS ON THE GROUND.
COUNCILLOR MCGURK, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER OR YOU ON? NO. DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE?
>> [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU. YOU VERY MUCH YOUR WORSHIP.
I DO WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS COMPROMISE.
AS THESE ARE TWO MED 2, WOULD THE ADVISABILITY OF THE ADMINISTRATION, CHANGING THESE POSITIONS INTO AN ENFORCEMENT OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR BE ADEQUATE TO BE ABLE TO MEET WHAT IS ALSO WITHIN THE PI JUSTIFICATIONS TO TACKLE THE OPERATIONAL CAPACITY GAP ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL
>> THANK YOU. I'LL JUST INVITE MR. MCLENNAN TO WEIGH IN ON THAT PARTICULAR QUESTION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
TO ADD ANOTHER OPERATIONAL SUPERVISOR AFTER ORGANIZING OUR STRUCTURE, OUR PROCESSES, OUR PROCEDURES, OUR GUIDELINES, EVERYTHING THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THE DUE PROCESS THAT WE FOLLOW.
IT PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE EFFECTIVE AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
BUT THANK YOU FOR THE CONVERSATION.
>> THANK YOU. SO VERSUS TRY TAKING UP THE MED 2S AND HAVING AN ENFORCEMENT OPERATION SUPERVISOR.
WHAT ABOUT JUST REDUCING IT DOWN TO ONE MED 2? WHAT KIND OF CAPACITY CHANGE WOULD THAT MAKE? MR..
>> THANK YOU. I THINK MADAM CHAIR EARLIER SPOKE TO THE TRAVEL AND TWO IMPORTANCE, BUT I'LL INVITE MR. MCLENNAN TO REACT TO THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I'D ASK YOU TO SAY AGAIN YOUR QUESTION. I MISSED THE END OF IT THERE.
>> WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT OF JUST HAVING ONE MED 2 VERSUS HAVING TWO MED 2.
[02:00:04]
>> WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT OUR NUMBERS IN 2023 AND NUMBERS I MEAN BY RESPONSES, AND THE RESPONSES ARE THE BY LAWS THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE BECAUSE NOT ALL THINGS, PUBLIC SAFETY, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE ARE UP 14%.
THIS YEAR, WE'RE UP ANOTHER 5%.
WE'RE SEEING ALMOST A 20% FOLD INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF CALLS THAT WE HAVE.
THERE'S A LOT OF DISGRUNTLED RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY, AS COUNCIL THROUGH YOUR ENGAGEMENT WITH THE RESIDENTS, WE'LL PROBABLY OFTEN HEAR.
PEOPLE AREN'T HAPPY ABOUT THINGS.
TONIGHT, I HEAR THAT POTENTIALLY WE COULD BE ADDING BIKE LANES INTO THE CITY, WHICH WILL HAVE A NUMBER OF EITHER NO PARKING OR NO STOPPING SIGNS, TO WHICH THERE WILL BE SIGNIFICANT ENFORCEMENT REQUIRED FOR THAT AND ACTION NEEDED TO MAINTAIN THE EXPECTATIONS AROUND THAT.
ONE WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE HELPFUL.
IT WOULD PROBABLY JUST AS THE MAYOR ALLUDED TO WITH TWO TEAMS THAT OPERATE INDEPENDENTLY, BUT COLLABORATIVELY.
IT MAY ADD MORE CONFUSION AND DISORDER TO IT THAN IT WOULD SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>>THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR WARBURTON., WE'LL GET FOR ROUND 2.
FOR ME, I THINK ONE OF THE CHALLENGES IS JUST TIMING, AND SO I'D LIKE TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT LEVELS OF SERVICE MORE LIKE IN JUNE WHEN THESE PI JUSTIFICATIONS ARE GETTING DRAFTED, BECAUSE IF I LOOK AT THIS PI JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING THE CHANGE AND HAVING MORE BOOTS ON THE GROUND BY JUST MAKING THAT ONE CHANGE, MED OFFICERS ARE DOING MORE COMPLAINTS PER OFFICER THAN 2016-2019.
THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO DO AS MANY PROACTIVE, BUT THEY'RE ACTUALLY ADDRESSING MORE COMPLAINTS QUITE SIGNIFICANTLY.
SO, TO TRY TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND.
WHAT ARE WE HOPING TO ACHIEVE? BECAUSE WE COULD ENDLESSLY ADD POSITIONS.
WE DON'T NEED TWO, WE PROBABLY NEED 40 MED OFFICERS.
PEOPLE WANT MD OFFICERS ON TINCAN HILL 24/7 TO CATCH THE DOG THAT POOP THERE.
THAT'S ALWAYS MY CHALLENGE IS WHAT'S TWO GOING TO DO? DO WE NEED FOUR, THAT REORG IS REALLY WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR.
DOES IT MEAN ONE MORE YEAR OF CURRENT STANDARDS.
FOR ME, YES, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT.
BECAUSE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE DOWNTOWN, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CLEAR, THERE'S NO CRIMINAL CODE VIOLATIONS THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO ADDRESS WHEN PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT DRUGS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
IF SOMEBODY IS LITTERING, MED CAN GO AND ISSUE THEM A TICKET.
IF THERE'S SOMEBODY SPEEDING, BUT CRACK DRUGS, THEY JUST CALL OUR CMP LIKE A REGULAR OLD RESIDENT WOULD.
THAT'S WHERE I'D LIKE TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION AND I THINK IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT ONE, BUT TO HAVE THAT MORE HOLISTIC DISCUSSION.
I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF IT, AND I WOULD REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING A DISCUSSION EARLY IN 2026 OR 2025, TO BE READY FOR BUDGET 2026.
SECOND ROUND I'VE GOT COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. SO ARE WE CURRENTLY OPERATING A SHIFT WITH ONE OFFICER ON CURRENTLY THE MOMENT.
>> THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. NOT NECESSARILY ONLY ONE OFFICER AVAILABLE.
DURING THE DAY SHIFT, WE DO HAVE A MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR WHO IS QUITE OFTEN OUT ON THE ROAD AS WELL, JUST BASED ON THE NUMBER OF CALLS THAT THEY TAKE, AND THE MANAGER WAS ALSO A RESPONSIBLE MEMBER.
DURING THE DAYTIME MONDAY TO FRIDAY, 8:00-5:00, WE ARE STAFFED WITH OFFICERS AND SINGLE CARS DURING DAYTIME HOURS.
IN THE EVENING WITH THE HIGHER RISK AND HIGHER FREQUENCY OF SOME OF THE BEHAVIORS IN THE COMMUNITY, WE ARE STAFFING TWO OFFICERS PER VEHICLE TO MAINTAIN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AND WORKING ALONE COMPONENTS. THANKS.
>> ANYTHING FURTHER ON THIS? SO THE MOTION IS TO REDUCE THE TWO MED OFFICERS.
COUNCILLOR FEQUET, YOU IN FAVOR? THAT CARRIES WITH COUNCILLOR PAYNE AND COUNCILLOR WARBURTON OPPOSED.
[02:05:01]
COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, DO YOU WANT TO DO ANYTHING ON DOG POUND?>> THIS SECTION. HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
I WASN'T SURE WHO WAS DOING THAT.
YES. MOTION TO INCREASE CONTRACTED BUDGET FOR DOG POUND SERVICES TO 50,000 FOR 2025.
>> TO BE CLEAR, IT'S TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT TO 50,000 AS OPPOSED TO INCREASE IT BY 50,000.
MR. VAN DINE, THE ADVISABILITY OF THE MOTION?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THIS WOULD BE LOOKING TO OFFER THE CONTRACTING OPPORTUNITY AMOUNT THROUGH AN RFP FOR PRESUMABLY A WIDER RANGE OF SERVICE OR TO AT LEAST ATTRACT SOMEONE TO OFFER THE LEVEL OF SERVICE WE'VE PREVIOUSLY OFFERED.
I'LL INVITE MR. MCLENNAN TO RESPOND TO THAT.
>> THANKS FOR THAT. MY RESPONSE TO THAT WOULD BE $50,000.
I CAN'T SIT HERE AND TELL YOU IF SOMEONE WOULD BID ON A CONTRACT FOR THAT.
IS IT AT HOME PLATE? DON'T KNOW. IS IT AROUND HOME PLATE? PROBABLY. BUT ANY ATTEMPT THAT WE MAKE TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE RISK WRAPPED AROUND DOGS AND NOT HAVING A SERVICE PROVIDER WOULD BE WELL ADVISED. THANK YOU.
>> AWESOME. THANK YOU. YEAH, I APPRECIATE WE CUT ON THE CAPITAL BUDGET SIDE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE ARE GOING TO KEEP GOING WITH THE CONTRACTED SERVICE, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO FOR THIS YEAR, THERE'S ENOUGH GAS IN THE TANK TO MAKE SURE WE CAN ATTRACT SOMEBODY.
>> THANK YOU. MR. VAN DINE, THE CURRENT AMOUNT IN THE BUDGET WOULD BE 37,000, THIS WOULD BE AN INCREASE OF 13,000.
YES, THAT WOULD BE BASED ON THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED.
I WOULD JUST DRAW TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION THE CURRENT BURN RATE OF WHAT WE'RE SPENDING NOW IN THE ABSENCE OF A FULL TIME SERVICE.
WE ARE EXPENDING A FAIRLY SIZABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY 50,000 WOULD CERTAINLY BE BETTER THAN WHAT'S CURRENTLY BEING SUGGESTED.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION TO INCREASE IT 37000-50,000, COUNCILLOR FEQUET?
>> THANKS JUST QUESTION ADMIN, AND AGAIN, WILLING IN GENERAL SUPPORT OF THIS, ESPECIALLY JUST CONSIDERING THE PREVIOUS DECISION.
WE WANT TO FARM OUT WORK WHERE POSSIBLE.
IS THERE A BETTER NUMBER THAT ADMIN WOULD LIKE TO THINK ABOUT AND COME BACK BASED ON OUR CURRENT EXPERIENCE, ABOUT WHAT THAT NUMBER SHOULD BE BECAUSE I RECOGNIZE I APPRECIATE AND SUPPORT COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, INTENT.
I'D RATHER MAKE IT 60 IF 60 IS THE RIGHT NUMBER.
IF YOU GUYS HAVE AN IDEA BASED ON YOUR PROJECTIONS BASED ON THE BUDGET, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT NOW, BUT IF YOU KNOW A NUMBER OR CAN COME BACK TOMORROW, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO WELL, THERE'S ALREADY STUFF FOR TOMORROW, SO WE'RE YOU COULD.
[LAUGHTER] BUT YEAH, JUST LOOKING FOR ADMINS THOUGHTS ON WHETHER THAT NUMBER IS RIGHT OR IF A LITTLE MORE TIME WOULD HELP THEM GET IT A LITTLE MORE REFINED.
>> I'M NOT SURE IF ANOTHER NIGHT WOULD GIVE US MORE CLARITY ON THAT, BUT MR. MCLENNAN. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?
>> THANK YOU. YEAH. APPRECIATE THE LATITUDE TO GO BACK AND EXPLORE PERHAPS WHAT SOME OF OUR TEAM HAS HEARD FROM CURRENT SERVICE PROVIDERS THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO TARGET IN ON A BETTER NUMBER. THANK YOU.
>> YOU OKAY WITH TING UNTIL TOMORROW NIGHT? WE'LL ADD THAT ONE TO THE LIST TWO SECONDS.
JUST RECOGNIZING THE POTENTIAL WELL, EITHER WAY, I'LL PASS THE CHAIR TO YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
>> THANK YOU, YOU WORSHIP TO YOU FOR EMOTION, I SUPPOSE.
>> THANK YOU. YEAH, I THINK IN HAVING THESE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT DOGS, DOG POUNDS, THE COSTS, DOING THE CALCULATION OF RIGHT NOW, WE CHARGE $100 AND THEN IT'S $25 AFTER THAT.
AT MINIMUM, TAXES OR THE EXPENSE IS 37,000 MIGHT GO UP TO 50,000.
I PROPOSE THAT WE INCREASE OR THAT THE FEES AND CHARGES BY LAW BE UPDATED,
[02:10:01]
SO THE EMPOWERMENT SERVICES 250 A DAY.WITH THAT, IT IS ABOUT $250 A DAY.
YEAH. IN THAT A LOT OF OUR FEES AND CHARGES DOES HAVE A PORTION OF TAXES, BUT THE OTHER IS A USER CHARGE, AND RIGHT NOW, IT'S HEAVILY TAXES WITH A MINISCULE USER CHARGE.
THAT'S WHERE I'M LOOKING TO BALANCE OUT AND GET MORE OF THAT ONE THIRD USER TWO THIRDS TAXES, AND THIS WOULD BE BRINGING US BETTER INTO ALIGNMENT WITH THAT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM MAYOR.
MR. VAN DINE TO THE ADVISABILITY OF THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, THE UPDATING OF FEES AND CHARGES TO BETTER ALIGN WITH A TWO THIRD, ONE THIRD RATIO, I BELIEVE, HAS A LOT OF CONSISTENCY AND GOOD POLICY.
I WOULD, LOOK AT WHAT WE MIGHT THINK THAT MIGHT BE BY WAY OF AFFECTING PEOPLE'S BEHAVIOR AS WELL AS RECOVERY.
IF WE'RE TABLEING A FEW THINGS FOR TOMORROW, I WOULD LIKE THE ABILITY JUST TO CONFIRM WHAT KIND OF POTENTIAL POSITIVE IMPACT THAT MIGHT HAVE OVERALL, BUT I DO CONCUR WITH THE GENERAL DIRECTION.
>> I HAD A FEELING TABLEING MIGHT BE ON THE TABLE. COUNCILLOR FEQUET
>> JUST A QUESTION MAYBE TO MADAM MAYOR WHEN SHE WAS DOING HER RESEARCH OR MAYBE TO ADMIN IF THEY KNOW.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS OR OTHER EXAMPLES.
THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN TIERED FEES FOR THOSE DOGS THAT ARE LICENSED OR UNLICENSED, TO PROVIDE SOME FURTHER INCENTIVE OR MOTIVATION.
BECAUSE I RECOGNIZE THERE'S A DIFFERENCE.
PEOPLE DO TAKE THE TIME TO LICENSE THEIR DOGS AND THE DOGS RUN AWAY, AND THERE'S ALSO DOGS THAT DON'T GET LICENSED AND ARE CARED FOR PROPERLY, AND I'M JUST CURIOUS IF TIERED FEE FOR SERVICE IS SOMETHING THAT OTHER JURISDICTIONS DO. WHAT WE LOOKED AT.
>> IT'S PRETTY GRANULAR WHEN WE COME DOWN TO A JURISDICTIONAL REVIEW OF THESE KIND OF SERVICES, BUT LET'S CHECK OUT WHAT YOU ADMIT, MR. VAN DINE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION, MR. CHAIR, THE POLICY QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THOSE THAT TAKE THE ABILITY TO LICENSE AND THEN HAVE THEIR DOG IMPOUNDED OR PUT INTO ENFORCEMENT FOR SOME UNKNOWN REASON, PAYING ONE FEE AND THOSE THAT DID NOT TAKE THE VIEW TO LICENSE THEIR DOG IN THE FIRST INSTANCE AND GET CHARGED ANOTHER FEE.
WE'RE UNAWARE OF ANY OF THAT CURRENTLY HAPPENING ACROSS OTHER JURISDICTIONS AT THIS JUNCTURE, BUT GIVEN THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO A LITTLE BIT OF GOOGLE AND BETWEEN NOW AND THEN.
>> NO, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. THANKS. I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF WE CAME ACROSS THAT, NOT LOOKING TO ADD TO THE PLATE.
>> I KNOW I'M QUITE SHOCKED THERE'S NOT A GAZETTE ON THIS ISSUE EITHER. MADAM MAYOR.
>> I WAS JUST WONDERING LAST NIGHT THERE WAS A MENTION ABOUT WHEN DOGS ARE FOUND, IF THEY'VE GOT A COLLAR, THE OWNER IS CALLED, THAT PERHAPS IS A WAY TO ADDRESS THE TIERED SYSTEM AND YOUR DOGS NOT COLLARED.
THE DOGS GOING TO THE DOG POUND AND YOU'RE GETTING THAT 250 VERSUS THAT OTHER WAY, BUT MAYBE ADMINISTRATION CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THERE ARE INSTANCES, I BELIEVE, WHERE DOGS ARE, IN FACT, COLLARED WITH AND UNLICENSED.
SO THERE'S CERTAINLY I'M NOT SURE WHETHER WE'RE "CAPTURING" THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE I BELIEVE THERE'S PROBABLY A NUMBER OF RETURNS THAT MAY BE GONE AND NOT ISSUED A WARNING OR A FINE THAT THEY SHOULD LICENSE IF THEY'VE BEEN FOUND.
SO I BELIEVE THIS IS AN INTERESTING SET OF TERRAIN FOR US TO EXPLORE AND HOW WE CAN PROVIDE BETTER SERVICES TO OUR CANINE COMMUNITY AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE WELL SERVED BUT IN TERMS OF STRATIFIED COST I DO BELIEVE THE GENERAL QUESTION THAT WAS PROPOSED EARLIER AROUND THE ONE THIRD, TWO-THIRDS RATIO IS PROBABLY THE ONE AREA THAT WE'D BE ADVISED TO INVEST A LITTLE BIT OF ENERGY AND THEN BRING IN A MORE STRUCTURED FEE STRUCTURE TO SATISFY THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. VAN DYNE. COUNCILOR MCGURK.
>> I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING WHAT ADMINISTRATION COMES BACK WITH TOMORROW.
I AM DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF INCREASING THESE FEES.
I JUST DO FEAR THAT 250 IS HIGH AND THAT WE WILL HAVE DOGS THAT ARE LEFT, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS AN OUTCOME THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILOR MCGURK.
THERE SEEMS TO BE A WILL FROM THE ADMINISTRATION ON ADVISORY LEVEL TO TABLE THIS.
DO I HAVE WILL FROM MY COLLEAGUES TO TABLE THIS TILL TOMORROW?
[02:15:02]
LET'S ADD THAT ONE TO THE SHOOT AS WELL.WITH THAT, I SHALL PASS THE CHAIR BACK TO THE MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER ON MED? I GUESS WELL YOU'RE COMING BACK TOMORROW.
I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW THE TOW TRUCK FINE.
I THINK THAT'S 200, 250 AS WELL.
THERE ARE PENALTIES AND IT'S A COST TO TAXPAYERS OR IT'S A COST TO THE OWNERS SO IT'S YOUR LEFT POCKET OR YOUR RIGHT POCKET.
DO WE PAY AS A COMMUNITY OR DO YOU PAY AS A USER? ANYTHING FURTHER ON MED? SEEING NONE NEXT, WE HAVE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT DIVISION, PAGE 80, THE HOUSING ACCELERATOR FUND, PAGE 81. COUNCIL ROBERTSON.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. IT'S IN THE Q&A, BUT JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS CONFIRMED.
WITH THE HOUSING ACCELERATOR FUND, WE GET FUNDED EVERY YEAR AND THERE IS ANSWER JUST TO CONFIRM, WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT FUNDING WILL CONTINUE EVEN IF AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL CHANGES.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. SUPER.
>> THANK YOU. EXCELLENT. THEN WE GOT A INFO UPDATE START OF THE YEAR ON PERMANENT TIMELINES, WONDERING WHEN THAT WILL COME BACK TO US AS A BIT OF INFORMING ON HOW WELL HALF IS WORKING.
I'LL INVITE MADAM WHITE TO UPDATE US ON OUR PROPOSED TIMELINES FOR UPDATING, COUNCIL. THANK YOU.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE ARE DUE TO REPORT TO HALF FOR YEAR NUMBER 1 IN ABOUT TWO WEEKS SO WE'RE JUST FINISHING UP THOSE REPORTS NOW AND I BELIEVE I SAID JANUARY, SO I'M GOING TO STICK TO JANUARY 2025, FOR THE FIRST REPORT.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE NEARLY AS EXCITING AS YEAR 2 BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO INCLUDE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES IN THAT YEAR 2 WHEN WE BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL, BUT JANUARY 2025. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE LANDS AND BUILDING SERVICES DIVISION. PAGE 82.
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, MOTIONS. COUNCIL FACET.
>> THANKS, MADAM CHAIR. JUST A QUESTION ON THE WORK CHART JUST RELATED TO THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ADVISOR.
COULD YOU JUST ELABORATE ON HOW THAT POSITION WORKS AND SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY?
>> THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WE ADDED IN MAY. MR. VAN DYNE?
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THAT IS CORRECT.
I'LL INVITE MR. GREENCORN TO ELABORATE, BUT I WOULD OFFER THAT IN THE PRESENTATION THAT I GAVE LAST EVENING, WE ALSO ARE PROPOSING AND WANT, AND AT MY DIRECTION, I'VE ASKED FOR A FURTHER REALLOCATION OF THAT POSITION INTO OUR COMMUNICATION SHOP FOR THE PURPOSES OF ENHANCING OUR ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE AND RESPOND TO GENERAL QUERIES ACROSS THE CITY, IN ADDITION TO THOSE THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THE ONES THAT ARE PARTICULARLY IMPACTED PUBLIC WORKS IN PUBLIC WORKS QUERIES.
PUBLIC WORKS IS CERTAINLY AN IMPORTANT, HIGH-INTEREST AREA FOR THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.
HOWEVER, FOR ECONOMIES OF SCALE AND OUR ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE WITH MORE IMPACT, MORE FOCUS, WE'RE INCLUDING THAT IN THE REVISED PICTURE FOR COMMUNICATIONS.
MR. GREENCORN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ELABORATE?
>> NO. PERFECT. THAT'S ALL I WANTED.
>> ANYTHING FURTHER ON THE DIRECTORATES? SEEING NONE.
NEXT, WE HAVE THE CITY GARAGE.
[02:20:04]
SEEING NONE.PAGE 89 IS PUBLIC TRANSIT. COUNCIL ROBERTSON?
>> JUST WONDERING WHEN THIS NEXT GOES TO TENDER BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S ALL CONTRACTED SERVICES.
>> JUST BASICALLY WENT THERE. MR. VAN DYNE.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I THINK WE'RE A COUPLE OF YEARS, BUT I'LL DEFER TO MR. GREENCORN ON THE EXACT DATE. THANK YOU.
>> I BELIEVE WE'RE AROUND FOUR, MAYBE A LITTLE LESS THAN FOUR.
>> IT'S THE NEXT COUNCIL'S ONE TO TACKLE.
I LOOKED AT A COUPLE OF COMPARABLE CITIES OF OUR SIZE, AND OUR NUMBER IS NOT SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
YEAH, I'M EXCITED WHOEVER GETS TO DEAL WITH THAT ON THE NEXT COUNCIL BECAUSE THAT ONE'S GETTING UP THERE. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU. PAGE 90 IS ROADS AND SIDEWALKS.
PAGE 91 IS ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY BUDGET.
NEXT, WE HAVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FUND.
NEXT, WE HAVE THE WATER AND SEWER FUND.
WATER AND SEWER FUND, PAGE 95 AND 96, COUNCIL ROBERTSON.
>> IT'S IN THE Q&A ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT TOO.
I KNOW IT'S EXPENDITURE OF THE OBJECT, AND NO ONE LIKES THAT.
THE TRUCK WATER SERVICE IS SUBSIDIZED BY PIPE WATER SERVICE.
I'M JUST SUMMARIZING, BUT IS MY READ CORRECT?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MADAM CHAIR.
THERE'S SOME CROSS-SUBSIDIZATION HAPPENING IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT AREAS, BUT THAT WOULD BE A GENERAL CONCLUSION.
>> YOU MIGHT ANSWER SOME PREVIOUS BUDGETS, AND I APOLOGIZE IF YOU HAD OR THE Q&A, WHAT'S THE POLICY OR RATIONALE, OR THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THAT SUBSIDIZATION?
>> IT'S PROBABLY A BIT OF A HISTORIC BLACK BOX, NOT FULL POLICY COUNCIL DISCUSSION BUT THIS COUNCIL CAN LOOK FORWARD TO THAT ONE IN THE NEAR FUTURE OR IN OUR TERM. MR. VAN DYNE.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. YES. IN FACT, COUNCIL WILL BE AWARE THAT THERE WAS A DRAFT STUDY THAT HAD BEEN PRESENTED SOME MONTHS BACK, I BELIEVE.
WE NOW HAVE THAT STUDY FINALIZED, AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO BRINGING THAT STUDY FORWARD EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR.
IN THAT, WE ARE ANTICIPATING A NUMBER OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT SPEAK TO SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE UNDERLYING YOUR QUESTION AROUND RATES AND WHO PAYS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. SEEING NOTHING FURTHER ON WATER AND SEWER, WE HAVE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT FUND.
SEEING NOTHING ON THE LAND DEVELOPMENT FUND, WHICH IS PAGE 98.
NEXT, WE COME TO THE SERVICE CONNECTION FAILURE ASSISTANCE FUND. COUNCIL ROBERTSON?
>> JUST BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE I CAN DO THIS CORRECTLY SO IT'S PROJECTING A DEFICIT FOR 2025, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> I BELIEVE THAT IS THE CASE, AND I'LL JUST INVITE MR. PANDU AND MR. GREENCORN TO COLLABORATE ON THIS ONE. THANK YOU.
>> I KNOW YOU MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATIONS THAT THIS IS A BIG CONCERN SO WHAT'S THE PLAN, I GUESS, THIS BUDGET YEAR, IS IT JUST A RIGHT IN DEFICIT, AND WE'LL ADDRESS IT LATER OR JUST WHAT'S THE APPROACH GOING TO BE BECAUSE IT JUST GETS BIGGER AND BIGGER AS WE GO HERE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT IS CERTAINLY THE TREND IF IT GOES UNSHIFTED.
WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO IN BUDGET 2025 IS TO
[02:25:02]
HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A TREND THAT IS NOW EVIDENT.WE ARE LOOKING AT MAKING SURE THAT OUR 3% GENERAL INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO MAINTAIN IN ALL DIFFERENT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH SERVICE LEVELS.
WE'RE WAITING UNTIL THE REPORT COMES BACK IN THE NEW YEAR TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT COUNCIL WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT OUR TECHNICAL EXPERTS ARE ADVISING WHO HAVE DONE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS, WE UNDERSTAND IN OTHER AREAS ON HOW TO MANAGE A PROBLEM OF THIS NATURE.
WE'RE NOT AT A POSITION YET TO BRING THAT FORWARD TO COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE CONSIDERATION OF BUDGET 2025 BUT WE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN BRINGING IT EARLY INTO Q1 SO THAT COUNCIL CAN HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE 2025 OPERATIONAL YEAR TO CONSIDER WHAT THAT IMPLEMENTATION ADVICE MIGHT BE WHEN WE COME FORWARD WITH IT. THANK YOU.
>> THANKS. AGAIN, I REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO THAT ONE.
THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPACTFUL PROGRAMS WE OFFER TO OUR RESIDENTS.
THE COSTS OF RIPPING UP YOUR WATER AND SEWER AND REPAIRING IT ARE ASTRONOMICAL AND IF PEOPLE HAD TO PAY AT ACTUAL COST MOST CITIES DON'T DO THIS.
MOST CITIES YOU PAY FOR YOURSELF.
THIS IS SAVING PEOPLE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS EVERY TIME THERE'S A LEAK.
I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THERE'S SOME ATTENTION BEING PUT TO IT BECAUSE I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN THIS. THANKS.
>> IF I MIGHT ADD, MADAM CHAIR, I'LL INVITE MR. GREENCORN TO OFFER A LITTLE BIT MORE GRANULARITY ON HOW WE'RE APPROACHING THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM AND HOW MEDIUM-TERM PLAN. THANK YOU.
>> SURE. WHAT I'D LIKE TO ADD HERE IS THIS IS VERY MUCH BASED ON A COUPLE OF YEARS TREND, IT'S ALSO BASED ON BREAKS.
THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY IN HERE, WHILE WE ARE PROJECTING IN MY OPINION, MODEST DEFICIT OF 322 GRAND CLOSING IN 2025, IT'S REALISTIC THAT IT MIGHT BALANCE ITSELF BASED ON THE NUMBER OF BREAKS, OR IT COULD BE WORSE.
IT'S OUR BEST THROW AT THE DARTBOARD BASED ON WHAT WE'RE SEEING IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
THAT'S THE BENEFIT OF THE SERVICE CONNECTION FAILURE FUND IS THAT IT DOES ALLOW US TO RUN A DEFICIT IN ONE YEAR AND CATCH UP IN THE NEXT IF THAT'S THE WAY THE TRENDS CONTINUE.
IF WE DO SEE SIGNIFICANT TRENDS AND DECREASING IF THIS CONTINUES, THEN AS MR. PANDU SAID, AND AS THE NOTE SAYS, WE'LL CONTINUE TO TRY TO INCREASE THOSE ERUS AND DIFFERENT RATES TO COMPENSATE FOR THOSE INCREASED FAILURES BUT I WOULDN'T GET TOO HUNG UP ON THE BOTTOM LINE JUST YET.
>> I WOULD JUST FURTHER ADD THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM IS A BIT UNIQUE TO YELLOWKNIFE IN TERMS OF THE SERVICE THAT IS OFFERED TO THIS COMMUNITY, GIVEN WHERE THIS COMMUNITY EXISTS IN THE PERMAFROST QUESTIONS AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT OCCUR.
IN OUR UNIQUE ENVIRONMENT, YOU WILL NOT FIND A PROGRAM LIKE THIS IN OTHER PARTS OF CANADA TO THE DEGREE THAT IT IS IN WHICH THE HOMEOWNER DOES RECEIVE A GROUP BENEFIT PARTICIPATING IN A PROGRAM LIKE THIS.
ONE WAS TO DO THE COMPARISON IN OTHER PARTS OF CANADA, IT'S A PRETTY CUT-AND-DRY KIND OF SITUATION IN WHICH IF IT HAPPENS ON YOUR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE, THEN IT'S ON YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO FUND, AND IT'S USUALLY HOME INSURANCE THAT USUALLY IS SOMETIMES TAPPED INTO FOR THOSE KINDS OF EXPENSES.
WHILE THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT IS NOW TRENDING INTO DEFICIT TERRITORY IT DOES, AS MR. GREENCORN, SOMETIMES CORRECT ITSELF, AND IT IS A PROGRAM THAT I WOULD JUST UNDER-SCORE IS HIGH VALUE TO YELLOWKNIFE RESIDENTS. THANK YOU.
SEEING NOTHING FURTHER, WE ZOOM PAST CAPITAL BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE 2025.
2026, 2027, WE'LL LOOK AT THOSE NEXT YEAR.
RESERVE FUND. PAGE 163, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? COUNCIL MCCLENDON?
>> WOULD NOW BE AN APPROPRIATE TIME FOR MOTION REGARDING TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN RESERVE PROPOSAL?
>> RIGHT ON. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE A MOTION TO CREATE A TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN RESERVE AND FUND THIS RESERVE YEARLY WITH AN AMOUNT TO ALLOW PROMPT IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND OR PROJECTS IMPACTED BY THE PLAN.
>> MR. VAN DINE, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THE ADVISABILITY OF THE MOTION?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH MADAM CHAIR.
WE HAVE A PLETHORA OF RESERVES.
I BELIEVE WE NEED TO HAVE A CLOSE LOOK OVERALL AT THE NUMBER OF RESERVES THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY MANAGING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING THE BEST USE FOR TAXPAYERS IN YELLOWKNIFE IN TERMS OF SETTING UP YET ANOTHER RESERVE.
WHILE I BELIEVE THE INTENTION OF THE MOTION IS TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS DOLLARS IN THE TANK IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT A MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN,
[02:30:04]
I BELIEVE THE MORE ADVISABLE OPTION FOR ADDRESSING THAT QUESTION WOULD BE THROUGH BUDGET 2026 AFTER THE MASTER PLAN HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AND AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN HAS BEEN FOLLOWED AND RESOURCES CAN BE THEN APPLIED TO THAT IN DUE COURSE AND IN SUBSEQUENT BUDGETS AFTER 2026.THAT WOULD BE MY GENERAL COMMENT WITH RESPECT TO THAT AND I'LL INVITE MR. PANDOO OR MR. GREENCORN TO ADD FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS TO THAT. THANK YOU.
>> I THINK THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD TO THAT IS IT WOULD PROBABLY BE ADVISABLE UNTIL WE HAD A PLAN.
HOW I WOULD ENVISION THIS PLAN IS SIMILAR TO OUR STRATEGIC WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN WHERE IT HAS A LIST OF IDENTIFIED OBJECTIVES, ROUGH DOLLAR ASSOCIATED WITH IT, AND THEN A YEARLY ALLOCATION AMOUNT SUGGESTED AND INDEXED BASED ON THE YEARS ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
ONCE WE HAVE THAT, WE WOULD BE IN A BETTER POSITION TO SAY THESE ARE THE ALLOCATIONS THAT WE RECOMMEND MOVING FORWARD OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS IF THAT'S HOW FAR THE TMP REACHES.
SETTING THE RESERVE NOW, I GUESS I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT AMOUNTS TO SET AT THIS POINT.
>> I GUESS THE OTHER IS THE SOURCE OF FUNDS TO POPULATE THAT RESERVE.
IN SOME CASES, AS COUNCIL IS AWARE, THERE ARE RESOURCES THAT SOMETIMES OTHER LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT PROVIDE FROM TIME TO TIME FOR SPECIFIC INITIATIVES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH TO COMMIT LIMITED CITY FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO A RESERVE.
IT MEANS THAT CAPACITY IS FOREGONE FOR OTHER PRIORITIES THAT MIGHT ARISE. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE INFO AND THE THOUGHTS. JUST TO SPEAK TO IT.
THIS RESERVE WOULD BE CREATED IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN AND THAT IT WILL BE PROPERLY RESOURCED.
WE'VE DISCUSSED A COUPLE OF PROJECTS TONIGHT THAT COULD BE EXAMPLES OF ONES THAT COULD ACCESS THE RESERVE.
IN MY VIEW, THE RESERVE IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT WAY FOR COUNCIL TO SHOW OUR COMMITMENT TO THIS PLANNING PROCESS AND TO AVOID THE MANY INSTANCES WE HAVE SEEN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS WHERE MONEY AND TIME HAVE BEEN SPENT ON PLANNING, BUT NO OR VERY LITTLE ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN.
A RESERVE WOULD GIVE RESIDENTS CERTAINTY THAT MONEY SPENT ON PLANNING WILL LEAD TO A TANGIBLE RESULT.
ALSO, A RESERVE WOULD ALLOW US TO SET ASIDE SMALLER AMOUNTS OF MONEY NOW AND IN NEXT YEAR AND PUT THIS ASIDE OVER TIME INSTEAD OF FACING COUNCIL WITH BIG BUDGET ASKS IN 2026 OR 2027.
JUST DUE TO THE HISTORY OF PLANNING AND NO OR VERY LITTLE ACTION IN THIS AREA AND OTHER AREAS, I COULD LIST THE PLANS.
I SIMPLY DON'T HAVE FAITH THAT COUNCIL WILL FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE MONEY TO RESOURCE THIS PLAN.
>> THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH YOUR WORSHIP.
I THINK THE ADMINISTRATION CAUGHT IT ON THE NAIL HERE IF THERE'S A CHICKEN OR THE EGG.
I FULLY RESPECT WHERE COUNCIL MCLENNAN IS COMING ON THIS ESPECIALLY WITH THE PLETHORA OF PLANS THAT WE HAVE.
BUT IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS A LOT OF PLANNING THAT HAS TO GO IN FOR ALL OF THE INCLUDING A POSSIBILITY OF SETTING UP A RESERVE WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE PART OF THE OVERALL CONVERSATION WHEN THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMES FORWARD BECAUSE I DO AGREE WE NEED TO PROPERLY FUND THESE THINGS THAT WE DECIDE TO PUT OUR EFFORTS BEHIND.
BUT GIVING OUR ADMINISTRATION MORE TIME TO BE ABLE TO WORK AROUND WHAT THAT WOULD ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE I THINK IS PROBABLY THE BEST FEASIBILITY AT THIS MOMENT MOVING FORWARD.
ON THAT FACT, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL HENDRICKSON.
>> I DON'T THINK I'LL BLOW ANYBODY'S MIND HERE.
I'M FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION FROM COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
IN TERMS OF WHERE FUNDS COULD COME FROM, I WOULD POINT TO A CARBON TAX LETTER THAT CAME FROM THE MINISTER OF FINANCE EARLIER THIS EVENING OF $629,035.
THAT IS MEANT FROM THE GOVERNMENT'S PERSPECTIVE, GRANTED, IT COULD BE USED FOR ANYTHING, BUT THAT IS MONEY THAT IS MEANT FROM THE GOVERNMENT TO BE USED FOR REDUCING THE CARBON IMPACT OF OUR COMMUNITY AND THAT IS ULTIMATELY WHAT WILL BE A BIG PART OF A TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN.
EVEN IF WE DIDN'T PUT ALL OF THAT TOWARDS IT, I DO THINK THE QUESTION OF POPULATING IT EVEN IF YOU TOOK $300,000 AND STARTED POPULATING SOME MONEY TOWARDS THAT, I DO THINK IS IMPORTANT.
IF THE ISSUE IS A RESERVED, THEN I THINK IT'S A MATTER OF IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO A RESERVE; I KNOW THE MAYOR DOESN'T WANT TO DISCUSS 2026 AND 2027 BUDGET,
[02:35:04]
BUT IS IT A MATTER OF ALLOCATING $350,000 TOWARDS IT? WE DON'T HAVE TO SET UP A RESERVE, BUT WE'RE SETTING UP A LINE ITEM IN THE CAPITAL FUND OR SOMETHING.BUT I AM FULLY IN AGREEMENT WITH COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
THIS IS A KNOCK ON COUNCIL; THE US AND PREVIOUS NOT ON ADMIN, BUT WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS A BODY MANY A PLAN AND NOT PUT RESOURCES BEHIND IT.
I AM VERY MUCH IN IN AGREEMENT WITH COUNCIL MCLENNAN IN THAT.
I'M PUTTING A LOT OF FAITH IN THIS PLAN.
I KNOW I WAS AGAINST IT AT FIRST BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE REASONS COUNCIL MCLENNAN HAS ALREADY IDENTIFIED SO FOR ME I WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT SHOWING OUR COMMITMENT TO EVENTUAL IMPLEMENTATION EVEN IF IT IS A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR TO AT LEAST ONCE PLANNING IS DONE, HAVE A GOOD GRIP OF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN KICK OFF WITH.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL WARBURTON.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THIS IS HARD FOR ME.
I OBVIOUSLY FULLY SUPPORT MASS TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND A LOT OF THE THINGS I PROPOSE ARE TRANSPORT RELATED.
HOWEVER, I AM ALSO KEENLY AWARE OF THE FINANCIAL SITUATION OF THE CITY.
WE'RE SEEING OUR CAPITAL BUDGET GET BLOWN OVER THE WATER WITH PROJECTS.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS ESSENTIALLY WE HIT OUR DEBT CEILING, SO THERE'S A LOT OF GAS IN OUR TANK TO TAKE IN AIR LIFT STATION HIT FOR EXAMPLE.
I AGREE WITH THE PREMISE OF PUTTING MONEY AWAY FOR THIS, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK WE CAN AFFORD TO EARMARK THAT BIGGER CHUNK OF CHANGE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE GOING TO NEED ALL THAT FOR THIS YEAR AND NEXT YEAR. THANKS.
>> I AM IN GENERAL IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION, BUT LIKE COUNCIL WARBURTON HAS SAID, I'M A LITTLE BIT WEARY TO IMPLEMENT IT IN THIS YEAR.
THE IDEA OF MAKING IT A LINE ITEM FOR NEXT YEAR; THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN IS NOT GOING TO BE COMING OUT AFTER WE'VE LEFT SO IT'S THE SAME COUNCIL THAT'S SITTING HERE THAT WILL BE VOTING ON IT OR WOULD BE VOTING ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD IMPLEMENT THIS RESERVE AFTER RECEIVING THAT PLAN.
I DO REALLY STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO COMMIT TO IMPLEMENTING THIS PLAN.
I JUST HAVE A HARD TIME WITH PUTTING THAT IN THIS YEAR. THANKS.
>> THANKS, MADAM CHAIR. MY QUESTION TO COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OR POTENTIAL ESTABLISHMENT OF A RESERVE, WAS THERE AN AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT YOU WERE ENVISIONING WOULD GO INTO THIS IN 2025 OR ARE YOU LOOKING SET IT UP AND COME BACK AT A LATER TIME FOR THE NEXT BUDGET TO START PUTTING MONEY IN THIS?
>> THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. I WAS SEEKING ADVICE FROM ADMIN ON THAT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY WOULDN'T SPECIFICALLY HAVE A NUMBER.
I GUESS JUST AS A SIGN, I WOULD SAY WHATEVER THAT NUMBER WAS FROM THE CARBON TAX LESS THE $450,000 POWER, SO THAT WOULD BE WHATEVER IT WOULD BE AROUND $200,000.
I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY HAVE TO SET UP A RESERVE.
AS AN EXAMPLE, WE HAVE IN QUEUE THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE.
THAT MONEY, 3.5 MILLION IS SITTING IN THE GENERAL FUND AS A PROTO-RESERVE.
I WOULD RECOMMEND DOING THE SAME THING HERE.
WE'RE CALLING THAT THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE AND IT'S JUST IN THE GENERAL FUND.
I THINK WE CAN DO THE SAME HERE.
>> THANKS FOR THAT. THEN MAYBE YOU COULD ADMIN JUST SPEAK TO THAT APPROACH OF ALLOCATING, HOLDING MONEY FOR A PURPOSE UNDER THE GENERAL FUND RESERVE?
>> WELL, I THINK WHAT COUNCIL MCLENNAN WAS SAYING IS YOU ESTABLISHED THE RESERVE.
BUT ONE THING THAT HAS TO HAPPEN IS THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION BYLAW HAS TO GET UPDATED.
ONCE THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION BYLAW GETS UPDATED, THEN COUNCIL COULD DO A TRANSFER SOMETIME IN 2025 FROM GENERAL FUND TO THIS NEW RESERVE.
HOWEVER, WE STILL HAVE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR BUDGET POLICIES REGARDING GENERAL FUND. COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I GUESS THE QUESTION, HAVE WE DONE THOSE STEPS FOR THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE?
>> NO, NOT YET BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE YET.
>> BUT WE'VE LEFT THAT MONEY IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR A YEAR?
[02:40:04]
>> CORRECT. BECAUSE THE GENERAL FUND HAS BEEN HOLDING SINCE COVID ANY OF THE SURPLUS MONEY BECAUSE HISTORICALLY PRE-COVID, COUNCIL WOULD TRANSFER MONEY FROM GENERAL FUND TO CAPITAL TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL FUND POLICY AND ANYTHING OVER POLICY WOULD GO TO THE CAPITAL.
WITH COVID AND THE WILDFIRES, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE HAS BEEN TO KEEP THAT CUSHION A LITTLE BIT HIGHER TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH GENERAL FUND.
THEN ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATION IN FEBRUARY WAS INSTEAD OF KEEPING A CUSHION IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT YOU ACTUALLY CREATE EMERGING ISSUES FUND SO THAT GENERAL FUNDS IN COMPLIANCE AND YOU JUST MOVE STUFF TO THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE.
>> UNDERSTOOD. BUT WE HAVE LEFT THAT MONEY SITTING IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR A YEAR SO THAT IS A PRACTICE WE HAVE DONE.
I WOULD PROPOSE THE SAME HERE.
IN FACT, I BELIEVE WITH THAT PROPOSED TRANSFER, THE GENERAL FUND WOULD ACTUALLY BE UNDER I THINK AROUND 9% AND THE 10% IS THE POLICY SO THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE UNDER THE AMOUNT EXTRA IN THE GENERAL FUND.
LEAVING SOME HERE WITH A MOTION FROM COUNCIL SAYING THIS IS WHAT THE MONEY IS WOULD ACTUALLY NOT ONLY HAVE THAT MONEY AVAILABLE FOLLOWING THE PRACTICE WE'VE DONE WITH THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE, BUT ALSO HELP US GET WITHIN OTHER BUDGET POLICIES AND IF SOMETHING CRAZY COMES UP LIKE ANOTHER LIFT STATION BLOWS UP, THEN NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE THE MONEY FOR THIS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE EAR MARKED WITH A MOTION.
BUT IF HELL FREEZES OVER, WE HAVE THAT MONEY IN OUR MEETING THIS OTHER BUDGET POLICY AS WELL.
>> SORRY. SO YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO CREATE THE RESERVE; WE CHANGE THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION BYLAW IN 2025 AND WE DO THE TRANSFER IN 2025?
>> I WANT TO PUT ASIDE MONEY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN AND I WANT TO DO IT IN WHATEVER WAY IS EASIEST.
THE PUSH BACK I'M HEARING FROM ADMIN IS PROBLEM WITH FINANCIAL REGULATIONS AND TOO MANY RESERVES AND WHATEVER SO I'M TRYING TO FIND A WAY.
>> NO. WE CAN HAVE AN UNLIMITED NUMBER OF RESERVES.
IT'S NOT REALLY A BEST PRACTICE, BUT COUNCIL CAN FULLY CREATE ANOTHER RESERVE AND WE CAN PUT MONEY IN IT.
THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU PUT TAXES IN IT OR ARE YOU PULLING FROM SOME OTHER FUND?
>> I WOULD PUT TAXES IN IT LIKE WE HAVE WITH THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE YET WE'VE LEFT THAT MONEY.
THAT'S THE PRACTICE I WOULD FOLLOW.
WE'RE PROPOSING TO PUT TAXES INTO THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE AND I WOULD DO THE SAME HERE.
>> YEAH. JUST TO CONFIRM THOUGH.
THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE WAS GOING TO TAKE EXCESS FUNDING FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND PUT IT INTO THE RESERVE VERSUS THE CAPITAL.
WHEN WE GO GENERAL FUND TO CAPITAL, WE INCREASE TAXES TO BE ABLE TO PUT THAT.
DO YOU WANT TO INCREASE TAXES THIS YEAR TO PUT MONEY OR DO YOU WANT PEOPLE TO TAKE MONEY OUT OF THEIR POCKETS IN 2025 TAXES OR ARE YOU LOOKING TO TAKE IT FROM THE GENERAL FUND SURPLUS?
>> ISN'T THE GENERAL GENERAL FUND SURPLUS ALSO TAXES?
>> IT IS, BUT ARE YOU LOOKING FROM THE GENERAL FUND SURPLUS OR DO YOU WANT TO GENERATE REVENUE THROUGH TAXES IN 2025 TO PUT IT IN A RESERVE?
>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS.
>> MR. VAN DINE, DO YOU WANT TO HAVE A GO?
>> SURE. THAT'S GREAT AND I'LL BE ASSISTED BY MR. PANDOO TO CORRECT WHATEVER I SAY THAT IS INCORRECT.
IN ESSENCE, I THINK WHAT MADAM CHAIR IS DESCRIBING IS THAT THERE IS THE GENERAL FUND AND THE GENERAL FUND HAS A LIMIT THAT IS ACCEPTED UNDER PRACTICE.
THAT LIMIT SOMETIMES IS AT RISK OF BEING EXCEEDED AND IN THOSE INSTANCES WHERE IT'S EXCEEDED, WE HAVE POSTULATED CREATING AN EMERGENT ISSUES RESERVE TO TAKE THAT SURPLUS RISK AND PUT IT INTO THAT SITUATION.
I THINK THE CLARITY THAT'S BEING REQUESTED IS IF THAT IS THE PRACTICE, WHEN THERE IS A GENERAL FUND SITUATION IN WHICH WE ARE IN A SURPLUS ENVIRONMENT, AT THAT SURPLUS ENVIRONMENT, THAT MONIES BE DIVERTED TO YET ANOTHER RESERVE FUND IN THAT CONTEXT RATHER THAN DECIDING THAT WE ARE GOING TO TAKE AN UNCONDITIONAL APPROACH TO CREATING A RESERVE FUND.
[02:45:06]
THAT IS TO SAY WE ARE ESTABLISHING A RESERVE FUND AND THEREFORE NEED TO FIND RESOURCES TO PUT IN IT IRRESPECTIVE OF THE THRESHOLD OF THE GENERAL FUND, WE ARE GOING TO CREATE THIS FUND.SO THAT IS THE KIND OF CLARITY I GUESS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIND BY WAY OF PRECISION AROUND THE MOTION.
MR. PANDOO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CORRECT WHATEVER I'VE MISREPRESENTED?
>> NOW, I WOULD JUST GO BACK TO THE PERCENTAGE REGARDING THE BUDGET POLICY.
CURRENTLY, THE GENERAL FUND SITS AT 15.85%.
THAT'S INCLUDING THE 3.5 BILLION THAT'S SITTING THERE UNTIL THE TERMS OF REFERENCE AND THE BYLAW GETS FINALIZED FOR THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE.
NOW, IF WE TAKE THAT OUT, THE GENERAL FUND WILL SIT AT 9.86%, WHICH IS BELOW THE THRESHOLD OF 10.15%.
NOW, IF I DO FOLLOW WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY, SO OVER AND ABOVE THE 3.5 MILLION EARMARK, IF WE SAY 350,000, THE PERCENTAGE GOING TO DROP A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.
NOW, TO BRING IT BACK UP, WE DO HAVE CHOICES TO EITHER GO AND INCREASE TAXES TO MAKE THE BUDGET IN LINE WITH OUR BUDGETING POLICY, OR YOU CAN JUST LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS.
NOW, AT THE SAME TIME, COUNCIL CAN MAKE ANY DECISION.
NOW, I HAVE MADE A REQUEST PREVIOUSLY JUST TO PAUSE A BIT ON THE FUNDS, THE RESERVES, AND EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN GOING ON.
IT HAS BEEN GOING ON TOO FAST PACE FOR ME.
I WAS VERY HONEST IN ONE OF MY PROBABLY EARLIER PRESENTATIONS.
HAS BEEN GOING TOO FAST FOR ME TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON.
WE NEED TO TAKE A PAUSE ON EVERYTHING. WE NEED TO PAUSE.
WHEN I SPEAK, MY FEELINGS DON'T SPEAK.
I SPEAK FACT, AND IT'S ABOUT THE NUMBERS.
MY ATTENTION WHEN I SEE THESE FUNDS THE WAY THEY ARE, WHEN I SEE THE OTHER SERVICES, THE WAY WE ARE PROVIDING THE SERVICES, THE CONTRIBUTIONS THAT ARE RUNNING LOWER, CONTRIBUTIONS IN TERMS OF THE TRANSIT, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IT CLOSE TO 10%.
WE SEE RECREATION FACILITIES BELOW THE 30% MARK.
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S BAD OR GOOD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I JUST WANT A CHANCE TO TAKE A BREATH AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON BECAUSE I CAN'T GET A HANDLE OF IT.
YOU WILL REALLY HEAR ME COMPLAINT, BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU CONTEXT, I DO HAVE FIVE DIVISIONS, AND FOUR OF THEM, ONE, I DON'T HAVE A MANAGER, THREE, VERY NEW MANAGER.
IT'S TOUGH TO GET A HANDLE OF EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S BEEN GOING ON PREVIOUSLY AND WHATEVER ELSE WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. IT'S DIFFICULT.
I CAN'T CONFIDENTLY SAY YES OR NO TO ANYTHING THAT'S GOING ON.
I DO HOPE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM BECAUSE I NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONFIDENTLY SAY, WE ARE SUSTAINABLE. THAT IS THE WORD.
I AM NOT PRO ANYTHING, I AM NOT AGAINST ANYTHING.
I AM ALL ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY.
WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SUSTAIN ANYTHING.
WHETHER YOU LEAN LEFT, WHETHER YOU LEAN RIGHT, IT'S FINE, BUT WE NEED TO BE SUSTAINABLE.
GOING THROUGH THIS BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, LISTENING TO EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN GOING ON, IT'S GREAT, BUT I DO WANT US TO TAKE A PAUSE, PLEASE.
THIS FUND IS NOT GOING AWAY, COUNCIL.
I'M GOING TO TELL YOU, IT'S THERE.
IF YOU WANT TO SET UP THE RESERVE TOMORROW, WE CAN DO IT. NOT AN ISSUE.
ALL I'M SAYING, LET'S TAKE A PAUSE.
SEEING THE PACE THAT WE'RE GOING, IT'S JUST TOO FAST.
>> IF YOU GO TO PAGE 21, I DON'T KNOW IF I COULD BREAK IT DOWN LIKE THAT, BUT THAT'S, PAGE 21, THE GENERAL FUNDS CLOSING BALANCE.
IF NOTHING WAS TOUCHED, WOULD BE 9.260.
THE QUESTION WOULD BE, IF YOU WANT TO CREATE A RESERVE, DO YOU WANT TO DRAW JUST TO MAKE IT A ROUND NUMBER, 260,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND, PUT IT IN A NEW RESERVE AND WE'D HAVE A CLOSING BALANCE OF NINE MILLION, OR DO YOU WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE A CLOSING BALANCE OF 9.26 AND YOU WANT TO ADD 300,000? THEREFORE, WE HAVE TO ADD ANOTHER CLOSE TO 1% TAX
[02:50:04]
TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A RESERVE AND HAVE A CLOSING BALANCE IN THE GENERAL FUND OF 9.26.THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR MR. PANDOO AND HIS COMMENTS.
I THINK WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO GET ACROSS IS WHAT I NEED BASED ON THE HISTORY OF OUR PLANNING AND SPENDING MONEY AND TIME AND NOT FOLLOWING THROUGH AND NOT RESOURCING THESE PLANS IS IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN, I NEED TO SEE SOME MONEY PUT ASIDE NOW TO SHOW THAT WE ARE SERIOUS, THAT WE ARE GOING TO ACTUALLY ACTION WHAT COMES OUT OF THAT.
PLEASE FORGIVE THIS TONGUE AND CHEEK REMARK HERE, BUT MY FIRST CHOICE WOULD BE TO CREATE THE RESERVE AND PUT THE TERMS OF REFERENCE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE WORK PLAN AND THAT MONEY CAN JUST SIT IN THE GENERAL FUND.
IF THAT'S TONGUE AND CHEEK, I UNDERSTAND.
I WOULD SAY FROM TAXES IS FINE BY ME BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO NEED THIS MONEY TO DO THESE PROJECTS ANYWAY.
I THINK WE FOUND SEVERAL DIFFERENT CUTS, AND WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE I THINK WE NEED OR ONE SPECIFICALLY THAT I'VE PROPOSED THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS TONIGHT.
MY PROPOSAL WOULD BE WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GET $629,035 FROM THE CARBON TAX, AND WE'VE HAD OVERAGE FOR POWER OF 450,000.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE TO BE IN THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN RESERVE.
I'M COMFORTABLE TAKING THAT FROM TAXES IN 2025 BECAUSE IF WE DO THIS PLAN AND WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT IT AND WE'RE GOING TO IMPLEMENT WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS PLAN, WE'RE GOING TO NEED THE TAX TO DO THAT.
LET'S DO A LITTLE BIT NOW, A LITTLE BIT NEXT YEAR, AND A LITTLE BIT YEAR AFTER THAT INSTEAD OF DOING IT ALL IN ONE BIG CHUNK WHERE WE BALK, AND THEN WE WASTE $300,000, AND WE WASTE STAFF'S TIME. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE WHERE THE COUNCILOR IS COMING FROM.
TWO POINTS THAT I JUST RAISED TO FOLKS.
COUNCIL HAS COMMITTED TO PLANS IN THE PAST.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMMUNITY ENERGY PLAN, AND THIS IS GOING BACK TO BEFORE EVEN I STARTED ON COUNCIL, EVERY YEAR IN THE CAPITAL, WE WOULD ALLOCATE BETWEEN $400,000-$1 MILLION TO ADDRESS THAT PLAN.
THE ACCESSIBILITY PLAN WAS ONE THAT COUNCIL APPROVED IN 2017, AND WE'VE PUT IN EVERY YEAR IN THE CAPITAL PLAN 500,000 TO ADDRESS IT.
I WOULD CAUTION WITH THE RESERVES.
I CAN APPRECIATE WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO GO.
RESERVES WE KNOW, AS A COUNCIL, WE ALSO TINKER WITH.
WE'VE BEEN DRAWING DOWN, WE'VE BEEN TINKERING WITH IT, WE'VE BEEN TINKERING WITH MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT.
TO THINK THAT CREATING A RESERVE, IF THERE'S NO COMMITMENT ON COUNCIL TO FUND SOMETHING, THERE'S NO COMMITMENT, WHETHER IT'S IN THE RESERVE, WHETHER IT'S IN CAPITAL, WHETHER IT'S IN O&M.
RESERVES AREN'T THAT PROTECTED AND WE EASILY DRAIN THEM IF WE'RE FEELING LIKE.
WE DO IT ALL THE TIME. JUST TO REDUCE THE TAX, WE'LL TRANSFER FROM THE DOWNTOWN RESERVE TO SOMETHING ELSE JUST TO TRY TO GET 0.3% OF A REDUCTION. COUNCILOR FEQUET.
I GUESS I WAS JUST WONDERING IF COUNCILOR MCLENNAN WOULD CONSIDER JUST REFRAMING HIS MOTION TO ALLOCATE THE CARBON TAX REVENUE TOWARDS THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN KNOWING THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PROBABLY SEE IT.
WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHEN. IT COULD COME IN A YEAR.
THERE'S NO RUSH, BUT IT'S A COMMITMENT AND IT'S NOT ABOUT A RESERVE.
IT'S JUST ABOUT EARMARKING WHATEVER THAT DIFFERENCE IS TO MAKE SURE WE COVER THE POWER THAT WAS 450, AND THE REST OF THAT JUST GOES TO EARMARK TOWARDS THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
MAYBE THAT DOESN'T MATTER AT ALL.
>> COUNCILOR MCLENNAN WAS RECOMMENDING, IT WAS THAT AMOUNT MINUS THE ENERGY COST.
THAT'S HIS RECOMMENDATION RIGHT NOW.
>> BUT REMOVING THE MOTION OR THE MENTION OF A RESERVE.
JUST EARMARKING THOSE FUNDS TOWARDS MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
LEAVE THE TOOL, THE MECHANISM UP TO STAFF KNOWING THAT WE DON'T EVEN HAVE IT YET AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT FOR A WHILE.
>> WE DO HAVE TO PUT IT SOMEWHERE IN THE BUDGET, SO IT GOES EITHER IN CAPITAL OR WE CREATE A RESERVE.
CAPITAL DOESN'T REQUIRE A FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION BYLAW AMENDMENT.
[02:55:02]
CREATING A RESERVE DOES REQUIRE THAT.>> IF IT'S EASIER IN CAPITAL ADMINISTRATIVELY, THEN I WOULD BE WILLING TO AMEND IT TO THAT.
>> COUNCILOR FEQUET, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK FURTHER TO THAT? COUNCILOR MCGURK.
>> ACTUALLY, ON THE DISCUSSION OF CAPITAL PROJECTS, WE SEE THEM, I GUESS BE PUSHED THROUGH YEAR TO YEAR.
TO DEVELOP A CAPITAL PROJECT, DO WE NEED TO HAVE A SPECIFIC PLAN IN PLACE OR A SPECIFIC SET OF ACTIONS? I'M JUST THINKING THE PAVING PROGRAM, THINGS LIKE THAT.
I'M WONDERING IF THIS WOULD BE A WAY TO POTENTIALLY ACHIEVE COUNCILOR MCLENNAN'S, THE SPIRIT OF HIS MOTION WITHOUT CREATING ANOTHER RESERVE BECAUSE YES, HE'S RIGHT.
IF WE DO WANT TO IMPLEMENT THIS, WE WILL HAVE TO SPEND MONEY WHICH WE WILL HAVE TO PUT ASIDE MONEY AT SOME POINT.
COULD WE DEVELOP A CAPITAL PROJECT THAT IS RELATED TO IMPLEMENTING THIS PLAN, OR DO WE NEED TO HAVE A SPECIFIC SET OF GOALS BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO BE AMENDING THIS STREET CORNER?
>> SOME ARE DEFINITELY MORE DETAILED, BUT ACCESSIBILITY AUDIT IMPLEMENTATION, THE COMMUNITY ENERGY PLAN, IT IS MORE BROAD.
IF WE ADDED A CAPITAL PLAN THAT WAS MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS, AND THEN IT'S UNLIKELY THAT WE WOULD DO ANYTHING IN 2025, AND IT WOULD BECOME A CARRY FORWARD FOR FUTURE YEARS. MR. VAN DAAN.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. IN MANY RESPECTS TO THAT POINT, WE ACTUALLY ARE IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN ALREADY WITH SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE ROAD CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN AGREED TO AND PROPOSED.
IN MANY RESPECTS, A LOT OF THE CURRENT EXPENDITURES THAT WE ARE NOW UNDERTAKING IN TERMS OF REGULAR BUSINESS I THINK COULD BE STYLED AND REPRESENTED AS DOWN PAYMENTS TOWARDS MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION.
THAT IS NOT LINKED DIRECTLY TO A MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN, BUT I'M REASONABLY CONFIDENT THAT, NOT TRYING TO MISREPRESENT OR CREATE FICTION, BUT WOULD SAY THAT MANY OF THE CURRENT EXPENDITURES ARE ALREADY THERE.
IF IT WAS HELPFUL FOR TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY PURPOSES FOR US TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT BE STARTING TO LOOK TOWARDS A DOWN PAYMENT OR PRE-IMPLEMENTATION OF A MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN BASED ON SOME OF THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED IN BUDGET 2025, WE CAN LOOK AT HOW WE MAY WANT TO PRESENT THAT INFORMATION SO THAT IT'S MADE MORE VISIBLE TO THE PUBLIC AND TO REMIND COUNCIL THAT SOME OF THE WORK THAT THEY'VE ALREADY APPROVED IS LIKELY CONSISTENT WITH A TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN THAT'S YET TO COME.
I WILL MAYBE JUST ASK MR. GREENCORN AND MR. PANDOO TO COMMENT FURTHER ABOUT TAKING THIS NOTION OF, I DON'T THINK WE NEED NECESSARILY A NEW PLAN IN ORDER TO POINT TO IT, BUT I THINK WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE ATTEMPTS TO MAKE IT MORE VISIBLE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH REGARD TO SETTING MORE VISIBILITY TO SOME OF THE CURRENT EXPENDITURES ALREADY TARGETED.
IF COUNCIL DECIDES TO ADD MORE BEFORE THE END OF THE BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, WE CAN CONSIDER THAT TOO.
MR. GREENCORN, IN TERMS OF CURRENT GREEN TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED INITIATIVES, WOULD YOU CARE TO COMMENT?
>> MAYBE NOT. I CARE TO COMMENT.
I THINK WHAT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT PARTICULARLY IS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS TRUST. IS THAT ACCURATE? I'M GOING TO ELABORATE.
IT'S TRUST THAT THE CORPORATION IS NOT FOLLOWING THROUGH. I'LL GIVE SOME EXAMPLES.
I THINK WE HAVE A TRAIL CONNECTIVITY PLAN.
I THINK WE HAVE HAD PAST BIKE STUDIES.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THAT, AND IS NO FAULT OF ANYONE HERE OR PAST COUNCILS, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD IN A COORDINATED FASHION. WE SEE THAT.
I SEE THAT. THE POINT OF THIS IS TO HAVE A MULTIFACETED TRANSPORTATION PLAN THAT BRINGS ALL THAT TOGETHER.
[03:00:03]
THOSE PLANS AREN'T USELESS. THEY'RE NOT USELESS.WE'RE GOING TO BRING ALL THAT TOGETHER AND DEVELOP AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
IN THAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, MIGHT HAVE SOFT THINGS.
I CALL SOFT THINGS LIKE EDUCATION CAMPAIGNS, BIKE TO WORK CAMPAIGNS.
WE'LL GO THROUGH THOSE THINGS.
I MAKE THE REFERENCE TO THE STRATEGIC WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN BECAUSE IN THERE THERE ARE EDUCATION CAMPAIGNS, BUT THERE ARE ALSO HARD COSTS.
THE WEIGH SCALE INSTALLATION, A NEW LANDFILL, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.
I SEE THOSE ALSO COMING OUT OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN.
THE LIST OF THINGS I HAVE HERE IS ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC LIGHT OPERATIONS AND BEST PRACTICES, WINTER SNOW MAINTENANCE AND OTHER ROAD ACTIVITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS, SERVICE STANDARD UPGRADES AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION IN SERVICE STANDARDS, TRANSIT SYSTEM MANAGEMENT.
I DON'T WANT TO REROUTE THIS THING TO DEATH BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY SO MANY TRANSIT ROUTES IN YELLOWKNIFE, BUT THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT THE WAY WE MODEL TRANSIT.
THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES THERE THAT WE HAVEN'T EXPLORED YET.
NON-STANDARDIZED CROSSWALKS AND ROAD MARKINGS.
I DON'T WANT TO SCOPE THIS OUT TOO BIG, BUT WHAT I ENVISION IS AN OVERALL MASTER PLAN WITH DIFFERENT TABS FOR DIFFERENT SUBJECTS, AND IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY, OR IT'LL BE MINE IN PARTICULAR TO BRING FORWARD THESE EVERY YEAR IN THE CAPITAL PLAN.
IF THEY GET PASSED, THAT'LL BE UP TO YOU FOLKS.
BUT YOU'LL SEE THAT'S WHAT I ENVISION, IS THE SAME AS THE STRATEGIC WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND A BUNCH OF OBJECTIVES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
I HOPE THAT PROVIDES SOME LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING, AT LEAST MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT, AND THE DESIRE OF COUNCIL TO MAKE SOME GOOD ACTION AND HEADWAY ON THIS. THANKS.
>> IN THAT EXPERIENCE, I BELIEVE WE ALSO HAVE CERTAIN RESERVES SET ASIDE FOR THE SOLID WASTES FACILITY.
SO TO THE COUNCILORS MOTION, I THINK HIS INTEREST IN THAT PUBLIC POLICY INSTRUMENT TO CONFIRM CHANGE IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN PRACTICED IN OTHER SCENARIOS.
I BELIEVE THE QUESTIONS AND QUERIES THAT WE HAVE HERE THAT WE'VE PRESENTED ON OUR SIDE, GET INTO A LEVEL OF MECHANICS ON HOW TO DO THAT IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T PUT THE CITY UNNECESSARILY HAVING TO INCREASE TAXES PREMATURELY OR UNTIL SUCH TIME AS WE HAVE THAT PLAN IN PLACE.
>> IT'S THE FUND FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT.
BUT MR. PANDOO MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING.
>> YEAH. THANK YOU. SORRY, JUST TO MAYBE IF WE CAN JUST PROVIDE A BRIDGE BETWEEN THE FINANCIAL REALITIES AND THEN PROBABLY HAVING THAT CERTAINTY THAT COUNCILOR MCLENNAN IS SAYING.
I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING IT AS A LINE ITEM AS A PROJECT AND A PROJECT FOR 2025, WHETHER WE CALL IT MASTER TRANSPORTATION.
WE CAN CHOOSE ANY NAME, BUT DO WE HAVE IT AS A LINE ITEM IN 2025? WE WILL HAVE TO DEFINE WHAT THAT AMOUNT LOOKS LIKE.
MY THINKING BEHIND IT IS JUST TWO THINGS.
ONE, WE CAN ALWAYS HAVE IT AS A CARRY FORWARD AT THE END OF THE YEAR, WHETHER YOU WANT TO ADD TO IT, WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO DIVERT IT BACK TO THE CAPITAL FUND.
THE SECOND HAVING THE LINE OF SIGHT WILL PROVIDE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURSUE ANY KIND OF FUNDING THAT MIGHT FALL UNDER THAT BROAD SCOPE OF EVERYTHING WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL IS WILLING TO ENTERTAIN, I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD IN THE MIDDLE WITHOUT TRYING TO CREATE ANY MORE RESERVES AND ANY MORE OF THOSE BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO PROBABLY HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO DO A DEEPER DIVE IN TERMS OF ALL THESE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE AND ALL THESE RESERVES THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE SET UP PROPERLY IN THE NEAR TERM AND IN THE LONG TERM. THANK YOU.
>> STILL MY QUESTION AROUND, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.
[LAUGHTER] FIRST OFF, I'M VERY GRATEFUL FOR OUR VERY COMPETENT STAFF.
SOMETIMES IT MAKES THIS HARDER BECAUSE IT'S A LOT MORE STUFF TO THINK ABOUT.
I FEEL LIKE MY HEAD IS LIKE A PING PONG BALL RIGHT NOW.
IT'S INTERESTING TO HEAR MR. PANDOO TALK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL TO SEEK ADDITIONAL FUNDING OR TO SEEK DIFFERENT GRANT OPPORTUNITIES, ET CETERA, IF WE WERE TO ESTABLISH THIS AS A CAPITAL PROJECT,
[03:05:01]
AND IT DOES LEAN ME MORE BACK TOWARDS THAT AND ENCOURAGES ME TO CONSIDER THIS AS A CAPITAL PROJECT.AND I THINK THAT THE QUESTION WOULD REALLY BE, WHAT ARE WE WILLING TO COMMIT AND WHAT ARE WE REALLY WILLING TO COMMIT THAT FROM? I THINK THAT I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF TABLEING THIS BECAUSE I WOULDN'T.
I NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT ELEMENT.
I DO THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO FUND THIS THOUGH, BECAUSE BEYOND JUST IT BEING IMPORTANT TO FUND SOMETHING OR PUT OUR MONEY WHERE OUR MOUTH IS.
THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE COST SAVINGS SYSTEM IN THE FUTURE AND ALSO TO RESIDENTS IN THE FUTURE.
THERE'S A REALLY FUN WEBSITE THAT I ACTUALLY SENT MY FELLOW COUNCILORS EARLIER.
IT'S ROADDAMAGECALCULATOR.COM AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE COMPARISON BETWEEN A ROAD BIKE AND ANY VEHICLE OF YOUR CHOICE REALLY DOES.
AND A ROAD BIKE VERSUS A SMALL SUV, IT WOULD TAKE 409 YEARS OF THE SAME JOURNEY EVERY DAY TO MAKE UP THE SAME DAMAGE TO THE ROADS THAT ONE SMALL SUV WOULD MAKE.
FOR ONE SINGLE JOURNEY, 409 JOURNEYS ON A BIKE OR ONE SINGLE JOURNEY ON AN SUV.
IT IS GOOD TO INVEST IN THESE PROGRAMS FOR MULTIPLE REASONS.
ACTUALLY, I GUESS TO GET CLARITY FROM YOU, COUNCILOR MCLENNAN.
I ACTUALLY REACHED OUR 90 MINUTE MARK.
>> THERE'S NOT REALLY A FINISH INSIGHT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
THERE'S STILL A FEW DIFFERENT OPTIONS, I THINK THAT YOU CAN CONSIDER.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN IS ALREADY A CAPITAL PROJECT, AND WE'RE ALLOCATING 300,000.
IF YOU WANT TO SIGNAL THAT WE'RE HAVING AN INTENT TO MY POINT OF NOT GENERALLY LIKING TO PUT STUFF FOR 2026, WELL, I DON'T WANT TO CUT STUFF FROM 2026, BUT IF YOU WANT TO SIGNAL THAT WE ARE FUNDING THIS AS A MULTI YEAR PROJECT, WE INCLUDE THAT.
AGAIN, THE ACCESSIBILITY WAS ONE PLAN WHERE WE PUT IN THE MONEY IN 2017 TO DO IT AND STARTING IN 2019, THAT'S WHEN THAT FINALLY CAME.
WE HAD THOSE $500,000 COMMITMENTS.
AND SO IF WE'RE SITTING HERE TODAY AND WE'RE GOING TO BE SITTING HERE NEXT DECEMBER, WE CAN DISCUSS THIS TO ADD NAUSEUM AND NEXT YEAR WITH A SWOOP OF THE PEN, WE CAN CUT IT.
IT IS A QUESTION OF, ARE WE INVESTING TODAY'S TAX DOLLARS IN A PROJECT FOR 2026? BUT OVER TO YOU, COUNCILOR MCLENNAN.
>> YEAH. I NEED TO SEE A LINE ITEM IN 2025.
THIS IS WHAT I THINK MR. PANDOO IS SUGGESTING, AND YOU HAVE SUGGESTED, CREATE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AS A CAPITAL LINE ITEM IN 2025 AND FUND IT WITH 179,035.
THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CARBON TAX REMITTANCE AND THE POWER OVERAGE.
AND USE THIS YEAR'S TAXES, WHICH IS OFFSET BY SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE CUT IN THE CAPITAL BUDGET.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT TIME IS GOOD.
I SENT THIS OUT TO COLLEAGUES A MONTH AGO, AND I'VE SIGNALED THAT I'M BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
SO I'D LIKE TO HAVE A VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT.
SO AMENDED MOTION WOULD BE TO CREATE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS AS A 2025 CAPITAL LINE ITEM, $179,035.
>> TO THE MOTION, WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO SPEAK TO IT FURTHER, COUNCILOR HENDRIKSEN?
>> I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR THIS ONE.
AGAIN, I'M 100% IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
WE NEED TO JUST SHOW THAT WE'RE BEHIND THIS IN MY MIND.
I KNOW DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS BACKING OF THIS.
[03:10:01]
I APPRECIATE THAT THEY WERE THE ONES WHO BROUGHT THIS FORWARD WHEN THEY SAW ALL OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE WERE HAVING.THEY ACTUALLY GAVE US A TANGIBLE ACTION.
I THINK IT'S OUR JOB TO GIVE OUR TANGIBLE ACTION.
I THINK WE GOT A LETTER TONIGHT FROM THE MINISTER OF FINANCE SHOWING CARBON TAX REBATE TO THE CITY.
AND THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THAT CARBON TAX REBATE IS TO PUT TOWARDS CARBON REDUCTION.
THIS IS A TANGIBLE ACTION TOWARDS THAT AS COUNCILOR MCGURK WAS SAYING.
I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO PUT SOMETHING IN THE BUDGET TONIGHT AND I'LL STOP THERE.
THANK YOU, COUNCILOR MCLENNAN FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
>> MYSELF, I DO THINK WE'RE SHOWING SUPPORT BY DOING THE 300,000 FOR THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN AND BE HAPPY TO CONSIDER 179 OR 500,000 NEXT YEAR, IF THAT'S WHAT THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN COMES BACK WITH.
WHEN IT COMES TO CARBON TAX THERE'S MANY PROJECTS IN THE BUDGET THAT WE'RE WORKING ON.
IF YOU JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THE TRANSIT, IT'S GROWN EXPONENTIALLY, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE'VE INCREASED THE ROOTS, WE'VE INCREASED THE SERVICE.
THERE'S NO SHORTAGES OF INITIATIVES THAT WE'RE WORKING ON.
BUT AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO DO THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
THEN I HOPE THAT NEXT YEAR WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE CAPITAL BUDGET THAT WE ARE DOING THOSE COMMITMENTS LIKE THE ACCESSIBILITY PLAN, LIKE THE COMMUNITY ENERGY PLAN, AND TAKING THIS AS A REALLY SERIOUS PLAN.
I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS PRESENTED.
WITH THAT FINAL COMMENTS, TO THE MOTION TO ADD $179,305?
>> AT 35. [LAUGHTER] THERE WE GO.
FOR MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? AND THAT'S DEFEATED WITH COUNCILOR MCLENNAN, MCGURK, FEQUET AND HENDRIKSEN IN FAVOR.
WITH THAT, WE'VE REACHED THE 90 MINUTE MARK.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE TAIL END OF THE NIGHT OR ARE WE LOOKING TO GO FOR ANOTHER HOUR?
>> WELL, WE'VE GOT LOTS OF OTHER THINGS.
SO THEN LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK AND WE WILL COME BACK AT 9:05 P.M.
FURTHER ITEMS COUNCILOR MCLENNAN.
>> THANK YOU. AND I'VE GOT A WHOLE SPEECH ABOUT THIS ONE.
I'D LIKE TO PUT FORWARD A MOTION TO CUT THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN.
>> THANKS TO COLLEAGUES FOR CONSIDERING THE PREVIOUS MOTION.
I'D LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS ABOUT THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE SEEK TO ADDRESS ISSUES IN OUR COMMUNITY.
BEFORE I DO, I'D LIKE TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT I KNOW THAT CITY STAFF AND CONTRACTORS WANT TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES AND THEY ARE WORKING VERY HARD TO DO SO.
MY CRITIQUE IS NOT WITH THEM OR THEIR WORK, BUT WITH THE PROCESS WE USE AS A COUNCIL.
THE PROCESS WE USE TO ADDRESS ISSUES IN OUR COMMUNITY IS TO SEEK ADVICE FROM EXPERTS, EITHER INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL AND PRODUCE A PLAN, REPORT, OR REVIEW ON HOW BEST TO MAKE PROGRESS.
IT IS THEN UP TO US TO TRIAGE AND ASSIGN RESOURCES TO ALL THE VARIOUS ISSUES FACING YELLOWKNIFE.
IN MY VIEW, THIS PROCESS IS FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN.
WE HAVE TIME AND TIME AGAIN, USED RESIDENTS HARD EARNED TAX DOLLARS AND STAFFS EXTREMELY VALUABLE TIME TO PROCURE PLANS THAT GO NOWHERE.
ASKING FOR A PLAN THAT IS EASY AND IT FEELS GOOD.
WE GET TO SIT IN THESE CHAIRS AND THINK WE'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING THE ISSUES.
THAT IS, WE ARE ONLY DOING SOMETHING, WE ARE ONLY ADDRESSING THE ISSUES IF WE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT THE ADVICE WE RECEIVE.
IT'S PERFECTLY UNDERSTANDABLE WHY THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN.
WE ASK FOR A REPORT, REVIEW, PLAN, AND WE GET IT A YEAR OR MORE LATER.
BUT THEN PERHAPS CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED.
OTHER ISSUES HAVE COME FORWARD, AND THE RESOURCES FEEL PARTICULARLY TIGHT.
THERE ARE VERY LEGITIMATE REASONS TO NOT RESOURCE THE PLAN.
HOWEVER, THE PRACTICAL IMPACT OF THIS PLANNING, BUT NO ACTION CYCLE IS THAT WE FEEL BETTER INITIALLY, BUT WE FAIL TO MAKE MEANINGFUL PROGRESS ON IMPORTANT ISSUES, AND WE'RE SLOWLY BLEEDING RESOURCES IN THE PROCESS.
IN MY VIEW, WE EITHER NEED TO COMMIT TO RESOURCING THESE PLANS, WE ASK FOR FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
AND IF WE DON'T FEEL THERE ARE RESOURCES TO DO SO, WE NEED TO BE REALISTIC AND UPFRONT ABOUT THIS AND NOT ASK FOR THE PLAN IN THE FIRST PLACE.
THE CITY, AS OUR MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY IS CONSTRAINED IN OUR ABILITY TO RAISE RESOURCES, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME FACING MORE AND MORE EXPECTATIONS FOR SERVICE,
[03:15:03]
ALONG WITH FUNDAMENTAL CHALLENGES TO CORE INFRASTRUCTURE.I KNOW WE WANT TO HELP ADDRESS HOW THE ISSUE IS FACING OUR COMMUNITY.
HOWEVER IT FEELS TO ME WE'RE FACING A RECKONING WITH THE FACT THAT WE MAY SIMPLY NOT BE ABLE TO DO SO.
BEFORE WE ASK FOR MORE PLANNING AND MORE ADVICE, WE REALLY NEED TO ASK OURSELVES IF WE CAN AFFORD AND IF WE ARE WILLING TO FOLLOW THROUGH.
GIVEN THAT WE'RE NOT WILLING TO ALLOCATE RESOURCES UP FRONT, I SIMPLY CANNOT, IN GOOD FACE, SUPPORT THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN AT THIS POINT.
THEREFORE, I'M PROPOSING TO CUT IT.
>> [LAUGHTER] I WILL SPEAK TO IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE LOOK AT A NUMBER OF PLANS.
WE'VE GOT OUR ACCESSIBILITY PLAN, WE HAVE OUR COMMUNITY ENERGY PLAN, WE HAVE OUR ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND WE'VE NEVER ADDED FUNDS TO CREATE THOSE PLANS, AND ADDED DOLLARS TO DO THE IMPLEMENTATION AT THE SAME TIME.
IT'S ALWAYS DOLLARS GO FOR THE PLAN, AND THEN AFTER WE GOT THE PLAN, THEN WE DO THE MULTI YEAR ASSET MANAGEMENT, WE HAVE TWO PYS AND OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS, IT'S BEEN 340-430K A YEAR THAT WE'VE ALLOCATED.
COMMUNITY ENERGY PLAN WAS FROM $400,000 TO A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR, ACCESSIBILITY PLAN, 500K-500,000 A YEAR.
SO IT IS POSSIBLE TO CREATE GOOD PLANS.
BUT THE IDEA OF PUTTING PLANNING DOLLARS AND IMPLEMENTATION DOLLARS IN THE SAME YEAR, WHEN WE KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET TO IMPLEMENTATION IN THE SAME YEAR.
I SUPPORT THE PLAN, AND I ENCOURAGE US IN ALL FUTURE YEARS TO DO THE ACCESSIBILITY PLAN, DO THE COMMUNITY ENERGY PLAN, DO THE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN.
WE CAN DO IT WHEN WE HAVE REALLY SERIOUS PLANS TO DO.
THE WACKER MALL SMALLER PLANS.
WE DON'T DO THOSE MULTI YEAR RESOURCES.
BUT I THINK THOSE AREN'T THOSE $300,000 PLANS THAT WE'VE BEEN STRUCTURING.
THEY'VE BEEN THE SMALLER PLANS, AND THAT'S WHERE I SEE THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS ON PAR WITH THOSE BIGGER PLANS THAT WE HAVE DONE THOSE FUNDING COMMITMENTS FOR.
I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
COUNCILOR MCGURK, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT?
>> YEAH. I GUESS I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT $300,000 IS A LOT OF MONEY TO SPEND WITHOUT GIVING THE ORGANIZATION A FIGHTING CHANCE TO IMPLEMENT ANY OF THE PROJECTS.
>> ALL THESE LARGE PLANS THE MAYOR HAS REFERENCED THEY'VE ALL BEEN AFFECTED BY SHIFTING COSTS AND WE ARE ALL COMING TO REALIZE, I THINK, EVERYBODY HERE THAT COSTS ARE RISING.
I JUST THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY PRUDENT FOR US TO PUT ASIDE MONEY FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
WELL, I HAVE FULL INTENTION TO BRING THIS BACK UP AND TO REQUEST TO CREATE A CAPITAL PROJECT OR CREATE AS A LINE ITEM AND CAPITAL TO FUND THIS NEXT YEAR.
I REALLY APPRECIATE WHERE COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN IS COMING FROM.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN?
>> THANKS, MAYOR ALTY. I DON'T THINK IT'S A SHOCK FOR PEOPLE TO HEAR THAT.
THERE'S TWO ISSUES THAT REALLY HAVE DRIVEN ME ON COUNCIL, HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS AND TRANSPORTATION.
WHERE WE LIVE AND HOW WE EXPERIENCE AND MOVE AROUND THAT PLACE IS EVERYTHING ABOUT A COMMUNITY.
THAT'S WHERE I'M STARTING FROM.
AS I SAID IN MY PREVIOUS REMARKS, ADMIN HAS LISTENED TO US FROM DAY ONE FROM OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING, FROM ALL OF OUR MANY CONVERSATIONS, AND THEY HAVE BROUGHT US AN OPPORTUNITY, AS THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORK SAID, TO KNIT THOSE.
ALL OF THE THINGS WE HAVE AN ACTION AS A CITY IN THE PAST, KNIT THOSE THINGS TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH THAT MISSION FORWARD.
OBVIOUSLY, I AM WITH COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN IN SAYING THAT I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE PUT A VERY NOMINAL AMOUNT OF MONEY WHEN IT COMES TO TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE SIDE THIS EVENING.
BUT I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION BECAUSE THIS ISSUE IS JUST TOO IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE IT IS ABOUT HOW WE MOVE AROUND AND EXPERIENCE THE CITY WE'RE IN.
I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN FOR BRINGING AROUND THE LAST MOTION, AND I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH HIS REASONING FOR BRINGING FORWARD THIS MOTION, BUT I WON'T BE SUPPORTING IT AT THIS TIME.
[03:20:01]
>> THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
I WANT US TO HAVE A LITTLE FAITH IN OURSELVES.
THIS WILL BE COMING BEFORE US TO MAKE A DECISION ON HOW WE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT WHAT DOLLARS WE PUT BEHIND IT.
JUST BECAUSE WE DIDN'T SAY TONIGHT THAT WE'RE GOING TO ATTACH SOMETHING TO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MAKE THE ACTUAL PLAN AN AUTOMATIC FAILURE.
LET US GIVE US SOME TIME FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO GO THROUGH WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE.
LET THEM COME UP WITH AN IDEA OF HOW TO PROPERLY FUNDED WITH IMPLEMENTATION, NOT ONLY THROUGH INTERNAL CAPITAL DOLLARS, BUT ALSO THROUGH GRANTS.
THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE EXPLORED HERE.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE COMING FROM THIS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD MANY A PLETHORA OF PLANS THAT HAVE NOT COME TO FRUITION.
BUT I THINK THIS COUNCIL, I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN IT, WILL BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY TACKLE THIS SERIOUSLY AND WITH FERVOR. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILLOR PAYNE.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I DON'T KNOW HOW GARETT GOT MY NOTES FOR THESE COMMENTS, BUT HE TOOK MY NOTES, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED TO SAY.
>> I DO LOVE THE WORD FROM [INAUDIBLE].
SEEING NOTHING FURTHER TO THE MOTION TO CUT THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN OPPOSED, AND THAT'S DEFEATED WITH COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN IN FAVOR.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, MOTIONS? WE'RE ALSO COMING BACK TOMORROW, SO I'VE GOT THAT WHACK.
>> THANKS, MAYOR ALTY. PROBABLY THE FINAL ONE FOR THE NIGHT.
IT DOES RELATE TO A QUESTION ALREADY ASKED IN THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, BUT I JUST WANT TO PROBE A LITTLE MORE.
IN MY PRE-BUDGET QUESTIONS, I ASKED ABOUT ADVISABILITY OF TRANSFERRING TWO-AND-A-HALF MILLION OR ANOTHER AMOUNT FROM THE MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RESERVE TO THE CAPITAL FUND.
ADMIN RECOMMENDED NOT AGAINST DOING THAT, SO I TAKE THAT ON BOARD.
BUT I JUST HAVE A FEW OTHER QUESTIONS BECAUSE IN THAT RESPONSE IN THE WRITTEN QUESTIONS TALKS ABOUT AN EXPECTED SHOCK COMING.
I GUESS, DOES NOT, AND I'M SURE I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, BUT DOES ADMIN HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF HOW BIG THE SHOCK WILL BE? BECAUSE WHEN WE LOOK OUT TO 2027, WE HAVE ABOUT NINE MILLION SITTING IN THIS RESERVE.
SO DO WE NOT THINK 9.4 MILLION IS GOING TO ABSORB THAT SHOCK, OR IS THAT THE EXPECTED AMOUNT THAT WE WILL NEED FOR THAT SHOCK? THANKS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO BE ALARMIST.
WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS SENSITIZE THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TRENDS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO COUNCIL THAT ARE HEADING INTO DEFICIT TERRITORY.
IN THOSE DEFICIT TERRITORY, AREAS WE'RE HIGHLIGHTING TODAY THAT THIS IS SOMETHING TO BE YELLOW LIGHT, THERE IS SOME DEFICIT TERRITORY COMING.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE'VE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF MOTIONS SINCE THE DRAFT BUDGET HAS BEEN TABLED TO ADD SOME LEVEL OF PROGRAMMING, AND WE'VE ALSO RECEIVED SOME MOTIONS TO REALLOCATE SOME LEVEL OF PROGRAMMING.
WE WILL NEED TO ASSESS THE FULL IMPLICATIONS OF THAT ONCE THE DUST SETTLES.
TERMS OF GOING FORWARD, WE KNOW THAT COMING INTO 2026, THERE WILL BE A GENERAL RATE REVIEW.
WE DO KNOW THAT IN 2026, WE'LL NEED TO CONSIDER SOME SERIOUS QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO WATER AND SEWER RATES THAT WE ARE BEING PRESENTED WITH EARLY IN Q1, AND WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE GENERAL ECONOMIC FORECAST THAT WE ARE JUST, UNFORTUNATELY, SUBJECT TO ECONOMICS IN THE TERRITORY WRIT LARGE, AND THERE ARE SOME UNKNOWN.
WHAT WE PRESENTED ON NOVEMBER 12TH WAS A BUDGET WITH AN 8.01% TAX INCREASE BASED ON A SET OF ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE INVITED COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO MOVE THE CITY FORWARD IN A SUSTAINABLE WAY TO BALANCE THE PRIORITIES AS WE UNDERSTOOD THEM AT THAT TIME.
AS WE'RE INTO THE BUDGET DISCUSSION NOW, AND AS WE'RE NOW LEARNING ABOUT THE FACT THAT NORTHWEST NT POWER CORP HAS SOME RATE QUESTIONS LOOMING OUT THERE AS WE'RE DEALING WITH NEW INFORMATION AS IT COMES, WE ARE SUGGESTING THAT COUNCIL BE MINDFUL ABOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL AND NOTED ADDITIONAL ITEMS AT A TIME WHEN WE DON'T HAVE A CLEAR FINANCIAL PICTURE GOING INTO 2026.
WHILE WE'RE CAUTIOUS OF NOT TRYING TO BE FEAR MONGERING, WE ARE TRYING TO INVITE COUNCIL TO BE MINDFUL OF SOME OF THE COSTS THAT ARE UNFORESEEN, THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LINE OF SIGHT ON IN 2026, BUT ARE ISSUES WITH WHICH COUNCIL WILL NEED TO TURN
[03:25:02]
THEIR ATTENTION TO IN DUE COURSE WHEN THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.TO YOUR QUESTION, IS THE CURRENT RESERVE SUFFICIENT TO ABSORB ANY LEVEL OF SHOCK ASSOCIATED? WELL, IN ALL BASED ON AVAILABLE INFORMATION, WE SEE NO REASON WHY MUNICIPAL AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS WILL NEED TO APPOINT AN ADMINISTRATOR TO TAKE OUT COUNCIL AND ADMINISTER OUR AFFAIRS.
WE SEE NO INDICATION OF THAT WHATSOEVER.
BUT HAVING SAID THAT, WE WOULD INVITE THAT WE EXERCISE A LITTLE BIT OF CAUTION.
WE ARE SENSITIVE TO THE FACT THAT YELLOWKNIFE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE HIGHER COST OF LIVING.
WE ARE OFFERING OUR BEST FINANCIAL ADVICE AND PROGRAM ADVICE BASED ON A REASONABLE TOLERANCE THAT WE THINK BASED ON OUR CURRENT VOLUME, BASED ON OUR CURRENT NUMBERS, BASED ON OUR NUMBERS THAT WE PROVIDED ON NOVEMBER 12TH, AND THAT PRESENTS AN 8.01% TAX INCREASE AND WE'LL NEED TO REFLECT AND BE MINDFUL ABOUT WHAT ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN THAT MIGHT MEAN FINANCIALLY AFTER COUNCIL HAS DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE.
IF THERE'S NEW MOTIONS COMING THAT HAVEN'T COME YET IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL PRESSURES, PLEASE SPEAK NOW, AND I'LL HOPEFULLY BE INVITED TO PROVIDE ANOTHER RESPONSE WHEN THOSE MOTIONS COME FORWARD.
PRUDENCE, I GUESS, WOULD BE THE CAUTIONARY MESSAGE.
>> MR. VAN DINE, I REALLY LIKE THE 50 YEAR FORECAST ON PAGE 122 OF THE FLEET MANAGEMENT.
THE ONLY CHALLENGE WITH IT IS THAT IT GOES BY YEAR 0 TO YEAR 1.
PERHAPS WE CAN JUST SIGNIFY WHAT YEAR 0 IS BECAUSE THIS IS A GOOD VISUALIZATION OF THOSE YEARS THAT ARE COMING, AND WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK FROM YEAR 9 TO YEAR 15, YOU'RE LOOKING AT TWO MILLION, THREE MILLION, CLOSE TO FIVE MILLION EVERY YEAR.
IT'S EASY TO SEE HOW FAST WE DRAIN, AND THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF RESERVES IS ABOUT STABILIZING NOT GETTING THE PEAKS AND VALLEYS LIKE THIS GRAPH IS SHOWING.
I CAN APPRECIATE THAT RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN A BIT OF THAT VALLEY, BUT THAT MOUNTAINS ABOUT TO COME.
IF WE COULD JUST MAYBE UPDATE THIS VISUAL FOR FUTURE, OR JUST ADD A LITTLE NOTE THAT YEAR 0 EQUALS BLAH.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT, AND AS COUNCIL IS AWARE THAT THIS WILL BE FURTHER INFORMED BY OUR ASSET REVIEW THAT WE WILL BE DOING OVER TIME, WHICH IN EVERY OTHER JURISDICTION AND IN ANY OTHER CONTEXT WITH WHICH A THOROUGH ASSET REVIEW HAS BEEN DONE USING THE METHODOLOGIES THAT WE'RE RELYING ON THAT HAVE BEEN USED ELSEWHERE IN TERMS OF BEST CASES, THERE IS A STICKER SHOCK THAT COMES WITH THAT.
BUT THAT IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN THEIR EXPERIENCE IN SHIFTING TO AN ASSET MANAGEMENT THAT IS REGIMENTED AND DISCIPLINE.
THERE ARE DEFINITELY TECHNIQUES WITH WHICH TO MANAGE THE FLEET AND CAPITAL OVER TIME.
BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR, WE WILL UPDATE THAT TO GIVE A MORE CLEAR PICTURE GOING OUT WITH BASE YEARS TO HELP CONVEY THAT MESSAGE BOTH TO COUNCIL AND TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
>> SO JUST TO CONFIRM YEAR 0 IN THAT GRAPH IS 2025 OR 2024, OR IS IT A DIFFERENT YEAR?
>> I THINK IT'S 2023, IF MEMORY MIGHT SERVE ME RIGHT BECAUSE WE WERE PRESENTED THIS.
IT COULD BE 2022. I KNOW WE WERE PRESENTED THIS IN 2023, BUT PERHAPS WE'LL BE BACK TOMORROW.
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. WE'RE PAST THAT FIRST SPIKE, SO I GUESS WE'RE BACK IN THAT VALLEY, AND I GUESS BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THE CITY MANAGER PROVIDED IN TERMS OF THE CONTEXT, AND I DON'T MIND A LITTLE FEAR MONGERING IF IT'S PRACTICAL FEAR MONGERING.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I GUESS MY QUESTION STILL STANDS.
WE HAVE IN 2027 A FORECAST OF $9.4 MILLION, AND WE STILL ARE SITTING ON A PRETTY HEALTHY RESERVE THERE WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE VALLEY, IF THAT'S 2022 OR 2023 THAT WE'RE STARTING IN, WE'RE ON A VALLEY FOR THE NEXT WHILE, SO I ONLY FORECAST OVER THE NEXT FOUR OR FIVE YEARS THAT RESERVE IS JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO GROW, SO ARE WE PLANNING ON JUST ALLOWING A MOBILE EQUIPMENT RESERVE TO CONTINUE TO GROW TO A VERY LARGE AMOUNT AND JUST HOLDING ONTO MONEY FOR FUTURE SPENDING, OR DO WE REDUCE A RESERVE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PLANNING ON SPENDING ANYTHING IMMEDIATELY?
[03:30:05]
I GUESS THAT'S MY QUESTION.>> THE RESERVES, I THINK, IS SUFFICIENT TO FUND EXPENDITURES, SO IT'S SUPER EXACT. MR. VAN DINE.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK DR. PANDOO CAN GIVE US A BIT OF INSIGHT ON THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. VAN DINE. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
I THINK THE REASON WE SAY THERE IS A SHOCK, BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN OTHER PLACES, WHENEVER ASSET MANAGEMENT COMES ON BOARD, THERE IS AN ADJUSTMENT THAT GETS MADE, JUST BECAUSE, IN TERMS OF SHIFTING OF HOW WE CURRENTLY RECORD OUR ASSETS, WE DO IT ON SOMETHING CALLED BOOK VALUE, WHICH IS PROBABLY NOT CURRENT VALUE, NOT A MARKET BASE.
WHENEVER WE DO THOSE ADJUSTMENT, WHEN ASSET MANAGEMENT COMES INTO PLAY, THERE'S A SHIFT THAT HAPPENS GOING FROM BOOK VALUE TO MARKET VALUE OR REPLACEMENT VALUE.
THAT ADJUSTMENT MOST OF THE TIME IS HIGHER.
THERE IS A SHOCK, THAT'S WHAT WE CALL IT MAYBE IT'S THE WRONG WORD, BUT MAYBE APPROPRIATE AS WELL BECAUSE WE CAN'T FORESEE HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO BE THE ADJUSTMENT.
IT'S VERY CONTINGENT ON A LOT OF FACTORS.
THAT'S WHY TO BE CAUTIOUS, WE'VE SAID, DO NOT TOUCH AT THE MOMENT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHEN ALL THOSE SWITCH OVER GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE VALUES, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT RESERVE GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
WE CAN ALWAYS GO BACK TO IT IN MAYBE TWO YEARS TIME AND HAVE A LOOK AT IT TO SAY, THE ADJUSTMENT WAS UP TOO MUCH, THEN WE CAN THINK OF DOING SOMETHING ELSE WITH THE RESERVE.
BUT TILL THAT TIME, I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE PRUDENT FOR US TO GO AND START TRANSFERRING OUT OF THAT RESERVE. THANK YOU.
>> BASED ON CAPITAL CARRY FORWARDS, THERE MAY BE SOME PURCHASES THAT DIDN'T GO THROUGH OR THAT ARE IN PROCESS IN 2024, WHICH IS WHY YOU SEE THAT THE BUDGET WAS 2.6 MILLION CLOSING BALANCE, BUT FINISHED AT 6.2, SO THE MONEY COULD BE THE BUDGET VERSUS ACTUAL IN TERMS OF THAT REVOLVING FUND CHALLENGE.
ANYTHING FURTHER FOR TONIGHT? SEEING NONE, WE WILL RECESS AND WE WILL COME BACK TOMORROW AND DEAL WITH A FEW TABLED MOTIONS.
HAVE A GREAT NIGHT, EVERYONE. SEE YOU TOMORROW AT 5:30 NOT 4:30.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.