[00:00:05]
OKAY. AND WE WILL CALL OUR MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
SO WE WILL START OUT SAME AS WE STARTED OUT LAST NIGHT.
[4. 2025 Budget Deliberations.]
THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND SAINT JOE'S AND NJ INTERSECTION.MR. VAN DINE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON INFORMATION? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
SO SINCE OUR LAST DISCUSSION ON THIS, WE'VE DONE SOME FURTHER THINKING AND WE BELIEVE WE HAVE A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS AND OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER, ONE THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT I BELIEVE, THE NEAR TERM INTEREST IN PROVIDING AN AFFORDABLE OR AT LEAST SOMEWHAT LESS EXPENSIVE OPTION OF DEALING WITH THE SAFETY ISSUES IN THE SHORT TERM, WHILE NOT COMMITTING FUNDS PREMATURELY TO LONGER TERM PLANNING THAT MIGHT BE REQUIRED IN 2026.
FOR THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. GREENCORN TO WALK US THROUGH THE TWO NOTIONS THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK.
SO I'LL TALK ABOUT THE ENTIRE TRAFFIC LIGHT CAPITAL PROJECT WRITE UP.
SO THERE'S TWO SECTIONS TO IT.
ONE IS THE 52ND STREET AND FRANKLIN LIGHTS.
THE RECOMMENDATION IS STILL TO DO THAT.
THE SECOND PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO MOVE THE 95,000 TO 2026 SO THAT WE CAN PROPERLY SO THAT I'M NOT ESTIMATING ON THE FLY AND THAT WE CAN PROPERLY PLAN OUT BUMP OUTS IF THAT'S THE PATH FORWARD.
AND IT ALSO CONTEMPLATES SOME TEMPORARY COST AND AN ADDITIONAL $10,000 FOR BOLLARDS THAT WE CAN PUT IN PLACE OR NOT BOLLARDS, BUT CONCRETE BARRIERS AND THE APPROPRIATE REFLECTIVE MARKINGS AND SIGNAGE THAT WE CAN PUT IN PLACE WHILE MAINTAINING THE EXISTING LIGHTS FOR REPLACEMENT NEXT YEAR. SO THAT'S OPTION ONE.
OPTION TWO IS WE KIND OF GO AT IT AS IS.
WE LEAVE IT ALONE. IT'S STILL A SAFE CROSSING.
IT'S STILL GOT THE LIGHTS THERE, BUT WE STILL COME BACK NEXT YEAR WITH THE BUMP OUTS AND THE PLANNED LIGHT EXPENDITURES THAT WE HAD PLANNED FOR 25.
AND I'M HAPPY TO EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE MORE IF IT WASN'T CLEAR.
PERHAPS MR. GREENCORN CAN TALK TO YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FINANCIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO.
AND OPTION TWO WOULD BE JUST TO MAINTAIN THE $70,000 FOR THE 52ND STREET LIGHTS OR LIGHT POLES.
DO YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE? I AM OKAY TO DEFER IT SO WE CAN THINK ABOUT IT AND DO THE TEMPORARY OPTION OF MY WILLING TO CHANGE THAT MOTION TO THAT.
OKAY, SO THE MOTION WOULD BE TO DEFER THE NJ SECTION WHICH IS 95 K TO NEXT YEAR. AND TO ADD TEN K FOR AN INTERIM OPTION IN 2025.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT COMPROMISE TO ME.
I FULLY SUPPORT THE REFURBISHED MOTION.
SO, TO THE MOTION TO DEFER THE REPLACEMENT OF SAINT JOE'S AND NJ TO 2026, TO PROCEED WITH THE 52ND STREET AND TO ADD 10,000.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AND YOU'RE AND TOM'S IN FAVOR? MY APOLOGIES, TOM, TO IF YOU WERE LOOKING TO DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON OR WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT MOTION? NO. OKAY. SORRY.
COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD.
AND WE DON'T HAVE CLEAR SIGHT LINES ON THE COST IMPLICATIONS AS COUNCIL AS IT'S NOT IN THE BUDGET.
[00:05:06]
THANK YOU. THANK YOU.ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL OR DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
I'LL BE NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
I WOULD, HOWEVER REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT THAT POSITION NOT PUT INTO THE ORG CHART AS OUTLINED.
I IF THEY'RE BEING BROUGHT IN TO FOCUS ON A REORGANIZATION OR A REFOCUSING, I WOULD PREFER IF THEY FOCUS JUST ON THAT AND DIDN'T HAVE AN ADDED RESPONSIBILITY OF A DEPARTMENT UNDERNEATH THEM. SO I KNOW THAT'S MORE OPERATIONAL ON THE CITY MANAGER SIDE, BUT THAT WOULD BE MY FEEDBACK.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN.
JUST FOR CLARITY, I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO ASK COUNCILLOR WARBURTON JUST FOR CLARITY ON WHAT YOU'RE THINKING, BECAUSE IN MY LIKE, ARE YOU ARE YOU THINKING SORT OF LIKE A DIRECTOR LEVEL THAT REPORTS TO CITY MANAGER AND IS JUST FOCUSING ON GOVERNANCE, OR ARE YOU THINKING COORDINATOR LEVEL EQUALLY JUST FOCUSING ON GOVERNANCE? BUT IN EITHER SCENARIO, JUST TO THE CITY MANAGER, FOCUSING ON GOVERNANCE WITHOUT THE DEPARTMENTAL? I'M JUST TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND THAT IDEA.
SO THEY'RE SOLELY FOCUSED ON ONE THING.
THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.
BUT I'D LIKE THE CITY MANAGER TO PIPE IN ON THIS.
AND FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOURSELF OR WHAT? YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE HOPING TO ENVISION IN TERMS OF THE WORK AND THE LINE OF SIGHT ON GOVERNANCE, RESTRUCTURE OR NOT RESTRUCTURING, BUT GOVERNANCE IMPROVEMENTS.
WOULD THAT SORT OF STRUCTURE WORK FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE TO MAKE SURE THAT, YES, YOU HAVE THE SUPPORT, BUT THAT IT'S WE'RE SORT OF FROM A COUNCIL LEVEL DRIVING THAT EFFICIENCY AND NOT GETTING HOPEFULLY AVOIDING.
MR. VAN DINE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
I DO APPRECIATE THE EXTRA ENERGY THAT PEOPLE ARE SPENDING ON THIS.
THIS IS REALLY HELPFUL IN A NUMBER OF, A NUMBER OF FRONTS.
THE THRUST OF THE DIRECTION IS TO IS TO ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD ON SOME MODERNIZATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT I THINK HAVE BEEN TAKEN WELL OVERDUE TO BE DONE.
AND I THINK THIS WOULD DEFINITELY GIVE US THAT ABILITY TO PUSH IN THAT DIRECTION WITH SOME SUBSTANTIVE THINKING AND HEAVY LIFTING. THE MODEL THAT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL ALSO HAD THE DIRECT BENEFIT OF CREATING MORE BANDWIDTH ON OUR ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY SIDE.
SO THAT RATIONALE WAS SIMPLY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BANDWIDTH WAS CREATED BY, BY REMOVING A FUNCTION THAT I THINK COULD BE SUPPORTED IN THIS OTHER ORGANIZATIONAL MODEL.
THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL RATIONALE, AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH IT.
SO THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERRED APPROACH.
I CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT AND CERTAINLY MAKE IT WORK.
I THINK THE TIMING OF THIS IS PRETTY CRITICAL.
SO THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THAT.
SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF KEEPING IT IN THE BUDGET AS IT IS.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S A TWO YEAR SCOPE HERE.
SO I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT AS IT HAS BEEN PRESENTED.
[00:10:01]
THANKS. THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
I STAND WHERE I WAS THE OTHER DAY.
I THINK IT WAS PROPERLY ARTICULATED WHERE MY OVERALL PRINCIPLE IS ON THIS.
BUT I ALSO JUST TO REITERATE SOMETHING THAT THE MAYOR BROUGHT UP DURING THE PRIOR DISCUSSION, I THINK HAVING THIS POSITION AT THE SLT LEVEL MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, NOT ONLY FOR THE LEVEL OF ACCOUNTABILITY THAT WILL COME TO BY BEING WITHIN THE OTHER DIRECTORS, BUT ALSO TO THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE.
SO I ALSO, AGAIN, FUNDAMENTALLY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE TASKED HIM WITH.
TO DO WAS TO MAKE THESE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES, TO RESTRUCTURE AND MODERNIZE THE WAY HE SEES FIT.
AND I WILL DEMONSTRATE AGAIN MY CONFIDENCE AND TRUST IN HIS EXPERTISE HERE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR FEQUET.
YEAH, JUST QUICKLY REITERATE THE MAIN POINT, I THINK, FROM THE OTHER DAY, I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION OF CUTTING THIS BECAUSE, AGAIN THE CITY MANAGER IS COUNCIL'S ONE AND ONLY STAFF.
AND LIKE EVERYONE HAS ALREADY MENTIONED IF THIS IS THE NEED THAT IS KIND OF OBSERVED AND THIS WILL HELP ADDRESS A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS, THE REQUESTS, THE DESIRES THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS ARTICULATED.
WE I THINK WE HAVE TO SUPPORT IT IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO PROPERLY EVALUATE THE OUTCOMES AT THE END OF THE DAY, BECAUSE IF WE SAY NO AND THINGS ARE STILL NOT AS WE WANT THEM TO, THAT'S THEN ON US.
SO I WOULD GIVE GRACE TO OUR CITY MANAGER TO TAKE HIS BEST CRACK AT TRYING TO MAKE THE MACHINE WORK OR BE MORE WELL OILED, OR GIVE IT THE HORSEPOWER IT NEEDS IN THE PLACES IT NEEDS TO HELP OUR TEAMS AND OUR STAFF GET DONE WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO GET DONE.
I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF CUTTING THIS POSITION.
I THINK THE MAIN SOURCE OF STRESS ON COUNCIL IS THE IDEA THAT THIS POSITION WHILE IT IS ONLY TWO YEARS, WILL CONTINUE AND OR IT'LL BE HARD TO NOT CONTINUE IT.
SO I JUST HOPE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WILL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION THAT WHEN HIRING THAT WE'RE A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS ABOUT THAT, AND WE DON'T WANT TO PUT SOMEBODY OUT IF WE HIRE THEM, THAT'S IT.
FOR MYSELF, I'M ALSO NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS PRESENTED.
I DEFINITELY I THINK THE SENIOR POSITION WOULD BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE JUNIOR BECAUSE THE JUNIOR WOULD REQUIRE MORE OVERSIGHT FROM THE CITY MANAGER.
AND SO I DON'T THINK WE WOULD HAVE ENOUGH OVERSIGHT TO GET THE STUFF DONE.
I DO REALLY THINK THE REORG IS IMPORTANT.
MY BIG CONCERN IS WE ARE CREATING A PRETTY TINY DEPARTMENT BY SPLITTING.
SO I DEFINITELY HAVE CONCERNS ALMOST KIND OF CREATING AN ORPHAN DEPARTMENT.
SO THAT REORG I SEE IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO REBALANCE THE WORKLOAD.
AND YEAH, THAT TWO YEAR TERM DOES ALLOW AT THE END OF IT.
HOWEVER, THERE'S ALSO AN ELEMENT OF MOVING RESOURCES THEN THAT ENHANCES THAT ONE DEPARTMENT.
BUT YEAH, DEFINITELY CONCERNED ABOUT ADDING A NEW DEPARTMENT.
BUT TO COUNCILLOR FEQUET'S, IF WE DENY THE THEN IT'S HARD TO HOLD THE CITY MANAGER AS ACCOUNTABLE.
SO YEAH, HAVE BIG EXPECTATIONS FOR THE GOVERNANCE REVIEW.
SO I WILL LEAVE IT AS IS RIGHT NOW.
COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, DID YOU WANT TO CLOSE? NOTHING. NOTHING MUCH TO ADD, I THINK.
I APPRECIATE FOR SURE, AND WANT TO FULLY SUPPORT THE CITY MANAGER.
YEAH. I JUST FEEL THERE'S THERE'S DIFFERENT DEGREES.
THIS IS TWO POSITIONS AND A SUBSTANTIAL REVIEW.
I YEAH, I'M JUST I'M NOT SURE.
ALL OF IT IS APPROPRIATE, GIVEN THE RESOURCES THE CITY HAS RIGHT NOW AND THE WAY IT'S SET UP.
BUT THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION.
AND YEAH I'M EXCITED FOR THE PROCESS AND EXCITED TO SEE WHAT COMES.
I WISH IT WAS IN THE NEW POSITIONS AND THE CITY MANAGER ALL THE BEST.
AND YEAH, JUST VERY EXCITED TO SEE WHAT COMES OF IT.
TO THE MOTION OF CUTTING THE SENIOR GOVERNANCE POSITION AND KEEPING THE GOVERNANCE COORDINATOR.
[00:15:03]
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. AND THAT'S DEFEATED WITH COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN IN FAVOR.DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE, I'LL PASS THE FLOOR TO YOU, AND I'LL DO A RELATED ONE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM MAYOR.
BACK TO YOU. SO I'LL DO THIS AS A THREE PART, BECAUSE IT'S ALL KIND OF BUNDLED.
THAT 300,000 FOR A TWO YEAR TERM POSITION BE ADDED TO IMPLEMENT THE MODERNIZATION INITIATIVES, AND THAT 75,000 BE ADDED TO COMPLETE AN ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW. AND MY REASONING BEHIND THIS IS I LIKE THE NOTES.
AND TO BE ABLE TO KEEP TRACK FROM YEAR TO YEAR.
SO IF WE DON'T ACTUALLY ADD THEM TO THE BUDGET, WE'LL SEE.
THE BUDGET VERSUS ACTUALS IS GOING TO SHOW A 300,000 DIFFERENCE.
AND THEN COUNCIL TWO YEARS FROM NOW IS GOING TO SAY WHY.
SO I THINK THIS IS A BETTER WAY TO ACTUALLY TRACK WHAT WE'RE DOING.
SO HAPPY TO SPEAK TO ANYTHING FURTHER, BUT THAT'S THE PROPOSAL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM MAYOR. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS TO THE MOTION? SEEING NONE.
ALL IN FAVOR? AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS INCLUDING COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
OKAY. TOM, BACK TO YOU FOR 25,000 TOWARDS THE GROW IMPLEMENTATION.
BUT MR. VAN DINE AND HIS ADMINISTRATION HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER THAT MOTION.
COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT ANY FURTHER? NOTHING TO ADD FROM WHAT WE SPOKE ABOUT THE OTHER DAY.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? DISCUSSION? FOR MYSELF, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS AS IT'S THE BROADER ONE OF THE THINGS I HEAR FROM MORE COMMERCIAL GROWERS IS THE NEED FOR SUBSIDIES ON WATER.
SO I THINK THAT COULD BE ONE OPPORTUNITY.
THERE'S NOT BRAINSTORMING RIGHT NOW.
SO TO THE MOTION OF ADDING 25,000 FOR GROW IMPLEMENTATION.
MR. VAN DINE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE MOTION? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THE WAY AND THE POLICIES BY WHICH COUNCIL REVIEWS AND DEEMS WHAT IS OF AVAILABLE FOR A DISCOUNTED PRICE OR A FREE OFFERING FOR THE CITY IS A IS SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE WOULD BE BEST SUITED IN REVIEWING A LARGER POLICY FRAME ON WHAT INSTANCES AND AT WHAT TIMES WE CHOOSE TO DO THAT.
SO THERE IS SOME FINANCIAL EXPOSURE GOING FORWARD.
TREATING IT ON A ONE OFF BASIS.
I BELIEVE THIS MOTION, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, DOES SPEAK TO A TIME LIMITED TRIAL WITH THAT, SO THAT FROM AN ADMINISTRATION POINT OF VIEW, PROVIDES US AT LEAST THE ABILITY TO REVIEW THE IMPACT OVERALL.
THE TRACKING OF DATA IS AN ISSUE THAT WE HAD PRIOR TO THIS MOTION BEING PUT FORWARD.
SO WE'LL NEED TO MONITOR THAT.
AND WE CAN REASONABLY EXPECT THAT THIS ISSUE WILL GENERATE A HIGHER LEVEL OF TRAFFIC IN THE YEAR, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE CASE THAT'S BEEN MADE BY MADAM CHAIR IN PROPOSING THE MOTION IN TERMS OF ALTERNATIVE USES DURING FIRE SEASON AND SMOKE, AND WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN DURING THE COLD, COLD WEATHER.
SO THAT DOES WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON, ON MAINTENANCE AND CERTAINLY OPERATION FROM, FROM THAT STANDPOINT, THOSE ARE COSTS THAT WE HAVEN'T CALCULATED.
[00:20:02]
MOTION. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION.YEAH, I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND I WAS GETTING TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS ABOUT REALLOCATING STAFF.
SO MY HIGH LEVEL IS THAT WE WAIVE THE ADMISSION FEES FOR THE FIELD, HOUSE, TRUCK AND PLAYGROUND IN 2025, RECOGNIZING I'VE GOT OTHER MOTIONS ON THE BOOKS, LIKE REMOVING THE BOOKING SUPERVISOR AS WELL AS THE CASHIER.
AND SO NOT TO SAY THAT ADMINISTRATION HAS TO MOVE THE BOOKING CLERK OR CASHIERS AT THE FIELD HOUSE TO OTHER FACILITIES, HOWEVER REMOVING THE ADMISSION FEES AND A CHANGE TO THE BOOKING SOFTWARE COULD FREE UP SOME TIME.
AND SO REALLOCATING RESOURCES ELSEWHERE.
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD ON THE FEES? ON THE FEE? IT'S NOT JUST THE FEE.
YOU. MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU'LL PERMIT.
SO AS I ALLUDED TO EARLIER WITH INCREASED VOLUME, THERE WILL BE INCREASED MAINTENANCE, BUT THERE WILL ALSO BE INCREASED ACTIVITY OF MONITORING AND VIGILANCE ON STAFF THAT ARE PRESENT THERE FOR THE INCOMING PUBLIC.
THAT WOULD BE PROBABLY MAKING THEMSELVES AVAILABLE TO THE OFFER.
SO WE'LL NEED TO MONITOR THE IMPACTS ON THAT OVER THE MEDIUM TERM.
AND RECOGNIZING THE AQUATIC CENTER WOULDN'T BE OPEN TILL APRIL OR MAY.
THE FIRST THREE MONTHS ARE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK OUT ANY KINKS.
DO WE ANTICIPATE THAT THE WITH THE NEW BOOKING SOFTWARE, IT'LL BE EASIER TO TRACK DATA OR WE'LL HAVE LIKE, BETTER QUALITY DATA FOR USE OF THE FIELD HOUSE.
SO I'LL HOLD ON TO THAT FOR SUBSEQUENT ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
AND THEN IN TERMS OF THE QUESTION ON HEALTH AND SAFETY, JUST BECAUSE I THINK IT MIGHT IMPACT IF THERE'S A NEED FOR THERE TO BE A DEDICATED STAFF PERSON TO BE THERE AT ALL TIMES MIGHT IMPACT HOW I FELT LIKE OTHER COUNCILORS AND MAYBE ME FEEL ABOUT SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
SO IS THERE ANY HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUE WITH IF WE WERE TO FREE UP THE BOOKING CLERK'S TIME TAKING THEM OUT OF THE BUILDING? MR. VAN DINE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
YES. IS THE SHORT ANSWER, SO I BELIEVE, AND I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE FORMULATION OF THE MOTION.
SO THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE I ANSWERED.
WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT GIVEN THE PUBLIC NATURE AND THE ACTIVITY, WE WOULD NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT COVERAGE TO MAINTAIN PUBLIC AND STAFF AND PUBLIC SAFETY BY VIRTUE OF WHETHER IT WAS A BOOKING PERSON OR WHETHER IT WAS SOME OTHER KIND OF PERSON, WE WOULD DEFINITELY REQUIRE ANOTHER SET OF EYES WHICH I BELIEVE MADAM CHAIR HAS INDICATED WE WOULD HAVE THAT ABILITY, CERTAINLY WITH A THE OR AT LEAST INTO THE NEW, INTO THE NEW YEAR BY NOT MOVING ANY POSITIONS INTO THE NEW YEAR AND JUST OFFERING THE FREE SERVICE IF THAT WAS THE DIRECTION THAT COUNCIL WENT.
BUT YES, WE BELIEVE THAT THE NUMBER OF USES THAT PEOPLE WOULD MAKE AVAILABLE OF AT THE FIELD HOUSE DO INCLUDE THE TRACK DO INCLUDE THE FIELDS DO INCLUDE A NUMBER OF THINGS A MAINTAINER NOT TO GET TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS NEEDS TO BE IN MANY DIFFERENT PLACES WITHIN THE BUILDING, AND IT CERTAINLY WOULD NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO KEEP AN EYE ON WHAT'S BEING GOING ON IN THE FACILITY WITH THAT MANY, THAT MANY ACTIVITIES POTENTIALLY IN USE.
[00:25:02]
SITE, WHICH WOULD MEAN POTENTIALLY SOME CAPITAL UPGRADES TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CLIMBING WALL, FOR EXAMPLE, WAS NOT ACCESSIBLE DURING HOURS THAT WERE NOT BEING SUPERVISED.AND SO THAT WOULD REQUIRE SOME CAPITAL CONSIDERATION OF MAKING SURE THE ABILITY TO BLOCK IT OFF SIMILAR TO THE FIELD, WOULD ALSO NEED TO POTENTIALLY BE MONITORED OR WHEN THE TRACK WAS IN USE.
SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DOMINOES THAT SORT OF FALL INTO PLACE THAT DO CREATE A BIT OF A PRESSURE ON OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY, AS WELL AS STAFF SUPPORT AND STAFF SAFETY IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE WE'VE GOT SO MANY DIFFERENT POTENTIAL SCENARIOS OF USE GOING ON SIMULTANEOUSLY. SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ELABORATE.
YEAH. THANK YOU. I JUST FIGURED I'D ASK BECAUSE IT SORT OF SEEMED LIKE THE CHOICE TO MAKE TO TRY TO ATTEMPT THE FREE TRIAL WAS CONTINGENT ON FREEING UP MONEY IN THE BUDGET FOR BUT THAT'S EVERYTHING FOR ME.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? COUNCILLOR, SIR DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
QUESTION TO THE ADMINISTRATION.
HOW MANY OF THOSE ACTUALLY WORK WITHIN THE FIELD HOUSE? MR. VAN DINE. THANK YOU.
SO THE STAFF MOVE AROUND, BUT I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO GIVE YOU THE DIRECT ANSWER.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SO THE DUTIES OF THE INDOOR FACILITY SUPERVISOR AND THE ASSISTANT SUPER ASSISTANT, INDOOR ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR TAKES HIM IN AND OUT AND AROUND ALL OF OUR INDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CURRENTLY THE RAMP.
AND THEN IN THE FUTURE, THE AQUATIC CENTER.
FOR SURE, MOST OF THEIR DUTIES ARE AT THAT FACILITY.
THEIR DUTIES ARE, OF COURSE, SUPERVISORY IN NATURE.
SO THEY'RE LOOKING AFTER STAFF, THEY'RE LOOKING AFTER SCHEDULING, THEY'RE LOOKING AFTER ANY ISSUES TO DO WITH CONTRACTORS? THEY HAVE BUILDING CHECKS TO DO AND THEN LARGELY AROUND THE ICE PLANTS AS WELL.
BEING THAT WE HAVE 12 OF THEM, IS THERE NO WAY WE COULD DESIGNATE SOMEBODY TO BE A FULL TIME OR TWO OF THEM TO BE A FULL TIME FACILITATOR OVER AT THE FIELD HOUSE? THE FIELD HOUSE DOES HAVE FULL TIME FACILITY MAINTAINERS AS WELL.
SO, THE MODEL THAT AT THE FIELD HOUSE NOW GUARANTEES US TO HAVE SORT OF A THREE UP TO THREE, DEPENDING ON WHAT SERVICES ARE BEING OFFERED AT THE TIME IN TERMS OF THE HOURS OF OPERATION.
I BELIEVE MR. WHITE HAD INDICATED THAT IN PART OF THE WIDER TEAM, THERE ARE OTHER FACILITIES THAT ARE NEEDING TO BE OBSERVED. WE HAVE TO HAVE A MAINTAINER, TWO MAINTAINERS ACTUALLY AT THE MULTIPLEX.
AND SO THERE'S THE SCIENCE AND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONNEL PER FACILITY ON PAR WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS.
IT'S FAIRLY MODEST IN THE WAY THAT THEY'RE PROVIDE IT.
AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE IN IN THE EXAMPLE THAT WAS USED LAST EVENING WITH RESPECT TO THE FIELD HOUSE, THE BOOKING INDIVIDUAL LOOKS AFTER BOOKINGS FROM ACROSS ALL OF OUR FACILITIES IN ADDITION TO THE FIELDHOUSE.
AND I THINK WE UNDERSTAND I UNDERSTAND WHY COUNCIL WOULD WANT TO BE VERY SHARPEN THE PENCILS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT OVER STAFFING. I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE COUNCIL WITH THE IMPRESSION THAT WE'RE NOT DOING THAT IN A FACILITIES ENVIRONMENT.
BUT IF THERE'S A GREATER INTEREST IN MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE AND WE CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT PERHAPS THROUGH THE ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE COMING FORWARD, WE CAN LOOK FOR POTENTIAL CONFIRMATIONS AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'VE GOT THE APPROPRIATE RATIOS TO MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S GOING TO BE THE CONCLUSION, BUT I'M PRETTY OPTIMISTIC THAT THAT WILL GIVE US MORE DATA TO SUPPORT AND PERHAPS GIVE COUNCIL THE CONFIDENCE THAT IT'S LOOKING FOR IN TERMS OF OUR FINANCIAL RESOURCE USE.
THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER AND TO DIRECTOR WHITE, VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.
[00:30:06]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.YEAH. ON THIS ONE, I WAS INTRIGUED BY THE OPPORTUNITY AND TO MOVE AROUND STAFF AND POTENTIALLY STAFF AND STATE RESIDENTS PLANNING AND HIRING NEW POSITIONS.
I THINK THERE ARE MANY RESIDENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO CAN VERY COMFORTABLY AFFORD TO PAY TO ATTEND THE FIELD HOUSE AND CHOOSING TO EXEMPT ONE FACILITY AND PARTICULAR AREAS OF ONE FACILITY FROM PAYMENT, EVEN IF IT ISN'T COST RECOVERY OR THAT ALL THAT CLOSE AT BUDGET DELIBERATIONS WITHOUT A LARGER DISCUSSION ABOUT WHY THAT FACILITY AND WHY SUBSIDIZE EVERYONE AND NOT PEOPLE WHO MAY STRUGGLE FINANCIALLY.
IT SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE TO ME, SO I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
THANKS, MAYOR ALTY. JUST BACK ON THE HEALTH AND SAFETY SIDE OF IT.
JUST SPECIFICALLY, ARE WOULD WE BE IF THIS WE DROP A PERSON IN TERMS OF STAFF OR ARE THERE LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY, HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES THAT WE WOULD HAVE IN TERMS OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY OR IN TERMS OF HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC, LIKE NOT JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, HEALTH AND SAFETY, BUT WOULD WE BE IN CONTRAVENTION OF ANYTHING FROM A LIABILITY STANDPOINT? BECAUSE THAT'S MY CONCERN FROM A LIABILITY PERSPECTIVE AS THE COUNCIL.
ARE WE PUTTING OURSELVES IN A LIABILITY ISSUE AS OPPOSED TO JUST A GENERAL? WE'RE DOWN ONE PERSON ON SITE.
SO THAT MAKES IT A BIT, YOU KNOW, MORE UNCOMFORTABLE TO, YOU KNOW, JUST ONE LESS PERSON ON SITE NOT KNOWING EXACTLY TO WHAT DEGREE THE CURRENT BOOKING CLERK IS UP AND ABOUT FROM THEIR DESK OR OFFICE AND MOVING ABOUT THE FACILITY AND KEEPING TRACK OF, YOU KNOW, HEALTH AND SAFETY.
I DON'T WANT TO I'M SORT OF AM A BIT, YOU KNOW, OUT TO LUNCH ON THAT.
SO JUST FROM ADMINISTRATION'S PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, DROPPING AN EMPLOYEE, ARE WE ACTUALLY IN ANY SORT OF LEGISLATIVE OR REGULATORY LIABILITY ISSUE AS OPPOSED TO JUST FROM A IT WOULD BE BETTER IF WE HAD MORE BODIES ON SITE? MR. VAN DINE.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND, IN SHORT, THE REGARDLESS AND THIS IS YOU GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOU INNOVATE ALMOST TO A FAULT, RIGHT.
SO, THE DOTS THAT WERE CONNECTED WITH RESPECT TO THE PARTICULAR POSITION TO REALIZE POTENTIAL SAVINGS TO THE TO THE CITY AT LARGE AND THE PHYSICAL RELOCATION OF THAT POSITION.
AND CERTAINLY THE FROM A WE WHILE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSULT THE BARGAINING AGENTS ON THIS, WE WERE RELATIVELY CONFIDENT OR CONFIDENT THAT THE BARGAINING AGENTS WOULD BE LIKELY BRINGING TO OUR ATTENTION A POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL CONCERN.
AGAIN, I HAVEN'T CONSULTED THEM.
IF WE IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SECTION AND VERSE ON WHICH I WOULD DEFER TO DIRECTOR THISTLE TO GIVE PERHAPS A MORE CONSIDERED VIEW ON THE MATTER.
BUT IN ESSENCE, THE GLOBAL PICTURE IS, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY WERE BOOKING OR TAKING IN FEES TO COME IN THE DOOR, ENTRY FEES OR CASH, WE WOULD NEED ANOTHER SET OF EYES.
SO WHETHER THERE'S ANOTHER POSITION OR WHETHER WE NEED TO PERHAPS CONSIDER SECURITY, THERE IS, YOU KNOW, SOME THOUGHTS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO MACGYVER SOME KIND OF ADDITIONAL SET OF EYES IN THERE IF WE WERE TO, TO MOVE THAT POSITION, THAT THAT POSITION IS OBVIOUSLY SERVING A NUMBER OF FUNCTIONS BY THEIR PHYSICAL PRESENCE. AND, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ARTICULATE LAST NIGHT AND TODAY.
WE ALSO HAVE A WORKING LOAN POLICY.
AS WE CAN ALL UNDERSTAND, THE FIELDHOUSE IS QUITE LARGE.
AND IF WE HAVE ONE MAINTAINER AND THEY'RE DOING WORK OUTSIDE AND BACK, AND THERE'S NO BOOKING CLERK.
AND YOU HAVE A TEENAGER AS A, SAY, FIELD, A CLIMBING WALL ASSISTANT OUT IN THE FRONT BY THEMSELVES.
[00:35:04]
ARGUABLY THAT'S NOT A SAFE WORKING CONDITION.IF THE MAINTAINER GETS CALLED AWAY, THEY BE THERE BY THEMSELVES.
SO THERE ARE CONCERNS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS, AS MR. VAN DINE INDICATED TO ENSURE SAFETY, IT COULD MEAN ANOTHER PERSON BEING HIRED AT THAT FACILITY.
AND AS PART OF THAT, THE CITY HAS INTERNAL WORKING LOAN POLICIES.
THANKS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MISS THISTLE FOR THAT ANSWER.
AND WE NOW HAVE STAR WARS, STAR TREK AND MACGYVER IN BUDGET DELIBERATIONS.
THANKS FOR THAT. ANYTHING FURTHER? I AM STILL IN SUPPORT OF IT.
I CAN APPRECIATE THERE'S THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO SORT OUT, AND BUT BETWEEN LAST NIGHT AND TONIGHT, I THINK THERE'S ALREADY WE'RE ALREADY STARTING TO THINK OF OPPORTUNITIES. AND SO WE'VE GOT THE FIRST THREE, POSSIBLY FOUR MONTHS WHILE THE NEW POOL IS GETTING BUILT, THAT THE BOOKING CLERK WOULD REMAIN THERE.
THE FIELD HOUSE DOES JUST HAVE A MAINTAINER FROM 6 A.M.
TO MIDNIGHT. THE MULTIPLEX JUST HAS A MAINTAINER MOST HOURS, EXCEPT FOR A HANDFUL.
AND FOR ME, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK HOW CAN WE BEST USE STAFF AND HOW CAN WE IMPROVE SERVICE FOR RESIDENTS? AND SO WE'VE GOT CUSTOMER SERVICE AND FINANCE CLERKS WHO WORK OUT HERE, WHO SELL PASSES TO PEOPLE.
WE HAVE BOOKING CLERKS AT FACILITIES, WE HAVE CASHIERS.
IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A CUSTOMER SERVICE FINANCE OFFICER WORKING AT THE FIELD HOUSE.
SO PEOPLE WHO WORK, WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WORK MONDAY TO SATURDAY, 8 A.M.
TO 6 P.M. THEY DON'T GET THAT OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN.
CAN YOU GO TO THE FIELD HOUSE AND PAY YOUR PARKING TICKET? PAY YOUR TAXES THEN I'M SUPPORTIVE OF OF HAVING THAT POSITION.
AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THEY'RE ALL CLASSIFIED A DIFFERENT WAY.
BUT THAT'S WHERE LET'S LOOK AT THE HOLISTIC PICTURE BEFORE WE ADD MORE PEOPLE.
AND THAT'S BASICALLY SAID ALL REPEATING.
SO ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN JUST A COMMENT AND IT'LL I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS BECAUSE, WELL, NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS RIGHT NOW, JUST BECAUSE OF THE DISCUSSION WE JUST HAD AND THE IMPLICATIONS THAT TO DO THIS, YOU HAVE TO DO THAT, BUT WILL LEAD INTO THE NEXT ONE.
AND MY MIND IS CHANGED ON THE TWO INTERLINKING BITS.
AND I THINK THAT LEADS ME TO WHERE YOU'LL PROBABLY SEE ME GO IN THE NEXT ONE.
I DO THINK THEY'VE DECOUPLED IN MY BRAIN.
BUT I JUST THINK FOR THIS, SINCE WE HAVE TO KEEP TO MY MIND, I JUST THERE'S ENOUGH QUEASINESS IN MY GUT ABOUT THE ANSWERS I JUST GOT FROM ADMINISTRATION ON THIS THAT I THINK WE NEED TO ALLOW THEM THE FLEXIBILITY TO HAVE THIS POSITION REMAIN FOR NOW.
THAT'S NOW DECOUPLED IN MY BRAIN, THOUGH, FROM TONIGHT ABOUT THE NEXT MOTION.
JUST A QUESTION FOR ADMINISTRATION.
THE ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW THAT'S SCHEDULED FOR NEXT YEAR.
THE SUGGESTIONS OR IDEAS THAT MADAM MAYOR JUST SHARED IS, WERE THOSE KIND OF THE KIND OF THINGS THAT YOU WERE ANTICIPATING WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW THAT TAKES PLACE, OR WAS IT MORE FOCUSED THAN THAT? MR. VAN DINE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
SO WE HAVE NOT SCOPED IT OUT YET.
THE INITIAL SEED OF THE IDEA WAS TO LOOK FOR AT A FUNCTIONAL LEVEL.
BUT IN TERMS OF OPERATIONAL INNOVATIONS, THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BUILD INTO IT.
WHETHER THE DOLLARS THAT WE'VE CURRENTLY BUDGETED FOR THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE US A RUNNING START OR WHETHER IT WOULD COMPLETE THAT KIND OF ANALYSIS. I'M NOT 100% SURE WHETHER WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET TO THE EXTENT, THE FULLEST EXTENT.
MY INTEREST THOUGH FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION IS TO MAKE SURE THAT EFFICIENCIES AND IMPROVEMENT IS AN ONGOING ACTIVITY.
AND ONE OF THE OTHER AREAS THAT COUNCIL WILL BE WELL AWARE OF IS THAT OUR THINGS ARE ELECTRONIC.
PLATFORM FOR A CITY IS REQUIRING A LITTLE BIT OF ATTENTION AS WELL.
[00:40:04]
POINTS, EITHER THROUGH THE ORG REVIEW, NOT NECESSARILY, BUT THROUGH ANY WEBSITE UPDATES.SO THAT'LL BE AN ONGOING EFFORT.
THE INNOVATIONS THAT MADAM CHAIR HAS POINTED OUT WITH RESPECT TO THE ORG REVIEW AT FACILITIES IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT I WILL LOOK TO BUILD INTO, AND THEN WE'LL SEE WHAT KIND OF RESPONSE WE GET FROM THE BIDDERS THAT COME IN AND TO WHAT EXTENT THAT THEY CAN OFFER THAT.
BUT I CAN CERTAINLY SCOPE THAT IN AND HOPE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ADVANCE THAT.
THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER TO.
OH, SORRY. YES. COUNCILLOR MCGURK.
THANK YOU. I APOLOGIZE IF WE HAD ALREADY GONE OVER THIS INFORMATION.
BUT DO WE HAVE CLEAR DATA SHOWING THE REVENUES THAT ARE GENERATED SPECIFICALLY FROM THE FOR THE YEAH, FROM THE WALKING TRACK AND PLAYGROUND AND MAYBE OR MAYBE THE CLIMBING, CLIMBING WALL TRACK AND PLAYGROUND, BECAUSE I IMAGINE THAT THE FIELDS THEMSELVES ARE PROBABLY BOOKED AND THAT IS EASIER TO TRACK THAT WAY, SEPARATE THAT WAY.
MR. VAN DINE I'M GOING TO TURN TO MR. WHITE PRETTY QUICKLY, BUT I WOULD OFFER JUST TO SAY THAT COUNCIL IS AWARE THAT WE HAVE MULTI PASSES FOR MULTI PURPOSES.
AND SO REVENUE IS KIND OF TRACKED FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE OF THE PASS.
IT'S KIND OF LOST IN THE WASH OF JUST COLLECTING THE DOLLARS FOR THAT PARTICULAR PASS.
BUT I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO GIVE US SOME MORE GRANULARITY ON HOW WE WHAT REVENUES WE ARE TRACKING.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SO STARTING WITH THE FLEXI PASSES AND THE PURCHASE OF A FLEXI PASS WHETHER YOU BUY IT AT THE FIELD HOUSE, THE RAMP OR HERE AT CITY HALL, IT ALL GOES TO ONE GL. ANY SPECIFIC REVENUE THAT IS GENERATED WHEN SOMEBODY WALKS INTO THE FACILITY AND PAYS BY CASH, BY VISA, OR BY A DEBIT CARD AT THE FACILITY TO ACCESS THE TRACK, TO ACCESS THE CLIMBING WALL OR THE PLAYGROUND, THEN THAT THAT AMOUNT IS COLLECTED FOR THAT SPECIFIC TIME AND USE ONLY.
SO RIGHT NOW MULTIPLEX, WHICH INCLUDES PUBLIC SKATING AND PICKLEBALL, IT GENERATES ABOUT $23,000.
THE FIELDHOUSE IS $126,000, AND THE RAMP, JUST THE ADMISSIONS IS $99,000.
WHEN A SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SWIPES A FLEXI PASS THAT WAS PURCHASED DOESN'T MATTER.
LIKE I SAID, WHERE IT WAS PURCHASED, IT WILL REGISTER AS A ONE TIME USE, NOT A DOLLAR FIGURE.
THAT'S THE SAME FOR LEGEND, WHICH WE JUST CLOSED UP.
AND IT'S THE SAME FOR OUR NEW EXPLORE REC SYSTEM.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT PROVIDES ANY OR MUCH CLARITY, I GUESS.
DO YOU KNOW THE NUMBERS THAT THE FIELDS GENERATE VERSUS WHAT IS COLLECTED IN HOUSE UNDERSTANDING? OR, LIKE SEPARATING OUT THE FLEXI PASSES? MR. VAN DINE.
I'LL JUST HAND IT BACK TO MR. WHITE. THANK YOU. YES.
THANK YOU. FOR THE MOST PART, THE FIELDS ARE A SCHEDULED ACTIVITY WITH MANY OF OUR USER GROUPS.
SO THOSE ARE CONTRACTS, AND THAT'S EASILY REPORTED.
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR PAYNE AND THEN COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
WHAT PERCENTAGE DO WE SUBSIDIZE THE FIELD HOUSE AS A WHOLE?
[00:45:04]
DO WE KNOW THE SUBSIDIZATION RATE? MR. VAN DINE.I DON'T KNOW MR. PANDOO'S SHAKING ME OFF, SO I WILL INVITE MR. WHITE TO SEE IF HE'S GOT A BALLPARK ESTIMATE.
BUT WE ARE OBVIOUSLY, THE FACILITY IS HEAVILY COVERED BY CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE TAXPAYERS, AND THE ACCESS FEES THAT WE OFFER ARE DON'T COME CLOSE TO COVERING THE OPERATING COST OF THE FACILITY, WHICH IS PROBABLY GETTING TO THE ROOT OF YOUR QUESTION.
BUT, MR. WHYTE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT? YEAH. THANK YOU. I DON'T LOOK AT THESE NUMBERS ON A REGULAR BASIS.
BUT IT'S USUALLY ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR.
OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, THE YK ARENA IS ABOUT A 30% RECOVERY RATE.
THE RMP IS ABOUT THE SAME, MAYBE 27 TO 30%.
OF COURSE, THERE'S NO RECOVERY RATE ON THE CURLING CLUB.
THE MULTIPLEX IS AT ABOUT 50% AND THE FIELD HOUSE, I THINK, IS IN THE HIGH 40S, CLOSE TO 50 AS WELL.
THANK YOU. AND IF THIS IF THE WALKING TRACK AND I GUESS THE WALKING TRACK MOSTLY IS GIVEN FOR FREE WILL.
WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE PRICING OF THE FLEXI PASSES THAT WE PUT OUT.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE INDEPENDENT, BUT I WILL OFFER MR. WHITE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ELABORATE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOING BETWEEN THE LEGEND AND EXPLORE.
OF ALL THE PASSES THAT ARE PURCHASED, 40% ARE HERE, 20% ARE THERE.
LIKE, I CAN'T SHOW YOU THAT BREAKDOWN.
OUR ANTICIPATED QUESTIONS WILL BE I ONLY USE THE FIELDHOUSE.
I ONLY USE THE TRACK. I ONLY USE THE CLIMBING WALL.
CAN I HAVE A REFUND? AND OF COURSE OUR ANSWER WOULD BE YES.
WE WILL REFUND YOU THE PRORATED VALUE OF YOUR MEMBERSHIP.
THANK YOU. WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS, IT WAS ABOUT WELL, WHAT STARTED IT ALL, I GUESS WAS THE LOCAL SENIOR SOCIETY COMING IN LOOKING FOR FREE USE FOR MORE DAYS.
WHICH I UNDERSTAND I'M NOT I CAN'T SUPPORT JUST A TOTAL FREE USE, LIKE COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN SAID ABOUT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT CAN'T AFFORD IT.
I'D BE MORE THAN OKAY WITH REVISITING OUR ACCESS FOR ALL PROGRAM.
I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF SENIORS UP HERE THAT HAVE STACKS, RIGHT? AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S THEY DO VERY WELL.
SO I, I FEEL THAT I WOULD SUPPORT MAYBE EVEN AN UPDATED VERSION OF OUR ACCESS FOR ALL.
BUT RIGHT NOW, I DON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION THAT'S AT HAND.
COUNCILLOR FEQUET. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
YEAH. THAT IS WHERE THIS CONVERSATION STARTED FOR ME, TOO.
I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE SENIORS.
ALTHOUGH I'M CONFUSED NOW BY LOOKING AT THE BUDGET BOOK BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S MORE THAN DOUBLE WHAT'S IN THAT INFORMATION? AND THE USER CHARGES.
SO YEAH, MY INITIAL SUPPORT FOR THIS MOTION WAS RELATED TO THE FACT THAT THE REVENUE GENERATED WASN'T EVEN COVERING THE EXPENSES OF THE STAFF. SO BY REMOVING STAFF AND ALLOWING, IF THAT'S THE ONLY PURPOSE THAT THEY'RE THERE FOR, IS TO REGULATE THE USE OF THE FACILITY, AND WE CAN MAKE THE FACILITY FREE, THEN WE WOULD GET RID OF ALL THOSE EXPENSES AND REALLOCATE THEM OVER TO OTHER FACILITIES THAT MIGHT NEED THEM.
SO THAT WAS THE REASON I WAS SUPPORTIVE, BUT I'M NOT AS CLEAR NOW.
[00:50:02]
OBVIOUSLY I'M SUPPORTIVE, HEALTHY, ACTIVE LIFESTYLES, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY MORE CLARITY WE CAN HAVE OR IF WE'RE DOING THIS IN THE WRONG ORDER.SO. ANYTHING FURTHER? YEAH. FOR ME, IT WAS IN SEEING THE ANSWERS.
I TOOK THAT DIVIDED BY THE SAME PROPORTION OF REVENUE BETWEEN THOSE THREE.
SO YES, WE'RE LOSING OUT ON $20,000 POTENTIALLY IN REVENUE.
SO THAT'S WHERE I'M TRYING TO GET SOME OF THE MATH TO, TO JUST WORK BETTER.
BUT I THINK WE'VE CHATTED ENOUGH ABOUT THIS ONE.
SO TO THE MOTION OF WAIVE THAT.
WE WAIVE THE ADMISSION FEES FOR THE FIELD, HOUSE, TRACK AND PLAYGROUND IN 2025.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. AND THAT'S COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN OPPOSED.
YOU'RE OPPOSED. RIGHT? YEAH. IF YOU DO A THUMBS UP THAT YOU'RE OPPOSED.
SO THAT FAILS WITH COUNCILLOR.
WERE YOU OPPOSED? YEAH. MCGURK AND MCLENNAN OPPOSED.
I AM STILL IN FAVOR OF THIS, BUT.
MR. VAN DINE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO INFORMATION ON THE SOFTWARE.
AND THEN I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO ADD SO WITH RESPECT TO THE NEW SOFTWARE THAT'S WENT OPERATIONAL YESTERDAY.
IT IS OPERATING AGAIN QUITE WELL TODAY.
I THINK WE'RE UP TO OVER 500 REGISTRATIONS WITH RESPECT TO SWIMMING.
WE'RE QUITE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
AND WE ARE HAVING LITTLE TO NO ERROR RATE IN INVESTIGATING THE ISSUE FURTHER, BASED ON LAST NIGHT'S DISCUSSION WE LEARNED AS A TEAM THAT THE SOFTWARE PACKAGE THAT WE, THAT WE PURCHASED ACTUALLY IS FAIRLY ROBUST AND OFFERS A WIDE RANGE OF CAPABILITIES.
WE HAVE NOT MAXIMIZED ALL THOSE CAPABILITIES.
AND THERE'S SOME THAT WE CAN TURN ON THAT WE'RE PREPARED TO DO.
AND THE IN ORDER TO MANAGE EXPECTATIONS, JUST TO GIVE FURTHER CONTEXT, WE HAVE SOME SEASONAL USE ACTIVITIES THAT MR. WHITE HAS POINTED OUT, AND THOSE ARE FAIRLY WELL REGULARIZED IN TERMS OF THE RHYTHM AND THE CYCLE.
WE WOULD NOT BE ADVOCATING TO CREATE SORT OF AN AD HOC WAY OF SELF-REGISTERING FOR THAT.
WE WOULD MAINTAIN THE CURRENT PROCESS, WHICH SEEMS TO BE WORKING VERY WELL.
SO THAT IS NOT A FEATURE THAT WE WOULD BE TURNING ON FOR THOSE LARGER ACTIVITIES.
BUT WHEN THOSE FACILITIES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A OF A COUPLE THAT WE WILL NOT TURN THAT ON FOR WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE THOSE SMALL SPOTS THAT OPEN UP IN BETWEEN THOSE USES TO ALLOW INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES TO AND, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO TRY AND USE BY WAY OF THE APP AND, AND WHATNOT.
AND WE'D BE PREPARED TO DO THAT ON A TRIAL BASIS EARLY IN 2025 AND REVIEW THE INTAKE OF THAT AND THE OPERATION OF THAT TO DETERMINE WHAT THE REVENUE LIKELY QUESTIONS WOULD BE.
BUT WE ARE KEEN TO HEAR WHETHER THERE IS A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION DIMENSION THAT WE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN GETTING FEEDBACK UPON TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN EXPAND IT.
BUT I'LL INVITE MR. WHITE TO EXPAND ON THAT CAPABILITY.
AND THE PILOT IDEA THAT WE GENERATED IN THE LAST 24 HOURS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I'LL START BY SAYING THAT WHEN WE FIRST STARTED AND I SAY WE I MEAN, THE TEAM THAT DID THIS FIRST STARTED INVESTIGATING DIFFERENT SCENARIOS WHEN WE KNEW THAT LEGEND WAS GOING THE WAY THE DODO BIRD.
EXPLORAC WAS THE MOST PREVALENT ONE THAT CAME TO MIND.
IT'S USED IN MANY PLACES OR MANY JURISDICTIONS AND MUNICIPALITIES AROUND CANADA.
[00:55:03]
AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T WANT TO BE THE POINTY EDGE OF A SPEAR GOING FORWARD WITH SOMETHING NEW.IT'S ONE FACILITY, ONE RATE, NO BIG DEAL.
WHERE YOU GO, YOU CAN DO THAT.
WHEN WE THOUGHT ABOUT IT FOR OUR PURPOSES, WE COULD PUT OUT SOME OF OUR RENTAL EQUIPMENT.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PICNIC TABLES OR WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, OUR SECURITY GATES, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE THAT ARE EASY ONE TIME USE WITH ONE FEE WITH THAT IN MIND AND THEN WITH OUR ICE ALLOCATOR.
SO OUR FACILITIES ALLOCATION POLICY AND OUR, OUR MANY FEES.
SO FOR EXAMPLE THE IF YOU'RE BOOKING TIME AT THE POOL, THERE ARE 17 FEES.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT, SORRY, 18 FEES, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE FIELD HOUSE, THERE'S 15 FEES.
THERE'S 19 FEES ASSOCIATED WITH GYMS. THE FOUR FEES ARE ASSOCIATED WITH MEETING ROOMS AND SEVEN WITH ARENAS.
AFTER DISCUSSIONS YESTERDAY, I MET WITH OUR TEAM THIS MORNING AND AS MR. VAN DINE EXPLAINED, WE HAVE OUR SEASONAL BOOKINGS, WE HAVE OUR ALL OF OUR MINOR GROUPS, WE HAVE ALL OF OUR ADULT GROUPS THAT ARE BOOKED IN ON A SEASONAL BASIS.
AND ONCE THAT'S DONE, THERE ARE TIMES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC USE RIGHT NOW.
TODAY, THE STAFF OR SORRY, THE PUBLIC CAN FIND THOSE SPOTS AND THEN CALL A BOOKING CLERK TO MAKE TO FINALIZE THE BOOKINGS. STARTING IN JANUARY, WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE NEED THIS TIME TO PREPARE FOR THIS IS MAKE THAT TIME NOT ONLY AVAILABLE TO SEE, BUT ALSO AVAILABLE TO BOOK BY THE PUBLIC.
WE WILL HAVE TO COME FORWARD WITH A NEW FEE.
THERE, AS MR. VAN DINE MENTIONED, THERE ARE A FEW FACILITIES THAT THAT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO PUT ONLINE.
AND THEN IN THE NEW YEAR, IT'LL BE THE AQUATIC CENTER.
SO THAT WILL HAVE TO REMAIN WITH A BOOKING CLERK.
AND THEN AS YOU MAY KNOW, WE HAVE THE JOINT USE AGREEMENT.
LARGELY AROUND A KEY ISSUE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GET A KEY.
AND IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THROUGH OUR JOINT USE AGREEMENT MEETINGS THE SCHOOLS WOULD PREFER NOT TO HAVE CASUAL USE IN THEIR FACILITIES BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENT PROBLEMS THAT HAVE ARISEN OVER THE PAST.
OH, I GUESS I SHOULD ADD ALSO AT THE OUTSET WHEN DOING THE OUR INVESTIGATION INTO THE EXPLORAC.
I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT IT IS A BIG TOOL THAT WE HAVE AT OUR DISPOSAL.
AND THE ONLY PORTION THAT WE DIDN'T BUY WAS THE APP.
WE PURCHASED EVERYTHING ELSE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY AND THE ORGANIZATION ARE HAVE THE RIGHT TOOL TO MOVE FORWARD INTO THE FUTURE.
SO THAT'S A BIT MORE INFORMATION FOR COUNCIL.
SO THE MOTION IS STILL THAT WE STRIKE THE CUSTOMER SERVICE BOOKING SUPERVISOR FROM THE BUDGET.
COUNCILLOR WARBURTON. YEAH, I, I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS A SUPERVISOR JOB.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BOOKING CLERKS THERE IN GENERAL HERE.
WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DO A LOT OF BOOKING AND A LOT OF FRONT END SERVICE HERE.
[01:00:05]
I IMAGINE THERE'S AN ABILITY FOR US TO FIND SOME EFFICIENCY THERE.SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF CUTTING THIS FOR NOW.
THANK YOU. I HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS.
I GUESS I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM WHAT THE PILOT MEANS OR EXTENDS TO.
DOES THAT IS IT GOING TO INCLUDE INDEPENDENT LIKE INDIVIDUAL USER FEES? BECAUSE THAT'S A BIG THING FOR ME, I GUESS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
SO I BELIEVE WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO CONVEY.
AND IS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN TRY THE PILOT FOR INDIVIDUALS, FOR ALL OF THE FACILITIES, EXCEPT FOR THE ONES THAT MISTER WHITE HAS INDICATED, THE SCHOOLS, THE RUTH MEMORIAL POOL, THE AQUATIC CENTER, BUT FOR THE OTHERS.
AND SO WE WILL NEED TO COME UP WITH POTENTIALLY A MODIFIED FEE FOR THOSE SITUATIONS IN THIS PILOT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WORKS AND THE FURTHER BACKGROUND AGAIN RELATING TO MR. WHITE'S COMMENTS, THE REASON WE NEED TO BRING THAT MODIFIED FEE TO BRING IN IS BECAUSE IN SOME CASES, WE'VE GOT A FEE STRUCTURE OF ABOUT 17 OR 18 DIFFERENT FEES DEPENDING ON WHAT FACILITY IT IS AND WHAT IT'S BEING USED.
SO WE WOULD NEED TO BRING FORWARD A MODEST PROPOSAL FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER ABOUT THE FEE.
IF YOU'RE ASKING IF THIS WOULD OPEN UP A LARGER DISCUSSION AROUND FEES ACROSS ACROSS THE ACROSS OUR FACILITIES AND ACROSS OUR SERVICES, THAT WOULD NOT BE OUR INTENTION AT THIS JUNCTURE.
TO DO THAT, WE WOULD BE VERY SELECT.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THAT THE RATIONALE THAT WAS INDICATED IN THE HR PRESENTATION THAT WAS PRESENTED EARLIER WITH RESPECT TO THE SUPERVISOR POSITION WAS NOTED.
THE FACT THAT WE ARE BRINGING ON BOARD A BRAND NEW FACILITY WITH A LARGER STAFF REQUIREMENT THAT DOES GENERATE, AND OUR REQUIREMENT FOR A LEVEL OF SUPERVISORY CAPACITY THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO MAINTAIN FOR, OBVIOUSLY, THE PROPER SPAN OF CONTROL.
SO WE WOULD WE ARE STILL OF THAT VIEW THAT THAT'S REQUIRED.
IF THERE ARE FURTHER EFFICIENCIES, THEN SOME OF THE OTHER POSITIONS MAY BE POSSIBLE TO ECONOMIZE IN THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION, ONE OF THE OTHER POSITIONS.
BUT THE SUPERVISORY ONE DOES HOLD SOME IMPORTANT VALUE TO US FROM AN HR PERSPECTIVE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD.
OKAY. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU CONFIRMED WHAT I THE SPECIFICALLY WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR, BUT WHEN I THINK OF THE SUPERVISOR POSITION, I FEEL LIKE IT ALSO OR IN THE BUDGET IS ALSO IS A TITLED AS A CUSTOMER SERVICE PIECE.
AND I THINK IF OUR USER CHARGES LIKE SPECIFICALLY INDIVIDUALS SAY ENTERING THE AQUATIC CENTER FOR USE, THAT'S I GUESS I'M WONDERING IF THAT IS BEING BROUGHT ONLINE, BECAUSE IF THAT IS, THAT WILL SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE STRAIN ON THE CASHIER.
SO THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW.
SO CAN YOU JUST CONFIRM IF IT'S JUST BOOKINGS OR IF IT'S ALSO THE USE OF LIKE SAY I WANT TO GO TO THE POOL AND PURCHASE.
YEAH. IT'S GENERALLY JUST BOOKING.
WELL, I SHOULDN'T SAY THAT THOUGH, BECAUSE WHEN YOU GO TO THE FIELD HOUSE, YOU COULD THEN BUY YOUR FLEXI PASS FROM THAT PERSON, BUT YOU COULD ALSO COME TO CITY HALL AND BUY IT FROM CUSTOMER SERVICE REPS HERE.
AND SO WOULD THE BOOKING CLERK SUPERVISOR BE FRONTLINE? NO. SO.
BUT YOU JUST GOING AND PAYING AT THE POOL ISN'T A BOOKING ISSUE.
MR. VAN DINE. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT.
I THINK WHAT I UNDERSTAND THE COUNCILLOR I'LL TRY ONE MORE TIME AND THEN I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ONE OF THE EXPERTS IF YOU'LL PERMIT ME. SO, SO THE BOOKING PILOT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO BE ABLE TO DO ONLINE INDIVIDUALLY IS NOT FOR A DAY USE INTO THE AQUATIC CENTER.
ONE IS A LARGER OFFERING OF SERVICE THAT WE'RE DOING AT THE AT THE AQUATIC CENTER.
[01:05:01]
SO WE HAVE AQUATIC CENTER BOOKING STAFF AND CASH MONEY FEE COLLECTING CAPACITY THAT'S THERE.AND THEN WE'RE ALSO DEALING WITH THE FACT THAT WE'RE IN A DIFFERENT DESIGN SITUATION IN WHICH UNDER THE, IN THE RUTHIN'S SCENARIO WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE, FROM TIME TO TIME, OTHER STAFF, NOT DESIGNATED BOOKING CLERKS TO BE ABLE TO GREET THE PUBLIC AND ALLOW THEM TO ENTER THE ENTER THE FACILITY AND TAKE THEIR MONEY. SO THE PILOT THAT WE'RE OFFERING IS DOESN'T REALLY GET AT THAT CASH EXCHANGE, IF THAT IS YOUR POINT.
YEAH. NO, THAT'S EXACTLY YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS QUESTIONING.
AND I THINK IF YEAH, I JUST, I, I MAYBE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE POSITION EXACTLY, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THAT ALSO HAS AN IMPACT ON THE SCOPE OF WORK, BUT THANK YOU.
SO IF THERE ARE DIFFERENT FEE STRUCTURES, YOU WOULD JUST NAVIGATE THROUGH VARIOUS MENUS UNTIL YOU HIT THE THING THAT YOU NEED.
SORRY, SORRY, I'M JUST VERY CONFUSED ABOUT THAT.
YEAH. IS THE PILOT PROJECT ONLY GOING TO BE OPEN FOR LONG TERM USERS LIKE THE SOCCER CLUBS, THE HOCKEY TEAMS, AND YOU CAN'T INDIVIDUALLY BOOK FOR KAT'S BIRTHDAY.
IS THAT THE DIFFERENCE? THANK YOU. IT'S ACTUALLY THE REVERSE.
SO THE PILOT IS DESIGNED TO ALLOW INDIVIDUALS TO TAKE THOSE, THOSE LITTLE POCKETS THAT WILL POP UP THAT ARE NOT BEING USED BY OUR SEASONAL USERS AND THE AND THE REGULAR SPORTS TEAMS THAT WILL STILL BE SORT OF A ON A SEASONAL BASIS.
WE WILL BE WORKING WITH THOSE COMMUNITIES TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY GET AND WE MANAGE THE FACILITIES TO ALLOW THOSE SEASONAL ACTIVITIES TO OCCUR WITHOUT TRAFFIC JAMS. BUT THAT DOES AFFORD US THE OPPORTUNITY THAT THERE WILL BE SMALL OPPORTUNITIES FOR BIRTHDAY PARTIES, WHETHER THEY'RE FOR COUNCILLOR MCGURK OR WHETHER THEY'RE FOR ANYONE ELSE, TO BE ABLE TO INDIVIDUALLY FIND THOSE SPOTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE AND BOOK IT THEMSELVES WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH A BOOKING CLERK.
SO THE VOLUME, THE VOLUME ACTIVITY IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO BE TERRIBLY HIGH.
THROUGH THIS PILOT, LIKE I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE WORLD, BUT IT WILL DIP OUR TOE INTO THE SPACE OF TRYING TO AUTOMATE MORE AND TO HOPEFULLY GIVE THE ABILITY OF YELLOWKNIFER TO BE ABLE TO GET IMMEDIATE SERVICE FOR THE WINDOWS, THAT THEY CAN SELF-IDENTIFY IN FRONT OF THEIR SCREENS AT HOME WITHOUT HAVING TO NAVIGATE THROUGH AN INDIVIDUAL, THROUGH A BOOKING CLERK.
THANK YOU. I'LL MAYBE JUST ASK, TALK, HAVE A CONVERSATION LATER ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I THINK THAT MY QUESTIONS ARE NOT LANDING. THANKS.
COUNCILLOR HENDRICKSEN QUESTION FOR YOU, MADAM MAYOR.
YOU BROUGHT UP YESTERDAY A BUNCH OF CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL ASK OF THE AQUATIC CENTER.
CAN YOU RUN OVER THOSE AGAIN? BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN STICKING IN MY HEAD SINCE YESTERDAY WHEN YOU CAN'T REMEMBER.
SO IF YOU COULD JUST REMIND ME OF THAT, PLEASE.
IN THE 2023 BUDGET, IT DIDN'T MENTION THAT WE WOULD NEED ANOTHER CUSTOMER SERVICE OR WE WOULDN'T NEED A CUSTOMER SERVICE AND BOOKING SUPERVISOR OR ANOTHER CASHIER.
THEN IN THE 2024 BUDGET, IT SAID, WE'RE GOING TO NEED ANOTHER CASHIER.
AND THEN IN THE 2025 BUDGET, NOW WE NEED ANOTHER BOOKING SUPERVISOR AND CASHIER.
ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY.
I GUESS TO ADMIN IS WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE 2023 TO NOW REQUIRE THIS POSITION.
SO NOW THAT WE'RE A FEW YEARS ALONG, NOW, WHAT'S THE NEED HERE THAT WASN'T ENVISIONED TWO YEARS AGO, EVEN 4TH FEBRUARY, IN ORDER TO GET THIS? YEAH, YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I'M REALLY TRYING TO THIS IS WHY I SAY, LIKE, YESTERDAY, IT SORT OF DECOUPLED FROM WITH IN MY BRAIN ONCE I HAD THAT INFORMATION IN MY HEAD, BECAUSE I GUESS
[01:10:09]
THAT'S MY STRUGGLE IS LIKE, WHAT, ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'VE KNOWN THE ARCHITECTURE FOR NOW.FOR A WHILE THE BUILDING SITE HAS BEEN ON, SO I CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S JUST A MATTER OF LAYOUT.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT, IS LIKE, WHAT NOW IS THE REASON THAT WE ALL OF A SUDDEN, I SHOULDN'T SAY ALL OF A SUDDEN, BUT THIS BUDGET, FROM LAST YEAR'S BUDGET TO THIS YEAR'S BUDGET NOW REQUIRES THIS POSITION.
MR. VAN DINE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THIS IS WHAT ACCOUNTABILITY LOOKS LIKE.
SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER.
AND MR. WHITE WILL RESPOND TO THAT.
HE'LL ALSO POTENTIALLY, IF, IF PERMITTED, GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A CRACK AT COUNCILLOR MCGURK QUESTION AROUND THE AROUND THE BOOKINGS IF YOU'LL PERMIT HIM SO, MR. WHITE. SURE.
SO WE'LL START WITH COUNCILLOR HENDRICKSEN, HENDRICKSEN QUESTION.
WHEN WE FIRST LAUNCHED THIS PROJECT ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER WE LOST OUR LONGTIME PROGRAM MANAGER.
SO WE WERE SO AT THAT TIME, WE WERE ALSO FOCUSED ON THE CAPITAL AND GETTING MAKING SURE THAT OUR, OUR DESIGN, WHICH WAS A DESIGN BUILD A METHODOLOGY.
WE NEED TO GET THAT DONE UP FRONT THEN GOING FORWARD, OF COURSE, WITH THE DESIGN BUILD, THE DESIGN CHANGES, THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT WILL POP UP.
OUR MOST RECENT DESIGN DECISION WAS, I THINK, TWO MONTHS AGO OR LESS.
SO WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THE DESIGN WEEKLY, MONTHLY FOR HOWEVER MANY YEARS IT'S BEEN.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE BY OUR TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS FACILITY IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE NEEDS OF BOTH, LIKE THE ORGANIZATION AND THE COMMUNITY AND OUR USER GROUPS.
AS WE WERE DEVELOPING OUR DESIGN, THEN WE WERE LOOKING AT AT THE PROGRAMING ASPECT AND OUR, OUR PROGRAM STARTED OFF AT, YOU KNOW, AT A LEVEL THAT WAS QUITE A BIT OVER AND ABOVE WHAT WE HAVE AT THE RAMP.
AND THEN WE GREW AGAIN, AND THEN WE GREW AGAIN, AND THEN WE GREW AGAIN.
THESE ARE THINGS THAT, THAT WE DO LIKE ON A DAILY BASIS.
AND THEN AS THAT EVOLVED AND THEN IT WAS, HOW ARE WE GOING TO MANAGE THIS? WELL, THE ONLY WAY TO MANAGE THIS IS WITH MORE STAFF.
WITH MORE STAFF COMES MORE PROGRAMING, MORE EVENTS.
WE'LL DO IT THROUGH AN INCUBATION PROCESS, OR WE WILL JUST FIND A FIND SOMEBODY WHO IS INTERESTED IN, SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, A SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMING CLUB, AND WE'LL GET THAT GOING. SO, SO WITH ALL THAT EXTRA WORK COMES ALL THE EXTRA STUFF THAT'S REQUIRED.
CURRENTLY, THE PROGRAM MANAGER IS THE ONLY MANAGER IN THE WHOLE ORGANIZATION THAT HAS CASUAL STAFF REPORTING TO THAT POSITION.
I'M SURE THERE'S OTHERS WHERE THERE ARE STAFF AND CASUAL STAFF, THERE'S A SUPERVISOR THAT IS IN BETWEEN THE MANAGER AND THOSE STAFF BY NOT HAVING A BOOKING CLERK SLASH CUSTOMER SUPERVISOR.
IT CAN IT TAKES SO MUCH AWAY FROM THE MANAGERIAL DUTIES HAVING TO, TO OFTEN DEAL WITH STAFF THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THEIR FIRST FORAY INTO THE, INTO THE EMPLOYMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY YOUNG.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT THAT TAKES THE MANAGERS TIME RATHER THAN A SUPERVISOR'S TIME.
I THINK I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR THE EVOLUTION.
AND THEN IN TERMS OF COUNCILLOR MCGURK QUESTION ON THE SELECTION AT THE POS FOR SURE. WHEN THERE, WHEN A CUSTOMER COMES UP AND IS AT THE COUNTER AND THEY'RE DOING A BOOKING, THEN THE PERSON ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DESK, THE BOOKING CLERK, HAS A WHOLE
[01:15:10]
BUNCH OF DIFFERENT FEE SCENARIOS TO RUN THROUGH TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IT'S THE APPROPRIATE FEE FOR THE APPROPRIATE USE.WITH WHEN WE DO OUR PILOT AND WE HAVE SOMEBODY AT HOME AND THEY'RE BOOKING A SPOT AT THE FIELD, IT'S THE LIMITATION OF THE EXPLORE RACK SYSTEM THAT ONLY ALLOWS US TO HAVE ONE FEE OR, SORRY, TWO FEES SO WE CAN HAVE A PRIME AND A NON PRIME FEE AND THAT'S IT.
SO WE'RE ABLE TO CHARGE THAT TO THE PUBLIC.
THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION THAT WE STRIKE THE CUSTOMER SERVICE BOOKING SUPERVISOR FROM THE BUDGET? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK? NO. OKAY. YEAH, I CAN APPRECIATE YOU KNOW, THE NOT HAVING FRONT LINE, RIGHT.
I HOPE THERE'S ANOTHER WAY WE CAN ALSO STRUCTURE IT.
WITH HOPEFULLY THE REDUCTION IN WORK REQUIRED FOR MANUAL ENTRIES.
THE JUSTIFICATION ABOUT THE SUPERVISOR NEEDING TO DO ALL THAT FINANCE WORK, I THINK IS REDUCED.
SO I'M STILL AM IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE REORG DISCUSSION AND SEEING HOW ALL THAT SHAKES OUT TO THE MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
OPPOSED. AND THAT CARRIES WITH COUNCILLOR PAYNE AND MCLENNAN OPPOSED.
OKAY. STILL CARRIED WITH COUNCILLOR PAYNE OPPOSED.
THE OTHER ONE IS THAT WE STRIKE THE CASHIER FROM THE BUDGET INCLUDED THAT ONE MORE OF TRYING TO REALLOCATE RESOURCES, BUT IF THE FIELD HOSTS IS STILL MAINTAINING IT.
I ASSUME FOLKS DON'T WANT TO CUT THE CASHIER? NOPE. OKAY.
WE WILL ADD THAT ONE TO THE BUDGET THEN.
INCREASED CONTRACTED BUDGET FOR THE DOG POUND SERVICES TO 50,000 FOR 2025.
ADMINISTRATION DID TAKE A LITTLE GANDER AT THE.
THE FEES AND RECOMMENDATION IS JUST TO INCREASE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
TO 60,000 COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH THAT? YEP. THAT'S FINE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YES, I, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ENOUGH.
LIKE I SAID LAST NIGHT, I'D LIKE TO HAVE ENOUGH FUNDS THERE TO HOPEFULLY INCENTIVIZE PRIVATE SECTOR OR SOMEONE ELSE TO HELP US WITH THIS AND APPRECIATING THAT IT'S COST MORE MONEY THAN WE THOUGHT. SO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ENOUGH IN THE BUDGET TO REFLECT THAT ACCURATELY, AND THEN HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIND SOMEONE TO DO THIS FOR US.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS TO THE MOTION TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT TO BUDGET FOR DOG POUND SERVICES TO 60,000 FOR 2025.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
THE NEXT ONE IS THAT THE FEES AND CHARGES BYLAW BE UPDATED.
SO THE IMPOUNDMENT SERVICE IS $250 A DAY.
FOLKS WANTED SOME TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? DISCUSSION? MEMBERS? YES.
I DON'T THINK NO ADMINISTRATION HASN'T DONE JURISDICTIONAL REVIEW.
SO WE CAN ALSO HOLD THIS AND DO IT LATER.
NO, NO, NO, IT'S A WE'RE DOING IT OR WE DO IT IN NEXT YEAR WHEN WE TALK FEES AND CHARGES.
SO COUNCILLOR HENDRIKSEN. I'LL SPEAK TO IT QUICKLY.
ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILMAN COUNCIL MEMBER.
JUST TO CONFIRM, IT'S $100, RIGHT? CURRENTLY IT'S $100 FOR PICKUP AND THEN $50 A DAY.
$25 A DAY AFTER THAT, I BELIEVE.
[01:20:02]
MR. VAN DINE. THAT'S CORRECT.MR. MCLEAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING? THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK.
SO. YES, RIGHT NOW WHAT? WE'RE BEING ASKED TO PAY TO RESERVE A KENNEL.
THOSE COSTS, THE FULL COST OF THAT'S BEING RECOUPED.
RIGHT NOW IT IS $100 A DAY, PLUS $25 FOOD AND CARE.
AND THAT'S UP FROM THE PREVIOUS TERMINATION OF THE CONTRACT IN MAY, WHICH WAS $75 PLUS $25 A DAY.
OKAY, THANKS. THAT'S FOR THE FURTHER INFORMATION.
I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
YEAH, I DID JUST A, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE PAYING 60,000 FOR A CONTRACT, IF WE HAVE 55 DOGS PER YEAR, WHICH HAS BEEN THE AVERAGE, IT COSTS $1,090 PER DOG FOR THIS SERVICE.
AND WE'RE CHARGING CURRENTLY BETWEEN $100.
IF YOU PICK UP YOUR DOG ON DAY ONE, UP TO 200 IF YOU PICK UP YOUR DOG FIVE DAYS LATER.
SO TAXES ARE PAYING 800 TO $900 PER DOG.
EVERY TAXPAYER OR NOT? EVERY TAXPAYER. SORRY.
AND THE DOG OWNER IS PICKING UP THE REMAINING 120 OR 100 TO 200 OF THE COST.
SO AGAIN, TO EVEN TO DO A ONE THIRD USER CHARGE, TWO THIRD TAX RATES, WE'D HAVE TO INCREASE THE FEE TO $327 PER DOG, WHICH FEELS LIKE IT'S A LITTLE MUCH.
SO I THINK WE DO NEED TO REBALANCE HOW MUCH TAXES PAY FOR THE DOG POUND, HOW MUCH THE OWNERS OF LOST DOGS PAY, WHICH IS WHY I'M RECOMMENDING THE INCREASE IN THE FEE.
TO THE MOTION THAT THE FEES AND CHARGES BYLAW BE UPDATED SO THE IMPOUNDMENT SERVICE IS $250 A DAY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AND THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
THE NEXT IS COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? SURE. I'LL BE SHORT.
I KNOW EVERYONE WAS HERE WHEN THE SENIOR SOCIETY OF YELLOWKNIFE PRESENTED TO US AND TALKED ABOUT HOW THEY CURRENTLY DO, ENJOY AND BENEFIT FROM THREE DAYS, THREE MORNINGS A WEEK.
I THINK IT WAS MONDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY.
IT WAS MORE ABOUT THE FLEXIBILITY FOR THE SENIORS JUST TO.
A LOT OF SENIORS OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE EXTRA INCOME OR DON'T HAVE A GYM MEMBERSHIP.
AND WALKING IS A IS A SAFE INDOOR ACTIVITY IN THE WINTER OR IN THE SUMMER, OF COURSE, WHEN IT'S SMOKY OUT AND IT WOULD GIVE THEM MORE FLEXIBILITY TO DO THE OCCASIONAL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE SCHEDULED THROUGHOUT THE WEEK, WHICH AGAIN, ARE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN FOR SENIORS.
SO JUST SOMETHING TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE.
YEAH. AND I THINK AFTER LOOKING AT SOME OF THE REQUESTS THAT WENT TO ADMINISTRATION ABOUT REVENUES IT SEEMS PRETTY NOT VERY MINIMAL THAT THIS THE COST IMPLICATION THIS WOULD HAVE TO THE CITY.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS TO COUNCILLOR.
A QUESTION FOR ADMINISTRATION.
IF THIS MOTION DOES PASS WILL SENIORS BE NOTIFIED FOR ANY OF THOSE THAT DO HAVE FLEXI PASSES THAT THEY'VE PAID WELL IN ADVANCE? WILL THEY BE REIMBURSED FOR SAID FLEXI PASS? MR. VAN DINE I BELIEVE WE'LL BE MAKING BEST EFFORTS TO DO SO.
MR. WHITE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ELABORATE? YES. THANK YOU. SIMILAR TO MY OTHER COMMENT WHEN ANSWERING COUNCILLOR PAYNE ANY REQUESTS THAT COME IN FOR A REFUND, WE WOULD FOR SURE GIVE THEM A PRORATED VALUE AND REFUND THEIR PASS.
THANKS. COUNCILLOR WARBURTON, THEN DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.
WE HAVE ACCESS FOR ALL PROGRAM.
PEOPLE THAT NEED ACCESS TO FACILITIES CAN ACCESS THEM.
AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD START PICKING INDIVIDUAL GROUPS THAT GET TO OPT OUT OF THAT SYSTEM.
I'M ALL FOR MEANS TESTING OUR FACILITIES, SO I WON'T SUPPORT THIS.
[01:25:01]
THANKS. THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE.WELL HEARD. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
THAT WAS QUITE THE THOUGHT YOU JUST PUT INTO MY HEAD.
BUT I GOT TO SAY, THE ART OF GOOD GOVERNING IS GOOD COMPROMISE.
AND BEING THAT I SUPPORTED THE USE OF THE FACILITY TO BE ENTIRELY FREE PRIOR IN THE EMOTION.
I THINK THIS IS A WELL MEAN TO COMPROMISE THAT I WILL SUPPORT GOING FORWARD.
YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT, I THINK JUST BECAUSE SENIORS ARE AT TIMES OR MORE LIKELY TO BE MORE VULNERABLE TO ELEMENT THE ELEMENTS AND OR DON'T HAVE THE SAME OPTIONS OF GOING FOR A WALK OUTSIDE AS SAY, SOMEONE MY AGE.
I THINK IT'S TOTALLY REASONABLE THAT WE EXTEND THIS TO THEM.
COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
I DO AGREE WITH COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
AS COUNCILLOR WARBURTON STATED, WE DO HAVE THE ACCESS FOR ALL PROGRAM AND FOR SENIORS THAT REQUIRE THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS, OR THEY CAN GET ACCESS NOW, AND FOR THOSE THAT CAN AFFORD IT, THEY CAN AFFORD IT.
SO I THINK THAT THE ACCESS IS AVAILABLE ALREADY.
THANKS. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
I THINK ALSO WE ASK THE GMWT TO LET US INCOME TEST THE SENIORS PROPERTY TAX REBATE.
YEAH, I THINK THE ACCESS FOR ALL FOR THOSE WHO CAN'T AFFORD IT.
AND THEN THE THREE MORNINGS A WEEK, I RECOGNIZE THAT SOME FOLKS THAT MIGHT NOT WORK ONE WEEK.
HOWEVER, IT IS IN ONE OF OUR OPTIONS, SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS PRESENTED.
ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
ENLIGHTENMENT FOR ME IS A LOT OF THERE IS A LOT OF SENIORS.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE FROM OUR POPULATION WHO CAN AFFORD THIS.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE SENIORS WHO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS, THAT MIGHT BE LOW INCOME.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ACCESS FOR ALL, THEY GO THERE TO GET THEIR MEDICAL APPOINTMENTS AND THEIR DRIVER'S LICENSES AND ALL THESE APPOINTMENTS SCHEDULED BECAUSE THEY CAN'T EVEN ACCESS THINGS ONLINE.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ACCESS FOR ALL APPLICATION SYSTEM, WHICH I FULLY SUPPORT AND AGREE, WE SHOULD HELP THOSE MOST VULNERABLE AND LOW INCOME AND OTHER GROUPS THAT NEED OUR HELP THE MOST. THAT'S CERTAINLY MY PRIORITY.
I DIDN'T REALIZE HOW MUCH OUR SENIORS, SOME OF THEM NEED OUR HELP.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT STRUCK ME AND IS THE REASON I'M MOVING THIS MOTION.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR HENDRICKSEN.
SO WE ACTUALLY NEED TO BE LOOKING AT NEEDS ASSESSMENT BEYOND THAT, WHICH I'M NOT.
DON'T WORRY. I'M NOT PUTTING FORWARD A MOTION TONIGHT.
BUT JUST THERE'S A BIGGER CONVERSATION THEN THAT I THINK YOU'VE IDENTIFIED.
BUT I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE THAN FREE ACCESS TO THE WALKING TRACK.
THOSE ARE TWO THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES OR THEY'RE NOT ENTIRELY CONNECTED ANYWAY.
THANK YOU TO THE MOTION FOR FREE ACCESS TO THE FIELDHOUSE FOR SENIORS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. AND THAT'S DEFEATED WITH COUNCILLOR, ARDEN-SMITH FEQUET AND DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE IN FAVOR.
[01:30:09]
THAT'S THE END OF TABLED.WE WERE JUST WRAPPING UP LAST NIGHT ON THE RESERVES.
YEP. SO WE WILL RESUME WITH RESERVES WHEN WE COME BACK.
WE'LL DO RESERVES AND THEN WE'LL DO THE LONG TERM DEBT, TEN YEAR CAPITAL PLAN, AND THEN AN OPENING IT UP TO ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR MOTIONS.
SO LET'S COME BACK AT 7:13 P.M..
[01:43:01]
OKAY. WE WILL CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.[01:43:05]
COUNCILLOR FEQUET.YEAH. JUST AFTER DIGESTING SOME OF THAT VERY HELPFUL INFORMATION FROM STAFF, AND I'D LIKE TO ASK TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE ON THE WAIVING THE FEES AT THE FIELDHOUSE.
SO THE MOTION IS THAT WE WAIVE THE ADMISSION FEES FOR THE FIELDHOUSE TRACK AND PLAYGROUND IN 2025.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? DISCUSSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? A WAVE TO WAIVE THE ADMISSION FEES FOR THE FIELDHOUSE TRACK AND PLAYGROUND IN 2025.
SAME MOTION THAT WE JUST VOTED ON.
COUNCILLOR FEQUET IS RECONSIDERING.
SO WHAT WAS THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION? YEP. COUNCILLOR PAYNE.
IS THAT WE WERE IN THE MAJORITY? IF YOU'RE IN THE MAJORITY, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
YOU CAN ASK FOR THE VOTE TO BE RECALLED.
BUT IF YOU'RE LIKE ME, I WASN'T IN THE MAJORITY.
COULD I JUST, I GUESS, ASK COUNCILLOR FEQUET TO SPEAK TO WHY HE IS BRINGING BACK THE MOTION? COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
SURE. YEAH, I THINK I MEAN, MY HOPE, MY CONNECTED DOTS FROM LAST NIGHT'S CONVERSATION WAS ABOUT THE FLEXIBILITY FOR STAFFING, RECOGNIZING THAT WE WANT TO BOTH GIVE THE AQUATIC CENTER THE SUCCESS AND THE STAFF THAT THEY NEED, BUT ALSO CREATING FLEXIBILITY AND OPPORTUNITIES ELSEWHERE. SO AFTER HEARING THAT, WE CUT ONE OF THE TWO NEW POSITIONS AT THE AQUATIC CENTER AND THAT HOPEFULLY THIS
[01:45:04]
BOOKING SOFTWARE WILL BE ABLE TO ALSO TAKE SOME OF THE BURDEN OFF.NOT ALL, BUT SOME. AND HOPEFULLY IF IT'S SUCCESSFUL, EVEN MORE IN THE FUTURE.
I THINK THAT OPPORTUNITY STILL EXISTS TO ALLOW ADMINISTRATION TO BE FLEXIBLE WITH THE CURRENT POSITIONS THAT THEY HAVE AND STILL HAVE SUCCESS AT THE NEW CENTER, AND STILL GIVE A BENEFIT TO RESIDENTS WITHOUT COSTING THE CITY GREATLY.
SO THE THOUGHT IS THAT IF WE WERE TO.
SO THE IDEA IS, IF WE DO MAKE THIS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC FOR FREE, THAT MAYBE, MAYBE ADMINISTRATION WILL ADJUST STAFFING SO THAT WE'LL HAVE JUST A CASHIER THERE AND NOT A BOOKING CLERK, I THINK.
YEAH. THAT CREATES MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO STAFF LESS.
YEAH. OKAY. BUT WE STILL NEED TO HAVE A STAFF THERE.
YEAH. WE DO HAVE TO MAINTAIN A SUPERVISOR AND THE CLIMBING WALL PERSON.
YEAH. THERE'S DIFFERING TIMES THAT THERE'S TWO PEOPLE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED AND THAT CARRIES WITH COUNCILLOR HENDRICKSEN AND PAYNE OPPOSED AND COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
ARE YOU IN FAVOR OR AGAINST? I'M OPPOSED TO THE MOTION.
IT STILL CARRIES WITH COUNCILLOR, HENDRICKSEN, PAYNE AND MCLENNAN IN OPPOSED.
OKAY, SO WE ARE NOW AT THE RESERVE FUND, PAGE 163 AND 164. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS? YEAH. EVERYBODY GET THERE.
NEXT, WE HAVE LONG TERM DEBTS.
NEXT, WE HAVE THE TEN YEAR CAPITAL PLAN.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? DISCUSSION.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE A MOTION.
THIS WAS THE BEST FIT I FELT FOR THIS, BUT I GUESS WE'LL DECIDE HERE.
THE MOTION IS TO SUPPORT, IMPROVE SAFETY AND FACILITATE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION.
IF A NEW FIRE HYDRANT IS NEEDED, THE ONUS IS ON THE CITY TO PAY FOR THIS AND INSTALL IT.
MR. VAN DINE, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERSPECTIVE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT.
SO THIS OPENS UP A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION IN DELIBERATING ON THIS MOTION.
SO WE ARE WE ARE ORIENTED IN TERMS OF THE PROPONENT COMING FORWARD THAT MIGHT NECESSITATE A CHANGE TO THE CHARACTER OF A PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD BEARING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PUBLIC COSTS ASSOCIATED FOR UPGRADING.
THAT THAT PARTICULAR AREA OF, OF, OF AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.
WE'VE DONE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS OVER THE YEARS TO ACCOMMODATE DEVELOPERS.
ASSUMING SOME LEVEL OF PUBLIC COST ASSOCIATED WITH IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA.
HYDRANTS ARE ANOTHER OF THESE MATTERS.
THERE ARE THINGS THAT IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS COULD BE TRANSIT STOPS, COULD BE PARKS, COULD BE OTHER THINGS THAT COME INTO COME INTO PLAY IN CONSIDERING A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL WITH RESPECT TO THIS PARTICULAR MOTION ON HAND, THERE IS NO COUNCIL IS WITHIN THEIR PREROGATIVE TO MAKE SUGGESTIONS ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. THIS WOULD BE THE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH WHICH YOU WOULD PERHAPS MAKE THAT SUGGESTION.
[01:50:03]
CITY TO AND WHAT LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY WE WOULD EXPECT FUTURE DEVELOPERS TO ASSUME WHEN WORKING WITH THE CITY.THIS IS A RELATIVELY SPECIFIC REQUEST WITH RESPECT TO FIRE HYDRANTS AND YEAH TO THAT BUT ON THAT, I THINK I I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR NOW IN TERMS OF CONSIDERATIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY WANT TO PONDER AS THEY'RE CONSIDERING THIS MOTION.
COUNCILLOR WARBURTON. THANKS FOR DOING THIS FIRST, MAYBE.
I DID WRITE IT OUT, SO IT'S CLEAR.
AND THIS, AS FAR AS MY MEMORY GOES BACK, THE FIRE MARSHAL IN THE CITY, OR WHOEVER REGULATES IT HAVE REQUIRED MOST NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN OUR DOWNTOWN CORE TO INSTALL FIRE HYDRANT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT PLACES A FIRE HYDRANT ON THE STREET FACING PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO IN FRONT OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, AS OPPOSED TO THE ALLEY, THIS SEEMINGLY MINOR REQUIREMENT IS HAVING A MASSIVE FINANCIAL IMPACT ON THESE DEVELOPMENTS, INCLUDING HOUSING, SHELTERS, BUSINESSES, BASICALLY EVERYTHING WE'RE BUILDING DOWNTOWN.
SO WHAT'S CHANGED TO REQUIRE THIS, THE REASONS GIVEN TO THOSE WHO ARE DOING THESE DEVELOPMENTS AND PROJECTS, INCLUDING THE NEW HOUSING AND BUSINESSES, IS THAT THIS IS A SAFETY REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS AND SUPPLY OF WATER.
PUT SIMPLY, THE CURRENT FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS AND ALLEYWAYS DO NOT ALLOW FOR SUFFICIENT ACCESS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT APPARATUS AND ARE TOO FAR FROM THE MOST BUILDINGS TO MEET THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS.
HOWEVER, IF THIS IS A SAFETY, IF A SAFETY ISSUE IS CREATED BY OUTDATED CITY INFRASTRUCTURE, THE ABILITY OR THE ABILITY OF A FIREFIGHTING APPARATUS TO ACCESS ALLEYWAYS OR BOTH, THEN IT IS INCUMBENT ON US TO HAVE A CAPITAL PLAN TO ADDRESS IT.
IN SUMMARY, THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE OR IT IS NOT.
OPENING IT UP TO QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE.
COUNCILLOR FEQUET. YEAH, AND FOR EITHER ADMIN OR COUNCILLOR WARBURTON IF HE KNOWS, WHAT IS COMMON PRACTICE WITH RESPECT TO REPLACEMENT OF FIRE HYDRANTS IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS? MR. VAN DINE. I MAY REQUIRE SOME ASSISTANCE ON THIS, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE PRACTICE OF HAVING THE PROPONENT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, SUCH AS FIRE HYDRANTS, IS A COMMON PRACTICE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS.
THAT BEING SAID, I THINK COUNCILLOR WARBURTON DOES MAKE A POINT WITH RESPECT TO THE DOWNTOWN THAT THAT I THINK COUNCIL HAS BEEN SEIZED WITH IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT KINDS OF THINGS WE ARE LOOKING TO DO TO TRY TO ENHANCE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT.
AND IT'S UP TO AND BUT COUNCIL DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO OPINE OVER OTHER INCENTIVE QUESTIONS THAT THEY MAY WANT TO PUT IN THE WINDOW TO PROMOTE DEVELOPMENT IN A CERTAIN AREA.
I WOULD ALSO OFFER THAT FROM TIME TO TIME WE DO HAVE I BELIEVE IT'S CALLED A A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT CHARGE, WHICH CAN BE LEVIED FROM TIME TO TIME IF THERE IS A PARTICULAR AREA OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR CITY IN WHICH WE CAN IDENTIFY A STRATEGIC NEED FOR A LEVY TO, TO ACCOMMODATE US, A REGION SPECIFIC OR A NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIFIC ITEM.
I JUST OFFER THAT UP FOR BACKGROUND INFORMATION, FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR COCHRANE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. I WONDER IF COUNCILLOR WARBURTON OR COULD GIVE US A TAKE ON WHAT IS THE AVERAGE COST FOR THE INVESTMENT OF THIS INFRASTRUCTURE BY A DEVELOPER? COUNCILLOR WARBURTON. THANK YOU.
OBVIOUSLY, IT GOES UP EVERY YEAR, BUT THE LAST DEVELOPMENT IN TOWN THE COST OF COMPLYING WITH THAT IS $750,000, OR JUST UNDER $12,000 PER RENTAL UNIT. WOW.
COUNCILLOR PAYNE, THEN COUNCILLOR HENDRICKSEN.
IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY? AND MAYBE CITY ADMINISTRATION HAS ALREADY DONE THIS, BUT IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE TO YOU KNOW, DISCUSS THIS ISSUE? I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S PRETTY UNFAIR.
[01:55:05]
SO ARE WE ABLE TO MEET WITH THEM? I DON'T THINK IT'S THE OFM THAT REQUIRES IT, BUT I WILL ACTUALLY PAUSE AND LET MR. VAN DINE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT WITHIN OUR WE DON'T RANDOMLY.
NO, I WOULDN'T SUGGEST THAT COUNCIL THINKS WE RANDOMLY CHOOSE WHERE FIRE HYDRANTS GO.
IT IS IT IS REGULATED AT THE TERRITORIAL LEVEL.
AND SO THAT'S THE WHAT WE FOLLOW.
I'LL ASK MR. MCLEAN AND PERHAPS MISS WHITE TO COMMENT ON THE ADVISABILITY OF REACHING OUT TO THE FIRE MARSHAL IN THIS SITUATION AND WHAT THAT MIGHT REVEAL.
THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK.
SO FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, FIRE HYDRANT INSTALLATIONS AND COMMUNITIES IS BASED ON OCCUPANCIES AND TYPES OF USE IN THE COMMUNITY. SO IN THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE WAS PROBABLY DEVELOPED.
IF YOU'RE IN SCHOOL ZONES, THERE'S PROBABLY HYDRANTS IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
THE PROBLEM THAT ARISES IS WHEN YOU HAVE A RESIDENCE THAT IS TORN DOWN AND IS REPURPOSED AS A, I DON'T KNOW, A FACILITY THAT MAY HOUSE NUMBER OF PEOPLE DURING THE DAY IN A LARGER OCCUPANCY SCALE THAT CHANGES THE NATURE AND USE OF THAT OCCUPANCY.
THEREFORE THE FIRE PROTECTION CHANGES ON IT.
THAT'S ALSO WHEN YOU HAVE AN OFFICE BUILDING OF MULTIPLE STORIES THAT MAY BE REPURPOSED INTO A RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX THAT'S NOW BEING POTENTIALLY OCCUPIED 24 OVER SEVEN.
THAT CHANGES THAT OCCUPANCY AND THEREFORE THE HYDRANT REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT CHANGES.
SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT A FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE AND THE CONCERNS ABOUT ALLEYWAYS AND HYDRANTS BEING AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF ALLEYWAYS FIRE OPERATIONS APPARATUS AND FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS IS PART OF THE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS.
EVERYTHING FROM THE ACCESS ROAD TURNING RADIUS FOR FIRE APPARATUS, ACCESS PATHWAYS THAT INCLUDES THE SPACE AROUND THE TRUCK TO WALK, MOVE, RETRIEVE EQUIPMENT, STAGE EQUIPMENT, SET UP ANCILLARY COMMAND POSTS, REHAB CENTERS, ALL THOSE THINGS.
ALLEYWAYS ARE NOT THE PREFERRED SPACE TO DO THAT.
THEY'RE A TIGHT SPACE 3M TO 5M, REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE OF THE TRUCK.
OPERATIONS REQUIRE SPACE TO MOVE AROUND.
THE FDC CONNECTIONS ARE USUALLY ON THE FRONT OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
SO WHEN YOU START TO HAVE HYDRANTS IN A LOCATION WHERE YOU NOW NEED TO STAGE IN A BACK ALLEY, NOW YOU NEED TO BUY EXTRA STAFF, EXTRA MANPOWER, EXTRA WORK TO DRAG HOSES AROUND TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TO CONNECT INTO THOSE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS TO SUPPLY THEM WATER.
ANNUNCIATOR PANELS FOR FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS ARE THAT TELL US THE LOCATION, GENERAL ZONE OF ACTIVATION OF FIRE ALARMS, HEAT DETECTORS, SO ON AND SO FORTH ARE ALL LOCATED AT THE FRONTS OF BUILDINGS.
SO FROM A ACCESS AND OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT, STAGING VEHICLES IN BACK ALLEYS IS A VERY RISKY ACTION TO TAKE, NOT ONLY WITH OUR STAFF SAFETY, BUT WITH OCCUPANT SAFETY AND POTENTIAL SURVIVAL RATE AS WELL.
THANK YOU. THROUGH YOU, MADAM CHAIR, JUST A FEW PIECES TO ADD TO IT.
OFM WORKS UNDER THEIR LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY AS GRANTED THROUGH THE TERRITORIAL ACTS.
[02:00:03]
SO WE COMMUNICATE WITH THEM QUITE FRANKLY, QUITE FREQUENTLY.BUT CHANGES HAVE TO COME FROM OTHER LOCATIONS.
THESE SITUATIONS OCCUR NOT BECAUSE CITY INFRASTRUCTURE IS INADEQUATE OR OUTDATED, IT IS BECAUSE WE ARE CHANGING USES, RIGHT? SO, AS CRAIG MENTIONED, GO FROM A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TO A 50 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING.
THOSE ARE VERY DIFFERENT THINGS.
SAME WITH GOING TO A COMMERCIAL USE.
SO THOSE ARE ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES THAT HAVE TO BE APPROPRIATELY CONSIDERED.
SO THERE ARE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES.
THERE ARE LICS, AS WAS MENTIONED BY THE CITY MANAGER.
WE DO HAVE THOSE. WE HAVE LIMITED ABILITY TO USE THEM WITHIN THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.
SO RIGHT NOW WE DO BUILD THESE SERVICE UPGRADES TO IT AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
THE DEVELOPER IS THE ONE WHO CURRENTLY IS PAYING FOR THESE.
IT IS STANDARD, LIKE I SAID ELSEWHERE AND THROUGH HALF, YOU'VE ACTUALLY PROBABLY HEARD THE GOVERNMENT SPEAK TO TRYING TO GET MUNICIPALITIES TO EITHER DECREASE OR FREEZE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ON NEW DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THE COSTS, BUT MUNICIPALITIES TAKE THAT MONEY TO PAY FOR UPGRADES TO THESE TYPES OF THINGS.
WE HEARD THE AMOUNT OF MONEY $750,000.
AGAIN, COULD BE DIFFERENT FOR EVERY SINGLE BUILDING.
THE CURRENT DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT RESERVE FUND HAS $619,000 IN IT.
WE ALREADY ARE IDENTIFYING 100,000 FOR DOWNTOWN CLEANUP AND 150 FOR INCENTIVES.
THAT DOES NOT LEAVE ENOUGH TO PUT IN ONE FIRE HYDRANT.
SO I JUST WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH THOSE THOUGHTS.
LOTS AND LOTS OF GOOD INFORMATION, I APPRECIATE IT.
SO WE OFFER LOTS OF INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPERS DOWNTOWN, LIKE TAX ABATEMENT, STUFF LIKE THAT.
ARE WE ABLE TO OFFER MORE OF A CHOICE OF INCENTIVES, MAYBE AN EXTRA YEAR OF A TAX ABATEMENT INSTEAD OF.
AND THEY PAY FOR THEIR OWN FIRE HYDRANT JUST TO DEADEN THE PAIN A LITTLE BIT.
THANK YOU. I'LL JUST INVITE MISS WHITE TO SPEAK TO THAT.
THANK YOU. AND THAT'S A REALLY GREAT QUESTION.
SO ONE OF THE BUILT IN OPTIONS IN THE NEW PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES BYLAW IS FOR DEVELOPERS TO COME TO COUNCIL AND ASK FOR AN EXTENSION. SO WE ACTUALLY BUILT THAT IN THERE.
SO IT COULD BE UP TO AN ADDITIONAL THREE YEARS.
THANKS. COUNCILLOR HENDRICKSEN.
THANKS FOR ANSWERING ALL OF MY QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE.
SO WITH THAT, I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S A REAL OPPORTUNITY FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS, BUT JUST BASED OFF OF EVERYTHING THAT CITY MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF JUST SHARED WITH US, I THINK WE'D BE PREMATURE TO MOVE ON THIS RIGHT NOW.
I'M SURE WE SCRATCH A LITTLE DEEPER.
THERE'S PROBABLY SOME OTHER SIMILAR TYPE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER.
SO THAT'S WHERE MY HEAD'S AT ANYWAY.
COUNCILLOR WARBURTON WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH MOVING THIS TO A DISCUSSION AT GPC FOR Q1? YEAH, HAPPY TO DO THAT.
I DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS TO CLOSE IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE IT THOUGH.
AND YEAH, WITH THE NEXT STEPS BEING TO BRING THIS TO A GPC FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
YEAH, I'D BE SUPPORTIVE OF A DISCUSSION.
THANKS TO STAFF FOR ALL THE INFORMATION.
YEAH, I THINK IT MATTERS TO ME THE REASONS FOR NECESSITATING FIRE HYDRANT REMOVALS.
YEAH. HAPPY FOR THE DISCUSSION.
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR WARBURTON.
THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR THAT REALLY GOOD DISCUSSION.
I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WHILE THIS ISSUE IS HIGHLY SPECIFIC, THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM, I DON'T THINK, IS THE CURRENT DEFAULT APPROACH TO MITIGATE ALL POTENTIAL PERCEIVED RISKS WHILE EXTERNALIZING ALL COSTS FOR THAT RISK MITIGATION.
I DON'T THINK IT'S SUSTAINABLE.
[02:05:06]
IF WE CONTINUE TO PUT OUR NEEDS AS AN ORGANIZATION OR THE OFM ABOVE THOSE OF PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES THAT WE ARE HERE TO SERVE.ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS, DISCUSSION ON THE TEN YEAR CAPITAL PLAN? SEEING NONE.
WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT UP TO ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR MOTIONS ON THE BUDGET.
SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR MOTIONS.
THE MAGIC'S UNFORTUNATELY GOING TO TAKE KAVI AND THE TEAM A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN A TEN MINUTE BREAK.
SO WHAT WE WERE GOING TO PUT UP FOR DISCUSSION IS TO COME BACK TOMORROW AT 5:15.
WHERE WE CAN JUST HAVE THE QUICK PRESENTATION ON WHAT? HOW THE STATE OF IS LOOKING.
THE OTHER OPTION COULD JUST BE AN EMAIL CIRCULATED AROUND.
MY PREFERENCE, THOUGH IS TO MEET THAT WE HAVE IT PRESENTED.
BECAUSE IF ANYBODY HAS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, TOMORROW WOULD BE YOUR TIME.
BUT HOPEFULLY WE WOULD BE DONE BY 6:00.
AND THEN YOU CAN GO AND ENJOY DINNER WITH FRIENDS OR FAMILY.
AND THEN WE WOULD COME WITH FORMAL APPROVAL MONDAY AT 7 P.M.
WITH FEES AND CHARGES, DOING A FIRST READING MONDAY AT NOON.
DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANY COMMENTS TO CLOSE? YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.
I'LL JUST INVITE MR. PANDOO TO JUST TO TALK ABOUT WHAT TOMORROW MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
SAVANNAH. JUST ONE CLARIFICATION.
SO I'M DRAFTING THE MOTION AS WELL TOMORROW.
YEAH. SO WITH THAT, WE WILL RECESS AND RECONVENE TOMORROW AT 5:15.
AND IF YOU'RE HERE AT 4:45, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE GREAT OLD LIGHT UP.
SO MAYBE WE'LL GET TO SEE SANTA CLAUS TOMORROW.
IF WE ARE QUICK ENOUGH TO GET TO THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.
SO SEE EVERYBODY TOMORROW AT 5:15.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.