[00:00:02]
AND I WILL CALL OUR SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING FOR BUDGET.
[Opening Statement]
BACK TO ORDER. AND MR. VAN DINE WILL START BY BRINGING IT OVER TO YOU FOR AN UPDATE ON THE OVERALL BUDGET POSITION BEFORE WE GET BACK INTO THE TABLED[2026 Budget Deliberations. ]
MOTION FROM LAST NIGHT. SO OVER TO YOU, MR. VAN DINE.AND I'D LIKE TO INVITE DIRECTOR PANDOO TO GIVE US AN ACCOUNTING OF THE ADJUSTMENTS.
BASED ON THE DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN SO FAR.
MR. PANDOO, ARE YOU ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT? THANK YOU.
MR. VAN DINE, GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. SO AFTER 2 NIGHTS OF REALLY HARD AND GOOD DISCUSSIONS AND WE HAVE GONE BACK AND ADDED ALL THE DECISIONS THAT YOU HAVE MADE, THE LAST ONE BEING TO ADD GROWTH STRATEGY, IMPLEMENTATION, FUNDING OF 25,000. AFTER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE EMOTIONS WE ARE LOOKING AT 4.903% TAX INCREASE.
AND THIS IS THE RESULT OF ALL OF THOSE ADDITIONS.
SO SO WE'VE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE FROM 7.7% WHERE WE BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 4TH.
ON TO REGULAR BUSINESS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO NEXT, WE HAVE THE TABLED MOTION FROM LAST EVENING.
SO THE TABLE MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN THAT WE WAS MOVED AND SECONDED IS THAT COUNCIL MAKE THE MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 2 POSITIONS, 2 YEAR TERM POSITIONS. SO COUNCIL MCLENNAN YOU SPOKE TO IT LAST NIGHT? ALSO NICE HAIRCUT. AS I LOOK DOWN NICELY. QUAFFED.
ANYBODY WITH QUESTIONS? COMMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATION FOR COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
ON THIS MOTION. SO THIS IS FOR TO MAKE A 2 YEAR TERM POSITIONS.
THIS IS THE MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. ANY QUESTIONS FOR? WELL, JUST 1 SECOND.
COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. BECAUSE YOU HAD YOU'VE SPOKE ON THE MOTION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. COUNCILLOR COCHRANE THEN.
COUNCILLOR MCGURK. COUNCILLOR FEQUET. COUNCILLORPAYNE. NO QUESTION.
COMMENT. I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE STAFF FOR PASSIONATELY PURSUING THIS PILOT AS IT WILL BE NOW.
AND I DO HEAR YOU AND I HAVE HEARD FROM THE ENTREPRENEURS AND RESIDENTS OF THE DOWNTOWN CORE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AND I'M AT THE VERY LEAST THOUGH, OF COURSE, ORIGINALLY SKEPTICAL AROUND THE PRICE TAG, AND THE INCREASE TO STAFFING.
I THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD COMPROMISE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
COUNCILLOR COCHRANE. NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR MCGURK. THANKS.
I JUST WANTED TO ASK ADMINISTRATION IF THEY COULD DESCRIBE THE IMPACT ON EXISTING SERVICES.
THAT IS THIS. I GUESS I'M TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF THIS AS IS A WANT OR A NEED.
LIKE, ARE ARE OUR CURRENT SERVICE STANDARDS FAILING OR LACKING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THESE 2 OFFICERS, OR IS THIS WANTING TO BOLSTER OUR CAPACITY SOME PERIOD POINT BLANK? MR. VAN DINE. YEAH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. CHAIR, HAPPY TO RESPOND.
SO THIS DOWNTOWN SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PACKAGE WAS PREPARED BY ADMINISTRATION BASED ON A NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS AND INPUTS FROM FROM THE PUBLIC ON A VARIETY OF THINGS.
SNOW REMOVAL ENFORCEMENT WITH RESPECT TO LITTER AND UNSIGHTLY PROPERTIES VISIBILITY WITH RESPECT TO THE SENSE OF PUBLIC PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE DOWNTOWN. AND AS WELL AS MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO MAINTAIN A CLEAN REGULAR SERVICE PICKUP WITH RESPECT TO GARBAGE.
SO THESE ARE COMPLETELY UP TO COUNCIL TO TO DECIDE.
WHEN MED DID THEIR SERVICE STANDARDS OR. SORRY THEIR PRIORITY SETTING THIS PAST SPRING, THEY IDENTIFIED THE DOWNTOWN AS BEING AN AREA OF FOCUS BASED ON SIMILAR RESPONSES THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM, FROM THE COMMUNITY.
THEY'VE DONE THAT WE'VE HAD POSITIVE IMPACT, BUT THAT POSITIVE IMPACT DID HAVE AN IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO SERVE THE REST OF YELLOWKNIFE ACROSS ACROSS THE COMMUNITY. THIS PROPOSAL IS LISTENING TO THAT FEEDBACK AND PROPOSING THAT WE ADJUST AND SO THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN A LEVEL OF SERVICE IN THE
[00:05:08]
DOWNTOWN. AND I THINK THE PROPOSAL IS ON A TRIAL BASIS.SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE, WE'RE ABLE TO, TO, TO MEET THAT NEED.
AND SO THIS IS THE, THE, THE GENESIS OF THIS PROPOSAL IS, IS BASED ON WHAT WE UNDERSTAND TO BE OF INTEREST TO THE COMMUNITY AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE NOT OVER OVERSTRETCHING OUR RESOURCES BEYOND THE OTHER SERVICE LEVELS THAT ARE EXPECTED BY THE COMMUNITY IN YELLOWKNIFE. THANK YOU FOR MR. VAN DINE.
OH, SORRY. GO AHEAD. I WOULD, I WOULD, YEAH, SORRY.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO MAYBE OFFER AN ADMINISTRATIVE KIND OF CONSIDERATION IN, IN, IN THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED, IF I MAY AND THAT AND THAT IS WE DO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE THE RELUCTANCE OF COUNCIL BASED ON OUR CURRENT FINANCIAL ENVIRONMENT, TO WANT TO BE ADDING A PERMANENT ADDITION TO TO OUR FTE COMPLEMENT THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S UNDERSTOOD. AND I DO UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE ON THE BASIS FOR FOR PUTTING A 2 YEAR TIMELINE TO, TO TO LIMIT ANY POTENTIAL UNNECESSARY GROWTH IN, IN THE COMMUNITY.
THE LAST TIME THERE WAS A FULL SERVICE REVIEW, OPERATIONAL REVIEW FOR MED WAS BACK IN 2014.
AND SO, THE CONSIDERATION THAT I WOULD OFFER THIS EVENING FOR CONSIDERATION OF REMOVING OR CONSIDERING THE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE MOTION WITH RESPECT TO THE TERM COMPONENT TO MAKE IT INDETERMINANT ON THE BASIS THAT WE DO A MORE COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW IN 2 YEARS TIME TO ALLOW FOR ALL OF THE RESOURCES TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST, AGAINST NEED AND INCLUDING THE RESOURCES THAT COULD BE POTENTIALLY APPROVED TONIGHT ON RELATIVE RELATIVE NEED, RELATIVE VALUE AND VERSUS SERVICE LEVELS PROVIDED I OFFER THAT NOT TO BE MISCHIEVOUS OR TO TRY AND UNNECESSARILY ANTAGONIZE COUNCIL BUT TO OFFER THE PRACTICAL COMPONENT THAT IF COUNCIL WAS CONSIDERING PUTTING A 2 YEAR TERM, THAT THE PRACTICAL NATURE OF IT WOULD BE THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT BE ABLE TO HARVEST ANY VALUE OUT OF A 2 YEAR TERM FOR THE FOR THE PURPOSE BEING THAT STAFFING ON A TERM BASIS IS INHERENTLY DIFFICULT.
IF WE DO ARE SUCCESSFUL IN STAFFING ANY POSITION IN THE MED CATEGORIES, IT TAKES BETWEEN SIX MONTHS AND LONGER, SOMETIMES FOR THE ORIENTATION. SO THE MOTION IN EFFECT WOULD MAY NOT ACHIEVE ITS DESIRED OUTCOME AND GOAL.
IF WE WERE TO TO PURSUE IF THEY WERE, IF COUNCIL WAS IN FAVOR.
SO STEPPING BACK JUST TO SUMMARIZE THIS WAS A PROPOSAL GENERATED FROM ADMINISTRATION TO RESPOND TO THE COMMUNITY'S MULTIPLE REQUESTS TO ENSURE THAT THE DOWNTOWN WAS VISIBLY SAFER, VISIBLY CLEANER, AND VISIBLY MORE ACCESSIBLE AS A RESULT OF OF SNOW ACCUMULATION.
THANK YOU, MISTER CHAIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMAN MCGURK. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? GO AHEAD.
SO AFTER WE STARTED ADJUSTING OUR SERVICES. SERVICES THROUGH MED OR WITH THAT, MED DELIVERS.
WHAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FEEDBACK IS VERY POSITIVE, IS OVERWHELMINGLY POSITIVE? IS THAT AM I AM I WRONG? MR. VAN DINE. THE FEEDBACK IS ABSOLUTELY BEEN POSITIVE.
AND I THINK THE NATURE OF YOUR QUESTION IS IT IS.
SO WHY WHY THE NEED FOR MORE? AND MY ANSWER THAT I PROBABLY COULD HAVE BEEN MORE DIRECT AROUND IS, IS IS IT SUSTAINABLE? AND THE QUESTION IS IN OUR OBSERVATION, THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THAT ADJUSTED SERVICE LEVEL IS OPERATIONALLY IS NOT SUSTAINABLE, BUT WE ARE HAPPY TO CONTINUE TO DO IT UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT IT'S VISIBLY UN SUSTAINABLE.
BUDGET IS THE TIME WHEN YOU BRING THESE IDEAS FORWARD.
[00:10:02]
THANK YOU, MR. VAN DINE. COUNCILLOR MCGURK. YEAH, I'M STILL VERY MUCH STRUGGLING TO SUPPORT ADDING THESE 2 POSITIONS, TERM OR NOT TERM. I THINK THAT THE CHOICE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENFORCEMENT POSITIONS IS A VERY BIG DEAL, THAT WE SHOULDN'T BASE ON THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WANT TO WANT TO SEE SOMETHING.I THINK THAT ANY ENFORCEMENT POSITION HAS A VERY VERY IMPORTANT ROLE OR, LIKE, A VERY LARGE ROLE THAT CARRIES A LOT OF POWER AND WEIGHT IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND IT'S A VERY IT'S A VERY SERIOUS DECISION.
AND IF IT, IF OUR CURRENT STANDARDS ARE NOT BEING.
SEVERELY NEGATIVELY IMPACTED. AND RIGHT NOW THE MEASURES THAT WE'RE TAKING ARE SUPPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY AND APPEAR TO BE GOING WELL, THEN THE CHOICE TO ADD THESE 2 POSITIONS IS QUITE SIMPLY I THINK, OF EXCESSIVE OR FRIVOLOUS.
I THINK IF ESPECIALLY IF WE HAVE NOT DONE AN OVER VIEW AND OVER 10 YEARS OF OF OF MED THAT BEFORE WE APPROVE THESE POSITIONS, I DO THINK IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO, TO REFLECT ON WHAT SERVICES WE, WE ARE LACKING IN PROVIDING, ETC.. SO I. I WOULD LIKE TO NOT SEE THESE POSITIONS IN THE BUDGET. IF IF NOBODY ON COUNCIL IS OF THE SAME MIND AS I AM, THEN I WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE TERM POSITION SIMPLY BECAUSE I REALLY DON'T.
I'M REALLY ANXIOUS ABOUT THE IDEA OF AND WEARY OF THE IDEA THAT OR LEERY RATHER LANGUAGE THAT THAT WE ADD TO ENFORCEMENT POSITIONS WITHOUT KNOWING THAT WE NEED THEM.
YEAH. SO I VOTE IN FAVOR IF THE REST OF COUNCIL IS IS NOT INTERESTED IN REMOVING THESE 2 POSITIONS, BUT THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE. YEAH. THANKS.
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MCGURK I KNOW IT'S A IT'S A VIEW SHARED BY MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY.
SO ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO HAVE ALL THOSE DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS EXPRESSED TO COUNCIL.
NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. A QUESTION FOR ADMIN. AFTER DOING A LOT OF THINKING SINCE LAST NIGHT, THIS GOING THROUGH MY HEAD.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING HOW DIFFICULT WILL IT BE TO ATTRACT 2 OFFICERS ON ON A TERM POSITION? AND WHAT IS THE TRAINING TIME NORMALLY REQUIRED TO GET SOMEBODY, LIKE, UP TO WHERE THEY NEED TO BE? MR. VAN DINE, OVER TO MR. MCLEAN. I'LL INVITE MR. MCLEAN TO RESPOND. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD, MR. MCLEAN.
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. WITH THE SPECIALIZED CREDENTIALS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL TAKING ON THIS ROLE WOULD HAVE, WHAT WE'VE SEEN ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION RIGHT NOW, IF, IF A TERM POSITION EXISTS IT'S HARD TO RECRUIT FOR IT.
SO I CAN SAY RIGHT NOW THAT THERE IS A COUPLE OF INSTANCES IN THE CITY AND POSITIONS WHERE WE CAN'T FILL BECAUSE OF THAT WHEN IT COMES TO OUR DIVISION NORMAL HISTORICAL RECRUITMENT TIMEFRAMES FOR POSITIONS THAT EXIST IS ANYWHERE FROM 2 TO 6 MONTHS.
OUR ONBOARDING AND TRAINING THROUGH OUR PROBATIONARY PLAN THAT WE HAVE IS SIX MONTHS.
SO IF YOU EXTRAPOLATE OVER 6 MONTHS TO RECRUIT, 6 MONTHS TO TRAIN UNTIL THEY'RE FULLY OPERATIONAL, THAT'S THAT'S ONE YEAR BEFORE YOU HAVE A FULLY TRAINED STAFF MEMBER READY TO DEPLOY.
NOW, THAT DOESN'T SAY THAT THEY'RE NOT OUT DOING WORK DURING THEIR PROBATIONARY PERIOD.
BUT THERE'S SOME, YOU KNOW, OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR THEM TO HAVE A LEVEL OF SUPERVISION WITH EXPERIENCED AND TRAINED STAFF PRIOR TO BEING RELEASED ON THEIR OWN COGNIZANCE. THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU.
I FEEL LIKE I'VE GONE TO 2 EXTREMES HERE. LAST NIGHT.
I WANTED TO CUT POSITIONS. WE'VE ALL DONE IT.
DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. YEAH. OVER TO YOU. I FEEL LIKE A BIG INTERNAL STRUGGLE HERE.
[00:15:05]
FORTUNATELY, THIS FORTUNATELY OR UNFORTUNATELY, I GUESS WE DO HAVE A HIGHER TURNOVER.I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MED OFFICERS THAT I VOTED TO APPROVE THEIR POSITION OVER THE LAST 11 YEARS.
IT'S BEEN A LOT. SO I KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE COME AND GO IN THESE POSITIONS.
PUT MYSELF IN A POSITION OF SOMEBODY APPLYING FOR THIS JOB.
SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET WHAT WE NEED OUT OF THIS.
AND IT'S NOT THAT I WANT TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE.
GIVE ME. YOU TEST ME. COUNCILLOR PAYNE. BUT I LIKE YOU.
KEEP GOING. YEAH. IT'S IT'S NOT AN EASY PLACE TO KEEP UNDER CONTROL RIGHT NOW IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.
SO I, I'M GOING TO PUT MY SUPPORT BEHIND HIRING FULL TIME.
I THINK THAT WE'RE SHOOTING OURSELVES IN THE FOOT WITH GETTING NO OFFENSE.
ROB. YEAH, I THINK WE'RE SHOOTING OURSELVES IN THE FOOT HERE.
IF WE GO WITH A 2 YEAR TERM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
COUNCILLOR PAYNE. NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR OR DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON. THANK YOU.
I WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THAT WE HAVE ADDED A TON OF STUFF COMING DOWN THE PIPE.
SO WE'VE ASKED THEM ON TOP OF ALL THE ENCAMPMENT WORK WE'VE HEARD ABOUT, THEY'RE DOING.
WE'VE WE'VE ASKED FOR A NEW BYLAW ABOUT VACANT BUILDINGS.
WE'VE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ASKED FOR THEM TO START ENFORCING MORE OF THE PARKING RULES AND BYLAWS.
SO I IF WE WANT TO REFOCUS THIS HEAVY ON DOWNTOWN, WHICH I DO I DON'T WANT TO DO IT AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYTHING ELSE WE'RE BEING ASKED THEM TO DO, WHICH IS IS READ. I'M GETTING. SO I SUPPORT THESE 2 POSITIONS FULL TIME.
I DON'T WANT THEM TO BE TERMS. I THINK WE WANT IT.
WE SHOULD WANT IT, AND WE SHOULD SUPPORT IT. THANKS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DEPUTY MAYOR. NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.
THANK YOU. I STRUGGLE WITH THIS ONE MAINLY BECAUSE AS A FORMER BUSINESS OWNER DOWNTOWN RECOGNIZING THE SAFETY COMPONENT FOR DOWNTOWN AREA, I ALWAYS FOUND. AND NO DISRESPECT TO OUR MED, BUT THERE WAS MORE POWER BEHIND RCMP THERE THAN THERE WAS MED IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY CAN OFFER AND WHAT THEY CAN DO IN TERMS OF ARRESTING POWERS.
AND OUR OFFICERS ARE FULLY THAT, WE'RE FULLY STAFFED AND THEY'RE REALLY BUSY AND THEY NEED EXTRA HANDS, EXTRA BOOTS ON THE GROUND. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THESE TWO FULL TIME POSITIONS.
AND I DO HOPE THAT ADMINISTRATION DOES DO A FULSOME BACKGROUND WORK ON PUBLIC SAFETY GOING FORWARD. I SEE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
THANKS, MR. CHAIR. JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR ADMIN.
FIRST. YEAH, I WAS JUST HOPING YOU COULD KIND OF FURTHER CLARIFY.
WHAT THE ASK IS FOR THESE TWO POSITIONS GETTING MAYBE BACK TO COUNCILLOR MCGURK QUESTION ABOUT IS THIS BOLSTERING CAPACITY OR IS IT ACTUALLY CHANGING A SERVICE LEVEL? AND, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED LAST NIGHT ABOUT IT WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE FULSOME COVERAGE IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, AS OPPOSED TO WHATEVER IT IS HAPPENING IS HAPPENING NOW.
SO I WAS HOPING YOU COULD ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THAT. MR. VAN DINE, OVER TO MR. MCLEAN. WELL, WE'LL SHARE.
OKAY. GO AHEAD. I'LL BEGIN IF I JUST SIMPLY TO SAY SO THE THE DOWNTOWN SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PACKAGE IS WHAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD TO IMPROVE IDEALLY SNOW REMOVAL GARBAGE PICKUP AND ENFORCEMENT OF A NUMBER OF THE BYLAWS THAT ARE GERMANE TO THE DOWNTOWN.
SO THAT THAT IS WHAT WE'RE HOPING TO ENHANCE.
[00:20:02]
DOWNTOWN AREA BEYOND WHAT WE CURRENTLY ARE ABLE TO DO NOW ON A ON A MORE LIMITED WAY ON A MORE WITHIN EXISTING RESOURCES. AND SO SO COUNCIL FOR THE MOMENT HAS HAS AUTHORIZED US THE IMPROVED ADDITIONAL DAY OF GARBAGE PICKUP COUNCIL SO FAR HAS APPROVED THE ADDITION OF SNOW REMOVAL EQUIPMENT TO AID IN THE DOWNTOWN SNOW REMOVAL.WE'RE NOT ADDING NEW RULES. WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT THE FOCUS ON THE DOWNTOWN AND THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN THE DOWNTOWN OR FOCUS ON THE DOWNTOWN WITH THESE 2 POSITIONS WOULD BE MUCH MORE WE'RE A MUCH MORE ABLE TO DO RATHER THAN THE CAPACITY WE CURRENTLY HAVE, WHICH MEANS THAT WE'RE JUST WE'RE GOING WE'RE SPREADING THINNER AND THINNER AND THINNER.
SO THE, THE, THE FOCUS OF, OF HAVING THIS CAPACITY IS TO ALLOW US THAT WE HAVE THE EYES AND THE ABILITY TO, TO DO THE SEVEN DAYS, AS YOU'VE REFERRED TO FROM LAST NIGHT BUT ALSO TO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, WE HAVE A PRESENCE AND WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THE THINGS THAT ARE SEEMINGLY EXPECTED OF US MORE AND MORE FROM FROM RESIDENTS.
BUT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. MCLEAN TO TO ROUND IT OUT.
THANK YOU, DIRECTOR MCLEAN. THANK YOU. I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY MORE TO ADD THAN WHAT MR. VAN DINE HAS COMMUNICATED. THANK YOU. SHORT AND SWEET.
ALWAYS HAPPY. COUNCILLOR FEQUET. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WILL MED OFFICERS BE OUT ON FOOT AND BIKE PATROLS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT MORE OFTEN THAN THEY ARE CURRENTLY WITH THESE 2 POSITIONS, MR..
VAN DINE? SO I'LL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DIRECTOR MCLEAN TO TO TO ANSWER THAT MORE DIRECTLY.
THANK YOU, DIRECTOR MCLEAN. THE ANSWER IS YES.
AND I'LL GIVE YOU A PRIME EXAMPLE. BICYCLE. YOU JUST ALLUDED TO BICYCLES WITH THE CURRENT VOLUME OF COMPLAINTS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH AND COUNCIL STRATEGIC PRIORITIES.
YOU KNOW, SO TO, TO GET OUT ON, ON OUR BIKES, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR STAFF ARE ORIENTED AND TRAINED TO THE SPACE AND ARE SAFELY DOING SO. HAVING THESE INDIVIDUALS FOCUSED ALLOWS THAT, THAT TIME AND SPACE TO GET THAT TRAINING UP.
WE HAVE THE EQUIPMENT TO DO IT. AND THEN WE'RE ABLE TO ROLL OUT THAT PIECE.
AND IF WHEN WE'RE IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE, THAT'S JUST NOT IN, YOU KNOW, AROUND THE CENTER SQUARE MALL PROXIMITY THAT'S ON ALL THE STREETS IN THE DOWNTOWN, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, SAMBA K PARK HERE IS PART OF IT.
IT ALLOWS US TO GET INTO THOSE SPACES, MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE ADHERING TO THE PARKS AND REC BYLAW SO THAT PARK ISN'T ENJOYABLE SPACE FOR ALL OUR RESIDENTS AND TOURISTS THAT COME HERE. SO THAT WOULD JUST BE ONE PRIME EXAMPLE.
THANK YOU, COUNCILOR PAQUETTE. THANK YOU. I WAS LOOKING FOR YEAH, I THINK THERE'S NO QUESTION IN MY MIND THAT EVERYONE UP HERE UNDERSTANDS THAT DOWNTOWN PRESENCE IS IMPORTANT.
IT'S IT'S LESS ABOUT ENFORCEMENT SPECIFICALLY AND MORE ABOUT JUST HAVING A PRESENCE AND SUPPORTING OUR COMMUNITY, ALL MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. I THINK MY FRUSTRATION AND HESITANCE LAST NIGHT WAS MOSTLY ABOUT THAT.
COUNCIL'S BEEN ASKING FOR THIS SINCE THE FIRST YEAR OF OUR TERM. WE APPROVED 4 PRIORITIES.
WE DIDN'T GET AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE NEXT YEAR BECAUSE OF EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED IN LIFE.
AND THEN EARLIER THIS YEAR, WE WERE PRETTY SPECIFIC AND MADE SURE THAT THE PRIORITIES OF THE DOWNTOWN AND THE SCHOOL ZONES WERE, WERE THE PRIORITIES, THE ONLY PRIORITIES, OF COURSE, AMONGST ALL THE OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES THAT THE MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT DIVISION HAS.
SO I THINK WHEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW, WE HAD JUST MADE THAT CHANGE THIS YEAR AND THEN, OF COURSE, THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS OWNERS SAFETY INITIATIVE HAPPENED IN JUNE.
AND OF COURSE, THEY REITERATED ALL THE THINGS WE WE TALKED ABOUT AND WE ALREADY KNEW ABOUT.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT TO US. I LIVE AND WORK DOWNTOWN, AND I HAVE SEEN THE ADDED BENEFIT AND PRESENCE OF OUR MED OFFICERS SINCE EARLIER THIS YEAR. I IT'S BEEN AMAZING. SO I THINK FOR ME THE REASON THAT I AM NOW WILLING TO SUPPORT THESE 2 POSITIONS IS BECAUSE I'M, I TRIED TO THINK ABOUT THE THING THAT WOULD TILT ME ACROSS THE 1 WAY OR THE OTHER,
[00:25:02]
AND I THINK IT'S MORE ABOUT GROWTH MOVING FORWARD.I THINK RECOGNIZING WHAT IS IN YELLOWKNIFE'S FUTURE IN THE SHORT AND LONG TERM AND THAT YES, WE HAVE SEEN GREAT STRIDES EARLIER THIS YEAR, BUT ADDING 2 MORE POSITIONS THAT WILL FOCUS ON MORE FOOT AND BIKE PATROLS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER, DIRECTOR MCLEAN.
I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS MOVING FORWARD, AND I HOPE THAT THROUGH WHATEVER INVISIBLE PORTAL OR WHATEVER REPORTING THAT WE CAN GET, WELL, WE CAN KEEP IMPORTANT TABS ON THE PROGRESS THAT WE MAKE IN THIS AREA BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO COUNCIL AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY.
SO I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT EITHER THE 2 YEAR TERM OR THE INDETERMINATE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR FOOTE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WHAT ALTERNATIVES, SUCH AS DEDICATED LIAISON OFFICERS WHO CONNECT INDIVIDUALS WITH SOCIAL SERVICES OR DEAL WITH ENCAMPMENTS AND BLOCKADES WERE EXPLORED DURING PLANNING FOR THE NEW POSITIONS.
MR.. VAN DINE. SO THANK YOU. THAT'S A PRETTY SPECIFIC QUESTION.
SO AND I APPRECIATE IT. SO IN TERMS OF OUR EXPERIENCE OVER THE LAST 2 SUMMERS WE HAVE WE FOUND THAT THIS SUMMER WAS DIFFERENT FROM LAST SUMMER, AND LAST SUMMER WAS DEFINITELY DIFFERENT FROM THE SUMMER BEFORE THAT. AND SO THE, THE NATURE OF OF RESPONDING TO THE AN ADAPTIVE OR CHANGING CIRCUMSTANCE CONTINUES. SO WE'RE WE'RE STILL LEARNING. WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE WHAT THE DEMANDS ARE WHAT THE SAFETY IS.
WE DID HAVE 2 FIRES THIS SUMMER THAT THAT OCCURRED THAT THANKFULLY DIDN'T RESULT IN ANY INJURIES.
HOWEVER, THERE WAS RISK. AND WE'RE NOW HEADING INTO THE THE WINTER SEASON.
WE'RE FULL ON RIGHT AS, AS AS EVERYONE KNOWS.
THEY'VE BEEN THE THE FIRST SET OF EYES THAT WE TYPICALLY GET A SENSE OF WHETHER OR NOT THE OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT MIGHT NEED TO BE ENGAGED, OR WHETHER OUR BUILDING INSPECTORS MAY NEED TO BE ENGAGED, OR WHETHER WE NEED TO BE REACHING OUT TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES FOR FOR ANY RESPONSIBILITIES THAT THEY MAY HAVE, OR TO CALL A LINE DRIVE TO SEE IF LINE DRIVE NEEDS TO RESPOND IN A MORE IMMEDIATE SENSE, OR WHETHER WE NEED TO CALL OUR EMERGENCY SERVICES PEOPLE TO TO RESPOND TO THE SITUATION.
SO THAT THAT'S BEEN A DYNAMIC SHIFT. IT HAS BEEN GROWING BETWEEN THE LAST 2 SUMMERS.
AND AS HAS BEEN ALLUDED, HAS BEEN MENTIONED A FEW TIMES.
WE'VE DONE THAT IN ADDITION TO THOSE THINGS. WE HAVE BEEN SPEAKING WITH THE, WITH THE RCMP.
WE CONTINUE TO WORK AND LIAISE WITH THE RCMP ON SOME OF THE MEASURES THAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.
THIS PAST SUMMER, IN EFFECT, AROUND COORDINATING EFFORTS SO THAT WHEN WE WERE LOOKING TO DO AN INSPECTION AROUND A STRUCTURE THAT HAD BEEN MADE THAT THE RCMP WAS ALERTED THAT THEY WERE NEARBY, THAT IN SOME CASES, I'LL MAYBE ASK MR. MCLEAN TO, TO TO TO MAYBE ELABORATE. BUT THE RCMP HAS BEEN ENGAGED.
SO IN TERMS OF ALTERNATIVES THE VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL OF THEM FROM ADVOCACY, ADVOCACY TO THE TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT TO ADJUST THEIR RCMP CONTRACT TO ENSURE THAT WE'VE GOT BETTER SERVICE ADVOCACY IN TERMS OF THE MAYOR'S RELATIONSHIP WITH MEMBERS OF LIAISON WITH OUR FORMER MAYOR AND OTHERS WITH RESPECT TO THE NEED FOR MORE RCMP OFFICERS IN THE COMMUNITY AREA.
SO AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF AN OPTION SET OR AN ALTERNATIVE SET WE FIND OURSELVES IN A POSITION IN WHICH WE'RE WE'RE PULLING ALL THE LEVERS TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY TO RESPOND TO A CHANGING NEED AND DYNAMIC THAT SEEMS TO BE SHIFTING FROM FROM FROM SUMMER TO SUMMER AND NOW BEYOND SUMMER.
SO IN, IN COMING UP WITH THE MED OFFICERS WE FOUND THAT GIVEN OUR EXISTING BYLAWS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO US AND OUR EXPERIENCES WITHIN THE LAST THE RECENT 2 YEARS THAT THIS HAS BEEN A MORE ACUTE ISSUE.
[00:30:04]
WE FELT THAT THAT WAS A I WOULDN'T CALL IT LOW HANGING FRUIT, BUT A NATURAL OPTION SET TO CONSIDER FOR COUNCIL TO RESPOND TO WHAT WE UNDERSTAND TO BE THE PUBLIC NEED AND SOME OF THE DEMANDS THAT ARE BEING PLACED ON ON CITY HALL.SO THAT'S, THAT'S THAT'S THE ANALYSIS IN A NUTSHELL.
WE WILL ABSOLUTELY CONTINUE TO DO WHAT WE'RE DOING.
WE WE HAVE A VERY PROFESSIONAL AND CAPABLE GROUP OF MED OFFICERS.
HOWEVER, THERE HAS BEEN MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL DEMANDS BEING PLACED BEFORE THEM TO TO, TO TO ENFORCE AND OUR ABILITY TO SUSTAIN THE DOWNTOWN AS A PRIORITY AND ACTUALLY HAVE THAT PRIORITY MEAN SOMETHING IS BECOMING DILUTED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR FOOTE. THANK YOU FOR THAT COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSE, SIR.
BEAR WITH ME HERE. I'M I'M OF A MIND TO KIND OF SUPPORT THIS AS WRITTEN NOW AFTER HEARING EVERYTHING TODAY, BUT I'M A LITTLE BIT RELUCTANT. WE'VE SEEN MODELS IN OTHER CITIES THAT PRIORITIZE INTEGRATED SUPPORT AND COMPLIANCE OVER LIKE A PURELY PUNITIVE ENFORCEMENT APPROACH.
AND I GUESS MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT AS VACATIONS AND STAFFING SHORTAGES ARISE AT THESE DOWNTOWN ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WILL BE REPOSITIONED TO TAKE ON MORE TRADITIONAL TYPE ENFORCEMENT DUTIES.
AND THAT KIND OF TAKES AWAY THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE TODAY. SO CAN YOU CONFIRM MAYBE HOW, LIKE JOB DESCRIPTIONS OR TRAINING OR EVEN OPERATIONAL MANDATES CAN BE STRUCTURED TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING? WHETHER THEY COULD EVENTUALLY BE RECLASSIFIED TO BE STRICTLY LIKE LIAISON OFFICERS, IF THAT WAS SOMETHING WE WANTED TO SEE.
MR. VAN DINE I THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SO I'LL, I'LL INVITE MR. MCLEAN TO TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE WOULD MANAGE WITH THESE, THESE RESOURCE LEVELS, BUT ABSOLUTELY.
THE THE INTENT IS TO TO ENSURE THAT WE'VE GOT DEDICATED CAPACITY IN THESE AREAS.
AND AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED LAST LAST EVENING, I THINK EVEN BY THE CHAIR THE, THE RULES THAT MED OFFICERS PLAY IN THE COMMUNITY PARTICULARLY WORKING DIRECTLY WITH THE, WITH THE UNDER HOUSED AND THOSE IS A, A NUMBER OF YOU KNOW, FAIRLY DELICATE SKILLS THAT THEY'VE BEEN EXERCISING GOOD JUDGMENT AND WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR THEM TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT WITH THESE, WITH THESE RESOURCES. BUT MR. MCLEAN, DIRECTOR MCLEAN.
I WOULD HAPPY TO IF YOU WANT TO SHARE THAT, WE COULD LOOK AT IT AND SEE WHERE THERE'S CROSSOVER BETWEEN WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING AND WHAT OUR CURRENT TASKING AND TRAINING IS FOR OUR OFFICERS. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO, FOR COUNCIL AND FOR ANYONE LISTENING TO UNDERSTAND THAT MED IS NOT A POLICE FORCE.
WE HAVE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE FOR ACTS UP IN THE NWT, THAT BEING THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC, THE DOG, THE ATV AND PRIMARILY AND THEN OUR BYLAWS, WE DO NOT ENFORCE CRIMINAL CODE ACTIVITIES.
THAT IS STRICTLY AN RCMP JOB. WHAT WE DO IS WE ENGAGE WITH THE COMMUNITY THROUGH COMMUNICATION TO TRY TO GET AND BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS, TO TRY TO GET COMPLIANCE.
WE ALSO OFTEN NEED TO TAKE BASED ON COMPLAINTS WE RECEIVE WE NEED TO TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION.
SO WHEN WE SAY THESE OFFICERS IN THE DOWNTOWN ARE GOING TO BE USED ELSEWHERE.
THESE OFFICERS ARE GOING TO BE MED 2S, WHICH WILL BE PROFILED UNDER THE CURRENT JOB DESCRIPTION OF AN MED 02, THEIR TASKING IS GOING TO BE TO THE THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT.
SO WHEN WE HAVE THE PERCEPTION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE USED ELSEWHERE WHAT THIS ACTUALLY DOES IS IT FREES UP THE OFFICERS THAT ARE FOCUSING ALL THEIR TIME IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE BASED ON OUR PRIORITIES.
EXCUSE ME TO NOW FOCUS OUR ATTENTION. PERHAPS STILL IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE AND WE, YOU KNOW, CAN TAKE EVEN GREATER ACTION UNDER COUNCIL'S STRATEGIC PRIORITIES.
BUT IT'S GOING TO ALLOW US THE CAPACITY TO REACH OUT MORE IN THE COMMUNITY, NOT WITH THESE OFFICERS, BUT WITH THE OFFICERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY FOCUSING THEIR TIME AND ENERGY IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE.
[00:35:07]
YOU KNOW, THAT ARE COMING IN ON THE PERIPHERY WHERE OF THE COMMUNITY WHERE YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE FOCUSING ALL OUR TIME AND ENERGY AND EFFORT IN THE DOWNTOWN, LIKE I SAID LAST NIGHT, WE CAN'T BE EVERYWHERE ALL THE TIME.THIS ALLOWS US TO BE A FEW MORE PLACES A LOT MORE OFTEN.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR FOOTE. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
SO IT ALLEVIATES A LOT OF MY CONCERNS. I GUESS I JUST WANTED IT TO BE ON THE RECORD THAT WE CAN OPERATIONALIZE THESE 2 NEW OFFICERS TO BE WHERE THEY NEED TO BE AND WHERE WE'RE SAYING THEY'RE GOING TO BE. AND THAT'LL FREE UP THE REMAINING OFFICERS FOR THEIR MANDATE.
SO WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD SUPPORT THE THE ROLES AS DRAFTED SO FAR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BEFORE WE GO TO ROUND 2, JUST FOR MYSELF.
YEAH, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE POSITIONS AS DRAFTED.
I MEAN, IF COUNCIL WAS, I WON'T SUPPORT THE 2 YEAR TERM ONLY BECAUSE I THINK, AS MR. VAN DINE SAID. ULTIMATELY, THESE POSITIONS IT'S DIFFICULT TO EMPLOY FOR THEM.
BUT WE HAVE CHALLENGES ENFORCING OUR BYLAWS AND OUR COMMUNITY MORE BROADLY.
I MEAN, I GET EMAILS VERY FREQUENTLY FROM RESIDENTS ABOUT UNSIGHTLY LAND, QUESTIONS ABOUT TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, GARBAGE AND LITTER AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT OFFICERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR.
AND THE OTHER THING THAT I MENTIONED LAST NIGHT THAT I HAVE SEEN THIS SUMMER IS THE POSITIVE ACTIONS OF OUR OFFICERS IN TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT WITH MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE LIVING IN ENCAMPMENTS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.
THIS IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY FOR ALL YELLOWKNIFER'S.
I DO, YOU KNOW, AS COUNCILLOR FOOTE, YOU TALK ABOUT SORT OF COMMUNITY LIAISON OFFICERS, YOU KNOW, SEE OTHER COMMUNITIES LIKE PENTICTON AS AN EXAMPLE THAT I LEARNED ABOUT YEARS AGO, WHO BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, ADAPTED MED OFFICERS TO HAVE MORE OF THAT COMMUNITY LIAISON PERSPECTIVE, FORMERLY ARMED OFFICERS ARE KIND OF DOING A LOT OF THAT WORK, AS DIRECTOR MCLEAN ALREADY SAID NOW, BUT THERE'S ALWAYS OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADAPTATION IN THE FUTURE.
BUT FOR NOW, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE POSITIONS AS THEY'RE DRAFTED.
BUT IF IF THIS MOTION IS DEFEATED, I'LL BRING FORWARD A MOTION TO INCLUDE WHAT MR. VAN DINE HAD RECOMMENDED AT THE START WHICH IS THAT WE COME BACK IN 2028 WITH A SERVICE REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT DIVISION THAT WE DO DO THAT WORK.
SO IF THIS GOES DOWN, THEN I WILL BRING THAT FORWARD SO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOES HAPPEN.
SO YOU'RE UP FIRST? YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE AND VOICE MY SUPPORT. THE OTHER REASON, I GUESS THIS WAS TRIPPING ME UP LAST NIGHT IS BECAUSE, AS MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS KNOW, WE WERE ALREADY PRESENTED A REQUEST FOR INCREASEDMED POSITIONS IN PAST YEARS.
WE COLLECTIVELY SAID NO. AND THE PRIMARY REASON, AMONGST OTHERS, WAS WE WANTED TO HAVE A FULSOME CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW TO BEST SHAPE AND SCOPE THE MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT DIVISION. WE TALKED ABOUT COMMUNITY SAFETY OFFICERS.
WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE ROLE AND SCOPE COULD BE.
OBVIOUSLY THAT HASN'T HAPPENED. BUT AS MAYOR HENDRICKSEN AND THE CITY MANAGER JUST SAID, I WANTED TO VOICE MY SUPPORT THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD WITH THESE 2 POSITIONS I WOULD FULLY SUPPORT ADMIN. CONSIDERING WHERE A FULSOME REVIEW OF THE SERVICE LEVELS ASSOCIATED WITH MED CAN FIT WITHIN THE TOP PRIORITIES WITHIN OUR WORK PLAN.
I DON'T THINK 2028 IS OKAY. I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY MUCH HIGHER PRIORITY.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE CONVERSATION WE STILL NEED TO HAVE SOONER THAN LATER, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING THE CITY'S RESOURCES TOWARDS THESE STAFFING POSITIONS. SO I JUST WANTED TO ECHO THAT AND MAYBE SUGGEST IT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE HIGHER PRIORITY.
FAIR ENOUGH. WELL, THEN I'LL LET YOU POTENTIALLY PROPOSE A MOTION OR IT'S A WORK PLAN QUESTION AS WELL, BECAUSE WE CAN ALWAYS PASS A MOTION AND THEN READJUST AT WORK PLAN TIME.
I WAS JUST BASING THAT OFF OF THE 2 YEAR PROPOSAL FOR POSITIONS.
WITH THAT, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE AROUND 2. OTHERWISE, IT'S BACK TO O.
[00:40:02]
SO THAT'S FOR EACH MED OFFICER. IS THERE OTHER ADDITIONAL COST TO EACH OFFICER, OR WHAT IS THE TOTAL COST OF ADDING OF THESE 2 POSITIONS IN THE BUDGET? THANK YOU, MR. VAN DINE. DIRECTOR MCLEAN. DIRECTOR MCLEAN.DIRECTOR MCLEAN. THANK YOU. OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I THINK A FULLY BURDENED POSITION IS AROUND 135, APPROXIMATELY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANYONE ELSE? THEN BACK TO COUNCILMAN MCLENNAN TO WRAP IT UP.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANKS FOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ADMIN AND FROM ALL MY COLLEAGUES.
VERY GOOD DISCUSSION. YEAH. I THINK LIKE THE QUESTION I ASKED EARLIER ABOUT, IS THIS ABOUT BYLAW ENFORCEMENT OR IS THIS ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY? AND ANSWERS WAS GIVEN WAS BOTH LIKE, IF THIS WAS ABOUT BYLAW ENFORCEMENT, IT'S A DIFFERENT THING.
BUT THERE'S THIS WHOLE PART OF THE CONVERSATION ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY THAT I, I DON'T FEEL THAT MED OFFICERS ARE THE BEST POSITIONS TO TACKLE, OR THE MOST THE BEST USE OF MONEY TO DO THAT.
I ACCEPT THAT THERE'S A ROLE FOR ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT TO PLAY IN ACHIEVING THIS PUBLIC SAFETY.
HOWEVER, THE PRIMARY ROLE IS THAT OF THE RCMP.
THE JOB OF MED IS TO ENFORCE BYLAWS. WE DO NOT HAVE BYLAWS THAT DIRECTLY IMPACT SAFETY, CRIMINALITY, VIOLENCE OR DRUG USE. I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT PRESENCE OF MED OFFICERS, GIVEN THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RELEVANT ENFORCEMENT POWERS NOR SPECIFIC TRAINING TO CONNECT AT RISK INDIVIDUALS WITH APPROPRIATE, APPROPRIATE RESOURCES WILL MEANINGFULLY ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSES AND POSITIVELY IMPACT PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE LONG TERM. I CAN AND HAVE BEEN WRONG IN THE PAST, AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THE REQUEST FROM RESIDENTS, MY COLLEAGUES AND ADMIN ARE MEANINGFUL. I AM WILLING TO SUPPORT THESE POSITIONS THAT I DO NOT AGREE WITH BEING THE MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF MONEY.
HOWEVER, I'M ONLY WILLING TO DO THIS AS TERM POSITIONS.
WHILE I ACKNOWLEDGE THE CHALLENGES TERM POSITION WOULD BRING. WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO ASSESS THE RESULTS OF ADDING THESE NEW POSITIONS, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF ADDING THEM. I'D LIKE TO VOTE ON MY MOTION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. THEN WITH THAT TO THE MOTION THAT COUNCIL MAKE, THE MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 2 POSITIONS, A 2 YEAR TERMS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? WE HAVE COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, COUNCILLOR COCHRANE AND COUNCILLOR MCGURK AND COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? WE HAVE COUNCILOR OR DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON, MYSELF.
COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH. COUNCILLOR FOOTE AND COUNCILLOR PAYNE. SO THE MOTION IS DEFEATED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR MOTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COUNCILLOR FEQUET. SURE. I'D LIKE TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING MOTION.
WELL JUST SO WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A FORTHCOMING KIND OF WORK PLAN UPDATE EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR.
JANUARY FEBRUARY-ISH. KIND OF ROUGH TIMELINES, BUT JUST ASK ADMINISTRATION TO CONSIDER INCORPORATING A REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SERVICE LEVELS INTO THE WORK PLAN FOR THE NEXT UPDATE COMING TO COUNCIL, I.E., GIVE ADMINISTRATION THE TIME TO THINK ABOUT THIS FROM NOW UNTIL THEN, TO TELL US WHERE THEY THINK IT BEST FITS IN, WHAT TIER OF PRIORITY, AND HOW THAT KIND OF JIVES WITH THEIR OTHER WORK. SO JUST A QUICK QUESTION TO ADMIN BECAUSE I APPRECIATE THE MOTION.
I GUESS MY QUESTION TO MR. VAN DINE. DO WE NEED TO PASS A MOTION OR CAN WE JUST HAVE BEEN PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, BRING THAT AS PART OF OUR WORK PLANNING OF WHERE THIS COULD SIT IN OUR WORK PLAN? I'M JUST TRYING TO. DO WE NEED A MOTION OR NOT? GO AHEAD, MR. VAN DINE. I DON'T BELIEVE EMOTION IS NECESSARY.
ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? COUNCILLOR FEQUET OR DO YOU WANT A MOTION? NO.
THAT SATISFIES ME. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER. I SEE DIRECTOR MCLEAN CHOMPING AT THE BIT, THOUGH, SO. DIRECTOR MCLEAN. YEAH, I JUST LIKE TO IDENTIFY THAT ON OUR CURRENT WORK PLAN, REVIEW OF LEVEL OF SERVICE AND THAT IS DEVELOPED.
COUNCIL APPROVED LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR ALL DELIVERY OF CORE MUNICIPAL FUNCTIONS, WHICH DRIVES BUDGET AND ASSET MANAGEMENT, IS CURRENTLY ON OUR WORK PLAN. THANK YOU. OKAY.
SO AS PART OF THAT, WE CAN ALWAYS MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS A KEY PART OF THAT.
THANKS FOR BRINGING THAT TO OUR ATTENTION. DIRECTOR MCLEAN COUNCILLOR FEQUET, ARE YOU? YEAH. JUST A QUESTION TO ADMIN. WHAT CAN YOU, SINCE YOU HAVE IT OPEN THERE, WHERE IS IT? IN THE PRIORITY LIST OR THE TIMELINE? DIRECTOR CALJOUW, IT'S ON YOUR LAPTOP, I SEE.
SURE. IS Q4 2026. YEAH. SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AS PART OF OUR WORK PLANNING.
OKAY. SO ANYTHING ELSE THEN, COLLEAGUES? SEEING NONE.
[00:45:04]
BACK TO OUR O&M. SO WE ARE ON PAGE 88 WHICH IS THE STAFFING SUMMARY FOR PUBLIC WORKS.MR. GREENCORN. I TOLD YOU WE'D GET TO YOU. I KNOW YOU'RE SO EXCITED LAST NIGHT.
OKAY. SO ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR MOTIONS, ANYBODY ON THIS SEEING NONE.
NEXT WE ARE ON PAGE 91 WHICH IS THE PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING DIRECTORATE BUDGET.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? MOTIONS. SEEING NONE.
PAGE 92. CITY GARAGE BUDGET. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? MOTIONS. COUNCILLOR MCGURK NOD OR SHAKING YOUR HEAD VIGOROUSLY.
YOU'RE IN MY PERIPHERAL. ANY PUBLIC TRANSIT BUDGET.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS, MOTIONS? QUESTION. COUNCILLOR FEQUET.
I HAD ASKED 2 QUESTIONS ABOUT JUST WHAT IT WOULD GIVE, WHAT WOULD BE THE BALLPARK COST FOR ADDING IN AN AIRPORT ROUTE AND SUNDAYS TO OUR PUBLIC TRANSIT? AND I AND I GOT A NUMBER AND I IN HINDSIGHT, I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION ABOUT THE ASSESSMENT OF NEED TO THE AIRPORT.
AND SO MY QUESTION IS HOPING YOU HAVE THE NUMBERS.
WHAT WOULD IT ACTUALLY COST TO JUST EXTEND OUR PUBLIC TRANSIT RIGHT NOW TO SUNDAYS? AS I DIDN'T REALIZE THERE WASN'T FULSOME SERVICE ON SUNDAYS UNTIL RECENTLY.
MR. VAN DINE. I'LL INVITE MR. GREENCORN TO RESPOND IF HE'S ABLE.
MR. GREENCORN, GIVE ME 30S. I GOT SOME UPDATED STATS FROM STAFF TODAY.
CONVENTIONAL HOUR. EACH HOUR OF TRANSIT SERVICES EXTENDED WILL COST ABOUT $200,000.
SO I'M ASSUMING THAT'S OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR. YES.
COUNCILLOR FEQUET. AND WHAT ARE CAN YOU, CAN YOU JUST REFRESH OUR MEMORIES ON WHAT IS OUR SERVICES, IF ANY, ON SUNDAYS? DIRECTOR GREENCORN CURRENTLY NO SERVICE ON SUNDAY.
COUNCILLOR FEQUET. YEAH. SOME TO TAKE AWAY. THINK ABOUT.
VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS, MOTIONS? SEEING NONE. THEN WE MOVE TO PAGE 94. ROADS AND SIDEWALKS BUDGET COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
I'D LIKE TO MOVE A MOTION. MOTION. AWAY. MOVE A MOTION TO CUT THE SNOW AND ICE STUDY.
IS THERE A SECONDER? COUNCILLOR MCGURK. COUNCIL MCLENNAN.
TAKE IT AWAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YEAH. SO BASICALLY THIS IS SO WE WENT THROUGH A LONG AND MEATY DISCUSSION ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN AND HOW THAT WAS AN APPROACH THAT WOULD STITCH TOGETHER SORT OF 1 OFF AD HOC PLANS THAT WEREN'T WORKING WELL TOGETHER. AND SO WE CHOSE TO SPEND $300,000 TO DO THAT WORK AND AVOID DOING ONE OFF AD HOC PLANS. SO I'M OPPOSED TO THE NEXT YEAR ADDING A NEW ONE OFF AD HOC PLAN FOR $150,000.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, ANY QUESTION COUNCILLOR COCHRANE OUT OF THE GATE. YOU'RE UP FIRST, THEN COUNCILLOR. MCGURK. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND THANK YOU TO COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN FOR INTRODUCING THE MOTION.
COULD HE SPEAK TO THE ADVISABILITY OF THIS DIRECTOR GREENCORN? THANKS FOR THE CHANCE TO SPEAK. I BELIEVE THIS WILL BE A REQUIREMENT OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
TO SOME EXTENT. MY INTENT ON GETTING AHEAD OF IT WAS SO THAT IT WOULD BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLAN.
AND I BELIEVE THAT IT WILL BE AN SOME, SOME LEVEL OF SNOW AND ICE CONTROL STATEMENT OR SECTION WILL EVENTUALLY FORM THAT PLAN, WHETHER IT'S IN THE IMPLEMENTATION FORM, IT'S CURRENTLY NOT IN THE SCOPE OF URBAN SYSTEMS TO DEVELOP FULL AND TO EXPLORE FULL SNOW AND ICE CONTROL CHANGES OR SERVICE LEVEL CHANGES OR CONSIDERATIONS.
SO THIS ALSO SPUN AROUND, SPUN OUT AROUND THE DOWNTOWN ENHANCEMENT AND SNOW REMOVAL STRATEGY.
[00:50:06]
THAT'S HAVING A BUTTERFLY EFFECT SOMEWHERE ELSE IN TOWN, UNLESS WE INCREASE EQUIPMENT AND STAFF LEVEL.I AM OKAY IF THIS FORMS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
SO THAT'S A LOT OF PLANS. BUT EITHER WAY, I THINK IT'LL OCCUR, AND I'M OKAY WAITING FOR LATER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DIRECTOR GREENCORN. COUNCILLOR COCHRANE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. YEAH, THAT'S DEFINITELY A MAJOR CONSIDERATION, BEING THE FACT THAT WE ALSO GOT A FAIR AMOUNT OF THE DOWNTOWN ENHANCEMENT INITIATIVE EARLIER. SO. YEAH, I'M GOING TO NEED MORE TIME TO THINK ON THIS.
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING WHAT MY OTHER COLLEAGUES SAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR MCGURK.
YEAH. I I APPRECIATE THE WANTING TO GET AHEAD OF IT.
THAT'S MY MY FAVORITE THING. AND AND I DO BELIEVE THAT IF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS IS SAYING THAT IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO HAPPEN, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO HAPPEN. IT'S TOUGH. $150,000.
I JUST FOUGHT AGAINST HIRING 2 OFFICERS BECAUSE WE I WASN'T SURE IF WE NEEDED THEM.
YEAH. THANK YOU. JUST MAYBE JUST IF I COULD ADD.
GO AHEAD. THERE ARE THERE ARE OPTIONS. BY NO MEANS IS THIS THE RIGHT ONE.
THERE'S MANY WAYS TO SKIN A CAT. WE CAN PROBABLY.
SORRY. IT'S WHEN PUNS GO WRONG. BACK TO YOU. MR..
GREENCORN. YEAH. FAIR ENOUGH. WHERE WAS I GOING? THERE ARE MANY WAYS TO DO THE TO DO A JOB. EVERYBODY COME DOWN.
HAND IT BACK TO MR. WAY. THERE ARE WAYS TO TO DO PARTS OF WHAT I JUST SAID IN-HOUSE.
IT'S JUST A MUCH SLOWER PROCESS. SO IT'S REALLY UP TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL'S APPETITE ON HOW QUICK AND HOW FAST WE WANT TO MAKE CHANGE OR EXPLORE CHANGE, OR ARE WE OKAY WITH STATUS QUO OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO REACT TO KIND OF WHAT CAME ABOUT FROM BUDGET LAST YEAR.
AND IF WE WANT TO TRY TO PICK AT IT OVER TIME, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE.
BUT THIS WAS JUST THE FIRST STEP IN THAT CONVERSATION.
SO I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN IS COMING FROM.
AND WE'RE OPEN TO WE'RE OPEN TO DEFERRING THIS DOWN THE ROAD AND GETTING MORE, MORE COUNCIL INPUT THROUGHOUT 2026 THROUGH THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR MCGURK ANYTHING FURTHER? NO. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU EXPANDING YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER FROM COLLEAGUES? COUNCILLOR FEQUET? YEAH. TOUGH ONE. I WASN'T SURE WHAT I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS, SO I APPRECIATE ALL THAT HELPFUL CLARIFICATION.
HOWEVER, THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN IS FORTHCOMING AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF THINGS IN IT.
AND SO I THINK GIVEN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE MADE SOME CHANGES ALREADY THIS YEAR BOTH THE, THE EXTENDED WEEKS IN THE BUDGET THAT IS IN EFFECT NOW, PLUS THE NEW EQUIPMENT PLUS THE OTHER IMMEDIATE PRESENCE DOWNTOWN.
BUT THAT'LL BE UP TO US TO LIKE, FUND AND PRIORITIZE THAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
SO I THINK I'D RATHER KIND OF DO IT MORE HOLISTICALLY.
AND AND IF THERE IS ANY IN-HOUSE WORK THAT CAN OR THINKING THAT CAN HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW AND WHENEVER THAT IS, THAT'S ALSO JUST A BONUS BECAUSE WE GOT WE GOT SMART PEOPLE THAT CAN CAN DO STUFF TOO.
ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILLOR WARBURTON. YEAH.
FOR THE SAME REASONS. COUNCILLOR FEQUET MENTIONED.
I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS MOTION. WE JUST FUNDED A [INAUBDIBLE] SNOWPLOW, WHICH EXTENDED SNOW HOURS WITHOUT KNOWING HOW IT'S GOING TO IMPACT THINGS. SO GETTING AHEAD OF IT TO ME IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE JUST DECIDED TO SPEND A VERY LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY ON SNOW, AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW THAT AFFECTS THINGS SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. SO SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING CUTTING IT BECAUSE YEAH, IT JUST SUPPORTS ALL THE MONEY WE JUST APPROVED FOR SNOW AND IT'S SNOWING A LOT RIGHT NOW.
THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON. ANYTHING FURTHER FROM COLLEAGUES THEN?
[00:55:03]
FOR MYSELF? YEAH, I STRUGGLED WITH THIS ONE. I STILL AM STRUGGLING WITH THIS ONE.I LITERALLY, AS THIS CONVERSATION HAS BEEN GOING ON AND WITH DIRECTOR GREENCORN AND HIS INFORMATION BUT I THINK WHERE I SIT ULTIMATELY IS WE ARE A WINTER CITY AND WE HAVEN'T ALWAYS ACTED LIKE IT WHICH IS KIND OF NUTS, BUT IT'S TRUE.
AND I THINK THAT AND MY INITIAL THOUGHT WAS VERY MUCH WITH COUNCIL AND COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN US THAT WE ARE ALREADY DOING THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN THAT WAIT UNTIL. BUT THE MORE I DO THINK ABOUT IT, THE MORE I GO THIS IS WINTER CITY STUFF THAT REGARDLESS OF THAT, WE NEED TO KNOW HOW TO REMOVE SNOW EFFECTIVELY.
BUT BUT FOR NOW, I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION.
BUT THAT'S WHERE I AM. SECOND ROUND. ANYBODY? COUNCILLOR FEQUET? YEAH. SORRY. YOU JUST. THANKS FOR THE WINTER CITY COMMENT.
THAT'S THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION. I REALIZED I MADE AN ASSUMPTION.
WHAT IS THE TIMING? SO IF THIS WAS APPROVED, WHAT'S THE TIMING OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN THAT'S EXPECTED? AND WHAT IS THE TIMING OF WHEN THIS STUDY WOULD HAPPEN? DIRECTOR GREENCORN. TENTATIVE FINAL PLAN FOR THE THE COUNCIL ENGAGEMENT AND ALL THE THE FOUR STEPS I EXPLAINED LAST NIGHT WILL OCCUR THROUGHOUT Q1 WITH A FINAL DELIVERY IN LATE MAY, EARLY JUNE.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE TIME FRAME IF THIS STUDY WERE TO OCCUR.
I I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT IT WOULD BE READY TO INFORM BUDGET 2027, BUT I'D HAVE TO PUT SOME MORE THOUGHT INTO THAT AND HOW HARD WE CAN PRESS A CONSULTANT. SO BASICALLY THIS WOULD COME AFTER THAT'S COMPLETED.
OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S CLEAR IN MY MIND. THANKS. I WAS JUST TRYING TO SEE IF THERE WAS, LIKE YOU SAID A BENEFIT TO GETTING IN FRONT OF THIS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY GET A FIRST LOOK AT THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IN Q1, WHICH IS PROBABLY SOONER THAN THIS. EVEN RFP WOULD GO OUT.
SO YEAH, I'LL I'M THANKS. I'M OF THE SAME MIND.
OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE ON ROUND 2? SEEING NONE. THEN MAKE SURE I PULL IT UP.
DO DO DO DO TO THE MOTION THAT COUNCIL CUT THE SNOW AND ICE.
YEAH. THANKS FOR THE INPUT. GREAT TO HEAR THAT.
WE HAVE THE ABILITY, ALTHOUGH TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE OVER A SLOWER PERIOD, TO DO SOME OF THIS WORK.
IN-HOUSE, I WROTE A MULTI PAGE RANT THAT I WILL NOT LET OUT ABOUT CONSULTANTS AND PLANS AND STUDIES.
I'LL GIVE YOU THE PARAGRAPH VERSION. I'M ALL FOR LOCAL PROBLEM SOLVING.
GOVERNMENT HAS DEVELOPED A HABIT OF OUTSOURCING OUR PROBLEM SOLVING.
THAT IS AN AMAZING BUSINESS MODEL FOR CONSULTANTS.
THESE STUDIES GIVE US ADVICE, NOT BULLETPROOF SOLUTIONS.
SOMEONE WHO GREW UP AND STILL LIVES IN VANCOUVER DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO HANDLE SNOW IN THE SUBARCTIC.
PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE SUBARCTIC KNOW HOW TO STAND OR HANDLE SNOW IN THE SUBARCTIC.
SPECIFICALLY FOR NORTHERN GOVERNMENTS, THIS MEANS SENDING A GOOD AMOUNT OF MONEY SOUTH. RELYING ON SOUTHERN CONSULTANTS PROVIDE US WITH ADVICE AND IT REMOVES STAFF BUY IN AS WELL AS RESIDENT BUY IN. WOULD LOVE US TO TAKE ON SOME OF OUR OWN PROBLEM SOLVING.
THANK YOU FOR WAVING. THAT WAS A VERY GOOD RANT.
EVEN IF I'M NOT ABOUT TO SUPPORT YOUR MOTION, IT WAS STILL GOOD.
SO WITH THAT TO THE MOTION THAT COUNCIL CUT THE SNOW AND ICE STUDY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN COUNCIL.
MCGURK COUNCILLOR FEQUET. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? OH, AND COUNCILLOR FOOTE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED. DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON COUNCILLOR COCHRANE MYSELF.
COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH AND COUNCILLOR PAYNE. SO THE MOTION IS DEFEATED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR MOTIONS ON THE ROADS AND SIDEWALKS.
BUDGET SEEING NONE. NEXT WE HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY BUDGET.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? SEEING NONE. IT'S 1 OF THOSE THINGS JUST OKAY.
SO. OH YEAH YOU'RE GOOD. OKAY SO THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FUND ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS MOTIONS COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
[01:00:03]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ASK THIS PRE BUDGET JUST TO SORT OF GET THIS OUT THERE PUBLICLY.COULD ADMIN JUST GO THROUGH THE REASONS FOR THE 21% INCREASE IN THIS FUNDS ADMIN COSTS? MR. VAN DINE. YEAH. I'LL INVITE MR. GREENCORN TO TO RESPOND.
THANK YOU, MR. GREENCORN. 1 SECOND.
FOR EXAMPLE, I'M THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
A PERCENTAGE OF MY TIME IS, IN THEORY, ALLOCATED TO THE SOLID WASTE FUND.
SOME OF IT IS ALLOCATED TO THE WATER AND SEWER FUND.
SOME OF IT IS ALLOCATED TO THE GENERAL FUND. THIS IS EXTRAPOLATED ACROSS ALL STAFF, AND AN ENGINEER, FOR EXAMPLE, MAY SPEND 15% OF THEIR TIME ON BUILDING THE LANDFILL CELL.
ALL THAT IS TABULATED IN THE BEST EFFORTS THAT WE CAN SUM SUMMED UP AND THEN PUT INTO A A NUMERICAL FIGURE BASED ON THOSE TIME PERCENTAGES. [INAUDIBLE] PARDON ME.
COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER ON THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FUND? ANYONE. SEEING NONE. NEXT WE HAVE THE WATER AND SEWER FUND.
ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL. MCLENNAN. THE ANSWER WOULD BE THE SAME.
SO JUST WANTED TO FLAG TO THE PUBLIC DEALING WITH THIS INFRASTRUCTURE TAKES A LOT OF STAFF TIME.
AND WE'RE SEEING A 38% INCREASE IN THIS FUNDS ADMIN COST.
SO THE CHALLENGES WITH INFRASTRUCTURE DOESN'T JUST END WITH THE THING BEING BUILT IT, OPERATING IT, AND MAKING SURE YOU GET CLEAN WATER AND YOUR TOILET FLUSHES DOES COST CONSIDERABLE MONEY.
AND DOING THAT IN A NORTHERN CITY IS CHALLENGING.
YEAH. MISTER CHAIR, JUST 1 QUICK THING THAT I FORGOT.
IT'S ALSO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NEW DEPARTMENT THAT'S ONLY 2 YEARS OLD.
SO THE SALARIES FOR THE IRA OR THE ENVIRONMENT DIVISION IS SOLELY BORNE BY OR SPLIT BETWEEN US.
THE SOLID WASTE FUND AND THE WATER AND SEWER FUND.
AND THAT'S A SPIN OFF DIRECTLY FROM OUR 15 YEAR WATER LICENSE.
AND THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE WORK THAT COME OUT OF THOSE THAT DOCUMENT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT ADDITIONAL CONTEXT. NEXT WE HAVE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT FUND.
ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. JUST YOU CAN HOLD.
YOU CAN COME OVER HERE. NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
OKAY, A FEW QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE. SO THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THIS FUND JUMPED CONSIDERABLY.
ESSENTIALLY ALMOST DOUBLED. IN A QUESTION, BASICALLY PRE-BUDGET QUESTIONS ASKING ABOUT WHERE THIS INCREASE CAME FROM WAS POINTED TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS THAT TALKED ABOUT A $4 MILLION TRANSFER.
IN THE BUDGET, IT MENTIONS THAT THIS WAS TRANSFERRED ORIGINALLY TRANSFERRED IN 2020.
SO JUST LOOKING TO GET DETAILS ON HOW WE FOUND HOWEVER MUCH THIS IS $8 MILLION OR SO.
MR. VAN DINE. I'LL INVITE MR. MR. GREENCORN TO RESPOND WITH SUPPORT FROM MR. PANDOO AS NECESSARY. THANK YOU. BASED OFF THE FACES OF YOUR DIRECTORS, I'M GOING TO SAY IT'S GOING TO DIRECTOR WHITE.
[LAUGHTER] I WASN'T PAYING ATTENTION. GO AHEAD, DIRECTOR WHITE.
OKAY. THANK YOU. SO, YES, I MAY NEED AN ASSIST FROM THE FINANCIAL WIZARDS OVER HERE.
SO WE HAD A POTENTIAL LAND TRANSACTION THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH COUNCIL.
BUT FOR MORE DETAIL, I WILL LET FINANCE MAYBE.
MR. PANDOO, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO THIS IS ACCURATE ON THE 4 MILLION? I JUST WANTED TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION WHEN YOU MENTIONED THE BIG JUMP BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO FLAG THAT THE 17.2
[01:05:02]
MILLION WAS A BALANCE OF ACTUALS AND NOT BUDGET.SO THERE WERE 2 DIFFERENT BALANCES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO I JUST WANTED TO GET SOME CONFIRMATION. AND IF THIS IS WHAT YOU WERE YOU ARE REFERRING TO IN TERMS OF THE JUMPS, BECAUSE IN TERMS OF BUDGET TO BUDGET, THE JUMP IS IS VERY LITTLE.
THERE'S THE THE 4 MILLION TRANSFER, AND WE DO HAVE 818,000 IN ADMINISTRATION FEES.
TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUND 32,000, TRANSFER TO SAMUEL COLLEY RESERVE 20,000 AND TRANSFER FROM SOLID WASTE FACILITY RESERVE $2.2 MILLION TO GIVE AN ENDING BALANCE OF $5.4 OF TOTAL INTER TRANSFERS.
SO JUST WANT TO CLARIFY IF THIS IS WHERE WE ARE JUST COMPARING BUDGET TO BUDGET OR IS IT ACTUAL TO BUDGET YOU WERE LOOKING AT? THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN I WAS GETTING CONFUSED BETWEEN BUDGET.
BUDGET TO BUDGET IS IS AROUND 10 MILLION AND ACTUALS TO ACTUALS IS THE 17.
SO THE BUDGET 2026 OPENING BALANCE OF $17.2 MILLION INCLUDES THE $4 MILLION, AND THE CLOSING BALANCE IN THE BUDGET OF $13.6 MILLION DOES NOT INCLUDE THE $4 MILLION.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND THEN WHERE IS THE $4 MILLION $4 MILLION GOING? MR. PANDOO, ALTHOUGH I SEE YOUR MANAGER OF BUDGET NODDING HER HEAD VIGOROUSLY AS THAT QUESTION WAS BEING ASKED.
SO I'LL PASS IT TO YOU, MR. PANDOO.
MR. PANDOO, SORRY, I JUST NEED A MINUTE JUST TO CLARIFY THE THE TO UNDERSTAND THE NUMBER BECAUSE COMPARING THE ACTUAL TO BUDGET THE THERE ARE 2 DIFFERENT THINGS, SO THERE WOULD REALLY BE THE SAME AND THEY DO GET RECONCILED WHEN WE DO OUR FINANCIAL AUDITED STATEMENTS.
IN TERMS OF THE BUDGETING, THE $4 MILLION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE MONEY WAS TAKEN OUT OF THE LANDFILL WAS PUT BACK INTO LANDFILL JUST EXPECTING THIS LAND TRANSACTION TO HAPPEN.
HOWEVER, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. NOW WE'RE PUTTING IT BACK INTO LANDFILL, AND I'LL JUST GO AHEAD.
DIRECTOR, WAIT, I WILL CLARIFY. SO IT WAS TAKEN OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND 4 MILLION INTO THE LAND FUND FROM THE LAND FUND NOW IN 2026, BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN UNDERSTOOD.
SO THE GENERAL FUND BALANCE WE'RE SEEING DEPENDS ON THIS MONEY COMING OUT OF THE LAND FUND.
A QUESTION OR AFFIRMATION. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. OKAY.
NEXT ONE JUST REGARDING THE NIVEN RAVINE TRAIL MONEY.
SO THE FIRST QUESTION IS IS THAT CORRECT? AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION IS WHAT WILL THAT MONEY BE USED TO CONSTRUCT? MR. VAN DINE. SO THIS THIS PARTICULAR ITEM REQUIRED A LITTLE BIT OF EXPLORATION AND A LITTLE BIT OF INDIANA JONES OR ARCHEOLOGY TO, TO FIND.
BUT IT WAS FOUND IN A, IN A, IN A BUDGET FOOTNOTE FROM, FROM A FEW YEARS BACK.
THE MONEY IS IN, IN THE IN THIS IN THE FUND TO ACTUALLY DO DO THE WORK, THE WORK THAT THAT HAS BEEN THAT WILL ASCRIBE TO IT IS NOW NEEDING TO BE ADJUSTED SOMEWHAT AS A RESULT OF THE FUEL BREAKS THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE AREA.
SO I WILL INVITE PERHAPS 1 OR 2 OF THE TEAM TO TO RESPOND, BEGINNING WITH MR..
GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR. VAN DINE. SO THE $1.9 MILLION BUDGET CONTEMPLATES A TRAIL SYSTEM THAT LEAVES FROM THE EDGE OF THE HIGHWAY AND GOES DOWN AND IN BEHIND THE THE CONDOS THAT ARE THERE AND ENDS IN A A LOOKOUT JUST ABOVE BACK BAY.
THERE WOULD BE FURNISHINGS ALONG THE WAY, INCLUDING BENCHES AND OF COURSE, LITTER CONTAINERS.
[01:10:02]
I CAN'T RECALL IF IT IS AN ASPHALT TRAIL OR, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT IS A CRUSH AND IT IT WAS THE.IT'S A DUAL TRAIL. ONE SIDE WOULD BE A MULTI-PURPOSE TRAIL OR SORRY, LIKE AN ATV TRAIL.
AND THEN THE OTHER SIDE WOULD BE FOR. BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS.
COUNCIL MCLENNAN. THANK YOU. AND SO THAT TRAIL THERE IS NONE OF IT THAT EXISTS CURRENTLY.
THIS IS LIKE CUTTING THROUGH THE BUSH AND PAVING AND THE WHOLE 9 YARDS.
OR IS THIS PUTTING BENCHES ON THE FIREBREAK? MR. VAN DINE TO DIRECTOR WHITE OVER TO MR. WHITE.
THANK YOU. THIS TRAIL. THE TRAIL WOULD CERTAINLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE FIRE SPREADING.
THAT WAS DONE. IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I'VE BEEN DOWN THERE MYSELF.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE REALLY HAVE, LIKE, A WE HAVEN'T DONE A THOROUGH LOOK AT IT.
COMPARED FROM THE PREVIOUS PLANS THAT WE'VE HAD, BUT WE WOULD CERTAINLY MAKE SURE THAT ANY OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN PRE-DONE, WE TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THAT TO SAVE ON THE LAND FUND.
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. OKAY. SO I'M HOPING BENCHES AND GARBAGE CANS ON A PRECUT TRAIL DO NOT COST $1.9 MILLION.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS ONLY COSTS 100,000 OR SOMETHING? THAT MONEY JUST REMAINS IN THE LAND FUND FOR OTHER PROJECTS.
I'M JUST COMMENTING THAT THE THE WHOLE ISSUE HERE WAS THAT THIS MONEY WAS COLLECTED WHEN PEOPLE BOUGHT PROPERTIES FOR SET RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. AND JUST LOOKING TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH OF THIS IS GOING TO BE SPENT ON THOSE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND WHAT HAPPENS IF WE HAVE EXTRA. MR. VAN DINE. OR DO YOU WANT ME TO SEND IT TO YOUR DIRECTOR OF.
AS SHE PUT HER HAND UP, YOUR DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT LED.
YES, MR.. GREENCORN NO, NOT [LAUGHTER] FROM HERE.
SO YES, IF DIRECTOR WHITE COULD RESPOND. PERFECT.
DIRECTOR WHITE. DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
YES. SORRY. YES. APOLOGIES. I DO IT EVERY TIME.
IT'S OKAY, IT'S OKAY. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT EVERY TIME.
SO 2 THINGS. $1.9 MILLION WAS WHAT WAS PUT IN THERE MANY YEARS AGO.
IT'S BEEN IN THE FUND FOR A WHILE, AND IT WAS ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATING KIND OF BUSHWHACKING.
BUT BECAUSE OF THE EVENTS OF 2023, WE NOW HAVE IN PLACE SOMETHING THAT CAN NOW BE UPGRADED.
SO WHAT HAPPENS TO THE REMAINDER OF THE MONEY IS IT WILL GO BACK INTO THE LAND FUND.
THAT IS NOT WHERE THAT MONEY CAME FROM. SO IT WILL GO BACK INTO THE LAND FUND.
THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE A NEW PARK PUT IN NIVEN.
SO THERE'S A NUMBER OF ACTIVITIES GOING ON THERE.
AND, AND HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE SEE THE VALUE AND WHAT COMMUNITY SERVICES IS DOING IN THE AREA.
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND THEN LAST ONE ON LAND FUND KNOWING THE PRIORITIES OF, OF COUNCIL AND STAFF AND RESIDENTS ON MORE HOUSING AND MORE LAND BEING AVAILABLE. DOES THE PROJECTED CLOSING BALANCE, $13.6 MILLION, SHOULD THE G&WT.
GIVE US A BIG OLD PIECE OF LAND IN OUR CHRISTMAS STOCKING? CROSSING THE FINGERS. BUT ARE WE READY TO JUMP ON THAT? WITH THE MONEY THAT'S IN THE LAND FUND? I FEEL I MIGHT BE DELIVERING COAL, BUT DIRECTOR WHITE.
I DO NOT ACCEPT COAL. I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
JUST. I MEANT SOMEWHERE IN ANOTHER DIRECTION.
BUT DIRECTOR WHITE. SO THE ANSWER IS NO. THE LAND FUND.
I'M GOING TO USE AN EXAMPLE. SO FOR TAYLOR ROAD, WHEN WE PRICE OUT WHAT THAT ACTUALLY WOULD LOOK LIKE TO BUILD OUT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT $35 TO $40 MILLION. THIS IS WHY WE PHASE DEVELOPMENTS.
WE DO A PIECE, WE SELL. WE PUT MONEY BACK IN THE LAND FUND.
WE MOVE TO THE NEXT PHASE. SO HAVING MULTIPLE ON THE GO AT THE SAME TIME.
SO WE ARE ABLE TO DO IT, BUT NO, $17 MILLION WILL NOT COVER THOSE COSTS.
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCIL. COCHRANE. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
[01:15:08]
8? MR. VAN DINE. OR TO MR. WHITE OR DIRECTOR WHITE? DIRECTOR WHITE. DIRECTOR WHITE. YEAH. DIRECTOR WHITE.RIGHT. SO NOT GOING TO INVEST A BUNCH OF MONEY AND THEN HAVE MR. GREENCORN COME IN AND PAVE IT OVER AND PUT A ROAD IN.
SO, YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT. BUT WE'LL BE.
YEAH. TALKING ABOUT HOW WE CAN WORK IT IN SO THAT THAT CONNECTIVITY ISN'T LOST.
MAYBE IT HAS TO KIND OF DO THIS AND DO A LITTLE BIT OF A LOOP, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
WE'LL MAKE IT WORK. OKAY, GOOD. I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR THE CLARITY ON THAT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON DIDN'T HAVE A QUESTION.
WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE MONEY ALL AT ONCE. DO WE EVER DO SITUATIONS WHERE WE WE JUST TENDER LARGE CHUNKS OF LAND? SO MAYBE A DEVELOPER COULD TAKE ALL THAT FINANCIAL RISK AS OPPOSED TO THE CITY.
DIRECTOR WHITE. SO HAS THE CITY DONE THAT IN THE PAST? NOT TO THE EXTENT I THINK YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT.
I AM FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THAT GOING FORWARD, WHETHER THAT'S RESIDENTIAL OR WHETHER THAT IS FOR MAYBE A NEW COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA. THERE ARE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE TO THE CITY, AND I THINK WE SHOULD BE EXPLORING THAT GOING FORWARD.
YES. DEPUTY MAYOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND JUST FOR MY COLLEAGUES HOW THE CITY HAS TRADITIONALLY DONE, LIKE THE FULL LOT DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ABNORMAL IN THE MUNICIPAL WORLD.
MOST MUNICIPALITIES DO NOT DO THAT. MOST OF THEM DO WHAT I ASK, WHICH IS TENDER, LARGE CHUNKS, AND ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT WORLD TAKE ALL THE FINANCIAL RISK ON DEVELOPMENT. SO I'M NOT ASKING BECAUSE I WANT TO BREAK NEW GROUND HERE.
I'M JUST HAPPY TO HEAR THAT WE'RE OPEN TO DOING THINGS THAT EVERYONE ELSE DOES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR FOOTE.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SORRY. BACK TO THE TRAIL 1 MORE TIME.
MULTIPLE USERS. SORRY. NEIGHBORHOOD OWNERS REACHED OUT OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS ABOUT THEIR CONCERN.
I GUESS I WAS HOPING A COMMUNITY CONSULTATION WOULD HAPPEN TO SEE WHAT THEY THINK.
SECONDLY, THERE ARE A BUNCH OF EASEMENTS IN FINDLAY POINT, MCMAHON COURT LYONS POINT THAT AT SOME POINT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBORS WERE TOLD THAT WOULD BE ACCESSED TO A TRAIL SYSTEM.
CURRENTLY, THEY ARE NOW PARKING LOTS FOR ATVS, BOATS AND CONSTRUCTION WASTE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR MOTIONS ON THE LAND DEVELOPMENT FUND? SEEING NONE. THEN WE HAVE THE SERVICE CONNECTION FAILURE ASSISTANCE FUND.
ANYBODY SEEING NONE? OH, COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN.
HE'S SNEAKY. GO FOR IT. YEAH. JUST LOOKING SEEING THAT THIS IS IN THE NEGATIVE JUST LOOKING TO CONFIRM THAT THE CHANGES IN FEES COMING IN 2026 WILL BRING US OUT OF THE NEGATIVE MR. VAN DINE. THAT'S THE THAT'S THE INTENTION. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT COUNCIL THAT THE RATE OF CHANGE THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO ADJUST IS GRADUAL. WE ARE LOOKING TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY PRICE SHOCKS TO TO USERS AND IN TERMS OF FEES.
SO OVER TIME, WE EXPECT THAT THE THE DEFICIT THAT YOU'RE NOW SEEING WILL WILL CLOSE OVER TIME.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A GREATER PRECISION ON THE RATE OF CLOSURE, I'LL INVITE MR. PANDOO TO PROVIDE HIS BEST THOUGHTS ON THAT. MR. PANDOO. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. AS NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD TO WHAT MR. VAN DINE SAID, WE THE HOPE IS CERTAINLY THERE TO KIND OF CURB THE DEFICITS IN ALL THE FUNDS.
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN THUMBS UP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? MOTIONS? NO. OKAY, SO I BELIEVE THAT'S THE END OF OUR FUNDS.
YEP. BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE CAPITAL. THAT WAS DAY 1.
SO IF WE GO TO PAGE 149 OF YOUR BUDGET BOOK, WE HAVE THE RESERVES.
SO IT'S THE RESERVE FUND. I'LL WAIT TILL EVERYBODY GETS THERE.
SEEMS LIKE FLIPPING HAS ALMOST CEASED. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? MOTIONS. DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON. THANK YOU.
[01:20:07]
RIGHT? 25%. MR. VAN DINE. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.YES. OKAY. AND IF I WANTED TO ADJUST THAT WOULD THAT BE A FEES AND CHARGES CONVERSATION OR THAT WOULD BE HERE, MR.. VAN DINE. I'LL DEFER TO TO MR.. PANDOO ON THAT.
BUT, MR. PANDOO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO OFFER YOUR YOUR VIEW? MR.. PANDOO, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I'M INCLINED TO SAY YES, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER TO DIRECTOR CALJOUW ON THIS ONE JUST TO HELP US OUT IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR CALJOUW. I'M AFRAID I AM NOT MUCH HELP EITHER.
GO AHEAD, DIRECTOR WHITE. I CAN OFFER A LITTLE ASSISTANCE.
SO IF YOU WERE LOOKING TO CHANGE THE RATE OR PROPORTION OF PARKING METER, AMOUNT OF THAT TOTAL THAT GOES INTO THIS FUND, YOU COULD DO THAT. NOW, IF YOU WERE LOOKING TO CHANGE THE FEE FOR PARKING, THAT IS, AT THE FEES AND CHARGES CONVERSATION.
SO THE ANSWER IS YES AND YES. DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON.
ALL RIGHT. MAKE A MOTION THEN. WHERE IS IT? SO IT SOUNDS LIKE IT CAN'T HURT.
SO I'LL DO IT HERE. SO ONE SECOND. JUST TRYING TO FIND IT.
THERE IT IS. SO THE MOTION IS TO INCREASE PARKING METER FEES TRANSFERRED FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT RESERVE FROM 25% TO 50%, WITH CORRESPONDING INCREASE IN PARKING METER FEES TO OFFSET THE REVENUE DECREASE IN THE GENERAL FUND.
IS THERE A SECONDER? COUNCILOR ARDEN-SMITH HAND FIRED UP ON THAT ONE.
DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON, OVER TO YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
HALF FUNDING ASIDE THIS POT IS DECREASING, AS WE CAN SEE OVER TIME.
AND ONE LARGE TAX ABATEMENT WOULD DESTROY THE WHOLE THING AND EAT IT UP.
SO THE PROPOSAL IS TO INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE OF PARKING FEE REVENUE, AND THEN TO OFFSET THAT BY INCREASING THE PARKING FEES, BASICALLY. SO IT'S A WASH IN THE GENERAL FUND. IT DOES MEAN IT COMES OUT OF PARKING FEES.
THEY GO UP. BUT I THINK WE'VE BEEN PRETTY GENEROUS FOR A VERY LONG TIME ON OUR COST OF PARKING.
SO THAT'S MY PROPOSAL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS TO THE MOTION FROM DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON, EITHER FOR ADMINISTRATION OR HIM? SEEING NONE O COUNCILMAN MCGURK HAND IS SLOWLY CREEPING UP LIKE THE TIN MEN.
GO FOR IT. YEAH, I LET'S SUPPORT THAT. I THINK WE DON'T NEED TO INCENTIVIZE DRIVING.
FAIR ENOUGH. I MEAN, FOR MYSELF, THEN I WOULD ACTUALLY.
I APPRECIATE DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON'S, YOU KNOW, FOCUS ON THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT RESERVE AND FINDING A WAY TO KEEP IT DOING WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO, WHICH IS INCENTIVIZE THE BUILDING THAT WE NEED TO SEE HAPPEN IN OUR CITY.
SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT FORWARD. WITH THAT TO THE MOTION, THAT COUNCIL.
OH. OH, YES. SORRY. THANK YOU. BACK TO YOU. AND JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S CONSUMPTION I DID HEAR SOME FEEDBACK FOR SOME BUSINESS OWNERS ABOUT THE CONCERN ABOUT PARKING METERS. THE ISSUE IS THEY DON'T TURN OVER ENOUGH IN OUR CITY.
THEY'RE TREATED LIKE LONG TERM PARKING. SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL INCENTIVIZE FOLKS TO USE OUR VERY, VERY HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED TRANSIT SYSTEM AND, AND WALK A LITTLE FURTHER.
THANKS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THEN, TO THE MOTION THAT COUNCIL INCREASED PARKING METER FEES TRANSFERRED FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT RESERVE FROM 25% TO 50%, WITH CORRESPONDING INCREASE IN PARKING METER FEES TO OFFSET THE GENERAL TO OFFSET REVENUE DECREASE TO THE GENERAL FUND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS MOTIONS ON RESERVE FUND PAGE. SEEING NONE. WE HAVE OUR LONG TERM DEBT.
JUST CONFIRMATION. YES, THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF ROOM LEFT.
[01:25:03]
AND KIND OF WHEN WE ANTICIPATE THE NEXT BIG KIND OF BUMP IN OUR IN OUR AVAILABILITY OF DEBT.MR. VAN DINE. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION.
SO I ALSO ON NOVEMBER 4TH, I THINK WE WE SPENT A LITTLE BIT OF TIME BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION AROUND THE THE QUESTION OF THE RELATIVE GROWTH THAT WE'VE HAD AS A COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF NEW SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT, WHICH HAS BEEN MENTIONED, I THINK NUMEROUS TIMES TODAY OR THIS EVENING AND YESTERDAY.
SO OUR ABILITY TO, TO, TO GROW AND THEN HAVE A TAX BASE THAT GROWS AND THEN HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT REVENUE COMING IN HAS HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT STUNTED. AND THAT'S MY LANGUAGE, I GUESS OVER, OVER THE LAST DECADE OR SO THAT HAS PUT PRESSURE ON OUR BORROWING LIMIT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN ABLE, WE'VE BEEN FORCING TO TO BORROW AND PAY FOR THINGS WITH A, WITH A SHRINKING TAX BASE, I BELIEVE, IS WHAT MR. PANDOO REFERRED TO OVER TIME. SO MORE DEMANDS GREATER POPULATION.
MORE, MORE, MORE, MORE NEED BUT SMALLER, RELATIVELY SMALLER GROWTH IN THE TAX BASE TO SUPPORT THAT.
SO SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION CONSCIOUS OF TIME IN TERMS OF REDUCING OUR OR INCREASING OUR LIMIT TO BORROW WOULD REQUIRE WOULD DEPEND ON A NUMBER OF FACTORS.
NUMBER OF FACTORS WOULD BE IN FACT GETTING OUR, OUR INCREASED LEVEL OF GROWTH IN TERMS OF INTENSIFICATION, BUT ALSO LARGER TRACTS OF DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY.
ONCE THOSE THINGS START HUMMING, IF THEY ARE TO HUM, THEN WE WOULD SEE SOME ADJUSTMENTS AND BREATHING ROOM, SO TO SPEAK, ON THE ON THE BORROWING LIMIT. THE OTHER DIMENSION IS THAT THINGS WILL COME TO TERM IN TERMS OF WE WILL BE PAYING THINGS OFF AND THEN AS WE PAY THINGS OFF YOU KNOW, WE WE ALSO WILL BE ABLE TO TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF BREATHING ROOM, BUT THAT THAT'S SORT OF THE MACROECONOMIC KIND OF DESCRIPTION.
MR. CHAIR, AND I'LL JUST INVITE MR. PANDOO TO TO TO TO ADD MR..
PANDOO. THANK YOU, MR. VAN DINE. JUST TO ADD TO WHAT MR. VAN DINE SAID, WE DO HAVE ROOM TO IN OUR REMAINING DEBT BALANCE.
SO WE DO HAVE ROOM TO BORROW IF WE WANT TO BORROW.
SO THIS IS WHERE THE THE CHALLENGE IS AND IT'S IMPROVING, BUT IT'S IMPROVING VERY SLOWLY.
SO I'M GLAD WE DIDN'T ADD ANY MORE FACILITIES THIS YEAR.
THANKS. COUNCILLOR COCHRANE. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. CHAIR. A QUESTION TO THE ADMINISTRATION. JUST IN RELATION TO THE DEBTS RELATED TO THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT COSTS FOR YELLOWKNIFE CONDO CORPORATION NUMBER 8, AKA NORTHLANDS. HOW MUCH LONGER BEFORE THEY NO LONGER HAVE TO PARTICIPATE WITHIN THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT LEVY? IF I LAST REMEMBER, IT WAS 25 YEARS I THINK ABOUT TEN YEARS AGO.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE DONE. MR. VAN DINE. I DO NOT HAVE THAT AT MY FINGERTIPS.
I DON'T KNOW IF MR. PANDOO HAS THAT AVAILABLE.
MR. PANDOO. MY APOLOGIES. I DO NOT HAVE IT. WOULD YOU LIKE A RESPONSE AT A FUTURE DATE? I WOULD VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT. THERE YOU GO.
IF YOU JUST GIVE US 2 MINUTES, THERE'S A BYLAW ON THE WEBSITE, SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO LOOK IT UP.
PERFECT. WELL, IT'S PERFECT TIMING. IT'S 7:00, WHICH IS OUR 90 MINUTE MARK.
SO LET'S TAKE OUR 10 MINUTE BREAK. WE CAN COME BACK, GET THAT ANSWER AND MOVE FORWARD.
THANKS. WE'LL BE BACK AT 7:10. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY. CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
LONG TERM DEBT. WAS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WAITING ON THAT OR THAT ONE ANSWER THAT WAS OUTSTANDING.
ARE YOU COUNCILLOR? COCHRANE. GO FOR IT. I HAVE THE ANSWER.
[01:30:02]
$4,000 PER YEAR ARE DUE FROM PROPERTIES FOR A PERIOD OF 25 YEARS.THERE YOU GO. COUNCILLOR COCHRANE. AND THANK YOU FOR PASSING ON THE KNOWLEDGE TO ALL OF THOSE CURIOUS NORTHLANDERS, AS I WAS GOING TO SAY THE THING WITH NIVEN, BUT I'LL PASS THAT ON FOR ANOTHER TIME. THE ONLY OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO STATE IS I KNOW IT'S NOT HAPPENING IN THIS ASSEMBLY, BUT WHEN THEY DO IN THE NEXT 1, THE OVERALL REVIEW OF CTV ACT, AND I'M HOPING SOMEBODY FROM MACA HAS BEEN WATCHING THESE PROCEEDINGS BECAUSE I ASSUME SOMEBODY GETS PAID TO DO THIS. I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO ALSO REVIEW SECTION 167 FOR THE CITY'S BORING LIMITS, SO WE CAN HAVE THE OVERALL CONVERSATION IF THIS IS ACTUALLY RELEVANT WITHIN OUR CURRENT STANDARDS OR SOMETHING WE NEED TO ADD, SINCE THEY SEEM TO BE SUCH BIG FANS OF DEATH THEMSELVES.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR COCHRANE.
WITH THAT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, MOTIONS ON THAT LONG TERM DEBT? OKAY. JUST FOR A FINAL LOOK, ANYBODY HAD ANYTHING ON THE TEN YEAR CAPITAL PLAN THAT THEY WANTED TO ASK? NO. SEEING NONE. OKAY, THEN. OH, SORRY. COUNCILLOR.
JUST LOOKING FOR AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE'RE AT THERE FROM ADMIN MR. VAN DINE. I'LL INVITE MR. GREENCORN TO UPDATE US.
THANK YOU, MR. GREENCORN. THANKS FOR THE UPDATE.
AS COUNCIL WILL RECALL, WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF I GUESS, CHOOSING OPTIONS.
WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR AN OFFICIAL WORD FROM CANADA ON SCOPE CHANGE AMENDMENTS.
THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEIR APPROVAL, THEY ARE APPROVING OF OUR SUGGESTED SCOPE CHANGE.
SO WE'RE WAITING TO FINALIZE THAT AMENDMENT, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH AT LEAST PUMP HOUSE ONE PORTION OF THE PROJECT THAT HAS TO BE DONE REGARDLESS. SO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE FUNDING THAT CANADA HAS PROVIDED TO AT LEAST GET THAT WORK DONE.
AND THEN NEXT STEPS WILL OCCUR AS FUNDING PERMITS AND MORE.
ALL THAT TO SAY, THERE'LL BE MORE COMING TO COUNCIL ON THAT. BUT WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR CANADA AND THEN WE'LL, THEN WE'LL PROCEED WITH NEXT STEPS. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN HAPPY TO ANSWER MORE.
COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. YEAH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND I GUESS JUST THE OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE IF COUNCIL THIS ONE OR THE NEXT 1 CHOSE TO JUST DO THE PUMPHOUSE ONE AND NOT DO THE REST OF THE PROJECT IF WE WEREN'T TO GET ANY MORE FUNDING. THAT DOESN'T MESS WITH THE THE FUNDING FOR PUMPHOUSE 1.
LIKE, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY THAT BACK. DIRECTOR GREENCORN.
THANK YOU. OH, THE SCOPE AMENDMENTS. SO MAYBE FOR CLARITY, THE CURRENT CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT IS FOR 3 PARTS PUMPHOUSE 1, PUMPHOUSE 2, AND THE SUBMARINE WATER LINE. BECAUSE OF THE ASTRONOMICAL COSTS OF ALL 3, WE'VE ASKED CANADA TO REDUCE SCOPE TO JUST JUST INCLUDE PUMPHOUSE 1.
COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. AWESOME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON LONG TERM? COUNCILLOR COCHRANE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. I KNOW IT'S EARLY DAYS, BUT ANY INDICATION THAT A PROJECT LIKE THIS MIGHT BE ELIGIBLE UNDER THE ARCTIC INFRASTRUCTURE FUND.
MR. VAN DINE. SO YOU'RE CORRECT. IT IS EARLY DAYS.
SO THE THE QUESTION AND ALL THE INDICATIONS FROM THE ARCTIC INFRASTRUCTURE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE SEEN SO FAR SUGGESTS THAT THIS THIS MIGHT BE A BIT OF A, A BIT OF A REACH. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT AT THIS POINT AIRPORTS DUAL USE ACTIVITIES AND OTHER THINGS.
THAT BEING SAID THE BUDGET WAS WAS FULL OF SOME THINGS WHAT WE USED TO CALL WHEN I WAS IN THE BUSINESS ABOVE THE LINE AND BELOW THE LINE ABOVE THE LINE BEING SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE VISIBLE WITH RESPECT TO TO NEW NEW EXPENDITURES OR NEW, NEW FUNDING SOURCES AND NEW PROGRAMING ELEMENTS.
AND SO IN THERE THERE HAS BEEN SOME INCREASED CAPACITY FOR EQUITY PARTICIPATION AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, IF THAT WAS ONE OF THE AVENUES THAT WE DECIDED TO PURSUE WITH THE PROJECT SUCH AS THIS.
ADDITIONALLY THERE IS SOME PROGRAMING THAT SHOULD, SHOULD DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENSE WISH TO INVEST EVEN MORE. THERE COULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF OFFSETS THROUGH THERE TO OFFSET ANY INCREMENTAL IMPACT ON OUR SERVICES AS A CITY.
SHOULD THEY SHOULD THEY HAVE AN INCREASE IN REQUIREMENTS? SO THERE ARE A FEW THINGS. THE ARCTIC INFRASTRUCTURE FUND MIGHT BE A REACH, BUT THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER THINGS TO LOOK AT FOR OFFSETS.
[01:35:04]
THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR COCHRANE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.EARLY DAYS AND HOPEFULLY SOME HAPPY WAYS AND MEANS AHEAD.
I CAN JUST ADD A COUPLE POINTS THERE BY ALL MEANS NOT TO NOT TO OVER SPEAK MR. VAN DINE, BUT WE'VE ALSO HAD SOME EARLY ON MEETINGS WITH OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE, HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOLKS.
SO WE'LL BE TAKING A HARD RUN AT THE PT PROVINCE TERRITORIES PORTION OF FUNDING.
THIS PROJECT DIRECTLY ALIGNS WITH THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE WATER TO HOUSING.
THAT THAT PATH IS QUITE CLEAR TO MAKE. THE OTHER ONE IS A NEW.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED YET, BUT KERRY CAN HELP ME.
I THINK IT'S CALLED BUILD COMMUNITY SAFER, FUND STRONGER, BUILD STRONGER.
STRONGER. THANK YOU. CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE FEDS AND THEIR ACRONYMS. BUT REGARDLESS I'VE ASKED WE'VE ASKED VERY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RESTRICTIVENESS OF FEDERAL STACKING REQUIREMENTS.
IN A LOT OF CASES, YOU CAN'T STACK FED FUNDING.
SO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO BE EXPLORING, AS MR. VAN DINE SAID, ALL AVENUES IN ADDITION TO THESE ONES THAT WE'VE THAT I'VE JUST MENTIONED.
SO AND WE'RE GOING TO DEFINITELY TRY TO PUT SOME PRESSURE ON THE ABILITY TO STACK.
SO WE'LL BE WE'LL BE TURNING OVER EVERY ROCK THAT WE CAN.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? NOPE. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, SO WE'VE COME TO THE END OF THE BUDGET.
BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, ARE THERE ANY OTHER OVERARCHING OUTSTANDING MOTIONS, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS THAT ANYBODY HAS? COUNCILLOR MCGURK. I'D LIKE TO RETURN TO THIS ISSUE AND MOVE TO CUT THE T2 NEW MED POSITIONS FROM THE BUDGET.
THAT'S THE MOTION ON THE TABLE. IS THERE A SECONDER? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN COUNCILLOR MCGURK, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO IT. OKAY.
BUT THIS IS A LAST DITCH EFFORT TO SAVE AN ADDITIONAL $270,000 IN THIS BUDGET.
I'D BEEN RETICENT TO BRING THE MOTION BECAUSE I'M AFRAID THERE'S A PERCEPTION THAT I DON'T SUPPORT THESE POSITIONS INHERENTLY. I AM, AFTER ALL, IN A PUNK BAND. BUT RESIDENTS. BUT RESIDENTS EXPECT US TO BE PRUDENT IN ASSESSING LONG TERM BUDGETARY COMMITMENTS, AND THEY ELECTED US TO DO JUST THAT. SO DO MY JOB, I SHALL.
WE'VE HEARD THE PUBLIC AND ADJUSTED OUR OPERATIONS, AND AS FAR AS BEEN EXPRESSED IN THIS ROOM, AND FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD, MED IS DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB FOR WHICH I COMMEND THEM.
AND RESIDENTS ALSO, FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD, AGREE THE BASE SALARY PER OFFICER IS 99,000 IN 2026, 108,000 IN 2027 AND 118,000 IN 2028. WE'RE COMMITTING ALMOST $200 $200,000 IN BASE SALARY ALONE.
ADDITIONAL EXPENSES BRING THE COST TO 135,000 PER OFFICER.
THAT'S A 270,000 ADDITION TO THIS BUDGET AND MORE PER FOR FUTURE BUDGETS.
I THINK IT IS AN IRRESPONSIBLE DECISION TO HIRE THESE POSITIONS WITHOUT COLLECTING MORE DATA.
THE NEXT COUNCIL WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE IMPACT OF OUR CURRENT SETUP, WHICH TO DATE HAS NOT PROVEN INSUFFICIENT IN A REVIEW IN 2026, COULD VERY WELL REVEAL THE NEED FOR THESE POSITIONS, IN WHICH CASE THERE WOULD BE A STRONG CASE TO BRING FORWARD TO COUNCIL, BUT FOR NOW, THE VALUE PROPOSITION IS NOT THERE FOR ME AND I CAN'T SUPPORT INCREASING THE BURDEN ON TAXPAYERS BY WHAT WOULD RESULT IN AT LEAST HALF A PERCENTAGE POINT.
SO I MOVE WHETHER THE WILL OF COUNCIL IS THERE TO SUPPORT THAT.
WE'LL JUST FIND OUT IN A SECOND. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS TO THE MOTION? SEEING NONE THEN TO COUNCILLOR MCGURK MOTION TO CUT THE 2 MED POSITIONS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN AND COUNCIL MCGURK AND COUNCIL ARDEN-SMITH.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED. DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON, COUNCILLOR COCHRANE, MYSELF, COUNCILLOR FEQUET, COUNCILLOR FOOTE AND COUNCILLOR PAYNE. ARE YOU OPPOSED? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO THE MOTION IS DEFEATED.
WITH THAT, MR. VAN DINE, I JUST WANT TO GET A FINAL SCOPE.
I BELIEVE WE'RE STILL SITTING AT AROUND THAT 4.9% AS I AS SEE MR. PANDOO NODDING, BUT I JUST. YEP, STILL SITTING THERE.
OKAY, SO WITH THAT THEN I WOULD LIKE TO BRING FORWARD A MOTION MYSELF.
SO I'M GOING TO PASS THE CHAIR OVER TO YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON. THANK YOU.
BACK TO YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD LIKE TO BRING FORWARD A MOTION THAT COUNCIL KEEP AN AMOUNT OF $1 MILLION FOR THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE IN THE GENERAL FUND, AND 2, USE THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO REDUCE THE OVERALL PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX BY A FURTHER 1%.
THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECONDER? COUNCILOR ARDEN-SMITH TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YEP. YEAH. SO WE'RE SITTING AT AROUND 4.9%. WE BY THROUGH THIS MOTION, WE REDUCED THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE BY A FURTHER
[01:40:07]
$500,000, WHICH IS WHAT I HAD SAID EARLIER THAT I'M COMFORTABLE WITH WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS ON DAY 1.I THINK WE CAN ALSO THEN REDUCE THE OVERALL PROPERTY TAX POINT BY A FURTHER PERCENT.
GIVING YELLOWKNIFE WAS A BIT FURTHER OF A TAX BREAK.
BUT ALSO YOU KNOW, REFLECTING THE FACT THAT WE DO STILL NEED TO SEE GROWTH IN OUR BUDGETS.
AND I NEVER THINK GOING TOO LOW IS ALSO A GOOD FACTOR BECAUSE WE NEED TO KEEP UP WITH INFLATION.
OUR COSTS HAVE INCREASED ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
SO I DON'T WANT TO GO TOO LOW AND GIVE YELLOWKNIFE A FALSE IMPRESSION THAT WE CAN AFFORD TOO MUCH WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, INCREASING OUR TAX APPROPRIATELY. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DO BELIEVE THAT AS COUNCILMAN MCLENNAN.
SO, YOU KNOW, PUT THIS SO WELL THE OTHER DAY, I THINK WE NEED TO BE CONSCIOUS OF THAT EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE UNTIL WE FULLY GET THE POLICY IN PLACE. AND I THINK $1 MILLION MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT IS THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT.
SO THAT'S MY RATIONALE. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MIGHT BE A TOUGH 1 ON THE SPOT, BUT TO ADMIN, WHAT WOULD THAT LEAVE THE TAX INCREASE.
AND WHAT WOULD THAT LEAVE THE REMAINDER IN THE GENERAL FUND RELATIVE TO THAT BUDGET STABILIZATION POLICY, LIKE THE PERCENTAGE 15 ABOVE OR BELOW? THANK YOU.
MR. VAN DINE I MR. PANDOO OUR CHIEF ACCOUNTANT SO I'LL DEFER TO HIM ON ON THAT BUT WE DO HAVE SOME PRELIMINARY NUMBERS THAT ARE STARTING TO CIRCULATE ON OUR STAFF CHAT.
SO GO AHEAD. MR. PANDOO. OKAY. YEAH. WE WE ARE CALCULATING THE GENERAL FUND BALANCE. JUST FYI, 1% AT THE MOMENT IS APPROXIMATELY 408,000.
JUST IF YOU WANTED TO KNOW. SO JUST BEAR WITH US.
THANKS. ALL RIGHT. IT'S OKAY IF I ANSWER QUESTIONS WHILE WE'RE DOING THAT.
THAT'S COMMENTS. OKAY, JUST WAIT A MOMENT. LET THEM CALCULATE THAT.
MR. PANDOO. DO YOU NEED A FEW MINUTES TO DO THIS? IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND.
PETER MAYOR. THANK YOU. OKAY, LET'S TAKE A 5 MINUTE PAUSE.
AND IF WE'RE READY SOONER, WE'LL COME BACK SOONER. OKAY. THANKS. ALL RIGHT.
WELCOME BACK. I THINK MR. PANDOO HAS AN ANSWER TO THAT BURNING QUESTION.
YEAH. THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU SO MUCH TO MRS. TRIFLE. NOT EASY TO COMPUTE ALL THAT WITH ALL EYES ON YOU.
SO AT THE MOMENT, EXCLUDING THE $1 MILLION THE GENERAL FUND IS AT 10.69%.
[INAUDIBLE] MR. PANDOO 10.69%. THANK YOU. DOES THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION? COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. AND THE TAX INCREASE WOULD BE.
GOOD. ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? ALL RIGHT. TO THE MOTION. I DIDN'T WRITE IT. I DON'T NEED TO SAY ANYTHING AGAIN.
I'M HAPPY FOR YOU TO GO TO THE MOTION SO I CAN READ IT AGAIN IF YOU WANT.
THANK YOU. JUST TO FOR. SO THE MOTION IS THAT COUNCIL KEEP AN AMOUNT OF $1 MILLION FOR THE EMERGING ISSUES RESERVE IN THE GENERAL FUND, AND 2, USE THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO REDUCE THE OVERALL PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX BY A FURTHER 1%.
THANK YOU TO THE MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL PASS THE CHAIR BACK TO THE MAYOR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. FINAL CALL. WITH THAT, CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
[01:45:04]
COUNCILLOR MCGURK SECONDED BY COUNCILOR ARDEN-SMITH.THANK YOU FOR BUDGET 2026, EVERYBODY. THE LAST COUNCIL.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.