Mar 04, 2026 Governance & Priorities Committee

JUMPING INTO THINGS. [LAUGHTER] SO. THANK YOU

[00:00:03]

[2. Approval of the agenda.]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT WE HAVE DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF.

DOES ANY MEMBER HAVE A CONFLICT WITH ANYTHING ON THE AGENDA TODAY? SEEING NONE. WE HAVE A MEMO REGARDING WHETHER TO AMEND TAX ADMIN BY-LAW 4207, AS AMENDED,

[4. A memorandum regarding whether to amend Tax Administration By-law No. 4207, as amended, to exempt the Yellowknife Day Care Association’s property at 5121 52nd Street (Lot 25, Block 39, Plan 4689) from property taxation.]

I'LL ASK MR. PANDOO IF THERE'S ANYTHING HE'D LIKE TO DESCRIBE.

THANKS. THANK YOU, MS. WHITE. AS OUTLINED IN THE MEMO THE YELLOWKNIFE DAYCARE ASSOCIATION HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION REQUESTING EXEMPTION FROM PROPERTY TAXES ON THEIR PROPERTY.

A SIMILAR REQUEST WAS MADE IN 2020 AND WAS DENIED BY COUNCIL AT THE TIME.

ADMINISTRATION IS AGAIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE TAX EXEMPTION NOT BE APPROVED.

THIS RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON OUR REVIEW OF THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION ACT.

THE CITY'S TAX ADMINISTRATION BY-LAW AND THE PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION CRITERIA FOR SOCIETIES POLICY, ADOPTED BY COUNCIL IN 2018. OUR CONCLUSION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE 2020 DECISION, IN THAT THE APPLICANT DOES NOT MEET ALL THE REQUIRED CRITERIA FOR TAX EXEMPTION, AND WE HAVE INCLUDED AS MUCH DETAIL AS POSSIBLE IN THE MEMO, BUT WE ARE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCILLOR FEQUET GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

YEAH. BEFORE I GET TO THE END IN MY THOUGHTS, JUST A FEW QUESTIONS AT THE BEGINNING.

TO HELP FILL IN SOME GAPS FOR ME. APPRECIATE THE ANALYSIS FROM ADMINISTRATION.

I IN MY MIND, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A LACK OF CLARITY AROUND THE HOW CHILDCARE DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THE CITY'S OWN DEFINITION OF MUNICIPAL PURPOSE AND THE 2018 POLICY. I RECOGNIZE CHILDCARE IS REGULATED BY THE GNWT.

I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE ITS IMPACTS ARE VERY LOCAL.

AND ACCESS TO CHILDCARE AFFECTS WHETHER FAMILIES CAN LIVE AND WORK HERE AND WHETHER A COMMUNITY REMAINS LIVABLE FOR FAMILIES. SO THAT SEEMS TO ME OFF THE CUFF, CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH COUNCIL'S STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AROUND A LIVABLE COMMUNITY AND OUR COUNCIL PRINCIPLE OF AMPLIFYING OTHERS TO MEET DIVERSE COMMUNITY NEEDS.

SO JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. ADMINISTRATION CONCLUDED THAT IT DOES NOT MEET OR SUPPORT A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE BECAUSE IT FALLS UNDER TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.

COULD ADMINISTRATION CLARIFY HOW THE CONCEPT OF A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE WAS INTERPRETED IN RELATION TO THE STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND THE DEFINITIONS IN THE 2018 POLICY WHEN EVALUATING THIS REQUEST? MS. WHITE. MR. PANDOO.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. THAT IS QUITE A DIFFICULT ONE.

AND BUT I WILL JUST CIRCLE BACK TO, YOU KNOW, MUNICIPAL PURPOSE.

WE ALWAYS GO BACK TO THE MUNICIPALITIES ACT AS TO WHAT THAT MEANS.

AND IN THIS INSTANCE FOR THE CITY. WE'LL GO TO THE CITIES, TOWNS AND VILLAGES ACT.

AND MUNICIPAL PURPOSE IN THE TRADITIONAL SENSE WOULD MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE RECREATION FACILITIES, ANYTHING THAT COULD BE DEEMED AS EXTENSION OF MUNICIPAL SERVICE AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, RECENTLY, THE AUDITOR GENERAL DID DEFINE MUNICIPAL PURPOSE AS BEING YOU KNOW DRINKING WATER, WASTE MANAGEMENT, FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS. SO, YES, THE WAY WE HAVE INTERPRETED THIS, YOU KNOW, CHILDCARE SERVICES AS NOT BEING AN EXTENSION OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES, IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT IT WAS NOT AN EASY QUESTION [LAUGHTER].

I KIND OF WAS IN A LITTLE RABBIT OR HAMSTER WHEEL HERE WHEN I WAS TRYING TO GO THROUGH THE POLICY AND GO THROUGH THE MEMO AND GO THROUGH THE CTV ACT MYSELF, BECAUSE MUNICIPAL PURPOSE IN OUR OWN POLICY, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, TAKES THE LEGISLATION A STEP FURTHER TO TRY TO PROVIDE CLARITY, TALKS ABOUT ALIGNMENT WITH MUNICIPAL SERVICES AND OR THE MUNICIPAL OUTCOMES.

AND SO FOR ME, WHEN I LOOK DOWN IN THE POLICY AND IT TALKS ABOUT SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES, ARTS AND CULTURE, RECREATION, THOSE ARE THE THREE BUCKETS THAT COUNCIL HAS DECIDED TO CREATE IN ITS OWN POLICY TO HELP GIVE ADMINISTRATION CLARITY ON,

[00:05:05]

CAN ADMINISTRATION PLEASE JUST REFRESH ALL OF OUR MEMORIES WITH THE LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY EXEMPT FROM PAYING PROPERTY TAXES? MS. WHITE. MR. PANDOO, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

CURRENTLY IT IS UNDER SECTION 14 OF OUR TAX ADMINISTRATION BY-LAW, SO WE WOULD HAVE ALL THE CHURCHES.

SORRY. I JUST WANTED TO KNOW, DID YOU WANT ME TO LIST EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM OR JUST THE CATEGORIES? I DON'T HAVE THE TAX ADMINISTRATION BY-LAW OPEN IN FRONT OF ME, SO I DON'T KNOW. IS THERE LIKE, 100 ON THE LIST.

I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE ALL DAY [LAUGHTER]. BUT IF IT'S A SHORT LIST, YES. YEAH.

WE'LL HAVE THE CAVALRY COMMUNITY CHURCH. WE DO HAVE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS.

CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS. AGAIN, TWO DIFFERENT LOTS.

GLAD TIDINGS ARCTIC MISSION, HOLY TRINITY ANGLICAN CHURCH, ISLAMIC SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA, CANADA, YELLOWKNIFE CONGREGATION OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESS, AND WE DO HAVE PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLIES OF CANADA, ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, SALVATION ARMY. AND WE DO HAVE ALBERTA CONFERENCE CORPORATION OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH, CHURCH OF CHRIST. A WESTERN CANADIAN DISTRICT OF THE CHRISTIAN AND MISSIONARY ALLIANCE CHURCH, CENTRAL ARCTIC BAPTIST CHURCH. WE ALSO HAVE PSEUDO MINISTRIES, YELLOWKNIFE GOLF CLUB, YELLOWKNIFE SHOOTING CLUB, YELLOWKNIFE SKI CLUB, YELLOWKNIFE COMMUNITY GARDEN COLLECTIVE, TRAILS AND COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, NORTHLANDS COMMUNITY GARDEN SOCIETY. THIS IS JUST A PORTION OF THE LENS.

HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES NWT, SPCA, MAKERSPACE YK AND I BELIEVE NWT MINING HERITAGE SOCIETY. THANK YOU, MR. PANDOO, COUNCILLOR FEQUET.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND WHAT'S THE TOTAL OR BEST GUESS VALUE IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER.

TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAX EXEMPTION THE CITY IS CURRENTLY PROVIDING TO ALL THOSE ORGANIZATIONS? MS. WHITE. I WILL ASK MR. PANDOO.

COULD WE MAYBE COME BACK TO THAT? TOTALLY. ABSOLUTELY.

COUNCILLOR FEQUET. YEAH, I THINK. I THINK WHAT I'M TRYING TO JUST UNDERSTAND AND GET A SENSE OF IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT OVER THE YEARS YOU KNOW, BEFORE AND AFTER THE COUNCIL PUT IN THIS POLICY IN 2018, THERE'S BEEN ORGANIZATIONS AND FACILITIES THAT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED FOR THIS TAX EXEMPTION. AND OBVIOUSLY IN 2018, COUNCIL TOOK SOME TIME AND ENERGY TO TRY AND CLARIFY WHAT THAT MEANT.

FOR ME, I FIND IT REALLY HARD TO ACCEPT THAT COUNCIL WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN INTENDING TO OR WOULD HAVE BEEN INTENDING TO EXCLUDE NOT FOR PROFIT DAYCARES.

THERE'S A BIG DISTINCTION BETWEEN FOR PROFIT DAYCARES, WHICH THANKFULLY WE DON'T HAVE ANY IN THE NWT BUT THEY WOULD BE EXCLUDING THIS FROM THAT SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES BUCKET. AND SO I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM AND I KNOW THIS MIGHT SEEM WEIRD, BUT I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE ACCEPTING THIS REQUEST BECAUSE I THINK THAT WITH ALL THE COST OF LIVING AND THE OTHER CONCERNS THAT WE THAT ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF YELLOWKNIFE ARE FACING, THAT WE SHOULD REALLY BE LOOKING INTO THIS POLICY ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD BE PROVIDING TAX EXEMPTION AND TO WHO? THERE MAY BE A MISINTERPRETATION OF VALUES. THERE MAY BE A MISALIGNMENT.

THERE MAY NOT BE. I RECOGNIZE THAT MY COLLEAGUES DIDN'T COME HERE TODAY TO PROBABLY DIVE INTO THE MERITS OF THE 2018 POLICY, NECESSARILY. SO I DON'T WANT TO THROW THAT ON YOU.

BUT I ACTUALLY THINK THIS TO ME, IT KIND OF RAISES THIS, THIS BIGGER QUESTION.

AND THE FACT THAT ADMINISTRATION SAID IT WASN'T AN EASY QUESTION TO ANSWER FOR THEM MAKES GIVES ME COMFORT THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENT OF WHY THIS POLICY AND SOME OF THOSE BUCKETS WERE CREATED.

SO I RECOGNIZE THAT THE VALUES THAT KIND OF UNDERLIE THAT 2018 POLICY WILL ALWAYS CHANGE EVERY COUNCIL TO EVERY COUNCIL AND MY PREFERENCE FOR MY COLLEAGUES FOR CONSIDERATION WOULD BE TO LOOK AT ALL OF OUR TAX EXEMPTIONS, BECAUSE THERE'S ACTUALLY A LOT LONGER LIST THAN I THOUGHT. I KNEW WHAT THE CHURCH IS AND WHAT THE GOLF CLUB AND SKI CLUB AND A COUPLE OTHERS, BUT I WASN'T AWARE OF ALL OF THOSE. AND IF THAT IS, YOU KNOW, A TAX POINT OR TWO THAT IS IMPORTANT TO ALL RESIDENTS,

[00:10:04]

FIRST, I DON'T WANT TO PUT ANY MORE WORK ON ADMINS PLATE WITH RESPECT TO I'M NOT SAYING THE POLICY NEEDS TO BE REVISITED I JUST THINK WE NEED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS WHETHER WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE POLICY IS INTENDED TO DO.

SO I'LL LEAVE IT THERE. THANKS VERY MUCH. AND I'VE JUST BEEN BY EMAIL, TOLD THAT ADMINISTRATION CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE TOTAL FIGURE.

SO, MS. WHITE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. PANDOO.

YEAH. THANK YOU. SO THE AMOUNT WOULD BE $365,712.

BUT IF WE DO IF I, IF I MAY JUST EXTEND A LITTLE BIT.

IF WE DO ADD WHAT WE WILL BE FORGOING, IF THIS COMMITTEE OR COUNCIL DOES APPROVE THE AMOUNT THIS APPLICATION, WE WOULD BE AT $399,000, WHICH AND CURRENTLY A 1% POINT IS AT 420.

SO WE ARE CLOSING IN ON THE 1%. NOW, IF I JUST MAY KIND OF ADD A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AS TO WHAT COUNCILLOR FEQUET SAID YES TO THE POLICY ITSELF, I READ IT LIKE, YOU KNOW, THREE MULTIPLE TIMES AND CAME TO THREE DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS.

NOW, IN MY MIND, FROM WHERE I'M SITTING IS THE QUESTION IS NOT AROUND, YOU KNOW, WHAT SHOULD BE DEFINED AS THE MUNICIPAL PURPOSE THROUGH THE INTENT OF THAT POLICY, BUT RATHER WHAT IS COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL TRYING TO ACHIEVE THROUGH THAT POLICY? THAT'S THE FIRST ONE AND ESPECIALLY AND THE SECOND ONE IS WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE? NOW THAT WE ARE ALREADY AT ONE PERCENTAGE POINT WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE? BASICALLY, AS AND WHEN DO WE KIND OF NOT GO BACK INTO THESE SLICING AND DICING OF THE PROPERTY TAXES BECAUSE FUNDAMENTALLY, PROPERTY TAXES ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE ANY KIND OF EXEMPTIONS.

THEY, YOU KNOW, IF I, IF I CAN JUST I UNDERSTAND WHY THERE IS EXEMPTIONS, BUT IF I CAN JUST THROW SOMETHING JUST TO CLOSE.

ACCORDING TO THE FEDERATION OF CANADIAN MUNICIPALITIES, THE FCM, THE CANADA MUNICIPALITIES IN CANADA OWN MORE THAN 60% OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT MUNICIPALITIES GET ONLY BETWEEN $0.8 TO $0.10 ON THE DOLLAR TO MAINTAIN THEM. SO I JUST WANTED TO LEAVE YOU WITH THAT THOUGHT, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR FEQUET ANYTHING FURTHER FOR YOURSELF FROM THIS? NO? I'M GOOD AND THEN I'VE GOT A FEW OF YOU AFTER THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

FIRST. YEAH, A COUPLE QUESTIONS AND THEN MY THOUGHTS.

SO IN THE MEMO, IT REFERENCES LIKE, SHOULD THIS PRECEDENT BE SET, IT COULD ALSO APPLY TO OTHER NON-PROFIT DAYCARES AND DAY HOMES.

REGARDING THE DAY HOMES IN ORDER TO QUALIFY, THEY WOULD THE DAY HOME WOULD ALSO NOT HAVE TO BE IT COULDN'T BE A RESIDENCE.

AND IT ALSO WOULD HAVE TO BE A NON-PROFIT SOCIETY.

DO ANY OF THESE 41-DAY HOMES MEET THOSE CRITERIA? MS. WHITE? MR. PANDOO. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

NO, THEY WOULD NOT. THESE 41-DAY HOMES ARE PRIMARILY USED AS RESIDENCES.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THE $111,000 POTENTIAL FORGOING OF TAX REVENUE ISN'T RELEVANT.

THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE MEMO. JUST FOR CLARITY IN REGARD TO THE DAYCARE ASSOCIATION BEING TAXED AS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, IS THERE ANY OTHER OPTION FOR NON-PROFIT SOCIETIES TO REDUCE THEIR TAX BURDEN OTHER THAN TO APPLY FOR THIS COMPLETE EXEMPTION? MS. WHITE? MR. PANDOO. SHORT ANSWER NO. CURRENTLY, THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE MUNICIPAL PROGRAM REBATES OR REDUCED RATES SPECIFIC TO NON-PROFIT SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS.

IN NWT CITY COUNCIL AT VARIOUS TIMES HAVE PREVIOUSLY DEBATED AROUND THE FAIRNESS OF EXEMPTIONS FOR NON-PROFIT DAYCARES, BUT NOT ABOUT CREATING SEPARATE PROGRAMS. SO AT THE MOMENT, THE ONLY VIABLE MECHANISM IS THIS EXEMPTION PROCESS.

COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. UNDERSTOOD THANK YOU. AND ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS RECENTLY CHILDCARE PROVIDERS LOOKING TO OFFER MORE SPACES HAVE RUN INTO ZONING AND COMMUNITY PLANNING ISSUES.

IS THERE ANY WORK BEING DONE, EITHER ZONING LEVEL OR AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THESE ISSUES AND HELP FACILITATE MORE CHILDCARE SPACES? MS. WHITE. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO WE'VE HAD ONE SITUATION RECENTLY WHERE THAT HAS OCCURRED.

AND IT WAS A CHANGE OF USE. SO A CHANGE OF USE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S DAYCARE OR NOT,

[00:15:03]

SO IT'S NOT THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH THE POLICY, THE DESIGNATION OR THE ZONING.

IT'S THE PROCESS. AND THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT'S IN PLACE THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW BECAUSE IT'S LEGISLATED.

SO NO, THERE'S NO CHANGES TO THAT. BECAUSE OUR POLICY DOCUMENTS FOLLOW THE LEGISLATION, THANK YOU.

COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YEAH, SO COMMENTS. SO WHILE THE PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION CRITERIA DOES HELP IN SOME RESPECTS.

I THINK CLEARLY IT'S NOT CLEAR ENOUGH. GIVEN THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT WAYS IT'S BEEN INTERPRETED AND THE FACT THAT THE YK DAYCARE ASSOCIATION IS APPLYING AGAIN.

I PERSONALLY DISAGREE WITH ADMIN'S INTERPRETATION OF MUNICIPAL PURPOSE.

THERE'S A VERY CLEAR DISTINCTION MADE IN THE POLICY BETWEEN MUNICIPAL PURPOSE AND MUNICIPAL SERVICES.

SECTION B.B AND B.C CLEARLY STATE THAT TO QUALIFY FOR AN EXEMPTION, THE ORGANIZATION NEEDS TO PROVIDE AN EXTENSION TO MUNICIPAL SERVICES.

SECTION B.A SPEAKS TO SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES GENERALLY, WITHOUT SPECIFYING THE NEED FOR THE ORGANIZATION TO EXTEND MUNICIPAL SERVICES.

THE POLICY IS CLEAR WHEN MUNICIPAL SERVICE JURISDICTION IS RELEVANT.

IF THE EXTENSION OF SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MUNICIPAL SERVICES WAS NECESSARY TO QUALIFY, THE POLICY WOULD STATE THIS AS IT DOES IN THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS.

THE WAY I READ THE POLICY IS THAT COUNCIL WANTED TO HAVE THE OPTION TO GIVE TAX EXEMPTIONS TO SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE, WHILE RESTRICTING EXEMPTIONS TO MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN REGARDS TO ARTS, CULTURE AND RECREATION.

THEREFORE, I BELIEVE THIS APPLICATION QUALIFIES UNDER THE POLICY AS WRITTEN.

SO, GIVEN THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS THIS MAY HAVE, WHAT DO I THINK HAS BEEN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY? FIRST IS CLARIFICATION TO THE POLICY SO THAT IT'S NOT INTERPRETED DIFFERENTLY BETWEEN DIFFERENT COUNCILLORS AND STAFF.

SECOND, IS SOME MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE BE AVAILABLE TO NON-PROFIT SOCIETIES THAT PROVIDE SOCIAL OR COMMUNITY SERVICES SO THAT THEY'RE NOT PAYING THE SAME PROPERTY TAX RATE AS FOR-PROFIT BUSINESSES? THE ALL OR NOTHING TAX EXEMPTION ROUTE IS, IN MY OPINION, NOT THE BEST WAY TO BALANCE FINANCIAL REALITIES WITH COMMUNITY INTERESTS.

IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THE BEST LONG-TERM OUTCOME MY BEST SOLUTION WOULD BE TO TABLE THIS APPLICATION UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE POLICY WAS AMENDED TO REMOVE SECTION B.A REGARDING SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES.

IN CONJUNCTION, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE NEXT COUNCIL, PENDING A FINANCIAL ANALYSIS, TO CREATE A NEW PROPERTY TAX CLASS FOR NON-PROFIT SOCIETIES SOMEWHERE AROUND THE RESIDENTIAL MILL RATE. GIVEN THE WORK PLAN AND THE ONGOING WORK RELATED TO VACANT AND OR ABANDONED BUILDING TAX CLASSES, I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS FEASIBLE WITHIN OUR TERM. AND I DON'T WANT TO DELAY THE ONGOING WORK BY ADDING TO IT.

SO BASICALLY, I WOULD PROPOSE TO PUNT THIS TO THE NEXT COUNCIL TO DEAL WITH IT MORE HOLISTICALLY.

HOWEVER, I UNDERSTAND THAT MAY NOT BE THE WILL OF COUNCIL.

AND IF MY COLLEAGUES WISH TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS APPLICATION UNDER THE CURRENT POLICY I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS, QUALIFIES UNDER THAT CURRENT POLICY. AND I WOULD BE OPPOSED TO THE RECOMMENDATION IN THE MEMO.

THAT'S NOT MY PREFERRED WAY FORWARD. I THINK THERE'S A BETTER WAY. BUT GIVEN THE POLICY AS WRITTEN, I INTERPRET IT TO MEAN THAT CHILDCARE SERVICES WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR A TAX EXEMPTION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH COUNCILMAN MCLENNAN. NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH. THANK YOU.

AS I WAS ON COUNCIL IN 2020, I'M GOING TO UPHOLD THE DECISION THAT WE MADE THEN, AND I WILL BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THIS MEMO IN DENYING THE REQUEST.

WHEN I THINK ABOUT MUNICIPAL SERVICES, I ALWAYS GO BACK TO DOGS, DITCHES AND DUMPS.

THAT'S WHAT OUR MUNICIPAL SERVICES ARE. AS A FORMER CHILDCARE PROVIDER MAJORITY OF OUR DEALINGS WAS WITH THE GNWT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF THOSE EXTENDED SERVICES SUCH AS CHILDCARE AND SO ON. WHENEVER YOU'RE DEALING WITH ECE WHICH IS MAJORITY OF YOUR REGISTERED DAY HOMES AND CHILDCARE SERVICES I THINK THE ONLY THING REALLY THAT IS DEALT WITH ON MUNICIPAL LEVEL IS A BUSINESS LICENSE.

SO I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS MEMO GOING FORWARD. AND THAT'S ABOUT IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH. NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR MCGURK. THANK YOU.

CLEARLY, I THINK CLEARLY THE QUESTION OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE IS BEEN RAISED.

THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE HAS SAID. BUT WELL, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF SOME SORT OF BREAK OR REBATE FOR NON-PROFITS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

I'VE APPLIED FOR ONE SUCCESSFULLY, SO I UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT IT CAN HAVE.

[00:20:06]

I THINK WE NEED TO MAYBE REEXAMINE WHAT THE GOAL IS OF PROVIDING A REBATE OR SOME OR TAX BREAK. I. FOR INSTANCE, WHEN I THINK OF WHY A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION IS ON THIS LIST, THEY ARE SUPPORTING A SMALLER SECTION OF THE COMMUNITY, WHEREAS THERE ARE SEVERAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE ON THIS LIST THAT SUPPORT.

THAT CLEARLY SUPPORT MUNICIPAL GOALS. SO RECREATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING ETCETERA.

SO I GUESS THAT IS. I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF TABLING IT, ESPECIALLY IF THAT MEANS THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER REVISITING THIS POLICY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR MCGURK. NEXT WE HAVE DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON. THANKS.

YEAH. I'M. I WOULD NOT SUPPORT. I WOULD SUPPORT THE MEMO AS WRITTEN TO DENY THE APPLICATION.

JUST TO BE CLEAR, NOT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S A VALID REQUEST.

I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'RE ASKING TO DO A GREAT SERVICE. WE HAVE A POLICY WHICH IS CLEARLY GRAY.

AND I AM VERY HESITANT TO OVERRIDE A RECOMMENDATION FROM ADMINISTRATION ON A POLICY THAT IS TECHNICALLY OURS.

IF WE DON'T LIKE IT, THEN SIMILAR TO OTHER COMMENTS, THEN MAYBE THIS GETS TABLED OR WE DENY IT, BUT AT SOME POINT WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT POLICY. MY CONCERN ABOUT OVERRIDING A POLICY WE HAVE WITHOUT ADDRESSING THAT FIRST IS WHERE DOES IT STOP AFTER THAT? SO NOW WE'RE SAYING COME TO COUNCIL. AND IF YOU CAN CONVINCE US AS A NON-PROFIT JUST I MADE A BRIEF LIST ON HERE.

THERE IS TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ASSESSED VALUE PROPERTIES THAT NON-PROFITS OWN THIS CITY.

THAT IS A GATE I'M NOT WILLING TO OPEN RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT COULD GET AWAY FROM US.

I THINK IS WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT. SO I'D BE OKAY SUPPORTING IT AS WRITTEN.

SO TO DENY THE REQUEST OR I'D BE OKAY TABLING IT AS WELL, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE NEED SOME CLARITY ON THIS POLICY TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR, BECAUSE WE GOT TO DRAW A LINE SOMEWHERE BECAUSE WE CAN'T HAVE MULTIPLE POINTS OF TAXATION ALL OF A SUDDEN OFF OUR BOOKS.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR FOR EVERYBODY EITHER SO THANKS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON, COUNCILLOR COCHRANE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. I'M HEARING EVERYBODY AND I UNDERSTAND I DO SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ADMINISTRATION, AS IS THROUGH A SIMILAR MINDSET FROM COUNCILLOR WARBURTON THAT WE MUST SUPPORT OR INTERPRET THE POLICY AS IS NOT WHAT WE WISH IT TO BE.

NOW, THE TABLING QUESTION IS INTERESTING. I DO NOT SUPPORT TABLING IT BECAUSE THERE'S NO GUARANTEE IT WOULD EVEN GET OFF THE TABLE IF IT GOES INTO THE NEXT COUNCIL.

FOR ALL OF THE REASONING THAT WAS ALSO PROVIDED BY COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN THAT THERE IS A LOT TO BE DONE CURRENTLY WITHIN OUR WORK PLAN, AND GOING INTO THE NEXT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE LEFT TO THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT ON TO THE NEXT.

I WOULD SUPPORT, HOWEVER, PUTTING THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE POLICY REVIEW BEING PUT INTO THE TRANSITION DOCUMENTS FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL TO CONSIDER WHEN THEY PUT FORWARD THEIR STRATEGIC PLANS AND WORK PLAN. SORRY. SO YES, I WILL SUPPORT THE ADMINISTRATION AS OF NOW FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU SO KINDLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND PULL OUT THOSE FISHERMAN'S FRIENDS.

[LAUGHTER] I KNOW YOU'RE NOT FEELING GREAT, SO THANKS FOR JOINING THE MEETING STILL. AND THANKS FOR THE REMARKS. NEXT WE HAVE COUNCILLOR FOOTE AND THEN COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I APPRECIATE THE WORK THE DAYCARE ASSOCIATION DOES FOR FAMILIES IN OUR COMMUNITY.

AND I RECOGNIZE THE ESSENTIAL ROLE THEY PLAY, ESPECIALLY GIVEN HOW CRITICAL CHILDCARE WAS DURING LAST YEAR'S EVACUATION OR THE YEAR BEFORE. PARDON ME. AT THE SAME TIME, BASED ON THE INFORMATION IN THE MEMO, I CAN'T SUPPORT THE EXEMPTION AS THE APPLICATION IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN.

THE MEMO MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE REQUEST DOES NOT MEET SEVERAL OF THE CRITERIA COUNCIL'S OBLIGATED TO APPLY, PARTICULARLY AROUND SUPPORTING A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE AND ALIGNING WITH OUR PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION CRITERIA FOR SOCIETIES POLICY.

WITH THAT SAID, I DO BELIEVE THE ORGANIZATION PROVIDES A SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC BENEFIT.

I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THE FINANCIAL PRESSURES THEY FACE, AND FOR THAT REASON, I'D BE OPEN TO OTHER AVENUES, LIKE TABLING THIS ITEM SO THE COUNCIL CAN SEEK CLEAR GUIDANCE ON HOW THE POLICY SHOULD BE INTERPRETED IN CASES LIKE THIS, AND EXPLORE WHETHER THERE IS A FAIR AND CONSISTENT PATH TO OFFERING SUPPORT WITHOUT UNDERMINING THE INTEGRITY OF OUR TAX EXEMPTION FRAMEWORK.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR FOOTE.

COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO ADD TO WHAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN TO.

RIGHT NOW. I MEAN, THIS IS THE SECOND TIME AROUND FOR THIS.

I DON'T SUPPORT. I DO SUPPORT THE MEMO AS WRITTEN BY ADMIN.

[00:25:02]

I THINK WE JUST NEED TO MAKE THE DECISION. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILLOR PAYNE. SO FOR THE END OF ROUND ONE.

YEAH, JUST TO SPEAK TO A COUPLE POINTS THAT HAVE COME UP, I WON'T GO INTO THE APPLICATION ITSELF TOO DEEPLY. I THINK DEPUTY MAYOR WARBURTON SAID IT MUCH MORE SUCCINCTLY THAN I WOULD HAVE. SO THANKS FOR THAT. IN TERMS OF THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF THE FINANCIAL ASPECT, JUST IN TERMS OF THE QUESTION FOR COLLEAGUES TO CONSIDER, MR. CALJOUW, I'LL MAYBE LOOK AT YOU AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT MY INTERPRETATION OF SORT OF PRINCIPLES OF DECISION MAKING ON THINGS LIKE THIS WOULD BE THAT EVEN IF WE TABLED THIS APPLICATION, RELOOKED AT THE POLICY POTENTIALLY MADE CHANGES TO THE POLICY.

ULTIMATELY, THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE UNDER THIS POLICY.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEING A HEAD NOD. SO JUST IN TERMS OF TABLING IT, THERE'S NO REAL BENEFIT TO TABLING IT BECAUSE THE GRAYS IN THIS POLICY AND TABLING IT WILL STILL ANY DECISION WOULD STILL BE MADE UNDER THIS POLICY.

SO I'D SAY IF FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, I'D SAY WE MOVE FORWARD AND WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS QUESTION.

I AM 100% IN AGREEMENT WITH EVERYBODY ELSE, THOUGH, IN TERMS OF IN COUNCILLOR COCHRANE, YOU SAID SORT OF WHERE MY BRAIN IS AT.

AND COUNCILLOR FEQUET, I THINK YOU BROUGHT IT UP TOO, AND OTHERS IN DIFFERENT WAYS AS WELL. IT'S I THINK SOMETHING THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO LOOK AT IS SORT OF A REASSESSMENT OF WHAT COUNCIL'S PURPOSE IS BEHIND THIS.

AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT COUNCILS DO, RIGHT? IT'S WHAT DECISION MAKING HAS TO DO. WE FIND A PROBLEM AS IT COMES, IT ARISES, AND THEN WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. SO I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES WHERE WE HAVE FOUND A NEW CHALLENGE WHICH NOW WE'LL NEED TO DEAL WITH.

SO ADMIN HAS STATED THAT THE WORK PLAN UPDATE WILL BE COMING TO US BY THE END OF Q1, WHICH IS THE END OF THIS MONTH.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE ALL REMEMBER THIS ITEM AND WE SHOEHORN IT INTO OUR GARDEN PLOT FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.

BECAUSE AS COUNCILLOR FEQUET SAID, THE IDEA OF JAMMING THIS INTO OUR CURRENT WORK PLAN IS NOT FEASIBLE, BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO CAPTURE FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL, AND I THINK WE HAVE. SO THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. YEAH, I'LL COME BACK FOR ROUND TWO IN A SECOND. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.

WE MAKE A DECISION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER AT THE NEXT COUNCIL.

EVERYBODY STILL HAS TIME BEFORE THE END OF THE MONTH TO MAKE THAT CALL.

OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, PUT YOUR STAKES IN THE GROUND WHERE THEY'VE BEEN SO FAR, BUT THAT CAN ALWAYS CHANGE AS WE KNOW. SO WE MAKE THAT CALL AT THE END OF THE MONTH FOR THIS APPLICATION, BUT WE PUT IN THE REVIEW OF, OF THE POLICY FOR THE FUTURE.

BUT WITH ROUND TWO, I SEE COUNCILMAN MCLENNAN OUT OF THE GATE.

GO FOR IT. YEAH. THANKS VERY MUCH COLLEAGUES.

THOUGHT YEAH, TOTALLY AGREE WITH THE FINANCIAL CONCERNS AND REGARDS TO TABLING.

YEAH. WORK PLAN, ALL THAT STUFF. YEAH. I WOULDN'T WANT TO ADD IT TO OUR REVIEWING THIS WHOLE POLICY AS PART OF OUR TERM.

I THINK WE'VE COMMITTED TO ENOUGH WORK ALREADY.

YEAH. SO SOMETHING FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL TO LOOK AT.

CERTAINLY. ONE QUESTION PERHAPS TO GET COLLEAGUES THOUGHTS ON GIVEN THAT THAT PARTICULAR SECTION B.A SUPPORT A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE BY PROVIDING SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, GIVEN THAT THAT'S BEEN INTERPRETED DIFFERENTLY LAST TIME BY FOR THE VOTE WAS 4-4 THE 4 COUNCILLORS INTERPRETED IT ONE WAY 4 COUNCILLORS INTERPRETED A DIFFERENT WAY THIS WAY THIS TIME IT'S JUST ME. BUT BUT THAT'S IT SEEMS LIKE MOST PEOPLE ARE DISAGREEING BECAUSE OF THE FINANCIAL ASPECT, NOT NECESSARILY THE WORDING OF THE POLICY. LIKE, I WOULD CONSIDER PUTTING FORWARD A MOTION TO STRIKE THAT SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC LINE JUST BECAUSE IT'S IT'S NOT CLEAR AND IT'S BEEN INTERPRETED A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT WAYS.

AND IT'S ALLOWING OR GIVING HOPE TO ORGANIZATIONS PUTTING IN APPLICATIONS.

YEAH. SO JUST IN ORDER TO PROVIDE CLARITY IN THE INTERIM BEFORE THE NEXT COUNCIL POTENTIALLY TAKES A LOOK AT THE POLICY AS A WHOLE I WOULD PROPOSE STRIKING THAT LINE AS IT IT ISN'T CLEAR AT ALL. ARE YOU REFERENCING THE ACTUAL WITHIN THE WITHIN THE ACTUAL POLICY ITSELF, RIGHT? SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO PROPOSE, YOU CAN FOR A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING. OR GPC EITHER, YOU KNOW, SPEAK TO THE CITY CLERK BEFORE A FUTURE GPC MEETING TO GET THAT DISCUSSION ON GPC AGENDA OR BEFORE OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING AT THE END OF THE MONTH, BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.

THAT POINT BUT YEAH. POINT TAKEN. ANYTHING ELSE FOR ROUND TWO BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? COUNCILLOR FEQUET. QUESTION TO ADMINISTRATION.

WHICH BUCKET DOES DO CHURCHES FALL INTO UNDER A, B, AND C, IN YOUR OPINION? MS. WHITE. I WILL ASK MR. PANDOO. THE OTHER THING TO REMEMBER IS MR. PANDOO SEARCHES IS WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR. THANK YOU COUNCILLOR MCGURK.

AHEAD OF THE GAME AND IN MY RIGHT EAR. BUT BASICALLY THERE WERE HISTORICAL IF YOU LOOK BACK AT A LOT OF THESE DECISIONS, THEY PREDATE THIS POLICY. SO THERE'S DECISIONS THAT ARE WITHIN THIS BY-LAW.

AND THIS IS JUST I SEE YOU'RE NODDING. SO JUST WE DO HAVE TO KEEP THAT IN MIND TOO, THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND AS PART OF ANY BY-LAW REVIEW IN FUTURE OR AND POLICY REVIEW THAT

[00:30:07]

BUT I'LL FLIP IT BACK TO MS. WHITE. BUT I DID JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT IT'S REALLY ONLY THE APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED SINCE 2018 THAT FALL UNDER THIS POLICY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I'LL ASK MR. CALJOUW TO PROVIDE A RESPONSE.

SURE. YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO THE POLICY RELATES TO PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS CRITERIA FOR SOCIETIES, BUT THE EXEMPTION FOR CHURCHES ACTUALLY FLOWS DIRECTLY OUT OF [INAUDIBLE] SECTION 74-2.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CALJOUW. COUNCILLOR FEQUET. SURE.

THANKS, MR. CHAIR. YEAH. I GUESS JUST FOLLOWING UP FROM COUNCILMAN MCLENNAN SUGGESTION.

I MEAN, WHEN COUNCIL OF THE DAY CHOSE TO INCLUDE THREE BUCKETS SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES, ARTS AND CULTURE, RECREATIONAL SERVICES. AS MR. MCLENNAN POINTED OUT THE LATTER TWO SPECIFICALLY SAY IN THE POLICY EXTENSIONS OF YOU KNOW, MUNICIPAL RECREATIONAL SERVICES OR MUNICIPAL ARTS AND CULTURAL SERVICES.

THE FIRST ONE DOES NOT. AND SO TO ME, THAT WAS AN INTENTIONAL DIFFERENCE THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THIS POLICY.

SO TO CLARIFY, I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH YOU, COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, THAT THIS POLICY HAS NOT BEEN APPLIED IN THE WAY IT WAS.

IT IS WRITTEN, AND IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME IF THAT'S WHAT WAS INTENDED.

SO THAT'S WHERE THE LACK OF CLARITY IS. AND I THINK, I MEAN, I AGREE WITH EVERYONE WHO SAID LIKE, I DON'T WANT TO ADD MORE WORK, BUT I ALSO WANT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION JUST ABOUT WHAT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO MEAN, BECAUSE IF IT MEANS NOTHING, THEN IT'S CAUSING NOT FOR PROFITS, EXTRA WORK AND TIME.

THAT'S FRUSTRATING TO THEM, I'M SURE. AND IF IT'S INTENDED TO MEAN, YOU KNOW WHAT, THE YWCA OR DAYCARE IS NOT FOR PROFIT DAYCARES OR THINGS LIKE THAT, THEN WE SHOULD BE CLEAR. SO I DO JUST WANT TO STATE THAT I AM NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND RATIONALE IN THE MEMO.

FROM A VALUES PERSPECTIVE, I WOULD LOVE AT SOME POINT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT TAX EXEMPTIONS ACROSS THE BOARD.

THE CITY OF IQALUIT REMOVED ITS EXEMPTIONS FROM CHURCHES A COUPLE OF YEARS BACK.

UNLESS THEY WERE PROVIDING A DIRECT AND OBVIOUS COMMUNITY SERVICE, I THINK FOR A PERCENTAGE OF USE TO NOT OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, WHICH IS A GREAT, GREAT WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EXEMPTION IS LEVERAGING OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION FOR A DIFFERENT TIME. SO, I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT I AGREE WITH COUNCILLOR MCLENNAN, THAT THIS IS 100% NOT CLEAR. AND WE'LL THINK ABOUT THE BEST WAY, THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION THAT DOESN'T TAKE UP PEOPLE'S TIME UNNECESSARILY. THANKS VERY MUCH. I THINK THE FACT THAT SO MANY OF US ARE SLIGHTLY UNCLEAR BACK TO EVEN ADMINISTRATION.

MR. PANDOO TALKING ABOUT HOW EVEN HIM AND HIS STAFF LOOKED AT THINGS ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT WAYS, IS INDICATION ENOUGH THAT WE NEED TO TAKE A FURTHER CRACK AT THE POLICY AND REVIEW OF THE POLICY, AND PERHAPS ALSO THE EXEMPTIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PROVIDED UNDER THE BY-LAW.

BUT WITH THAT. SEEING ANY FINAL HAND FLYING UP, WE WILL MOVE THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL THEN FOR A DECISION IN TERMS OF THIS ACTUAL ITEM.

AND THEN WHEN WE GET TO THE WORK PLAN, WE CAN REVIEW THAT.

COUNCIL MCLENNAN HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU AFTERWARDS IN TERMS OF IF YOU WANT TO PROPOSE A POTENTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE POLICY IN THE FUTURE WITH ALL OF THAT CLEAR AS MUD TO EVERYBODY. WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS A IN CAMERA ITEM.

[IN CAMERA]

THERE WAS NO BUSINESS ARISING FROM OUR IN CAMERA SESSION.

SO WE COME TO THE CONCLUSION OF OUR MEETING. CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN? COUNCILLOR MCGURK SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR ARDEN-SMITH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY HAVE A GOOD DAY.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.