Permit Second Round of Questions (Ferry)

Thanks, Chair. And I won't take the full two minutes. I know there's a number of speakers and I know it's a complicated agenda. I'm actually in Victoria right now and running a pretty tight schedule myself. Since I did introduce this motion a couple of weeks ago as urgent business and it's now coming to us today, I do want to underscore the real timing importance to get this funding approved so that we can actually onboard lifeguards. in time for beach season, which is happening very quickly, as we can tell by the weather recently. And I just want to also underscore that in the time since I brought this motion forward, I've really had a lot of interesting conversations with lifeguards and lifesavers who work on our beaches. And the extent of work that they do in proactive safety is quite humbling to bring this forward and really to... uh respect the really critically important work that they do to keep folks safe at our beaches and uh i i know that this council supports public safety in all its forms and i think this is a really crucial investment uh i was we recognize that park board is struggling with some of their budget constraints uh it's crucial that we we ensure that we have lifeguard protection at our public beaches uh for everyone to enjoy we're coming into a remarkable summer season we're gonna have visitors from around the world We know it's often visitors and folks who aren't familiar with our beaches that are most likely to get in trouble. We also want our lifeguards there to inform folks as they come and enjoy the beaches about safe practices when enjoying our beaches here in Vancouver. And I'll leave it at that. Thanks.

In person? Michael?

Please go ahead, Michael. You have three minutes.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Michael Robinson. I'm the President-elect of QP Local 1004, representing over 1,500 City of Vancouver workers, including the outdoor lifeguards who keep Vancouver's beaches safe every summer. I'm also a Kitsilano resident who spends a quality amount of time swimming at and enjoying our beaches with my young family. I'm here today to urge you to support this motion and restore lifeguard services to all of Vancouver's beaches, including Spanish Banks East and West, Sunset Beach, and Third Beach. These are some of the busiest beaches in our city. Thousands of people use them every day in the summer, including families, children, seniors, residents, and visitors alike. When people think about lifeguards, they think about rescues. But the reality is that most of the work they do is prevention. It's calling a child back when they've strayed too far into the water. It's warning swimmers about a sudden drop-off or an unbeknownst to them current. It's clearing a safe path through rocks so people can safely enter the water. And it's spotting a dangerous situation before it becomes an emergency. Our lifeguards know our beaches intimately. Their currents, their hazards, and their blind spots. They are more times than not the first to respond when something goes wrong. At Spanish banks, for example... There are long mudflats and a sudden drop-off that can catch people off guard. At Sunset Beach, there are powerful currents and heavy vessel activity near the creek. These are not simple environments to navigate, especially for visitors or people who are unfamiliar with the water. Lifeguards routinely and skillfully deal with complex situations. When a boat capsizes and multiple people need to be pulled from the water at once. When a serious injury at the beach requires immediate first aid. When a child is separated from their family, they're quickly located and reunited because lifeguards know exactly where to look. Without these trained professionals at our beaches, response times increase, and so do the risks to beachgoers.

Lifeguard services are a core public safety function. The cost to restore them is modest relative to the scale of impact and the level of risk. And they are a cost-effective investment. Lifeguards prevent emergencies and reduce the need for response from paramedics, fire, and police. Ultimately, this is about the kind of city Vancouver wants to be. A city that welcomes visitors, a city that supports recreation and public health, and a city that takes public safety seriously.

I was under the assumption that speaking on behalf of multiple people, on behalf of all of 1004I, would be granted five minutes.

Oh. Okay.

Please go ahead. Hi. Can you hear me?

Hi there. Am I on the line?

Thank you. My name is Gabby Tremblay, and I'm here in support of Pete Fry's motion, Restoring Lifeguard Services at Key Vancouver Beaches. I'm a born and raised Vancouverite. I grew up learning to swim at Vancouver's beaches and outdoor pools, places that have shaped who I am today. I have three key points for council on why lifeguards should be restored at Spanish Banks East and West, Sunset Beach, and Third Beach. The first is youth economic opportunity and character building. I began as an outdoor lifeguard in 2014. As a youth at the time, I learned discipline, respect for knowledge and guidance of senior staff, and ultimately was able to make money to pay my way through my undergraduate degree. I was able to pay off my $16,000 student loan without accruing any interest on the debt because of lifeguarding. This set me up for success in my career. In this current economic climate where youth fresh out of high school make very little in the entry-level job market, This opportunity stands out against the rest. If you cut lifeguards, only more senior staff will be working this summer, drying up opportunities for youth and creating a bottleneck for budding outdoor lifeguards at the city. Number two, prevention, prevention, prevention. Most of my work as an outdoor lifeguard with the city from 2014 to 2020 entailed prevention. As the relief head lifeguard at both Sunset Beach and Spanish Banks East over the years, meaning I was in charge of the beach for two days and second in command for three. I taught my staff to be extremely perceptive to situations before they became major incidents and to watch the entire beach, 360 degrees, not just the area between the flags. We stopped intoxicated folks from attempting to swim across the boating channel at Sunset Beach, and we would make sure kiddo at the drop-off at Spanish Bank found mom, who was 300 meters away on dry sand. We responded to many aquatic emergencies, but also dealt with major land-based emergencies. Without lifeguards, incidents will increase, placing more strain on paramedics, of which 30% on average are currently off work due to mental health reasons and so are already understaffed, and on police, of which I have seen many situations escalate when they have gotten involved at the beach, rather than us, the lifeguards, who are trained to de-escalate tensions and take a community public health approach. often knowing common beachgoers by name. The third and final point I would like to leave you with is this. During my seven years as an outdoor lifeguard, my staff and I stopped several near-death aquatic experiences in the ocean. It might have been a child, a non-English speaker who could not read the signs, an elder adult, or even a fatigued experienced swimmer. It is not a matter of if, but a matter of when aquatic death at these beaches occurs if the lifeguards are not reinstated. And that will be a direct result of those of you who do not vote to pass this motion.

Thank you for your attention. Thank you. Speaker number two is Lenia Grace.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Linnea Grace. I'm the Executive Director of the Life Saving Society, BC and Yukon Branch. I'm here to speak in favor of today's motion to restore funding for lifeguards at public beaches in Vancouver, a critical issue affecting public safety. At the Life Saving Society, our mission is to prevent drowning through education, training, and public awareness. We are Canada's water safety experts, the certifying body for National Lifeguards, and the leading provider of swim lessons across the country. And while we understand the city's pressures, drowning prevention requires continuous investment to avoid tragedy and injury. Today, we strongly urge you to invest in public safety. There is one statistic I ask you to remember today. Only less than 1% of drownings in British Columbia occur in lifeguard supervised settings. That means 99% happen when lifeguards are not present. That's not a coincidence. It's evidence that trained supervision works. Lifeguards do far more than respond when somebody is already in crisis. They prevent emergencies before they happen. They intervene early, educate the public, de-escalate unsafe behavior, and they provide immediate skilled response when seconds matter. Without trained lifeguards, minor situations can become life-threatening very quickly. And when that happens, the burden shifts to other emergency responders, paramedics, firefighters, and police who are already stretched. Risk factors in Vancouver in particular mean that lifeguard supervision is especially important. These include changing tides, currents, weather, tourists and visitors who are unfamiliar with local conditions, children or newcomers who haven't yet accessed swimming lessons, and other risks. And while the value of someone's life is immeasurable for that person, their loved ones, and network, the cost of drowning is not only human, it is economic. To share data from the Drowning Prevention Research Center, each fatal drowning in Canada carries an average cost of $623,000. $623,226. And when you consider that figure, investing $600,000 to ensure safety for thousands of beach visitors and countless preventions seems more reasonable, doesn't it? Vancouver beaches have long served as a nationally and internationally respected model. For over a century, this city has invested in public safety, beginning with Joe Fortes, Vancouver's first official lifeguard. I urge council to continue that legacy today in restoring the funding, restoring these essential core lifeguard services, and investing in public safety.

And the Life Saving Society stands ready to continue working with you to support safe, supervised, and welcoming waterfront spaces for everyone. Thank you very much.

Speaker number three is withdrawn. Oh, okay. Speaker number four has withdrawn as well. Speaker number five is Annalise Hoffman.

Hello, my name is Annalise Hoffman. I am here as a concerned citizen. I grew up on the Vancouver beaches, swimming, sailing. I'm one of the lucky ones who does know what it's like and how to be safe out on the waterways. I wanted to really highlight how Vancouver has been a leader in water safety for many years, dating back over 100 years now, back to Joe Fortes. He was the first lifeguard. He started as a volunteer. Like many of the current volunteers, they also volunteer in their community and are large contributors. Vancouver hosted the World Conference on Drowning Prevention in 2017. It was the largest conference of its kind at that moment. We were leaders. It also was the first drowning prevention conference hosted in North America. Their slogan was, share globally, prevent locally. In Canada, we're lucky many people have access to swimming lessons. However, others around the world are not as lucky. We are also a very diverse group of people here in Vancouver, visitors, new immigrants, and we want to make sure that everyone is kept safe. Other fun facts about lifeguards are that in other places, such as San Diego, lifeguarding is considered a first responder role, and they are part of the firefighting service. So they're recognized as a critical part of first responder and emergency response. Also in Hawaii, there is currently a motion at one of the locations for the lifeguards to also join the fire department. I urge you to make sure that the Vancouver lifeguards are returned to the five locations, Spanish Banks West, Spanish Banks East, Third Beach, and Sunset Beach. These are very important beach locations. There are numerous rescues that occur every year. And as everyone has said, most importantly, preventions. Lifeguards are able to identify very quickly what could escalate into larger emergencies and prevent those from happening. They're also the ones helping to helping the paramedics and the fire to navigate to where these people are located in a quick manner. The lifeguarding service has also developed many people over the years into paramedics, police, fire, doctors, lawyers, you name it.

There's somebody who is now in that profession who learned their leadership skills as a lifeguard on the beaches or pools. It is a critical public safety resource, and I urge you to vote to restore lifeguards immediately. Thank you.

Hi, my name is James Rees. I'm a resident of Vancouver. I'm calling in support of Pete Fry's motion to restore lifeguard services at key Vancouver beaches. I'm in support for the following reasons. Firstly, we need to be preventative rather than reactive when people's lives are at stake. All too often, authorities react after something bad happens or someone dies. We are here today privileged with the position and the opportunity to do something about it. Secondly, let us imagine a world where money didn't matter. Would you want the best and bravest on our shores? Would you want highly experienced first responders equipped with AEDs to come to your rescue or a beloved family member? If you cut the funding, those lifeguards will seek other positions. And if the funding was then reinstated, you would have those positions built by newer, less experienced lifeguards who don't know and understand these specific locations. Many of the lifeguards are highly skilled and experienced because they've worked for years at the same locations. Further, if you do require help, the chance of survival from a drowning or a heart attack without a rapid response time is very slim. Thirdly, ostensibly this is a budgetary discussion. But what price do you put on a human life? Yours? A family member? A tourist from another country? In Australia, where I'm from, we wouldn't dream of cutting services. If anything, our life notes should be paid more. I'll tell you one thing. I'm not doing it for the money. They are holding high regard for the invaluable public service they offer. Additionally, I am very familiar with one of the locations, Spanish Banks West. It's a spectacular place with kilometers of beach to explore, especially at low tide. If you know this spot, you will know it has very strong currents, and the tide comes in quickly, often stranding people on the sandbars, including little kids. Lifeguards at that location have a huge job. They monitor everyone from kiteboarders to canoers and kayakers to swimmers, and are available as frontline first aid for walkers, joggers, and cyclists using the foreshore path. Our world is changing. We need to change and adapt with it. Populations are rising as are global temperatures. The city is growing too. More and more people are coming to the city and living in smaller footprints as well. Where do these people go when they want to recreate and enjoy the weather? They are going ahead to our spectacular beaches and lakes. In closing, prevention is the best cure. Let us take responsibility for the lives of our citizens, our visitors, and the irreplaceable skills of our venerable lifeguards and reinstate them at all five locations. Thank you for your time.

Speaker number nine has drawn Irvin.

Okay, thank you. Good afternoon, Chair and Council and members of the public and staff. I'm John Irwin, a resident and a former Park Board Commissioner. I represent myself and I'm speaking in support of the motion. If we had a reasonable operating budget for the Park Board, we would not be here asking for money to fund an essential service. Lifeguards at Sunset, Third Beach and Spanish Banks. Staff at the Park Board are doing their best to meet the challenges of a $12 million shortfall caused by the last operational budget. We in the community appreciate the extra funding that prevented fee increases to meet these challenges. Thank you. Basically, alcohol and water mix well at home and in bars. On an ocean beaches, they only mix well with dedicated lifeguards on our beaches. Alcohol can lower inhibitions and lead to injury or tragedy. Lifeguards can intervene to save lives.

As a younger father, yes, I was a younger father, obviously, many hours were spent at sunset and through beaches with my twin boys and slightly older daughter when they were very young. I always kept them at arm's reach, but we only waited and swam in the lifeguard zone for added safety. The lifeguards were there and made our visits to the beach much more secure. Please fund these lifeguards for this season and those that follow. Not leaving enough room in the operating budget for the park board erodes its independence and jurisdiction. I have to also give a shout-out to my older sister, who now is much older. She was our lifeguard in a small community pool where I grew up in a small town in Alberta. That pool was our temple. We swam there every summer day, and they had two full-time lifeguards on duty all the time. Lifeguarding is essential. Service, you know, we live in a very crowded city. As people have mentioned, there's going to be visitors here. for FIFA and, you know, the tourist season is coming upon us. Please, you know, put this funding in and get the lifeguards working on our beaches. Thank you.

Hey, speaker number 10 is Philip Skinder.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Phil Skinder. I'm the Director and Head Coach of the largest life-saving sport club in BC. I'm here in support of the motion. We operate in city pools and beaches and have taught thousands of Vancouver children to swim, race, teach, and save lives. Many of them right here on these beaches. I want to speak clearly about the proposal to remove lifeguards from half of Vancouver's beaches. I am here in support of the motion. This is not a cost-saving measure. This is a risk decision. Let's be clear, it transfers risk away from the city's budget and puts lives and Vancouver's reputation at stake. And this isn't just my perspective. BC's paramedics have warned that removing lifeguards also creates avoidable risks and shifts the burden out to an already strained emergency system. And because when something goes wrong in an unguarded environment, and it will, the result is not savings. It's a more complex rescue or preventable tragedy. The vast majority of drownings in BC happen in unguarded waters during the summer months, the exact conditions we're trying to address. And only a tiny fraction happen when lifeguards are present, as Linnea already mentioned. This is prevention working. This city is rapidly losing pool space. Access to swimming lessons is declining. Therefore, fewer children are learning to swim. So the risk doesn't disappear, it increases. And we're going to see more children in open water and beaches because they don't have pools. So at the same time, more families will be relying on beaches. We're moving in the wrong direction. This risk is escalating. See, this is what I do for a living. We save lives by preventing drowning and teaching children to swim, teaching them to guard. We know that prevention is the most cost-effective approach. Because once something goes wrong, the costs escalate quickly. So I would ask, what is the value of a life? Because once something goes wrong, this is no longer a budget question. We are also entering years of critical pool shortages. Access is going to get worse, not better. And that means more risk at beaches. So we need to be clear about priorities. We may want landmark facilities. Do we really need them? What we need is simple. We need guards on the beaches, guards in the pools, and children safe in the water. Because people can find recreation anywhere, but they cannot learn to swim, they cannot have fun in the water without access to supervised ocean space. And one final point, Vancouver's reputation. We're about to welcome the world. A preventable incident doesn't stay local. The impact of one high-profile tragedy can outweigh years of savings. And when the world is watching,

Prevention is not optional. Keep the lifeguards on our beaches to make them safer and more welcoming, because over the next several years, more people, not fewer, will depend on them. Thank you. Thank you.

Speaker number 11 is Andrea Nicholson.

Thank you, Chair and Council. My name is Andrea Nicholson, and I'm in support of this motion. I'm a former head lifeguard on our Vancouver beaches, and I grew up learning to swim at our outdoor pools and beaches, all staffed with lifeguards. As a result, my passion for lifeguarding, public safety, and pride in our city began six decades ago. I was part of the group of presenters in 2012 when city councillors and park board commissioners recognized the importance of a similar motion. Quite frankly, I'm appalled that we're here again. It's clear that due diligence has not occurred, either in the funding for the Park Board, in the position of City Council, but either way, we hope that you've reviewed our submission as former lifeguards and head lifeguards, and that you will carefully choose your decision today.

Lifeguards are not negotiable. Vancouver's beaches are celebrated for their beauty, and because of decades of preventative work by our lifeguards, our city is known internationally for the safety of our beaches, an obvious fit for let's keep making Vancouver safer. Are we expecting the public to visualize an imaginary boundary between Spanish Banks East and Locarno, especially when the tide is out? Does the Locarno lifeguard now have to choose between swimmers in their designated area and someone drowning in the unguarded Spanish Banks Bay? Do you understand how the tide moves on the western beaches? How are boats moved to adjust to that? Or that there's a 30-foot drop-off and sandbars surrounding? If lifeguards are considered essential service during a strike, job action, or other emergencies, then the importance must be reflected in the budget for that service. This is especially true when we're welcoming the world for mass events such as FIFA, and when the city continues to grow through increased housing density and our community pools have been closed. Your decision on this motion has life-threatening consequences. Politics and contempt have no place in decision-making when public safety is at stake. If funding is not approved, the consequences will be measured in preventable tragedies and the accountability that follows. You'll certainly need to clear your calendars for the onslaught of coroner's inquest summons because they're going to be coming, and they will keep coming. That is unlikely to be the legacy that anyone would wish to leave. Making the right decision, please do. Support funding and sustain lifeguards on all Vancouver beaches. Thank you.

Speaker number 12 is Cameron Grierson. Cameron. Speaker number 12.

Number 12.

Oh, 12 is not speaking. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Council. I am here in support of the motion to restore the lifeguards to the beaches. My personal interest is one that I think is more universal in the city. I lost my leg six years ago. I'm a right leg amputee. Getting into the water is very difficult, especially on beaches where there's no structures or docks or whatever. And until you can get a waterproof leg in there, $15,000 to $20,000, you're kind of stuck with what you've got. And the lifeguards have things on the beach in their huts. that are sort of plastic three-wheeled vehicles that can get you into the water, wheel you out, the lifeguards help you out there, and they can get you into the water. So for the first time in five years, I was able to go swimming again, which was extremely important to me psychologically, but also I know to any amputee, anybody. So it's a disability issue. At the root of one of the things, all the other cases that have been made for lifeguards, it's an essential service. I know you're looking for $100 million in efficiency cuts and things like that. This is not an efficiency cut. This is exactly the opposite. Lifeguards are essential services. They're first responders. That's exactly what they do. And they also provide an opportunity for people with disabilities to be able to get into the water and enjoy the water safely. And that's not been thought about. It's a very ableist kind of decision to cut things like that without thinking there's other people besides children and beachgoers and people partying on the beach. And it seems to me that The word efficiency has come up in many of the articles about this. It just seems really daft. And it seems odd to be cutting such an essential service. And I think that also when we look at duplicating services, which is another thing that's come up in news articles, we're not duplicating services with having lifeguards. In fact, there could be more. The beaches could use more lifeguards, not less, and not fewer. And so I think essentially, I think it's an essential thing, especially with FIFA, the world coming here, more Americans coming here because they don't want to go in their own country, and it's a safe place to come. So there's people coming here, and they don't know our beaches, they don't know our places. And it's a sign of safety to them that we have lifeguards present. It's like having police on the streets. It's like having anything that's visible, fire trucks and fire things available. I think it's really essential that we recognize that lifeguards are not a frivolity. They're not a luxury. They're not excessive. They're not duplicating services. They're essential services. And I think that's one thing I'd like you to think about. I would also like to thank the councillors who are actually here today because it's important when an issue like this comes up that the council is represented. So I appreciate you being here in the room and I appreciate you hearing me. Thank you very much.

All right. Speaker number 14 is Jacqueline Robbins.

So we happen to be two. We're twins. My sister is. I'm Joyce Robbins. And we're going to be speaking together. We are really clients of lifeguards. I just need a point of clarity. I just want to thank British Columbia. I believe this is a Nobel issue that we've managed to control the tides. That's what I heard. I was told that the riptides are controlled. The tidal pools are controlled. I was told that the weirs are controlled, and I was told that every child born will be receiving a diving mechanism, so that we're all going to be perfectly safe. So I honestly believe that lifeguards are absolutely redundant.

Oh, excuse me. You can't believe what you always hear on the internet. I guess I'll have to reverse into a Gilda Ratner. Never mind. We're here to support the lifeguards. And the reason being is that we are indeed clients of lifeguards. And our story began very quickly. We're from Calgary, which is very landlocked. We used to spend our summers here in Vancouver. And under the graciousness of the sun in the province, we offered free swimming programs. My sister and I took all those courses for many years and 14 years with the YWCA in Calgary and together collectively we both sink like a stone. We are literally our specific gravity is below zero and we would have made great anchors on the Titanic but it went down quickly. We would have brought it down even faster. But that's why we need lifeguards more and more. We do support them. They are indeed an essential service. My sister and I are not statistics. And we cannot schedule a heart attack. We cannot schedule an event that requires instant and immediate intervention. Therefore, we are really spreading ourselves thin. It can't really be just a money issue. in this particular case. We are in very much support of the lifeguards and we also do not like the fact that some voices here have been suppressed. As far as we remember this is still a democracy. Please support the lifeguards. Go ahead. Thank you, Joyce, and thank you to the counselors who are here, and thank you for the mayor, and thank you for doing our city's service. It is a very essential service, and I must say that children live what they learn. Children will learn that if no one is there to protect them, that they can make up their own rules. Children need structure. Lifeguards are structure. Rules are important. And it is also very important to remember that children are our future. We need to protect them. This is not artificial intelligence. This is intelligent people who are doing their jobs after they have been well trained. Prevention is the number one tool of a lifeguard.

And if these tragedies cannot be cannot be stopped because we did not offer prevention through lifeguards. We are definitely in for a series of unfortunate events. Please, please restore the lifeguard services to Vancouver. Thank you for listening.

Yes, good afternoon. Can you hear me?

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Patricia Valadez, a Vancouver resident, and I support the motion to restore life course services at key Vancouver beaches. I'm speaking here today to share my experiences and concerns as a deep water swimmer and a water sports enthusiast who enjoys very much the waters of all Vancouver beaches. especially Spanish banks, Pearl Beach, and Sunset Beach. One of the greatest dangers for deep water swimmers is being exposed to motorized watercrafts like jet skis and recreational boats who, at high speed, cut through and trespass the protected swim zones. Additionally, these motorboats, jet skis, and even sailboats often attempt to reach the shore or to anchor in the swimming areas. creating a big hazard, including when swimming closer to the beach. This, combined with the fact that a lot of visitors and locals are able to rent guest keys and motorboats without proper knowledge of marine navigation rules and regulations, makes this hazard even greater. Lifeguards keep swimmers safe by monitoring these areas and deterring vessels away from them. educating their users when possible, and reporting dangerous behaviors to the proper authorities when necessary. This represents especially a problem for Third Beach, Spanish Banks, and Sunset, since their swim zones are very exposed to marine traffic due to their location and geography. As a deep water swimmer, I feel safer when I know that there are lifeguards looking out for me. and I know for a fact that every other swimmer feels the same. There is nothing more distressing than to hear and see a motorized watercraft approaching at high speed when enjoying my swims, and I must mention that this happens very often. In recent years, there has been an increase of interest in open water swimming, with triathlons in Vancouver becoming more popular. These events attract participants who are new to open water swimming and go deep with little to zero experience. As an experienced open water swimmer, I am very familiar with the highlights and dangers of the locations that will be left unsupervised if not restoring the lifeguards who keep them safe. Many locals and visitors are not. With their presence, lifeguards provide the reassurance that people need and appreciate when learning and practicing water sports and recreational activities. They also prevent accidents by providing education and information to all public involved in such activities. By maintaining lifeguards at all Vancouver beaches, the city provides equal access to vital public spaces for everyone, especially for vulnerable and marginalized communities.

to safely enjoy the Vancouver beaches and waterways. Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Roseanne Persaud. I'm a Vancouver resident. And I support the motion to have Vancouver lifeguards at various key beaches.

I'm a concerned citizen and with the busy summer season that Vancouver usually has coming up. Also, it's predicted to be a very warm summer season as well. Having a reduced number of lifeguards at a lot of the busy beaches might not necessarily be the best idea. In my opinion, lifeguards are not just sitting in chairs waiting for someone to drown. Their primary role is prevention. They're constantly interacting with the public. They're educating, intervening and stopping dangerous situations before they escalate. For example, A parent letting a toddler play alone near the water is quickly reminded to stay within arm's reach, or a tourist unfamiliar with our beaches is warned about the sudden drop-offs, and families walking about during Spanish Rang Slow Tide are told that the sand beneath them will soon be surrounded by deep water. These are small, everyday interactions that prevent emergencies before they happen, and it's not just about water safety as well. Lifeguards respond to missing children, provide first aid, de-escalate conflicts and manage situations that would otherwise turn into 911 calls. And so without the presence of these lifeguards, those situations don't necessarily disappear. They escalate even further. So a missing child becomes a full emergency response or an injured cyclist becomes something more and you need to call an ambulance. A conflict between beachgoers can sometimes turn into a police matter. So these are all various examples of responses that are expensive, especially beaches where the response time can take more than 30 minutes. Thank you so much.

Speaker 18? He's not speaking.

Sorry, am I starting now?

Podium over there. Please go ahead. Thank you. It was early June, and the weather had been inclement the night before. There had been a big storm that went through. When I arrived for work as a head guard at the Carmel Beach, I was the only one working there. The wind had actually shifted and was now blowing from the west at 20 knots per hour. which caused the whole bay to form up in these very steep, choppy waves with white caps on top of them. The whole bay was covered like that. And I saw sailboats way off in the distance and decided to take a look with the binos. And as I was scanning for them, I noticed an overturned small boat with a man clinging to the back end about 400 meters offshore. I immediately got a hold of Spanish Banks East, the beach next to me, and said, can you watch my beach? I got a tarp that we kept. It was about a six by six, no, seven by seven squared blue tarp, loaded some gray blankets into it, rolled it up, got our very large baler, threw those in the boat, which had already taken down to most of the dry sand, ran the boat down the beach, kicked the dolly over, jumped into the boat just as a wave was pulling back, which fortunately caught the boat and pulled it into the water, was just able to get two strokes in and turn the bow slightly towards the west so we didn't get swamped over the side. This is a very special old wooden boat called a clinker, which was very stable in rough water. So I managed to roll like a madman, got out there in about five minutes, found him hanging onto the boat, his boat, and he had pulled himself up about halfway, so there was only a wave that was hitting his lower torso. I backed our boat up to the bow of his boat. crawled onto the back seat, reached over, and I could get a hold of him. And I pulled him very slowly and carefully to me, turned him over, got him into our guard boat, and moved him up to the front and wrapped him up in all of the tarpaulin and the blankets. I then jumped back towards the rear of the boat, and fortuitously, just as I was about to climb over the rowing seat, a big wave picked up his sabot, and it actually pushed the bow of his boat up over the transom. over the transom of the back of our boat. So I grabbed a hold of that, and all the water poured out of his boat, so I just quickly turned his boat over, and he had a long tie-up line that was there, so I let that out, tied that up to the back of our boat, rowed furiously back in, got him in close to shore, got out, and we caught a really good wave which brought the guard boat right almost out of the water. Pulled the boat, got him out, pulled the boats up, got him, got in front of him and got a hold of his shoulder and his, under his left knee. Pulled him onto my back and ran him up the beach to where we have a cold water shower just outside the first aid room.

What we have inside the first aid room, and I don't know if it's still there, is this beautiful hot water shower connection, which the lifeguards all used when they came in from a cold swim. So I started to hook all that up by first taking the cold water shower head off. Hold our hot water shower.

30 seconds? Thank you. Long and short, after a few minutes, he was totally warm, functional, talking to me. I got all his personal information, called his wife. She came down with a dry set of clothes and towels.

Got them changed, and he was very happy. Sorry, Jim. Thank you. That was the end of the story. Thank you.

Yes, I'm representing Vancouver Open Water Swim Association.

There's Keith Fisher, Courtney Cohen, and Andrea McCallum.

Yes, Keith Fisher is here, and I'm here on support of the proposal.

This is Courtney Cohen, and I'm also a Vancouver resident in support. Thank you. And one more. We need one more.

Iris, we need one more speaker. If we don't have it, I can just keep it to three. I think it's Andrea if she's having audio trouble.

Yeah, I can just keep it to three.

And yes, hi, I'm Iris Katowski. I'm a Vancouver resident. I'm president of the Vancouver Open Water Swim Association. And I'm in support of this motion to restore a lifeguard to Key Beaches this summer. At the Vancouver Open Water Swim Association, we are a local nonprofit. We're a community group. And we have a large community of open water swimmers. We swim every summer at Kitts Beach on Mondays and Thursdays, and we rely on the city lifeguards to provide safe access to our swims. They provide a great service to us.

And we've just seen, I just want to speak, maybe people have felt that there's not a demand for our beaches, but we've seen an increased demand. Our swims, which we offer lifeguards out in rowboats, there's a huge demand for safe, open-water swimming. We sell out within typically 15 minutes. We open our swims two days before. We've been selling out, and unfortunately, we cannot accommodate everyone who wants to swim with us. So we've seen a lot of demand, and we've also seen a lot of new and experienced swimmers taking up this hobby. You know, Vancouver is a very active city. We've got exciting new events like the T100 and many marathons and cycling events. A lot of these people are getting into open water swimming, and unlike things like pool swimming or... or running or other things, even if you're fit, there's a lot of unknown risks. So as other people are talking about, lifeguards play a huge role in educating and preventing tragedies by just informing people of the proper precautions they need to take with gear. with safety, with maybe routes that they're planning. I think it would be a huge loss to not have lifeguards available at these beaches. Absolutely critical for keeping our community safe. Our beaches are a huge asset. We're an expensive city, and our beaches are one of the most valuable things we have, and this is one of the greatest things that Vancouver has to offer people, and it would be such a shame to have preventable issues. that could simply have been prevented by just having, spending 600,000, which in the scheme of things nowadays is really not very much, to have our beaches properly staffed with lifeguards. So we would ask you, Council, to please support this motion and restore our lifeguards to the beaches. Thank you.

Speaker number 24 is Alvin Glare.

Speaker 24 is not on the line.

Hi there. Can you hear me?

Please go ahead. Hi, Mr. Mayor. Hi, City Council. My name is Chris Fallon. I've been a Vancouver citizen since 2010. I spent 10 years as a Vancouver Beach lifeguard before I resigned to start my career in the fire service. I'd like to tell you a quick story of a day I was working at Spanish Banks Extension, a beach that is no longer staffed by Vancouver Lifeguards. For those of you unfamiliar with Spanish Banks, at low tide, you have the sand flats exposed that stretch for a kilometre or two or more, depending on how extreme the tide is that day. This day was a pretty extreme low tide, and as it started to come back in, a sandbar island was formed roughly two kilometres offshore. I saw somebody out there. So I decided to go and speak with them, just let them know the tide was coming in and it was going to get more and more difficult to get back to shore. As I got closer and made contact, I realized this person was a six-year-old boy out there by himself, no parental supervision, nobody else around to help him if he needed help. And the water between us and the shore was roughly three to four feet deep. It would have been up to his neck or over his head in some areas. And I personally have never met a six-year-old who can swim for two kilometers unassisted. Excuse me. i put him in the boat i walked back i told him in had a nice chat he got a nice little boat ride out of it i walked back i was thinking about how i was going to talk to these parents i was a little frustrated at their irresponsibility of letting him be out there by himself and when i got back to shore they ran up they were flustered emotional terrified because he had walked away from them when they were distracted by the birthday party they were hosting Something kids do, they walk away, they get lost in Walmart and parks. It happens all the time. So it's my belief that if lifeguards were not there that day, that the best case scenario would have been us finding the body and those parents getting some closure. Worst case scenario would have been those two would have been tortured for the rest of their lives, not knowing what happened to their son, where he is, whether he's alive or dead, whether he was kidnapped or worse. I'm very proud of my role in helping that family. And thank you for listening to my story. I hope you make the right decision.

Hi, can you hear me?

excellent thank you so much and thanks to the council i'm really appreciative of the time i also i'm aware that some of the things i might be saying are going to be things that you've already heard before my i'm a vancouver resident i'm a former lifeguard for the beaches and pools for the city of vancouver i'm a stand-up paddler and racer in local waters and currently i'm the director for professional practice for vancouver coastal health working in acute care So I come from a variety of viewpoints. I've been working on FIFA emergency planning, which I know other people have been bringing up. But I really, really feel like this is going to be a big problem. I'm supportive of... re-putting the lifeguards back. And I think that there is a really big piece of public safety, which we've talked about. Seasonal lifeguards are a frontline public safety service, and we have taken responsibility for that. We see the outflow into emergency, in the emergency department all the time, and both... in uh our health authority and others and um it's it's a really important piece i see it for the vancouver and i also think it's such a big piece of prevention um in a risk management situation i think it's responsible for us to put um the lifeguards back where they can do the best and the most prevention um and they are so integral to the community and it prevents so many people from coming and being in an emergency when they did not need to be there I think a seasonal risk is a really big piece. We know that the drownings occur most between May and September. We have a huge influx of people coming in. People are drinking more. We have a lot of adverse effects from drug supply coming into Vancouver. And we have the lifeguards doing a lot of frontline work in that area as well. And I'm super appreciative of them, along with all of our other emergency services. I feel like this is a small thing that has such a huge impact on our community, on the safety for our beaches, for families, for anybody who's using beaches in the local waterways. I feel like it's a due diligence. It's our duty to provide these safety services. And I'm speaking now from all these aspects, but also from a healthcare aspect, being in the role that I'm at. And I feel like it means that we have equitable access to beaches for people who may not be able to go there otherwise because their safety would be compromised. It's an inclusion piece. So I think I'm saying much the same thing that others have said. I think for tourism, for our reputation, for our public trust, I think we really need to go back and re-look at this. And I think that putting the lifeguards back on the beach is going to be the thing to do.

I think it's going to be really, really important. Thank you.

Yeah, please go ahead, Stephen.

Hi, my name is Steve Fulmer, and I'm in favor of this motion. In 1980, I started my first responder career as a lifeguard for the city of Vancouver. In 1993, I pivoted to the service with the Vancouver Fire Department. For 31 years, I worked as a firefighter, training officer, captain, battalion chief, acting chief, and founder of one of the founding members of CanTF1. I've since retired in 2024. but it can speak from experience that eliminating the lifeguards at key Vancouver beaches will significantly increase public safety or decrease public safety and place additional strain on the already overextended first responder system. Three of these beaches are remote, such as Third Beach, Spanish Banks, and Spanish West. Without lifeguards, police and fire crews will be required to respond to the incidents. that lifeguards currently prevent, manage, or manage on site. Lost children, medical calls, water emergencies, beach fires, to name some. At a time when call volumes in the downtown east side are already stretching resources, removing lifeguards will put police and fire units even farther away from where they're urgently needed. urgently needed. Sorry. It is also important to note that police and fire ambulance personnel are not trained to perform water rescues. As a former training officer with the Vancouver Fire, I can say that sending untrained responders into the water puts them, the public, and the public at serious risk. Lifeguards also play a critical role in fire prevention. in the beaches that are in question are adjacent to Stanley Park and Pacific Spirit Park, both high-risk, high-fuel-load environments. Lifeguards consistently enforce the fire bylaws. Last August, I personally witnessed a lifeguard talk to five separate groups about the fire bylaws and have them extinguish their fires. Without lifeguards, these calls would have fallen on Vancouver Fire Rescue Service, tying up crews and increasing the risk of catastrophic wildfire in two of their most vulnerable parks.

In 1983, while working at Spanish banks as a lifeguard, I rescued Peter Gabriel days before his concert. Without lifeguards on this beach, it would have been a big tragedy. Lifeguarding has also proven a good pathway to policing and firefighting.

Many strong recruits come through the lifeguard program.

In short, lifeguarding simplifies. Lifeguardings are not simple beach staff. They are critical components of the Vancouver public safety infrastructure. They reduce the strain on police, fire, and ambulance, provide... Immediate first aid and early intervention to prevent incidents through education and enforcement, protect our parks and neighborhoods.

Thank you, City Council, for your time and consideration to hear my concerns on today's agenda item. My name is Mackenzie Perry, and I'm a citizen of Vancouver. I am calling today to express my support for the motion to restore lifeguards at key Vancouver beaches. While I am not a lifeguard for the city of Vancouver, I have been a lifeguard and instructor for nearly 10 years, a head lifeguard for six of those years, as well as a national lifeguard trainer. I'm also an avid swimmer and open water swimmer. I live in the West End, and during the summer months, I swim at the beaches nearly every day, and I am concerned at the risk to my personal safety as a citizen in Vancouver. Statistics pulled from the National Life Saving Society put drowning as the third leading cause of accidental death for people under the age of 60 in Canada. As of 2025, nearly 70% of these deaths occurred in unguarded open bodies of water. An overwhelming majority of these drownings occur between the months of May and September. In BC, less than 1% of fatal drownings occur in guarded environments. This clearly highlights the significant role beach lifeguards play in public health and safety. Lifeguards are an essential service that the city must invest in. If lifeguards are removed from these key beaches, the responsibility for responding to emergencies will fall to our emergency services. Paramedics, police, and fire department are not adequately trained on aquatic-related emergencies and how to respond to them. This would put an immense amount of stress on our emergency services in Vancouver, which are already stretched thin. These incidents will inevitably escalate to search and rescue missions. The average cost of a singular search and rescue mission is $150,000.

Preventing five incidents would more than cover the alleged savings from the budget cuts proposed. I urge the city to consider the ramifications of leaving these beaches unprotected. This is not a question of if fatalities will occur, but when and how many are going to occur. This cost cutting will lead to negligence lawsuits being filed against the city for not protecting its citizens and visitors. The cost of employing these lifeguards is nothing in comparison to the moral obligations you have to your citizens in Vancouver, not to mention legal costs that will accrue. A case I'd like to highlight is the lawsuit against the city of Windsor, which is a $5 million claim that highlights the scale of liability that you could be responsible for. The claim is finding the city negligent for inadequate safety measures and is responsible for the death of a teenager who died swimming at one of their beaches. This beach has a landscape that is not dissimilar to the landscape of Third Beach and Spanish Banks. As a lifeguard myself, I understand the many ways that lifeguards prevent and protect the public so that all swimmers can enjoy the beauty of our great city. In closing, lifeguards are not just teenagers in a red t-shirt working their summer job. They are essential emergency services, and we should not be taken lightly.

Thank you for your time and consideration, Council.

Good afternoon. My name is Greg Royal. I am a resident of Vancouver as well as the vice president of QP 1004. Public trust. That is what is at stake by not reinstating and refunding the outdoor lifeguard program. That trust has been built over decades of service by well-trained and competent lifeguards providing professional safety supervision. That supervision provides reassurance to community members that their families are protected and prevents incidents by identifying hazards before they can escalate. That supervision translates into superior crowd control. They enforce clear rules, curb risky behaviors, and organize groups in high-traffic areas. Given the number of visitors the city expects for FIFA during peak beach hours, it is counterintuitive that they would strip themselves of this valuable tool before needing them the most. Public trust. We have a collective duty, a set of obligations that we all adhere to. We pay our taxes, and we follow the rules. And up until now, the city has held up their end of the bargain by providing public safety and prevention on our beaches by employing lifeguards.

Removing lifeguards may be fiscally expedient, but it is short-sighted. Without clear authority and presence, you leave the beaches to the freedom of the user, leading to opportunistic crime, delayed emergency response, and increased risk to beachgoers. I call on council... to fund the lifeguard program and preserve the public trust and safety. Thank you. Thank you.

I just would like to say thank you for giving me the time to speak to City Council. As an immigrant from a country in South America, I see myself in another immigrant that came here in 1885. And he came here... He lived on a tent on English Bay. And he saw the tragedy of seeing people drown and the pain that caused to their families. Without any recompense, he decided to, you know, take it upon himself to do rescues and to teach children and adults how to swim safely. He was a man that knew the risks of being out there in the water, exposure to the sun. And he still did it without, like I said, any recompense. His name is Joe Fortes. And like the Vancouver lifeguards of 2026, he was a man who was from experience and living from... you know, living in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, able to recognize the hazards in the water.

I've besieged the city council and Mayor Ken Sim to essentially fund our lifeguards. They're an essential necessity for the residents of the city of Vancouver. And I think, you know, not having them around is essentially a shame in the memory and legacy of one of the best Canadians that we've ever had. And I will teach you the council and the municipality to keep their funding alive. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Hello there. All right. President, I forgot to say that part. But yeah, I am in support. of having lifeguards in our city because we know that our public spaces, especially our beaches, bring in a lot of visitors, not just residents, including ones from all around the world, because we know that this summer there's going to be a FIFA World Cup. We also know that there will be alcohol involved because no matter what the rules are, there will always be. So lifeguards are an essential part in terms of making sure that tragedies are prevented. Because you will always have people who underestimate their own abilities when it comes to the water. You can see that in beaches all around the world. We will also have, for example, children. And if you've ever had to deal with them, you know that just one small lapse inattention is all it takes for them to wander off somewhere, potentially into the water. And case in point, when I was around three to four years old, I was that kid. If it wasn't for a lifeguard that scooped me out of the water, I would have been a tragedy that occurred. But no, I am here speaking, and I want to make sure that such tragedies that could have happened to me all those years ago do not occur to anyone else by not having lifeguards. It is a shame that not having lifeguard disease has been considered to begin with. And we need to make sure that they're funded by our city to protect not just the residents, but for any visitor that comes to this city forever. Thank you.

My name is Gabby. I'm a resident of Vancouver and a lifeguard for 11 years. I'm also an aspiring water safety professional. I hope to share a bit about my personal experience in the field and why I support reinstating lifeguard presence on our Vancouver beaches. There are so many angles as to why lifeguards on beaches are critical to public safety in our city during the summer. But one side we may not often consider is the emotional and mental impacts losing lifeguards will inevitably have on the members of our community. Having been in the industry for so long, I sometimes like to think that I've seen it all. But after a life or death rescue at my workplace in 2022 that required me to utilize my national lifeguard training, I started to struggle mentally. I couldn't eat, I couldn't sleep, and I had vivid flashbacks of holding a dying individual's head in my hands as I realized this person might die and there's nothing more I can do about it. I was quickly directed to counseling, where I was later diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder as a result from this response. A year later, I responded to a similar life or death emergency, utilizing my training from the National Lifeguard Program once again. I continued to struggle after this with the feeling of breaking another human being's ribs during chest compressions forever etched into my brain. Despite having saved two human lives using training I've had ingrained in me for years, I struggled, and I continue to struggle, with the thoughts and feelings I have related to those rescues. I'm really someone in a best-case scenario when it comes to approaching situations like these. I have years of research-backed training. I'm already in the routine of identifying dangers and responding to it, and I have access to supports in the industry to help me debrief after major incidents. I am so remarkably better equipped than a good Samaritan walking onto the scene, and yet I will never forget that individual's bluish-gray head in my hands while feeling so helpless, or the cracks of another human being's ribs as I desperately tried to compress the light back into their body. My heart truly breaks at the thought of a well-meaning bystander in our city having to experience something like that, then having to navigate the after-effects of critical incident stress just because we removed the individuals who are trained to do it in the first place. By removing lifeguards from our waterfronts and our communities, you are not just removing a layer of preventative protection from recreation spaces. You are asking members of the public to step into first responder roles, first responder roles that will be the line between life or death this summer. Civilians do not have the training, resources, or support to deal with these complex, high-pressure emergencies, and we will be traumatizing and putting members of our community at risk if we're expecting them to step up to the plate. When we have access to highly trained, incredibly knowledgeable waterfront lifeguards, why are we actively choosing to jeopardize the mental well-being of our beloved community members, our brothers and sisters, our mothers and fathers? I deeply encourage you that we consider reinstating lifeguard presence on the impacted waterfront. Thank you.

Hi there. My name is Cindy. I am a resident of Vancouver. I am also a mother of a neurodivergent child, as well as somebody who lifeguarded in Vancouver, both in the indoor and outdoor system. I would like to say that I support the motion to restoring lifeguards at the key Vancouver beaches and would like to express disappointment that Trout Lake, the only beach in East Van, is not included in part of the motion. I would like to say that as a parent who have young children in Vancouver, There are already a lack of spaces for children to go, especially during the summer months. With recent cutting and funding, as parents have tried to get swimming lessons as being the game of thrones, our children aren't getting access to learning water safety, swimming to begin with, with less programming in the community center and also shorter opening hours at the libraries. The beaches is a great place for those of us with young family to go and enjoy what I feel like our poverty tax has paid for the city. So to think that it is a huge myth to not have a safety service such as lifeguards being the first responder in some of the busiest beaches we have in the city. I would like to let you know that A drowning can happen within 30 seconds. I am not sure in what likelihood that would be when any of the ambulances or firefighters can come. And specifically speaking about the neurodivergent children, 90% of preventable death in neurodivergent children are from drowning. So I would like to urge everyone to be in support of this motion. and thank you for your time.

Please go ahead. Good afternoon. My name is Craig Amundsen. Thank you, Mayor Sim and councillors. I wear too many hats, but in the interest of time, I am here today because in 2016, as a volunteer of the Life Saving Society since 1983, and as a past national president of the Royal Life Saving Society's National Board, I was invited to celebrate the 125th anniversary of the Royal Life Saving Society, which was created in 1891 in the UK. That memorable experience prompted me to become more active in our life-saving activities in Vancouver, in Canada, and abroad. It also prompted me to acknowledge that Joe Fortes started Vancouver Lifeguarding in 1888, three full years before the association we've all belonged to, was even established. His history establishes that 1888 was the year he started spending his summertime at English Bay teaching children and adults how to swim and rescuing drowning victims when required. 1900 is listed as the start of the Vancouver Parks Board lifeguarding with the hiring of Joe Fortes by the Parks Board. If you look around, if you're compelled by it, it is very difficult to find another jurisdiction with our unique history and such depth. And if you're curious as to why there is a passionate outpouring, I would say that this is part of it. Consider the impact of an Afro-Caribbean man in the 1880s and 1890s, teaching largely Caucasian Vancouver residents in a time of the Asian head tax and other racist policies and practices against Indigenous and people of colour. He created the Vancouver lifeguard system, an amazing legacy. followed by the Pantages family and the polar bear swim cub, all of which are part of our international reputation as a leader in water safety and a very nice place to visit. The various speakers here today are just standing before our elected leaders, arguing to maintain funding, just as Joe Fortes had to do several times during his time as a lifeguard and special constable of the Parks Board in those days.

It is frustrating to feel the necessity to defend lifeguarded beaches when the statistics are so clear. As stated nationally by many previous speakers and the Life Saving Society, 99% of drownings happen at unsupervised beaches. If we have unsupervised beaches, those numbers and statistics will fall on us. This is now your decision to make, and I can sympathize the challenges you face better than most. As a formal Chief of Staff to Mayor Diane Watts and an Executive Assistant to Daryl Masato and I know the budgets require compromise, but I urge you not to compromise public safety. Please return the required funding to Vancouver's beaches. Thank you, Mayor Sim and Council, and thank you, Councillor Fry, for bringing forward the motion. Good afternoon.

Hello. Thank you, Mayor Sim and Council. My name is Anna, and as a member of the community, I encourage you to support this motion. As the last speaker, I will be brief. Much of the public discussion has been about finances, and while maintaining the $600,000 worth of cost savings are noted, according to stats from the BC Injury Request and Prevention Unit, a single fatal drowning will cost hundreds of thousands of Vancouver taxpayer dollars, and that's not including a coroner's inquest. As well, a single non-fatal drowning could result in life-altering deficits that cost millions of taxpayer dollars in health care and living expenses. With the guaranteed rise in preventable injuries and death, the budget will not be saved in the long run. Apart from drownings, lifeguards also attend to major injuries in the parks and streets nearby the beaches, such as heart attacks, strokes, and overdoses. Having less frontline workers is a very dangerous move, especially during the current opioid crisis. and will make the city a less desirable place to visit. Lastly, having no lifeguards on the beach will also cause a fear of the water from locals and tourists, and it will affect one of the aspects that make Vancouver so special from the other Canadian cities. I urge you to restore the lifeguard budget, and thank you for listening. Thank you. Speaker 40 is Natasha Stolzgaard.

Speaker 40 is not on the line. Speaker 41 is Dominic Labrosse.

Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, Chair and Council. My name is Dominic Labrosse. I'm a Vancouver resident. I'm also the General Manager of the Jericho Sailing Center, and I've been involved with its Jericho Rescue Team for over 30 years. I'm in strong support of the motion to restore seasonal lifeguard services at Spanish Banks East-West. sunset and third beaches. The removal of lifeguards from these beaches would create a significant and predictable gap in supervision at some of the most heavily used and geographically expansive waterfront areas in the city. At Spanish banks, low tide can expose an area of up to two square kilometers. On a typical summer day, that space can hold thousands of people. Without lifeguards, that becomes a very active and entirely unsupervised environment. Lifesaving Society of BC reports that 99% of drownings occur at unsupervised locations. Expanding the number of unsupervised beaches increases the likelihood of preventable fatalities. Locations like Spanish banks where alcohol consumption is permitted introduce additional factors that further increase the likelihood of incidents. Removing lifeguards from those environments multiplies risk. Lifeguards identify hazardous behavior before it escalates, and their presence alone changes behavior. They reduce the number of incidents that become emergencies. Without that presence, we are not just removing response capacity, we are removing prevention. From an operational standpoint, these incidents do not disappear. Based on our experience during the Kitts Coast Guard base closure, we can expect increased call volumes to other City of Vancouver services, including Vancouver Police, Vancouver Fire Rescue, and Park Rangers, along with continued reliance on BC Emergency Health Services and Marine Response Partners.

While highly capable, these are not substitutes for onsite lifeguards. Water-related emergencies are time critical. The difference between immediate intervention and delayed response can be the difference between a rescue and a fatality. Those responses require dispatch, travel time, coordination, and in many cases, multi-agency involvement. And in fact, removing lifeguards does not eliminate cost. It redistributes it, often at a higher per incident cost and with slower response times leading towards outcomes. This creates additional operational pressure on city services that are already managing competing demands during peak summer months. Lifeguards, by contrast, provide continuous on-site coverage with the specialized training to intervene immediately. They resolve the vast majority of issues before they escalate into the kind of emergencies that require a costly multi-agency response. In 2007, beach lifeguards were deemed an essential service, recognition of their role in protecting public safety. This motion proposes a $600,000 investment to restore that protection. In the context of the city's overall budget and given the scale of use and risk, this is a modest and targeted investment in a core service. the alternative is to accept a foreseeable increase in risk increased pressure and cost on city services and the very real possibility of preventable loss of life i urge council to support this motion to ensure lifeguard services are in place for the 2026 speech season thank you for your time thank you speaker 42 is strong cross hello uh hello my name is jonathan cross and I am a resident of Vancouver. Lifeguards save lives through prevention and intervention, and removing lifeguards from key beaches puts public safety at risk. On September 1, 2013, four people in two canoes, for example, were rowing past Spanish Bank West, and none of them were wearing life jackets. Both canoes tipped over, and all four people began to drown. Lifeguards responded immediately and were able to retrieve all four people from the water. Had the lifeguards not been there, all four of those people would almost certainly have died. Lifeguards prevent injuries often before they happen.

For example, on a hot summer day in 2019, a kite surfer repeatedly entering the swim zone in Spanish Banks East, he was moving fast and disregarding the numerous people in the water. At the speed he was going, it was highly likely that he would have caused serious harm, if not a fatality, to one or more of the swimmers had the lifeguards not been there. One lifeguard and a rowboat intercepted him and attempted to redirect him elsewhere, but when the kite surfer ignored the lifeguards, they coordinated with the Vancouver Police Department, which led to the kite surfer's arrest. In the coming hot summer months, there will be thousands of people on the beaches and in the water. If there are no lifeguards on our key beaches and someone gets hurt, untrained beach patrons will likely begin to make unnecessary 911 calls. These well-intentioned but untrained people are likely to make it

seem at times that like the injured people are in worse shape than they actually are. 911 operators will be uncompelled to send emergency medical services and or police, which will result not only a waste of city resources, but also taking these resources from people who might really need them elsewhere. Lifeguards are trained experts who are able to distinguish within seconds what type of treatment an injured or drowning person requires and whether emergency services are required. Untrained bystanders are likely to call for an ambulance for someone with an injury or symptoms that they don't recognize, diverting services away from someone elsewhere who may be having any number of serious conditions such as a stroke or heart attack where time really is of the essence. When it really counts, lifeguards are an economical solution to a multitude of problems that occur in the water or on the beaches and in the surrounding area. When any one person dies, countless other lives are affected. Families, friends, neighbors, classmates, workmates, or more, and more. A single loss of life can be devastating not only to families and friends, but to entire communities. That trauma can easily be prevented by having lifeguards on any of our key beaches. Yeah, I've been listening to everything everybody has to say, and it really does occur to me that the work of lifeguarding is going to get done no matter who does it. And Why not just have lifeguards do it? Because that's the easiest way to do it. I mean, police, fire, someone's going to do it. And why not just have lifeguards do it, you know? So thanks very much. Thank you, John.

Thank you very much. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm going to try and break this into two parts. One is a bit of a recap of the 2026 budget discussions in the fall. And myself and many, many other people in Vancouver came and spoke and urged caution by this council on that vote. Specifically, I talked about potential unintended consequences. that the Vancouver Park Board in particular was already a lean operation, that there was no fat to be cut from the system. And I was delighted to hear that that was a message that was well received, not just from my message, but others. I believe it was Councillor Klassen that had moved an amendment to secure extra funding for community centre hours. So again, thank you. I think when we dialogue back and forth, I think good things can happen. This lifeguard funding issue is one of those unforeseen consequences of the budget approach approved by this council. This was an issue that flared up during my time on the park board. I believe it was 2012. And again, in a cost-saving endeavor, staff had made some recommendations. We heard from the public. We heard from our frontline lifeguards and thought otherwise. So here we are again. didn't come up during the budget discussions in the fall because I think steps could have been taken then. It's a very stressful situation for our fabulous frontline workers, our lifeguards. I think we actually have the potential of losing many of them in this uncertain time. I also know that a lot of our lifeguards would have loved to be here to share their perspectives, but obviously... employees or you know potential employees I think they're a bit nervous about coming and speaking but I know that many of them actually had been signed up initially to speak to this so it's important that you've been able to hear from past lifeguards and from others and so I would urge you to to restore the funding and essentially that's what it is Steve Jackson the Park Board general manager has as I thought done his very best to try and make the budget work and and obviously it hasn't completely and so here we are with the big hole, 600,000. So I would urge you to approve this motion. You know, and as a parent, I have two teenagers and we have spent much of their lives at Locarno Beach and Third Beach. And I can tell you from firsthand experience, it's not just about water safety, but the number of times I've seen the lifeguards intervene in situations and whether it's a rowdy crowd, predatory behavior from people on the beaches. Myself, we had an encounter with an elderly woman who was going through some distress. We didn't know what it was, but the lifeguard was there in two seconds to intervene. And so, you know, unless we want to see more VPD up and down the beaches, if we are concerned about safety, I think the right decision to support the motion. So thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today.

Good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Graham Lewis, Vancouver resident, and I'm both a former Vancouver Beach lifeguard and paramedic. And I'm here today in strong support of keeping Vancouver beaches safe and maintaining lifeguard services. Having worked on Vancouver's beaches as well as in emergency medical services, I can say without hesitation, lifeguards are not a luxury. They're a critical component of public safety infrastructure. They prevent incidents through vigilance and education, and when emergencies occur, they deliver immediate and highly trained care in the moments that matter most. Without lifeguards stationed at beaches such as Third Beach, ambulance response times can easily exceed 20 minutes during peak summer conditions, particularly navigating through Stanley Park traffic. In medical emergencies like cardiac arrest, drowning, spinal injuries, those minutes are often the difference between life and death or between full recovery and permanent disability. Lifeguards bridge that gap. They are already on scene. They initiate rescues within seconds, begin life-saving interventions, and stabilize patients long before an ambulance can arrive. I have many personal stories of how trained lifeguards on Vancouver beaches have directly and positively impacted public safety and have saved lives. I'd like to share two with you today. In 2019, a man in his early 30s collapsed on the seawall between 2nd and 3rd Beach. A bystander alerted nearby lifeguards. My eldest daughter, who was working as a lifeguard at Second Beach that day, responded immediately with her partner. They performed CPR, administered oxygen, and delivered three shocks with an AED, restoring his pulse before paramedics arrived. The next day, his wife returned to thank them, saying the doctors didn't know if he would have survived without their intervention. I've also seen this impact on my own family. When my son was 13 at Second Beach and Stanley Park babysitting a family friend's child, he suddenly felt like he couldn't breathe. Panicked, he ran into the nearby washroom, where his condition quickly worsened. Thankfully, lifeguards were present. They recognized he was having a severe anaphylactic reaction, and they acted immediately. Their presence and critical intervention likely saved his life. These are not isolated incidents, but just two personal examples of the incredible service that lifeguards provide. Beyond safety, there's a broader civic and economic consideration. Vancouver beaches are a cornerstone of its identity as a world-class tourist destination. Visitors from around the globe are drawn not only to the natural beauty of these spaces, but also to the sense of safety, professionalism, and care that lifeguard services provide. The visible presence of trained lifeguards reassures families, supports tourism, and reinforces Vancouver's reputation as a city that prioritizes public well-being. Lifeguards also serve as ambassadors. They are often the first point of contact for visitors, offering assistance, information, and welcoming presence. The positive impact they project, competence, approachability, and safety is invaluable to the city's public relations and tourism economy. Please help keep Vancouver beaches safe by maintaining our lifeguards. Thank you for your time.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Sam, and as a Vancouver resident and local beachgoer, I am here to speak in support of restoring lifeguard services to key city and beaches. On July 25th, 2023, an elderly man died on dendritus in an unguarded area. On April 17th, 2025, a swimmer drowned at Wreck Beach. And in August 2025, another swimmer lost their life in the unguarded stretch between Jericho and the Cardinal. These are not distant or abstract events. They are recent local tragedies that highlight a clear and ongoing gas to public safety. Our coastline is beautiful, but it is also unpredictable. Currents shift, winds rise, and conditions can change quickly. Even experienced swimmers can find themselves in distress. Without lifeguards present, there's no one dedicated to actively monitoring the water, identifying risk early, or intervening in those critical first moments when a life can still be saved. This is why lifeguards matter, not only for response, but for prevention. Their presence deters risky behaviors, provides guidance to inexperienced swimmers, and creates a safer environment for everyone. And our beaches are busy. In the warmer months, they are filled with families, children, tourists, and people of varying skill levels, many of whom are unfamiliar with local conditions. When emergencies happen in unguarded areas, the response is slower and more difficult. Emergency services must be dispatched from elsewhere, often navigating distance, access challenges, and time constraints, especially at Spanish West and East, where shorelines extend over a kilometer. In water-related emergencies, those delays can be the difference between life and death. We should not accept these kinds of tragedies as inevitable. The deaths on July 25th, 2023, April 17th, 2025, and August 2025 are reminders of what is at stake when there is no dedicated safety presence. It points to a need for a more proactive, preventative approach. Restoring lifeguard services is a practical and necessary step. It strengthens public safety, reduces strain on emergency responders, and demonstrates a clear commitment to protecting both residents and visitors. I urge the Council to support this motion and take action to prevent future loss of life. Thank you.

Speaker 24 is Owen Glare. Owen?

Are you online, Owen?

Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Please go ahead. Over.

You're good? Yes, we can hear you. Please go ahead. Awesome. Sorry about that. Thank you. I would like to start off by thanking Tom Digby, Tara, and the whole Parks Board for putting this forward initially as an urgent motion. Thank you to Pete Fry for bringing this forward to council as an urgent motion. I would also like to say before I start that we have already heard from the Parks Board a unanimous decision on this topic. My name is Owen Gore. I'm a resident of Vancouver for the last five years, and I'm also a lifeguard in the city. Funny enough, I've been pulled out of the water while I was mid-swim lesson teaching to speak to you today, which is quite a fun experience as I'm going to tell you why I believe we should keep lifeguards in Vancouver. When I first moved here five years ago, I was very shocked to hear that Vancouver had beach lifeguards. I'm originally from Manitoba, where before I was born, they had cut our beach lifeguard programming and replaced it with a program called the Beach Safety Officers. Now let me tell you, these programs do not work. The only way to truly prevent drowning is with proper supervision from a trained lifeguard. We have seen across this country... Thousands of times which lifeguards have saved the lives of children, families, weak swimmers, the water, but on the land. I myself jumped in for a kid two hours ago. This is not an uncommon occurrence. If we remove lifeguards, we lose it all. It's a big, scary thing. Think about how many children are going to swim who might not know how to swim, might get in trouble, and who's there going to be to help them? Their parents? Well, I can tell you, as someone who works in pools, their parents aren't always watching. It's our duty as lifeguards. to care and provide for our community, which is my big point I bring to you today. The beaches aren't just a place of water recreation. The beaches are a place of community. And by removing our lifeguards, we are doing nothing but joining in in the world of organized abandonment of our aquatic spaces. We've already seen the shutdown of numerous pools across Canada this year. We've seen a massive reduction in lifeguards. What are we going to do? Swimming, as you have probably heard, is the number two activity enjoyed by children in the summer. Drowning is the number two cause of non-intentional death for children in Canada.

These are terrifying statistics. It is not just me who is going to stand here today and read out to you facts from the National Drowning Report. Rather, People have already done that. I urge you to read the report and see the only way that we can truly guarantee a safe community space for everyone in this city. Those like me who only came here a few years ago, and those like many of my friends who are beach lifeguards who were born and raised in this city.

Yes, thanks, Chair. So, first of all, I just want to thank all the speakers. We heard a lot of I think important stories and important information that should really give us pause to think about how we want to make sure that we are always committed to public safety. And I know as a council... that we're strongly of the view that public safety is paramount in all its forms, including at our beaches. Which brings me to the fact that the Vancouver Park Board is the duly elected body responsible for setting service levels and allocating resources within its operating budget, including decisions related to lifeguard and staffing hours. And with that, I have sent into the clerk a referral motion

Yes.

You're talking about the amendment, not the motion.

Amendment. Okay.

Okay, we need a seconder for the referral amendment.

No, for the Council Classes Amendment.

So let's take five minutes recess. Chair, just for the online folks who have joined, could you, it was not audible. What's just happening here? Is it a point of order?

Okay, and is there a section of the procedure bylaw we can reference?

Yes, I said that under 8.7E, that has been referred to a committee or postponed to a later date and time so that this motion has been referred to us from the park board. And F is incorrect in that council is actually responsible for funding decisions.

Okay, thank you very much. Thanks, Councillor. We're going to be back in five minutes.

All right. Yeah. Maybe Councillor Fry can speak more to this, but Yeah, in terms of that, it's asking counsel to do something. It's asking us to make a decision, not another body to make a decision. Does that make sense?

Yeah, it's asking us to make a decision, not another body.

No, you can scrap that, but the motion is asking... There was also two things, too, that I... There was also F. Do we have a ruling on F?

It was E and F.

Well, dilatory would mean to delay further. And this motion was originally an emergency motion, so this causes further delay. Incorrect in that the motion is allocating resources and says that the council's job is to allocate resources in this case.

Okay, so again, we need to take five minutes' recess above F. We're going to be back in five minutes.

Councillor Clausen? Thanks very much, Chair. So as I began, just the responsibility for setting service levels and allocating resources is within the operating budget of the Vancouver Park Board, and that includes lifeguard staffing and hours. Over the past three budgets... Over the last three budgets, the Park Board's overall budget has increased each year, providing additional resources, flexibility to manage core services like aquatics and beach safety. Given this, sustained growth in funding decisions about how to best allocate those resources, including whether to maintain, expand, or adjust lifeguard services, properly rest with the Park Board. Referring the motion back respects the governance and roles and avoids council directing operational decisions that fall within the park board's mandate. And this approach assures that service level decisions are made by the body that is with most direct oversight of parks and recreation operations. informed by operational expertise, staffing considerations, and on-the-ground needs. A referral allows the Park Board to fully assess impacts considered to the trade-offs across its system and report back with recommendations grounded in its approved budget and service priorities. Where we find ourselves today has nothing to do with a 0% property tax increase. This has everything to do with the park board not properly prioritizing lifeguards at our beaches. No money has been taken away. If a park board is truly prioritizing these services, they would have properly and funded this appropriately at their last meeting where they had an emergency motion to discuss this topic. Thanks.

Councillor Frye.

Counselor Frye?

Counselor Frye, we can't hear you. Maybe you are mute on yourself.

Counselor Frye there. Okay, so Counselor Frye, we can't hear you.

Okay, I'm going to move on, Counselor Fry. Maybe I do it myself later.

Yeah, thanks. just trying to get a sense of here, of what's happening here. I just think this is being unnecessarily politicized. I feel like this, we can't delay. I mean, if this is, we're talking about lives, you know, and we're talking about the summer season right upon us. I mean, like we noted the weather today. I mean, I just think this is, it behooves us to act immediately. I'll go on with my other remarks that I was going to say back when I thought this was going to be supported unanimously. But we heard from QP 1004, BC Paramedics Association, lifeguards, boaters, open water swimmers, and more. We heard all about the beloved Joe Fortes. We heard that this is all about public trust and public safety. And I agree. We heard that it's all about prevention. we heard from the twins that this would be a series of unfortunate events. I'm a big fan of your work, by the way. And we heard that we almost lost Peter Gabriel, which would have been a real sledgehammer. So as someone who has lost a friend... In a drowning accident, RIP Gary Duong, back in 2015, I feel like this motion was easy to support as it originally stood. I don't think $600,000 in the grand scheme of things, considering we'd already taken out of our reserves for a number of other things, is a lot when life is on the line. Thank you very much. So I won't be supporting the referral.

Thank you. Council apply.

Can you hear me okay? Yes, we can. Okay. Yeah, I'm not supportive of the referral. I think that there were constraints on the park board budget, and I do think that this is an opportunity for us to... state our priorities when it comes to what needs to be funded in terms of public safety measures across our city. I think public safety expands to a lot of different services the city provides including the obvious of course with policing and that includes in my opinion lifeguards at beaches. My hope with this motion is that it would trigger an opportunity to engage with Park Forward leadership to understand how they prioritized what I think is a perception or a reality. I think it's a reality of a reduction in funding as per the 0% budget and what it's going to take to reinstate this.

I mean, we are a coastal city. We're a tourism hub. The numbers show that there is a staggering increase in risk when it comes to beaches that do not have lifeguards, you know, attending to safety risks during, you know, peak hours and daytime hours where the public is using the beach. So I'd like to see this move forward. And I think a referral back to Park Board shows a lack of workability. We have to show some leadership here. We essentially assign a budget to Park Board if they have made decisions that restrain lifeguard services. As part of that, we need to lean in, not just toss it back to them as their problem. Because any... Obviously, we hope for nothing to come of any urgency or risk to the public in terms of what happens at our pools and on our beaches. It really is on us in terms of this being a city service that... ultimately comes down to, was their funding allocated and prioritized for the service? And I believe that there needs to be. You know, we've heard personal stories of people who have experienced near tragic situations and tragic situations, and they are preventable deaths and they are preventable accidents. And If we say that we prioritize public safety, we need to prioritize funding for lifeguards at beaches.

So I'll leave it there for now. But I just I hope that we we know that this referral really doesn't offer a productive process in terms of engaging with Park Board. It essentially says this is your problem, not ours. And I think we can do better than that. So I won't be supporting the referral.

Yeah, thanks, Chair. You know, when... When my family moved to Canada, one of the very first things that my mom did was put me into swim lessons. I think I was six and a half, almost seven, around the importance of ensuring that people have skills, and particularly living in an oceanside city in Vancouver. And I was really glad that she did that. And I'm really glad that we're having a debate about public safety today and keeping people safe when they're out and enjoying our city is incredibly essentially important. It is the right debate to be having. It is the wrong place to be having it, in my opinion. It should be the park board that should be tackling this issue. thought it was interesting that we didn't hear I know we're hearing later from the part board chair but we didn't hear from them on this issue and so I went back in terms of doing a bit of my homework and I was looking at some of the previous comments made by the chair sorry losing my voice a little with respect to this decision. And there was a CKW interview, for example, on March 17th, where the chair made a comment that said, most beaches across the Salish Sea on Vancouver Island, Sunshine Coast, for example, don't have lifeguards. Vancouver is a bit of an anomaly, and many communities take a swim at your own risk approach. Similarly, in a radio interview on March 18th, the chair made similar comments and also suggested that ocean swimming is often at your own risk. I think that that is not sort of a commentary that exemplifies taking public safety seriously and causes me to question why the park board wasn't holding... that was a priority for them to invest in it. The park board budget, people keep saying that it has been cut, but it has been raised for three years. There was an additional $1.2 million additionally that was provided for that. Again, I think public safety is important. If I was on the park board, and I have been and served on the park board, it's often been important to listen to people and to do that. But I haven't seen them looking at prioritizing and solving this issue. We certainly prioritize public safety within our funding envelope at council. And we want to ensure that Park Board has the opportunity within its operational jurisdiction and its independence to be able to do that as well. And I'm not seeing that here. What I'm seeing simply is a request for funding, but not an ownership of the issue and a prioritization. And management will prioritize what its elected body and Park Board directs. And they have not, in my opinion, directed that and done that in this case. They've sort of simply taken the easy way to go to mom and dad and ask for more funding. But what it's really about is prioritizing and spending on things that the public wants. And clearly, we've heard from the public, 46 plus speakers today, how exceptionally incredibly important this is to people. STAFF PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS. ULTIMATELY THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE PART BOARD AND IT'S THEIR JOB TO ACCEPT OR REJECT THOSE OR IF AN ISSUE COMES UP TO LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC AND TO BE RESPONSIVE TO IT. SO I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THE OPERATIONAL JURISDICTION RESPONSIBILITY AND OBLIGATION OF THE VANCOUVER PART BOARD.

to ensure that it keeps residents safe when it's enjoying recreational and swimming facilities. And I would encourage them vociferously to do that. It's really important and perhaps to be a bit thoughtful in responding before perhaps some of those comments because clearly this is really important to people and I would encourage them to direct their resources accordingly because I think that that is where that conversation should and could happen. So thank you everybody for coming today. that voice and should be directed to the Park Board and you should be encouraging them to put those resources where you want them to go. Thank you. Thanks, Councillor. Councillor Fry. Councillor Fry, we can't hear you. Yeah, sorry. There we go. I'm just, yeah. Excuse me one second. I'm just stepping out of a meeting with the Minister.

Folks, I think this is really, unfortunately, distracting from the essence of this motion. And I do want to acknowledge Commissioner Jensen, who brought this to my attention. And I gather that Councillor Kirby-Young was just mentioning the chair's somewhat flippant remarks about lifeguard safety, which he's since recanted and actually came back with some more thoughtful considerations. But... I want to just focus on the essence of what this motion is. And it's recognizing that there is a funding gap for the park board and that they are being tasked with a significant reduction in services as a result of reduction in budget allocation. And so recognizing that they, that this is a staff recommendation to cut, cut lifeguard staffing. in order to meet those budget constraints that they're faced with. I think the operation here, and I'm frankly surprised that this motion was not ruled, sorry, this amendment wasn't ruled incorrect, because in reality, we can't refer a request for council to approve funding to the park board back to the park board. That makes absolutely no sense. The essence here really is whether or not you support adequately funding through our allocation of funds to... the park board in order to facilitate lifeguard safety in our Vancouver beaches. And I think we all, and I haven't had the opportunity to listen to everybody speaking from council, but I do think we all support public safety. And I think this is an opportunity for us to be magnanimous in our approach to allocating the funds appropriate to staff. And I'm so sorry that I'm in these meetings right now, but I can't speak much longer. Thank you.

Chair, can I please get a vote assist? Vote assist opposed to the amendment, please. Okay, Mayor Sim. Vote assist in favor. Please.

Okay. Mayor Sin's vote assists in favor.