VanStat Amendment (strike FURTHER THAT clauses)
Motion 4 · Standing Committee of Council on City Finance and Services, May 20, 2026
Summary
- Amendment to the VanStat infrastructure motion proposed by Councillor Kirby-Yung, striking two clauses that would have prioritized "functional occupancy" seismic standards for community centres and accelerated accessibility upgrades.
- Kirby-Yung argued the clauses were too prescriptive and that staff should bring back comprehensive information through the capital plan process.
- Councillor Maloney opposed, arguing seismic preparedness and accessibility are urgent and should be explicitly directed.
Vote
Public comments
Read all 4 statements
Transcript
63 segments
Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to declare. Does anyone have a conflict of interest to disclose? Okay. This item does not have a team member presentation. Committee members, you have up to five minutes to ask questions of team members. Are there any questions? Councillor Kirby.
Yeah, I have one question that really struck me, because I think we've had this report at Council, I recall, once or twice before, and it seems to be a regular thing when ICBC changes, we need to realign our schedules. So my question is, procedurally, is there any direction that council can give that we just regularize this, that when ICBC updates, that staff are given standing direction to align there? Because it becomes a very, my understanding is this is a requirement that we align our best practice. So I guess I'm looking for, do we need to keep doing this administratively, or could council give direction that when ICBC updates, we update?
Good morning, Council Sarah Hicks, Chief License Inspector. When we're speaking to the city's bylaws, we're unable to point to another agency to set those rates without coming back to Council. They would effectively be changing our bylaws without your input.
I had a feeling you would say that. I just wondered if there had been any... Sorry, there's my mic. If there had been any update, but there is no other... kind of administrative path that would save process, right?
Not that legal is made us aware of to date.
Okay. And then just to follow up on that then, so for clarity, like this is how council should consider the report? It's simply that we're aligning with ICBC changes predominantly? Or with some other components as well?
Predominantly it is alignment with ICBC. There is the addition of an itemized administration fee within the vehicle for hire bylaw and some updates to some language on the private property towing side.
Okay. Thank you.
Thanks. Councillor Orr.
Yeah, I just have a question on the large vehicles bylaw 2849. Essentially, we've been hearing from a member of the public who was in chambers today and she's had her vehicle towed numerous times. I believe she said $10,000. that she's had to pay. And if I understand correctly, it's sort of based on an interpretation of where the large vehicles was capturing vehicles that were too long, but that included things like extended pickup trucks and things like that. So it was amended to be length or height, or length and height. but now this has become to include length and height. So if a vehicle is within that length, and that's fine within a parking spot, this person is saying that the enforcement is choosing height instead of length and height. So she's within the length but over the height. Can you speak to that?
Ohm Mogerman, Associate Director of Parking Operations and Enforcement. This report is only speaking to the changes within the bylaw. We're referencing towing, so I can't speak to that aspect of the oversized vehicles as part of this report.
Okay. Thanks. And then maybe a question around towing then around RVs that people use as homes. Is that a question you can answer too? Will this, no?
No change for enforcement. Okay, thanks.
Okay, thanks. All right, so we're going to hear from the registered speaker for this report. Public speakers, whether they're in support or in opposition of the report and recommendations, and that may only speak once. I will also ask speakers if they are residents of Vancouver, if it is not noted on the speaker's list. Our first registered speaker is speaker number one, Louise Allard.
Please go ahead.
Hello. I oppose the fee changes. I can speak to what Constable Orr just spoke about as I was the one he was referring to. There's an overarching issue which the towing fees are just a small part of, and the overarching issue... has to do with the bylaw ticketing practices of the city, which are ticketing vehicles not subject to the large vehicles bylaw per the correct and intended interpretation that go back to the 1999 administrative reports. I don't have time to get into that all right now, but I have given you those packages. All the speakers should have them. I have also sent them to every councillor on December 11th, emails. about the whole practice, it's articulating it all. I've received no response to that email and I followed up on January 15th, 2026 and no response to that either. I've left urgent voicemails and urgent emails, no response. So I'm feeling quite betrayed about that. But to get to the issue of the towing, is that because it's intertwined with the ticketing practices of the city, when Busters Towing is committing corrupt practices, that reflects badly on the city because the city then is seen as complicit in that. And Busters, because my vehicle has been towed, my small vehicle has been towed numerous times, I've had a lot of repetitive experience with Busters. Their towing fees are all over the map. when I go to pick up my vehicle, and they're towed from outside my residence from the same location every time, and yet the fees to pick it up could be $204 one day, $316, $515, $444. They're all over the map. And when I have attempted to get some kind of explanation and rectification of these fees, the fleet manager, Justin Shrump, who's part owner of the company... He has been rude. He has ignored my emails, lied to my face when I've gone in to see him, hung up on me on the phone. So these correct practices continue without rectification. They go well outside the fee guide as it is. The charges, they deem my vehicle larger than it actually is as far as the tow rate group. They have these surcharges. uh fuel surcharges that they attach to the tow rate group to the other bogus charges of load and secure that sometimes are are applied and sometimes aren't uh the storage rates are also which i understand go to the city are over charges i put that in my report as well they um are Sorry, this is blinking. If the vehicle is in four minutes before midnight, they can charge you a daily rate. Sometimes it goes up to as much as $149 for four minutes before midnight, and then when it crosses midnight, another daily rate. You can pick up your vehicle 10 minutes after it's been dropped.
Louise, you have overtime already.
So, yes.
Thank you for speaking to the council. Thank you. All right. Speaker number two is Duane Bryan.
Hi, Duane. So, as a procedure question, I need to ask you if you are residents of Vancouver or not. No. Okay. That's okay. Go ahead.
Thank you. Good morning, Mayor and Council. My name is Duane Bryan from Teamsters Local 31 in Delta. I'm a business representative. We hold a certification for busters towing. the unionized drivers of Buster's Towing. And on behalf of the unionized tow truck drivers of Buster's Towing, Teamsters Local 31 opposes the amendment to the impounding vehicle for hire bylaws, specifically the one that would reduce the fuel surcharge from 27% to 22%. Financial impact to the owner-operators is the fuel surcharge is not a windfall. It's an important mechanism that helps offset operating costs to remain competitive and continue providing towing services to the City of Vancouver. Reducing it at this time would place added financial pressure on the drivers who perform this work. Fuel costs remain exceptionally high and are driven by factors outside the control of the owner-operators. Drivers may wait two to three hours between dispatches during a 10-hour workday, and in some cases, a vehicle is no longer present when they arrive at the tow. A 5% reduction in the surcharge would come directly out of the pockets of the tow truck owner-operators themselves. These pressures are compounded by the need to renew an aging fleet, Buster's tow is in the process of updating its equipment. Many owner-operators are facing the costs of purchasing replacement trucks. That dollar amount can go from $100,000 to $300,000. That is a business cost. They do assess for that, but at the same time, the reduction of the surcharge will impact what their options are to maintain that truck. Instead of reducing the surcharge by 5%, Teamsters Local 31 recommends increasing it by at least that 5%, at least 32%, and or adopting a fuel surcharge that takes into consideration the fluctuation of the diesel fuel costs for commercial vehicles monthly. The proposed 3% increase to the per-kilometer trip rate does not offset the impact of the 5% reduction in the fuel surcharge. These two amendments are the only changes that directly affect the tow truck owner-operator, and the net effect would be to worsen the financial strain on those providing the service to the City of Vancouver. Thank you.
Thank you. Okay, speaker number three is Bob Clames.
Okay, Bob, same as the previous speakers, I need to ask you if you're a resident of Vancouver.
Yes, I am. Bob Clemas, I am not a resident of Vancouver. Thank you. Please go ahead. Okay, thank you. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak. Vehicles are towed from private property because the property owner is denied use of their own space, whether it's a restaurant on Kingsway or a resident in the West End. When a driver parks on private property without consent, They are deemed to have authorized towing under the Motor Vehicle Act. The city has two responsibilities here. One, to protect the public from excessive charges, and two, to ensure property owners can use their stalls when needed. Next slide, please. ICBC is being used as the benchmark. That's the wrong instrument. The ICBC province-wide rate is used for towing from collisions. The first tow is from an accident to the impound yard, the later tow to a shop, repair shop. The second tow is scheduled off hours, no cancellations. The administration invoicing are all done online during business hours. Private impounds are completely different. 45% of the calls are gone on arrival, the vehicle has left, and the tow truck has wasted time, money, fuel, and opportunity. Vehicles locked, half the jobs are in underground parkades, and abandoned vehicles result in unpaid storage and towing fees. Next slide, please. Even if you were to stick with ICBC rates, they've not been adjusted for inflation. There is a precedent for adjusting in 2007 and again in 2016 when ICBC hadn't adjusted the rate for nine years. More appropriate comparisons are Burnaby and Richmond, who follow the Motor Vehicle Act, which by now, in fact, is the ICBC rate adjusted. Our request is very straightforward. This amendment cannot be permitted to pass. Regardless of what is done about the fuel surcharge, the problems this could create are not good. We recommend revising the Schedule C to private impound rates that are adjusted with inflation annually. This would protect customers and property owners. Alternatively, adopt the Motor Vehicle Act. Like Burnaby and Richmond, rates are comparable to ICBC, and you don't have to deal with this again. Yes, I guess the only... Oh, next slide, please. Yeah, these are the comparison rates. And unfortunately, you can see that Vancouver does have the distinction of being the most affordable city, major city, in terms of parking illegally. Next slide, please. These are the net benefits, which are, as you can see, not what we're hoping for.
That's our time, Bob.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
All right, speaker number four is Laura Holt.
Yeah, Laura, same question as the previous speakers. Are you a resident of Vancouver? Just a procedure question.
No, I am not.
Okay, thank you. And also, you are representing a group of speakers, right?
Yes, I am.
They need to identify themselves, so you have five minutes instead of three minutes.
Thank you.
So can they identify themselves? Yes.
Okay. Harvey, two in person and one online. He needs to identify himself, right? Yeah. Okay, speaker on the line, please identify yourself. Can you unmute yourself?
I don't know which speaker online. Rob?
Harvey or Rob? Rob, okay. Rob, Rob Hart, can you please identify yourself online?
This is Rob.
Oh, Stacey. No, it's not on the note, Stacey.
Hi, I'm Stacey Lamoureux.
Is one of your speaker?
Sorry? Yes.
Okay, yeah, good. You have five minutes. Please go ahead.
Thank you. Good morning, Mayor and Councillors. My name is Laura Holt, and I represent Drake Towing, one of two frontline major towing operators serving Vancouver's private property impound needs. I'm here today to oppose the proposed Vehicles for Hire By-law changes as drafted. because in their current form they are not financially sustainable and not aligned with provincial standards and metrics. Private property impound towing represents 27% of our business. That is not a relatively small share of our overall towing activities, as stated in your proposed amendment notes. That revenue supports staffing, equipment, compliance, and our ability to... keep trucks available to respond to the public needs in Vancouver. Firstly, the proposed amendment reduces the fuel surcharge from 27% to 22%. That forces us to pay current diesel prices while receiving compensation based on outdated data. Arguably, a precedent has been set. In July 2022, Council increased fuel surcharges after recognizing fuel as, and I quote, a significant, substantial, and volatile overhead expense for tow truck companies, and that updating the bylaw was vital to support local industry sustainability.
That volatility is equally severe today, and for reference, other trucking industries have been adjusting monthly as prices rise much more than in 2022. Request number one, do not reduce the fuel surcharge below 27%, and direct staff to use current transparent methodologies for the future adjustments. so the bylaw tracks real conditions. Secondly, the bigger issue is that the city continues to anchor towing compensation to ICBC schedules, which are not designed for enforcement impounds. Deloitte... completed a third-party study in March 2024 for RoadSafeBC, including that ICBC pricing reflects volume discount data intended for bulk accident insurance claims, and that is not an appropriate benchmark for enforcement towing. RoadSafeBC moved away from ICBC metrics and aligned with the provincial impound framework under the Motor Vehicle Act and related lean regulations structure. practical point is simple ICBC is the wrong anchor if Vancouver sets regulated fees significantly below the real cost of providing compliant impound service you do not get consumer protection you get reduced service capacity delays and instability in a service that property owners operators and occupiers rely on Request number two, fully decouple the towing fee bylaw from ICBC and align baseline tow and storage rates with the provincial MVA framework other cities have already embraced. These include 110 flat fee tow, $3.32 per kilometer beyond six kilometers, $40 doll fee, and $40 daily storage. And then adjust accordingly for the reality of doing business in Vancouver. Importantly, the bylaw should include a clear, fair schedule for release fees when a vehicle is released before leaving the property and after being fully loaded, to be fairly paid for the work already performed, and to reduce high-risk interactions on-site. We also request for a formal dispute fee of $25 based off the City's own model to deter fraudulent disputes and give a true framework to this process. Clearly, we agree with the council's addition of administration fees, research fees aligned with the Commercial Liens Act, which we already follow. The proposal, as drafted, only captures a narrow slice of the true administrative workload. An impound file includes document handling, release, processing, compliance steps, and coordination. The provincial MVA framework recognizes that processing an impound requires real administrative work.
Request number three, keep the proposed CLA search fee and also include an MVA administrative fee of $55.05 to reflect the real cost of impound processing and align municipal rules with the provincial approach. Include a release fee based on true work performed, not the current half of impound, and include a dispute fee of $20.25. Mayor and Councillors, these amendments do not balance consumer production and industry sustainability. They significantly underfund the service, and consumers pay for it through less capacity. longer waits, and instability. Consumers are not just the violators. The consumers are the ones whose parking spaces are being violated. Thank you for your time.
Thank you, Laura. Thank you. All right. I was informed speaker five and six have withdrawn. Speaker number seven is Maricel Barami.
Oh, okay. So she doesn't need to speak.
Okay. Speaker number eight also withdrawn. Speaker number nine is Christine Brenner.
Okay. And speaker number 10 is Susan Booth. Okay. All right. So that's our speakers list.
Thank you, everyone, for speaking to the committee. Would someone like to move a motion?
Yeah, so we have to move the motion first. Moved by Councillor Meiszner. Do we have a seconder?
Do we have a seconder for this report?
Can we do that? Or we have to move to the report and then we can ask questions through the... Yeah, it has to be moved.
Okay, second by Councillor Domenato. All right. So, committee member, is there any questions? Councillor Domenato.
Yeah. Thanks, Chair.
I'm curious if staff could comment on the comments made by a number of speakers around the reference point around the rates being ICBC and not the MVA, like other jurisdictions. Can you... sort of explore that with me so I have a better understanding of why are we unique in that regard or can you just expand on that?
Certainly. How towing rates are handled across the lower mainland are different. Surrey and New Westminster use ICBC. North Vancouver does not specifically regulate it. And Richmond, Burnaby, and a couple of others reference the MVA. We do not reference the MVA. We have been referencing ICBC for decades. quite some time. Within that, we align with our engineering department in the rates that are able to be charged for public tows as well as on the private tow side. And typically, the MVA is for higher risk police-based tows, speeding, impaired driving, those types of situations.
Okay. Just out of curiosity, have we explored, though, making that shift? Because obviously, I think you referenced Burnaby and Richmond as using the MDA as a reference point. Have we explored that?
Speaking to the private side only, we have looked at that. It would be a significant increase in the amounts that are towed to customers being picked up. So we've looked at adding... The administrative fee, the itemized administrative fee to help balance adding additional opportunities for the companies to recover the costs that they're putting in, particularly the things that we're asking them to do in the bylaw, like finding an owner, notifying owners. We have, you know, throughout the years added additional fees for a dolly as well as for parkade related chargers, towings to recognize that Vancouver does have a bit of a unique infrastructure and that we have more parkades relating to towing as opposed to larger open lot cities.
So what I'm hearing is you're trying to strike a balance around cost to customers, so affordability, but then also enabling companies to recoup as well costs. I have two more questions. I want to make sure I get through them. There was a reference around the fuel charge and following again, I think, Decrease to 20% to align with ICBC's fuel surcharge. I'm curious, do you know the rationale for that change by ICBC in light of the costs that overall fuel costs are going up for a whole variety of reasons globally and why that would be, why ICBC moved that direction at this time?
I certainly can't speak to why ICBC didn't raise their, when they decreased the rates. However, we are in line with ICBC at 22%. That is what the report is recommending. And ICBC are the guidelines that we use to set our towing rates on the public side of things.
Okay, thank you. And then just speaking, I don't know if staff are able to comment on this, but I'd be curious, just with our first speaker who is talking about their experience and just variability, I guess, in fees charged from time to time. And then I was looking at the Better Business Bureau and complaints filed against busters, and there seems to be a similar theme. And I'm just curious, can you give me some insight as to what may be contributing to that? And again, they are a contractor to us as well as the city.
Yes, certainly. So some of the variability could very well be related to the size of the vehicle. So there's different charges for towing vehicles of different sizes. So a small vehicle costs less to tow than it does a large vehicle, and so that's where you can see some of the variability within there. Without specifics, it's very difficult to look into each of the individual charges that are laid, but we do have it set out in our contract with the city's towing provider on what those fees are.
Okay. If I have time for one more question, I'm just curious if we, within our contract and our bylaw, do we have a sense if tow companies are exercising more latitude than what is provided for in the contract or within the bylaw in terms of towing? Again, looking at some of the complaints that were filed, do we have any sense of what that looks like?
I can speak to the public side of things. So anytime somebody is towed from the public street, it's done with a ticket. So that ticket generates the tow. And so we're able to monitor and know exactly what's being towed off of the city streets because it is parking enforcement staff that are initiating those tows. So we do have a built-in monitoring mechanism in place for those types of tows.
Okay, that's exactly what I was looking for. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Yeah, okay. Councillor Corbett.
Yeah, just following up on a couple of the questions, the commentary, and I might not express this very articulately, but the commentary from some of the speakers with respects to essentially cost recovery or hardship in terms of the fees not aligning with the actual cost of service, do staff have any comments on that and how that's considered?
When considering the towing-based rates, staff did ask for information from the companies in relation to the increased cost pressures. We did not receive detailed financial analysis of cost versus revenues, so we can't go into an in-depth review. Staff, again, are looking, I think, to balance cost opportunities and consumer protection with the fees in front of you today. We also took into account a 2022 ICBC towing report, business review report, done with PricewaterhouseCoopers, which looked at the cost and the workforce challenges. It does recognize that there are some cost pressures, but without the data behind the... The detailed financial data, they weren't able to go into a significant review of their fees, but recognized that there could be pressures and that they did adjust some of their rates to take that into account.
Okay, so is it fair to say that if some information was received, then prior to a future of data adjustments, staff would duly consider and look at that?
Yeah, we would certainly consider whatever information was provided.
Okay, and then just a comment in general. There was a slide I think someone showed with respects to Vancouver's fees looking to be more affordable. Any comments on that? Has that been a conscious choice to remain lower than some of the other municipalities, or do you find that information to be accurate?
Towing rates are certainly set differently across the lower mainland. As described prior to, New West and Surrey both point to ICBC, along with Vancouver and other jurisdictions point to MBA. It is not a conscious effort to be lower than. It is to be consistent with our approach in aligning with ICBC.
Okay. Thank you.
All right. Thank you.
Seeing no one else on the queue, I'm going to call the vote for this report. Also, remember that the committee members online participating virtually whose video is disabled will be marked absent.
Okay.
So, counsel, please register your vote on this voting panel.
Councillor Meiszner?
Okay, so the report passed with Councillor Meiszner abstained. Councillor Orr and Councillor Maloney in opposition.
Statement Watch
Hello. I oppose the fee changes. I can speak to what Constable Orr just spoke about as I was the one he was referring to. There's an overarching issue which the towing fees are just a small part of, and the overarching issue... has to do with the bylaw ticketing practices of the city, which are ticketing vehicles not subject to the large vehicles bylaw per the correct and intended interpretation that go back to the 1999 administrative reports. I don't have time to get into that all right now, but I have given you those packages. All the speakers should have them. I have also sent them to every councillor on December 11th, emails. about the whole practice, it's articulating it all. I've received no response to that email and I followed up on January 15th, 2026 and no response to that either. I've left urgent voicemails and urgent emails, no response. So I'm feeling quite betrayed about that. But to get to the issue of the towing, is that because it's intertwined with the ticketing practices of the city, when Busters Towing is committing corrupt practices, that reflects badly on the city because the city then is seen as complicit in that. And Busters, because my vehicle has been towed, my small vehicle has been towed numerous times, I've had a lot of repetitive experience with Busters. Their towing fees are all over the map. when I go to pick up my vehicle, and they're towed from outside my residence from the same location every time, and yet the fees to pick it up could be $204 one day, $316, $515, $444. They're all over the map. And when I have attempted to get some kind of explanation and rectification of these fees, the fleet manager, Justin Shrump, who's part owner of the company... He has been rude. He has ignored my emails, lied to my face when I've gone in to see him, hung up on me on the phone. So these correct practices continue without rectification. They go well outside the fee guide as it is. The charges, they deem my vehicle larger than it actually is as far as the tow rate group. They have these surcharges. uh fuel surcharges that they attach to the tow rate group to the other bogus charges of load and secure that sometimes are are applied and sometimes aren't uh the storage rates are also which i understand go to the city are over charges i put that in my report as well they um are Sorry, this is blinking. If the vehicle is in four minutes before midnight, they can charge you a daily rate. Sometimes it goes up to as much as $149 for four minutes before midnight, and then when it crosses midnight, another daily rate. You can pick up your vehicle 10 minutes after it's been dropped.
Louise, you have overtime already.
Statement Watch
Thank you. Good morning, Mayor and Council. My name is Duane Bryan from Teamsters Local 31 in Delta. I'm a business representative. We hold a certification for busters towing. the unionized drivers of Buster's Towing. And on behalf of the unionized tow truck drivers of Buster's Towing, Teamsters Local 31 opposes the amendment to the impounding vehicle for hire bylaws, specifically the one that would reduce the fuel surcharge from 27% to 22%. Financial impact to the owner-operators is the fuel surcharge is not a windfall. It's an important mechanism that helps offset operating costs to remain competitive and continue providing towing services to the City of Vancouver. Reducing it at this time would place added financial pressure on the drivers who perform this work. Fuel costs remain exceptionally high and are driven by factors outside the control of the owner-operators. Drivers may wait two to three hours between dispatches during a 10-hour workday, and in some cases, a vehicle is no longer present when they arrive at the tow. A 5% reduction in the surcharge would come directly out of the pockets of the tow truck owner-operators themselves. These pressures are compounded by the need to renew an aging fleet, Buster's tow is in the process of updating its equipment. Many owner-operators are facing the costs of purchasing replacement trucks. That dollar amount can go from $100,000 to $300,000. That is a business cost. They do assess for that, but at the same time, the reduction of the surcharge will impact what their options are to maintain that truck. Instead of reducing the surcharge by 5%, Teamsters Local 31 recommends increasing it by at least that 5%, at least 32%, and or adopting a fuel surcharge that takes into consideration the fluctuation of the diesel fuel costs for commercial vehicles monthly. The proposed 3% increase to the per-kilometer trip rate does not offset the impact of the 5% reduction in the fuel surcharge. These two amendments are the only changes that directly affect the tow truck owner-operator, and the net effect would be to worsen the financial strain on those providing the service to the City of Vancouver. Thank you.
Statement Watch
Yes, I am. Bob Clemas, I am not a resident of Vancouver. Thank you. Please go ahead. Okay, thank you. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak. Vehicles are towed from private property because the property owner is denied use of their own space, whether it's a restaurant on Kingsway or a resident in the West End. When a driver parks on private property without consent, They are deemed to have authorized towing under the Motor Vehicle Act. The city has two responsibilities here. One, to protect the public from excessive charges, and two, to ensure property owners can use their stalls when needed. Next slide, please. ICBC is being used as the benchmark. That's the wrong instrument. The ICBC province-wide rate is used for towing from collisions. The first tow is from an accident to the impound yard, the later tow to a shop, repair shop. The second tow is scheduled off hours, no cancellations. The administration invoicing are all done online during business hours. Private impounds are completely different. 45% of the calls are gone on arrival, the vehicle has left, and the tow truck has wasted time, money, fuel, and opportunity. Vehicles locked, half the jobs are in underground parkades, and abandoned vehicles result in unpaid storage and towing fees. Next slide, please. Even if you were to stick with ICBC rates, they've not been adjusted for inflation. There is a precedent for adjusting in 2007 and again in 2016 when ICBC hadn't adjusted the rate for nine years. More appropriate comparisons are Burnaby and Richmond, who follow the Motor Vehicle Act, which by now, in fact, is the ICBC rate adjusted. Our request is very straightforward. This amendment cannot be permitted to pass. Regardless of what is done about the fuel surcharge, the problems this could create are not good. We recommend revising the Schedule C to private impound rates that are adjusted with inflation annually. This would protect customers and property owners. Alternatively, adopt the Motor Vehicle Act. Like Burnaby and Richmond, rates are comparable to ICBC, and you don't have to deal with this again. Yes, I guess the only... Oh, next slide, please. Yeah, these are the comparison rates. And unfortunately, you can see that Vancouver does have the distinction of being the most affordable city, major city, in terms of parking illegally. Next slide, please. These are the net benefits, which are, as you can see, not what we're hoping for.
That's our time, Bob.
Statement Watch
Thank you.
So can they identify themselves? Yes.
Okay. Harvey, two in person and one online. He needs to identify himself, right? Yeah. Okay, speaker on the line, please identify yourself. Can you unmute yourself? I don't know which speaker online. Rob? Harvey or Rob? Rob, okay. Rob, Rob Hart, can you please identify yourself online? This is Rob. Oh, Stacey. No, it's not on the note, Stacey. Hi, I'm Stacey Lamoureux.
Is one of your speaker?
Sorry? Yes.
Okay, yeah, good. You have five minutes. Please go ahead.
Thank you. Good morning, Mayor and Councillors. My name is Laura Holt, and I represent Drake Towing, one of two frontline major towing operators serving Vancouver's private property impound needs. I'm here today to oppose the proposed Vehicles for Hire By-law changes as drafted. because in their current form they are not financially sustainable and not aligned with provincial standards and metrics. Private property impound towing represents 27% of our business. That is not a relatively small share of our overall towing activities, as stated in your proposed amendment notes. That revenue supports staffing, equipment, compliance, and our ability to... keep trucks available to respond to the public needs in Vancouver. Firstly, the proposed amendment reduces the fuel surcharge from 27% to 22%. That forces us to pay current diesel prices while receiving compensation based on outdated data. Arguably, a precedent has been set. In July 2022, Council increased fuel surcharges after recognizing fuel as, and I quote, a significant, substantial, and volatile overhead expense for tow truck companies, and that updating the bylaw was vital to support local industry sustainability. That volatility is equally severe today, and for reference, other trucking industries have been adjusting monthly as prices rise much more than in 2022. Request number one, do not reduce the fuel surcharge below 27%, and direct staff to use current transparent methodologies for the future adjustments. so the bylaw tracks real conditions. Secondly, the bigger issue is that the city continues to anchor towing compensation to ICBC schedules, which are not designed for enforcement impounds. Deloitte... completed a third-party study in March 2024 for RoadSafeBC, including that ICBC pricing reflects volume discount data intended for bulk accident insurance claims, and that is not an appropriate benchmark for enforcement towing. RoadSafeBC moved away from ICBC metrics and aligned with the provincial impound framework under the Motor Vehicle Act and related lean regulations structure. practical point is simple ICBC is the wrong anchor if Vancouver sets regulated fees significantly below the real cost of providing compliant impound service you do not get consumer protection you get reduced service capacity delays and instability in a service that property owners operators and occupiers rely on Request number two, fully decouple the towing fee bylaw from ICBC and align baseline tow and storage rates with the provincial MVA framework other cities have already embraced. These include 110 flat fee tow, $3.32 per kilometer beyond six kilometers, $40 doll fee, and $40 daily storage. And then adjust accordingly for the reality of doing business in Vancouver. Importantly, the bylaw should include a clear, fair schedule for release fees when a vehicle is released before leaving the property and after being fully loaded, to be fairly paid for the work already performed, and to reduce high-risk interactions on-site. We also request for a formal dispute fee of $25 based off the City's own model to deter fraudulent disputes and give a true framework to this process. Clearly, we agree with the council's addition of administration fees, research fees aligned with the Commercial Liens Act, which we already follow. The proposal, as drafted, only captures a narrow slice of the true administrative workload. An impound file includes document handling, release, processing, compliance steps, and coordination. The provincial MVA framework recognizes that processing an impound requires real administrative work. Request number three, keep the proposed CLA search fee and also include an MVA administrative fee of $55.05 to reflect the real cost of impound processing and align municipal rules with the provincial approach. Include a release fee based on true work performed, not the current half of impound, and include a dispute fee of $20.25. Mayor and Councillors, these amendments do not balance consumer production and industry sustainability. They significantly underfund the service, and consumers pay for it through less capacity. longer waits, and instability. Consumers are not just the violators. The consumers are the ones whose parking spaces are being violated. Thank you for your time.